Roach believes Thomas needs substantial time in prison is bitter and looking for ill-deserved vengeance against someone who he himself mistook for a criminal just as the person whose life he wants to ruin had done to him.

farking pigs.

While Melvin's wife, Paulette, called 911 - the dispatcher placed her on hold - it was Melvin who reacted. He recovered Roach's pistol, pointed it at Thomas and pulled the trigger.

Misfire. He cocked the gun and pulled the trigger again. Again nothing. He then began pistol-whipping Thomas.

As more people joined in to help, Melvin saw the pistol's magazine was ejected. He slammed it in tight and chambered a round.

And why the fark isn't this guy facing the death penalty? Hell, he stole a police officer's gun and tried to murder someone with it!

It was a pig. Maybe not in on this crime but a criminal neverless. The shooter deserves a medal

Who fired first is a matter of contention, but Roach's pistol malfunctioned after one shot and ejected the clip.

Not guilty

"Roach's pistol malfunctioned after one shot and ejected the clip."

sounds like operator error to me.
Perhaps had something to do with the struggle?

I'm with the shooter on this one. When was there ever a cop that wasn't a criminal?

Shoot swine now -- eat the bacon later.

Moral of the story: As a cop, you can "believe" you are going to be harmed, and kill in cold blood. Hell, you'll get a promotion, town/state car, and live the good life with a kill under your belt. You can shoot on sight according to your instincts and gut feelings and whim, and feel proud doing so.

As a civilian, if you see someone wearing a uniform that looks like a police officer uniform, your right for self preservation and defense is thrown the fark away. You cannot act on your instincts, as your instincts are animal instincts, and should be kept in check because you are but a slave to The Man. You're nothing but a waste of oxygen and should be thankful that you are not shot on sight by every cop you come across simply because they didn't get the proper amount of fiber in their diet.

So, as a protip, if you're going to rob someone, go on amazon.com and buy yourself a police officer uniform. Life will be so much easier.

Funny how if this was the other way around the cop would be on paid leave until it was investigated and then he'd be back at work. Instead this guy is going to go to jail for the rest of his life... oh wait that's not funny at all.

You know, maybe he should just be charged with discharging a firearm in public or something similar. He shouldn't be facing 25 years in prison, though.

dj_spanmaster: Haven't you seen any Statham movies? YOU CAN NEVER BE SURE

Unless he's Ben Affleck

I have to say that Thomas' logic regarding the situation is pretty sound. The man in uniform got out of a civilian vehicle. He did not flash a badge. His arms were covered in tattoos (Not that this is a crime, but it is unusual for an officer of the law). After having been ambushed, Thomas was well within logical limits to think that the criminals may have had a partner disguised as a police officer who would assist should the deal go sour.

As for the cop getting shot, at least he had on his vest. He pulled his weapon on a man who had just acted in self-defense, and was willing to do so again. I understand that he did not recognize this fact at the time, but to go back and say "This man is a criminal because he saw suspicious circumstances and mistook me for a robber" is pure nonsense.

Sounds like the streets will be safer with this animal off the streets. That used to be the point. it still is, right? Right?

Not into the all police are pigs ignorance, ane this case seems to really be a toss up.

The police officer went into a situation with no information other than what he saw, black man with a gun.

The citizen saw a blacked out windows wanna be pimpmobile disgorge a tattooed guy in a uniform claiming to be a cop aggressing on him.

I for one would not choose to disarm myself and die. Fake cops are out there, not that unusual, at least in the Fark headlines.

Want credibility officer? First look like a fine upstanding citizen, then inquire regarding circumstances, as people running are behaving defensively, then make damn sure you have a clean, simple, well functioning, defensive weapon and don't threaten to use it first.

Tourney3p0: Sounds like the streets will be safer with this animal off the streets. That used to be the point. it still is, right? Right?

No, left! Left!

sounds like a wash to me.

I would let Thomas go and slap the shiat out of the DA for allowing it to go this far.

If only everyone had a gun this whole situation....

Oh. Everyone DID have guns. Nevermind.

/an armed society is a polite soc....CRAP I just got shot in the leg!

I'd give Thomas a bit something more for discharging a gun in public, something like 3 months to 3 years, cause I really have no idea. I'd waive it if the army would take him and if he'd join up, because it sounds like he needs some training, but is otherwise not a guy that should be in prison.

I'd give the remainder of the 25 years to Sims.

This is becoming more and more common; not the particulars of this story, but the presence of Trolls in the thread before anyone has a chance to say anything remotely reasonable. This place is turning into /r/politics at a remarkable speed.

Black on Black crime.

Not Guilty....

I think Thomas' story sounds pretty realistic, and I certainly have more than reasonable doubts that he's guilty. I would not vote to convict. Plus, hasn't he been punished enough? He was almost robbed, had a gun pointed at him, had a car driven into him, got repeatedly pistol whipped!, and was then arrested and has had to face up to life in jail. And putting him in jail doesn't really serve any purpose of deterrence, retribution, or rehabilitation.

RoyBatty: I'd give Thomas a bit something more for discharging a gun in public, something like 3 months to 3 years, cause I really have no idea. I'd waive it if the army would take him and if he'd join up, because it sounds like he needs some training, but is otherwise not a guy that should be in prison.

I'd give the remainder of the 25 years to Sims.

I'd give some to the cop that went in blind and tried to kill the victim of a violent robbery.

Gotta love all these stupid comments from Internet Tough Guy Farkers who are anti-cop. But I'm sure the second y'all see a black guy, you act like Michael Bolton in "Office Space" -- and pray there's an officer nearby.

Sorry, but this guy came thisclose to shooting an officer, and like the article said, would have meant the death penalty. If the guy was that suspicious of the thugs, he should have ran the other way and called the cops.

And this article also proves my long-standing point: Nothing good comes from Craigslist.

At least the prosecutor is taking the case with an eye on the law and not some vendetta, or lesson to other potential criminals

Oh wait:

"But if he doesn't go to jail, it will look like he can shoot a police officer and get away with it."

RoyBatty: I'd give Thomas a bit something more for discharging a gun in public, something like 3 months to 3 years, cause I really have no idea. I'd waive it if the army would take him and if he'd join up, because it sounds like he needs some training, but is otherwise not a guy that should be in prison.

I'd give the remainder of the 25 years to Sims.
Its actually entirely legal to discharge a gun in public if acting in self defence.. so at best... some sort of careless use of a firearm or some such.. BUT.. the dude hit his target. Quite well from the sounds of it so you cant really even have him charged with careless use

This guy should get to walk just as any police officer would get to walk if a civilian walked into a "gun battle" and was accidentally mistaken for a criminal...

However, the people who stole from him should be charged and found guilty of shooting the officer even thought they never pulled the trigger

Catsaregreen: Sorry, but this guy came thisclose to shooting an officer,

umm..???? okay I need to read the article again cause I read him as actually shooting the officer. Three times.

you are a puppet: Who fired first is a matter of contention, but Roach's pistol malfunctioned after one shot and ejected the clip.

Not guilty

Everyone knows Han shot first. That bastard Lucas must be bribing the police.

hallotavagyna: [www.ajc.com image 205x275]

Black on Black crime.

So Eddie Murphy quit the NYPD and Beverly Hills PD to work in Atlanta....

That explains it.

kvinesknows: RoyBatty: I'd give Thomas a bit something more for discharging a gun in public, something like 3 months to 3 years, cause I really have no idea. I'd waive it if the army would take him and if he'd join up, because it sounds like he needs some training, but is otherwise not a guy that should be in prison.

I'd give the remainder of the 25 years to Sims.
Its actually entirely legal to discharge a gun in public if acting in self defence.. so at best... some sort of careless use of a firearm or some such.. BUT.. the dude hit his target. Quite well from the sounds of it so you cant really even have him charged with careless use

This guy should get to walk just as any police officer would get to walk if a civilian walked into a "gun battle" and was accidentally mistaken for a criminal...

However, the people who stole from him should be charged and found guilty of shooting the officer even thought they never pulled the trigger

Whats good for the Goose...

That was a rather well written article.

Theaetetus: I think Thomas' story sounds pretty realistic, and I certainly have more than reasonable doubts that he's guilty. I would not vote to convict. Plus, hasn't he been punished enough? He was almost robbed, had a gun pointed at him, had a car driven into him, got repeatedly pistol whipped!, and was then arrested and has had to face up to life in jail. And putting him in jail doesn't really serve any purpose of deterrence, retribution, or rehabilitation.

I like your mode of thinking. I hope someone follows up with the story, I'd really like to know how it pans out for him.

brigid_fitch: overmortal: I have to say that Thomas' logic regarding the situation is pretty sound. The man in uniform got out of a civilian vehicle. He did not flash a badge. His arms were covered in tattoos (Not that this is a crime, but it is unusual for an officer of the law). After having been ambushed, Thomas was well within logical limits to think that the criminals may have had a partner disguised as a police officer who would assist should the deal go sour.

As for the cop getting shot, at least he had on his vest. He pulled his weapon on a man who had just acted in self-defense, and was willing to do so again. I understand that he did not recognize this fact at the time, but to go back and say "This man is a criminal because he saw suspicious circumstances and mistook me for a robber" is pure nonsense.

I disagree. A lot of districts don't have tattoo policies. My town doesn't, while the next town over says no visible tattoos. Another a few towns over says no visible tattoos while in DRESS uniform. Also, Thomas was running away from the gas station WHILE FIRING. Moronic and irresponsible. So a cop shows up in full uniform and, instead of trying to shoot him like the punks just did, he's telling Thomas to drop the gun. Then, as the trying to handcuff Thomas, THEN he fires. WTF? I'll buy that he wasn't thinking clearly--I don't know WHAT he was thinking--but I don't think he should walk. The cop & the witness are right: It would send an extremely bad message. I don't think he should do 25 years but some jailtime is called for here.

There's no room for your logic here, the trolls have already taken over.

Headso: Funny how if this was the other way around the cop would be on paid leave until it was investigated and then he'd be back at work. Instead this guy is going to go to jail for the rest of his life... oh wait that's not funny at all.

Pretty much... this is the saddest story I have read / heard of in a long long time. Someone tries to murder him, he is running for his life. Someone with a gun (Tunnel vision) chases him and jumps on top of him and tries to shoot him. He struggles and fires his gun at them. No one is killed and he is going to get a sentence greater than someone who actually murders an individual all over a misunderstanding a poorly handled situation by the officer.

brigid_fitch: overmortal: I have to say that Thomas' logic regarding the situation is pretty sound. The man in uniform got out of a civilian vehicle. He did not flash a badge. His arms were covered in tattoos (Not that this is a crime, but it is unusual for an officer of the law). After having been ambushed, Thomas was well within logical limits to think that the criminals may have had a partner disguised as a police officer who would assist should the deal go sour.

As for the cop getting shot, at least he had on his vest. He pulled his weapon on a man who had just acted in self-defense, and was willing to do so again. I understand that he did not recognize this fact at the time, but to go back and say "This man is a criminal because he saw suspicious circumstances and mistook me for a robber" is pure nonsense.

I disagree. A lot of districts don't have tattoo policies. My town doesn't, while the next town over says no visible tattoos. Another a few towns over says no visible tattoos while in DRESS uniform. Also, Thomas was running away from the gas station WHILE FIRING. Moronic and irresponsible. So a cop shows up in full uniform and, instead of trying to shoot him like the punks just did, he's telling Thomas to drop the gun. Then, as the trying to handcuff Thomas, THEN he fires. WTF? I'll buy that he wasn't thinking clearly--I don't know WHAT he was thinking--but I don't think he should walk. The cop & the witness are right: It would send an extremely bad message. I don't think he should do 25 years but some jailtime is called for here.

And what bad message is that? Never get confused when death is on the line?

Edwardo17: This is becoming more and more common; not the particulars of this story, but the presence of Trolls in the thread before anyone has a chance to say anything remotely reasonable. This place is turning into /r/politics at a remarkable speed.

Trolls? Is that what you call people who disagree with you because they can actually think and critically analyze the situation?
The pig rushed in like a mad dog and almost killed the VICTIM! the pig showed a complete lack of any of the training that a police officer SHOULD have. And now that the truth about him being a dangerous embarrassment is out he wants to strike fear into anyone else that could ever do the same in the future, allowing him to be a wanton, rampaging bully for hire with a bloodlust. He didn't diffuse the situation; he escalated it. He is the one who should be punished.

Catsaregreen: Gotta love all these stupid comments from Internet Tough Guy Farkers who are anti-cop. But I'm sure the second y'all see a black guy, you act like Michael Bolton in "Office Space" -- and pray there's an officer nearby.

Sorry, but this guy came thisclose to shooting an officer, and like the article said, would have meant the death penalty. If the guy was that suspicious of the thugs, he should have ran the other way and called the cops.

And this article also proves my long-standing point: Nothing good comes from Craigslist.

LOL I've been seeing a cop's daughter. Both parents are black.

Never bring a S&W to a Glock fight.

...also, what happened to the rims / original thieves?

brigid_fitch: I disagree. A lot of districts don't have tattoo policies. My town doesn't, while the next town over says no visible tattoos. Another a few towns over says no visible tattoos while in DRESS uniform.

Your town, with all due respect, is irrelevant. The question would be whether it's common for officers in Atlanta to have tattoos - and even then, the question really is whether it was reasonable for Thomas to believe that officers don't have tattoos. We all agree that he shot the officer... The issue is solely his subjective intent:
(i) was he reasonably acting in self-defense, albeit mistaken?
(ii) was he acting in self-defense, but was unreasonable about that act? or
(iii) was he not acting in self-defense, but was intentionally trying to harm the officer (out of anger, or whatnot)?

If he reasonably believed that no officers have tattoos, then he may well be in category one, even if the district doesn't have a tattoo policy.

Also, Thomas was running away from the gas station WHILE FIRING. Moronic and irresponsible. So a cop shows up in full uniform and, instead of trying to shoot him like the punks just did, he's telling Thomas to drop the gun.

But the punks didn't just start trying to shoot him - according to the story, he saw their gun pointed at him and shot first. They probably didn't know he was armed and were just menacing him with the gun... which, technically, is exactly what the cop was doing.

Then, as the trying to handcuff Thomas, THEN he fires. WTF? I'll buy that he wasn't thinking clearly--I don't know WHAT he was thinking--but I don't think he should walk.

It's in the story... While the cop was trying to handcuff him, Thomas saw the tattoos and then believed he wasn't a cop and that he was about to get kidnapped and probably killed.

You can reasonably disbelieve that story, but I, personally, don't disbelieve it beyond any reasonable doubt. And accordingly, I could never vote to convict based on the evidence we have available.

The cop & the witness are right: It would send an extremely bad message.

And finally, we don't convict people based on the message it sends to others. We convict people because we believe they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Once you start leaning on "we can't let him go free, regardless of actual innocence, because of what people might think," you're heading away from any reasonable definition of justice.

That sounds fair. Because you know what happens when a police officer mistakes a civilian for a criminal and causes severe bodily harm: He gets 25 years in prison.

Oh, sorry. I meant paid administrative leave. He gets a few weeks of paid administrative leave. Almost the same thing.

I'm impressed with Theaetetus's well thought out and entirely logical argument. Sure doesn't happen that often on Fark.