Georgia police chief calls 911 to report he accidentally shot his wife — twice

Watching the press conference, I would assume they mean 2pm eastern, so it ought to be going on, and all I see are mics and an empty podium and some bored reporters talking off camera about bad batteries in their recorders.

eta: it's about to lead off. The detective from office of professional standards, the DA and some Peachtree talking head are going to talk.
linky

...aaaaand they're going to try to cast it as a WORK RELATED SHOOT. Holy crap!

etfa: "...we're going to be reviewing it to confirm the shoot fits with department policy"

I guess you have to do this if you're going to try to sweep it under the blue carpet of qualified immunity.

originally posted by: Bedlam
Watching the press conference, I would assume they mean 2pm eastern, so it ought to be going on, and all I see are mics and an empty podium and some bored reporters talking off camera about bad batteries in their recorders.

eta: it's about to lead off. The detective from office of professional standards, the DA and some Peachtree talking head are going to talk.
linky

Got a link?

a reply to: Bedlam

Your link is a link to editing your post...which we can't do It comes up as security error. lol

a reply to: Bedlam

As in he was on a call when he shot his wife at 430 am?

Musta picked up an extra shift, you know those police chief wages are low

I was sort of joking when I said they would try to sprinkle crack on her to cover it up.

During the presser, they twice used language that infers they're going to try to call this a police action and not try him as a citizen that was maybe two sheets to the wind on New Year's Day and blew a few small holes in the old lady due to criminal negligence.

That way, he can invoke qualified immunity to cover nearly any action he took, and avoid prosecution.

What a chicken# thing to do. Seriously.

a reply to: superman2012

Sorry...I was typing at mach 2 trying to get it posted.

Hold on a minute. Before we pass judgement on the Chief, we need to know if the wife was wearing a hoodie.

originally posted by: superman2012
a reply to: Bedlam

Your link is a link to editing your post...which we can't do

It comes up as security error. lol

Yes, that's kinda weird, except in my case I can see all the text, including stuff not in bedlam's post.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Bedlam

As in he was on a call when he shot his wife at 430 am?

The GBI spokeswoman made sure she stated it was his service weapon. The internal affairs guy twice said they were reviewing the incident to verify that the shoot adhered to department policy on use of force.

So, as gobsmacky as it might be, it's sort of sounding like they're going to try to make it out to be a police action.

eta: I went back to see if 11Alive was streaming replays of it, and all you get is a weather radar map. The link to their home page is:

Here

I'm still looking for a replay of it to make sure I'm not imagining things. I might really hope that's not what they said.

a reply to: Bedlam

She must have been coming right for him...

just my 2 cents ,with him being a cop,and if he did anything on purposes
why did it take 2 shoots and not get the job done with 1

a reply to: olaru12

Everyone keep an eye on the news..

This is what some of the MSM are reporting so far : Google News Results

Glad it got picked up, Christmas is over now so the "nice police" news stories and media campaign should be over.

We'll see what happens, luckily this is being handled by a state agency, but we all know corruption has no glass ceiling.

S&F

a reply to: Bedlam

The internal affairs guy twice said they were reviewing the incident to verify that the shoot adhered to department policy on use of force.

Why would they have a policy on ''Accidental" use of force?

I can't help but wonder if the police officers among us still believe there is not a double standard in place here. If this guy wasn't a cop he would be locked up right now. I wonder if he will get away with murder too?

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: Bedlam

The internal affairs guy twice said they were reviewing the incident to verify that the shoot adhered to department policy on use of force.

Why would they have a policy on ''Accidental" use of force?

Well, you'd be reviewing it for that if you were going to claim you were acting as an officer when you shot the mysterious stranger in your dark bedroom at 0400. Because then you get the magic cloak of qualified immunity.

It takes it out of the "I screwed the pooch and shot my wife" and puts it into the "even when I'm off duty, I'm on duty, and I saw this possible perp in my bedroom and responded with force as per department policy, so nanny nanny boo boo you can't touch me"

a reply to: olaru12

From reading only the heading and off the top of me head.
Was it once in the head and once in the chest?

a reply to: Bedlam

I guess you have to do this if you're going to try to sweep it under the blue carpet of qualified immunity.

If it were local law enforcement investigating this then you may have something, but the GBI is a different story as they don't play favorites with officers that break the law.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: olaru12

From reading only the heading and off the top of me head.
Was it once in the head and once in the chest?

He only hit her once, the GBI lady said. Maybe he only fired once. On the 911 recording he apparently said he fired twice, as GBI said that after reviewing the physical evidence she was only shot once. That's a bit ambiguous.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

Hold on a minute. Before we pass judgement on the Chief, we need to know if the wife was wearing a hoodie.

And eating skittles...

It is possible.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Bedlam

I guess you have to do this if you're going to try to sweep it under the blue carpet of qualified immunity.

If it were local law enforcement investigating this then you may have something, but the GBI is a different story as they don't play favorites with officers that break the law.

What breaking of the law? If it's within department policy, IA can just claim it's a righteous shoot in the line of duty. In which case, no laws are broken.

I'm not claiming he murdered her. Just that he was negligent in a way I'd likely pay for the hard way. And it's a cinch they conveniently forgot to test for alcohol in time.

I hope they post the whole thing somewhere, I'd love to go back over it a couple of times. I'm really hoping I misunderstood. But I don't think I did.