Archived page

    … A responding officer, Officer Joseph Barrett, finally approached Edward and Candance Ballard’s home. He walked over to Edward Ballard, who was outside with his children, to ask him about the gunshots. Barrett told Ballard that a neighbor called police after seeing someone carrying a pistol and assault rifle outside the Ballards’ home and firing a shot.    
    Ballard told the officer he heard gunshots but didn’t know where they came from.    
    When Officer Barrett asked for Ballard’s name, Ballard said, “Eddie,” but the officer pressed him for his full name.    
    “Sir, listen, either you identify yourself to us, or we have to detain you, and we have to figure out who you are,” Officer Barrett is heard saying on the body camera footage.    
    Georgia law does not require individuals in Ballard’s situation to provide their full names or identification.    
    After Ballard doesn’t give his full name, Officer Barrett handcuffs him, removes his wallet from his back pocket, and asks another responding officer to check his state identification in the police system.    
    Moments later, Ballard’s family comes out of their home, and Ballard’s wife, Candance, questions Officer Barrett about why her husband is in handcuffs.    
    Barrett tells Ms. Ballard, “Because he refused to identify himself.”    
    When Ms. Ballard explains that it’s not against the law for her husband not to identify himself, the officer tells her that Ballard has to provide a name and date of birth “by law” while police are investigating an incident and speaking to potential witnesses.

  • steebo_jack@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Its much worse than the snippet above…the officers come back days later and arrests the wife and detains her until the husband turns himself in for obstruction. Yah this is gonna be a tax payer funded shit show when it goes to court…

    • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wonder when the individual is going to be held responsible for their actions instead of the system. It’s all fucked.

      If Bezos was responsible instead of Amazon for making people piss themselves during their shift, things would change a lot faster.

  • SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They are going to win so much money suing the absolute shit out of these police

    Edit: if you haven’t read the article it is so bad and they will win so easily. The whole aftermath of the original incident is just a lawyer’s wet dream.

    • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s so blatantly illegal, and it’s all on video, he has a good chance of getting past ‘qualified immunity’.

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sue the shit out of the state - the filth won’t be footing the bill - that’ll be the taxpayers.

      When there’s no consequences on the rare occasions the local mechanism for state violence do get caught, why would they ever change?

  • Serinus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s 2023. Everyone has the internet in their pocket, including every law for your state.

    There’s no reason a cop shouldn’t be able to cite the law given five minutes to look it up.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s no reason a cop shouldn’t just know the relevant laws for conducting an investigation.

      The fact that police are not required to be aware of the law is astounding.