Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

The police were called because he was drunk driving. This is a given. How else did he manage to fall asleep in the drive through lane? Beyond reasonable doubt, he was driving under the influence. The caller to 911 is witness and evidence of that.

Up to the point before being shot, he was also an armed felon and threatening police because he stole a taser which is classified as a fire-arm.

I am pleased that we agree that he would be alive if he behaved differently.

No Max, the police were called because Brooks was asleep in his car blocking traffic in the drive-thru and not because he was seen driving his car drunk. Had Brooks not given any information to the police, there wasn’t anything they could have done about it because he was on private property and not on the street, and if they had arrested him, it would have been an unlawful arrest because he had not committed a crime at that point.

Sleeping in your car drunk or otherwise on private property is not a crime until if and when the property owner trespasses him and he refuses to leave. How Brooks car got to the drive - thru is immaterial. The police cannot reach a conclusion that he drove there. All the police would have done is arrest him if Brooks was trespassed by Wendy’s and he refused to leave. He could have left the car right where it was and just walk away and have Wendy’s have the car towed away.

Of course, knowing these cops, they would have arrested him once he left the property on foot by being drunk and disorderly in public place on the sidewalk. Best Brooks could have done was to call for a cab if the police allowed him that courtesy, which I doubt as he already asked the police to let him sleep it off in his car. This was a moment for the cops to be good cops and help this guy out, but there never is a good cop, as they want to make an arrest whenever they can or issue a ticket.

How did the car get into that drive through?

Also, every drive through I know of has CCTV.

It doesn’t prove anything. For all you know he was drinking in his car at Wendy’s private parking lot. Brooks should have just kept quiet and invoked his 5th amendment. The police had no cause to give him a sobriety test on private property for sleeping in his car.
Had he been pulled over on the street, then they could as he was witnessed driving erratically. Brooks could still refuse, but it would have resulted being arrested and taken to the police station.

[Paphitis]

The police were called because he was drunk driving. This is a given. How else did he manage to fall asleep in the drive through lane? Beyond reasonable doubt, he was driving under the influence. The caller to 911 is witness and evidence of that.

Up to the point before being shot, he was also an armed felon and threatening police because he stole a taser which is classified as a fire-arm.

I am pleased that we agree that he would be alive if he behaved differently.

No Max, the police were called because Brooks was asleep in his car blocking traffic in the drive-thru and not because he was seen driving his car drunk. Had Brooks not given any information to the police, there wasn’t anything they could have done about it because he was on private property and not on the street, and if they had arrested him, it would have been an unlawful arrest because he had not committed a crime at that point.

Sleeping in your car drunk or otherwise on private property is not a crime until if and when the property owner trespasses him and he refuses to leave. How Brooks car got to the drive - thru is immaterial. The police cannot reach a conclusion that he drove there. All the police would have done is arrest him if Brooks was trespassed by Wendy’s and he refused to leave. He could have left the car right where it was and just walk away and have Wendy’s have the car towed away.

Of course, knowing these cops, they would have arrested him once he left the property on foot by being drunk and disorderly in public place on the sidewalk. Best Brooks could have done was to call for a cab if the police allowed him that courtesy, which I doubt as he already asked the police to let him sleep it off in his car. This was a moment for the cops to be good cops and help this guy out, but there never is a good cop, as they want to make an arrest whenever they can or issue a ticket.

How did the car get into that drive through?

Also, every drive through I know of has CCTV.

It doesn’t prove anything. For all you know he was drinking in his car at Wendy’s private parking lot. Brooks should have just kept quiet and invoked his 5th amendment. The police had no cause to give him a sobriety test on private property for sleeping in his car.
Had he been pulled over on the street, then they could as he was witnessed driving erratically. Brooks could still refuse, but it would have resulted being arrested and taken to the police station.

Sorry, but a judge is never going to be buying that one.

Whether he kept quiet or not, he would have still been arrested and he would have to explain it to the judge, and all I can say is that I wouldn't buy that story at all. Plus, I hope he was smiling because they would have had everything on camera.

[Kikapu]

The police were called because he was drunk driving. This is a given. How else did he manage to fall asleep in the drive through lane? Beyond reasonable doubt, he was driving under the influence. The caller to 911 is witness and evidence of that.

Up to the point before being shot, he was also an armed felon and threatening police because he stole a taser which is classified as a fire-arm.

I am pleased that we agree that he would be alive if he behaved differently.

No Max, the police were called because Brooks was asleep in his car blocking traffic in the drive-thru and not because he was seen driving his car drunk. Had Brooks not given any information to the police, there wasn’t anything they could have done about it because he was on private property and not on the street, and if they had arrested him, it would have been an unlawful arrest because he had not committed a crime at that point.

Sleeping in your car drunk or otherwise on private property is not a crime until if and when the property owner trespasses him and he refuses to leave. How Brooks car got to the drive - thru is immaterial. The police cannot reach a conclusion that he drove there. All the police would have done is arrest him if Brooks was trespassed by Wendy’s and he refused to leave. He could have left the car right where it was and just walk away and have Wendy’s have the car towed away.

Of course, knowing these cops, they would have arrested him once he left the property on foot by being drunk and disorderly in public place on the sidewalk. Best Brooks could have done was to call for a cab if the police allowed him that courtesy, which I doubt as he already asked the police to let him sleep it off in his car. This was a moment for the cops to be good cops and help this guy out, but there never is a good cop, as they want to make an arrest whenever they can or issue a ticket.

How did the car get into that drive through?

Also, every drive through I know of has CCTV.

It doesn’t prove anything. For all you know he was drinking in his car at Wendy’s private parking lot. Brooks should have just kept quiet and invoked his 5th amendment. The police had no cause to give him a sobriety test on private property for sleeping in his car.
Had he been pulled over on the street, then they could as he was witnessed driving erratically. Brooks could still refuse, but it would have resulted being arrested and taken to the police station.

Sorry, but a judge is never going to be buying that one.

Whether he kept quiet or not, he would have still been arrested and he would have to explain it to the judge, and all I can say is that I wouldn't buy that story at all. Plus, I hope he was smiling because they would have had everything on camera.

It is not up to the judge but the law. First the district attorney has to file criminal chaeges, but if he has no evidence, he's got nothing. Suspicions, hearsay, maybes do not count in the courtroom.

[Paphitis]

Here is a story for all of you.

I have been in a similar situation. I was stopped by Aussie Police for a Breath Test. I was completely sober. Not a single drop.

But it was a traffic stop of some difference. had a TV Crew shoved in my face for a reality RBT TV series.

I never refused testing but on that occasion I did. Had a passenger with me (witness).

he shoved the machine in front of my mouth and I refused to take the test. I stated that my reason for refusal was on accounts of my privacy and that I refuse being filmed like a commodity to entertain the masses on TV.

Police threatened me with arrest saying that it is against the law to refuse a test. I said, i'm sure it is Officer, but let's say you arrest me, how do you think this will play out in front of a judge when I explain why I'm refusing the test. I continued by saying that if the lights and camera are turned off, I will not refuse to take the test. I didn't know whether I had a right to do that, but I was pissed off.

he said that I can't refuse the test under any circumstances. Yes I said to him, I am not sure if that is correct, but I think that a case like this will be making the news, and that chances are you will be dealing with a PR nightmare and the risk for you is that the judge might take my side.

A bit of to and fro, some agitation, before the officer ordered the camera crews to stand down. he wasn't taking the risk.

he then asked me to blow in the machine, I blew, reading was 0.00. I was free. I said good bye to the Officer and told him I'm going to the pub with my mate.

Got a weird look and rude nod of the head.

[erolz66]

What he did was stupid.

Yes you keep going on about the evidently drunk confused misled and peaceful citizen being stupid. Yet of course a sober working paid public servant first misleading him and then shooting him dead in the back in cold blood when he panicked because he had no idea what the fuck was going on because he had been misled is not at all stupid. No that is all perfectly understandable and normal and business as usual. This is in major part why the protest globally have so much support from normal every day citizens around the globe and why that support is so confusing to you Paphitis.

[Paphitis]

The police were called because he was drunk driving. This is a given. How else did he manage to fall asleep in the drive through lane? Beyond reasonable doubt, he was driving under the influence. The caller to 911 is witness and evidence of that.

Up to the point before being shot, he was also an armed felon and threatening police because he stole a taser which is classified as a fire-arm.

I am pleased that we agree that he would be alive if he behaved differently.

No Max, the police were called because Brooks was asleep in his car blocking traffic in the drive-thru and not because he was seen driving his car drunk. Had Brooks not given any information to the police, there wasn’t anything they could have done about it because he was on private property and not on the street, and if they had arrested him, it would have been an unlawful arrest because he had not committed a crime at that point.

Sleeping in your car drunk or otherwise on private property is not a crime until if and when the property owner trespasses him and he refuses to leave. How Brooks car got to the drive - thru is immaterial. The police cannot reach a conclusion that he drove there. All the police would have done is arrest him if Brooks was trespassed by Wendy’s and he refused to leave. He could have left the car right where it was and just walk away and have Wendy’s have the car towed away.

Of course, knowing these cops, they would have arrested him once he left the property on foot by being drunk and disorderly in public place on the sidewalk. Best Brooks could have done was to call for a cab if the police allowed him that courtesy, which I doubt as he already asked the police to let him sleep it off in his car. This was a moment for the cops to be good cops and help this guy out, but there never is a good cop, as they want to make an arrest whenever they can or issue a ticket.

How did the car get into that drive through?

Also, every drive through I know of has CCTV.

It doesn’t prove anything. For all you know he was drinking in his car at Wendy’s private parking lot. Brooks should have just kept quiet and invoked his 5th amendment. The police had no cause to give him a sobriety test on private property for sleeping in his car.
Had he been pulled over on the street, then they could as he was witnessed driving erratically. Brooks could still refuse, but it would have resulted being arrested and taken to the police station.

Sorry, but a judge is never going to be buying that one.

Whether he kept quiet or not, he would have still been arrested and he would have to explain it to the judge, and all I can say is that I wouldn't buy that story at all. Plus, I hope he was smiling because they would have had everything on camera.

It is not up to the judge but the law. First the district attorney has to file criminal chaeges, but if he has no evidence, he's got nothing. Suspicions, hearsay, maybes do not count in the courtroom.

I don't believe it is lawful to refuse a breath test, a sobriety test or resist resist.

the guy was completely goners albeit on very misdemeanor traffic offences like driving under the influence.

[erolz66]

I don't believe it is lawful to refuse a breath test, a sobriety test or resist resist.

Of course it is lawful to refuse a sobriety test if all you are doing is sleeping in a switch off car and NOT driving it. Which is exactly why the police had to trick him in to voluntarily consenting to do such a test. If Brooks had not tried to please and placate the police man by consenting to doing something he had no legal obligation what so ever to do, in the mistaken hope that this would placate the police man, he would not today be dead. Never assume when dealing with the police that they have your interest as a citizen at heart. The simple plain reality is that way way too much of the time they do not have your interests at heart at all and all they will try and do is find some way they can label you as a criminal. That is what too many of them do too often and it is a real problem. Ordinary people are waking up to the realities and are saying enough is enough.

[Maximus]

Erolz, you are making shit up as you go along.

The only thing that is debatable in this case, in my opinion, is whether deadly force was justified. Which I think it was not.

Brooks was guilty of everything else, including being a contributor to his own death.

[Paphitis]

I don't believe it is lawful to refuse a breath test, a sobriety test or resist resist.

Of course it is lawful to refuse a sobriety test if all you are doing is sleeping in a switch off car and NOT driving it. Which is exactly why the police had to trick him in to voluntarily consenting to do such a test. If Brooks had not tried to please and placate the police man by consenting to doing something he had no legal obligation what so ever to do, in the mistaken hope that this would placate the police man, he would not today be dead. Never assume when dealing with the police that they have your interest as a citizen at heart. The simple plain reality is that way way too much of the time they do not have your interests at heart at all and all they will try and do is find some way they can label you as a criminal. That is what too many of them do too often and it is a real problem. Ordinary people are waking up to the realities and are saying enough is enough.

Sorry, but sleeping all alone in a car that was driven into a drive through, through many CCTV cameras, is more than enough to ask for a sobriety test.

It would happen in Australia as much as it would happen in the US or any other first world country.

Brooks really did put himself in a very bad situation and for no good reason. Worst thing that could have happened to him is being arrested and getting a small life. Instead, he acted in a way that got himself killed. I am not justifying his shooting as I believe it was excessive force by the police, but he should have never got himself in that situation for something that is really a nothing burger.

[erolz66]

People should educate themselves, myself no less than anyone else (but not you Paphitis - you know everything about everything without having to make any effort so you get a free pass)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_dri ... able_cause

"Probable cause" is established by obtaining evidence from the police encounter sufficient to meet the "probable cause" standard for arrest. "Probable cause" is not necessarily sufficient to obtain a conviction, but is a prerequisite for arrest.Examples of "probable cause" for a drunk driving arrest includes:

1. Observation
2. Confession of having consumed alcohol in the recent past.
3. Documented test results

In Brooks' case there was no observation other than a dive of 15 meters not on a public highway but from the drive thru line to parking spot undertaken at the instruction of a police officer. There was no probable cause and thus no means to arrest unless 2 and or 3 could be obtained by the officers. Brooks repeatedly claims that he was dropped off at the Wendy's by a different driver in a different car and that the rental car he was found sleeping in was already at the Wendys when he was dropped off. The police needed him to confess and submit to sobriety test in order for them to be able to arrest him and get their 'result' and that is what they were after. As the wikipedia article explains they used standard Police tactics to trick such confessions out of suspects.

The confession is the easiest way to establish "probable cause", and police know that social convention encourages people to respond to police questions. While it is inadvisable to lie to police, the suspect has the option to "respectfully decline" to answer questions.[62][63]
The suspect is typically not given Miranda warnings at this time because the encounter legally has not gone from "investigatory" to "accusatory", and because the police want the suspect to believe the questions are not being made to gather "probable cause" evidence. At this point, the suspect is not required to provide more than identification and vehicle information.

This is what they did in this case. They wanted Brooks to believe that he was not in fact helping them to give them the power to arrest him but was in fact just trying to placate them so that they would let him go about his business. An example of the kind of lies they routinely use and used on Brooks to get what they want would be "I want to make sure you are OK" . I believe it was the shock of Books discovering that all his helpfulness (beyond what he was legally obliged to give) gained him was the police suddenly trying to handcuff and arrest him, combined with his general confusion and that he was in a strange city and the fact that this was a week or so from images where a black man gets handcuff and then executed in broad daylight by police with people watching, that led to him panicking and trying to get away and the fatal consequences of that. I genuinely believe if at any point the Police had clearly explained to him the true situation, along the lines of 'we want you take a sobriety test and PBT and if you agree and fail we will handcuff you and arrest you and if you pass we let you go, or if you refuse to take the test we will handcuff and arrest you' then this incident would not have ended up with someone dying. That they did not make this clear is part and parcel if the standard procedure of trying to trick citizens in to making their lives easier because they so often do not understand what their rights are. We should all educate ourselves what our rights are because you can be dammed sure the Police will NOT tell you what they are and will in fact try and mislead you and sometimes even just blatantly lie. This kind of shit should be taught mandatory in schools along with the reason why it is every citizens civic duty to not just automatically give in to any police request in any situation regardless of what the law requires. If this was done Brooks would be alive today and we would have a better more accountable police force to boot.

This is what a lawyer would advise anyone to do

https://larryformanlaw.com/why-you-shou ... ety-tests/