E D I T O R I A L and O P I N I O N

12/5/2014

The Rule of Law- Shopping for Justice under the guise of Civil Rights?
By Jerry Brewer

There are many questioning and opining as to whether or not our U.S. Constitution is under siege. The
recent shooting death in Ferguson, Missouri by police, and the death of a man in police custody in New
York City attributed to a choke hold by police; is soberingly questioning whether this nation is at times
forsaking the rule of law to obtain a more favorable partisan or political authority who will acquiesce
beyond the ruling courts decision(s).
This nations current culture appears to be overwhelmingly saturated in the drama of law. This is no
doubt posing new challenges to this nation and all of our Constitutional rights. It is understandable that
civil liberties advocates monitor big brother and observe acts of authority by legislators, the president,
and enforcement officials. Our nation was built on such principles of checks and balances.
The many trends today facing law enforcement and policing officials nationwide, also demands a
tolerable intellect in comprehending the diverse tasks and monumental responsibilities in the protection
of life, property, and service to a community.
Internal and external threats to a populace exist around the clock. A casual shopping spree for the
average citizen or a pleasant cookout in the backyard on a sunny day, might mean a minute or so in pure
terror as police face a life and death situation of a motor vehicle accident, shootout, or a robbery in
which a retail clerk has been killed or injured.
We only have to look south of our southern border and further south to see the inability of police to
protect its people or remotely investigate or enforce the rule of law. Some of these nations have the
highest homicide rates in the world- many of which solve less than 5 percent of those killed. Police and
their citizens are facing superior paramilitary-like weapons and tactics from transnational organized
criminals; that have at times threatened a nation with failed state possibilities. Much of that criminal
element is now embedded in U.S. cities and requires superior skills, equipment, and training to protectlet alone to simply survive. Those nations to our south have had no choice but to use their militaries.

12/5/2014

As our nation follows media coverage and those unscrupulous pundits and others who report purported
facts before the evidence and facts are known of an incident; a frenzy of those taking sides begin to
defend and impose their personal verdicts on others. We do not have to list all of the atrocities of
beatings, killings, property damage, and civil unrest that have resulted from such arbitrary and selfserving attitudes and hatred.
This author has policed as the top administrator and leader of three law enforcement agencies in three
separate states. These jurisdictions included majority culturally diverse communities and high violent
crime (Hispanic/African American majorities; as well as an upper middle class community).
Consequently, a critical point must be made and understood by so many that are quick to minimize
some threats made to some police officials at a scene. Weapons such as firearms and knives are obvious
threats and require little discussion.
However, to those of us that have worked homicide scenes, we also know that a human being is NOT
simply UNARMED if he or she has arms and legs. Homicides by physical beatings; head stomping;
one-punch knock outs, and related acts of assault/battery occur far more than most people realize. And
these are not necessarily martial arts skills.
In many cases; especially in the Trayvon Martin case in Florida; Michael Brown in Missouri, and Eric
Garner in New York, much of the media coverage and overall national and international preliminary
dialogue of the incidents stress details that have no relevance to the first harmful event that constitutes
the crime that leads to the act of deadly force.
Officer(s) at two of the scenes listed above are attempting to enforce the law and take suspects into
custody. They expect voluntary compliance so no force other than a command is needed pursuant to
their authority. The suspect does not get the luxury of debating the decision at that point or resisting with
or without violence. A court of law will determine his guilt or innocence.
If the suspect does not comply, a force continuum matrix is used. The usual sequence is first a command
to comply. A hands-on act follows to take control. If the suspect is combative, an escalation may involve
a sprayed chemical irritant, police baton (as the violence escalates), or a Taser. At any phase of this
resistance and escalation, a law enforcement officer may use deadly force to protect his own life, or the
lives of others from imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death.
Officers are not trained or paid to wrestle, box, or wing the suspect with a firearm. Even shots to the
leg or arms sever major arteries and death may come quickly. Sometimes drug and alcohol influenced
behavior escalates these encounters. Both Brown and Trayvon Martin were shown to have marijuana
use, via the results of the autopsies/toxicology.
In the Brown case, one could argue that the first harmful event was what was described incorrectly as a
theft It was in fact a strong armed robbery. That crime is a felony. The most glaring harmful event
would be the incident at the patrol vehicle of Officer Darren Wilson. According to evidence to the Grand
Jury; Brown approached the car and prevented the officer from exiting- this was an act of false
imprisonment- another felony. The punching to the face of Wilson (a sworn law enforcement officer)
was another felony; as well as to the refusal to comply with the orders of Wilson during the hostile
confrontation; and the attempts to get the officers firearm, and his return to rush Wilson- another
2

12/5/2014

felony(s). All of the physical evidence and witness testimony vetted by the Grand Jury for what they
would ultimately determine to be reliable and matched the physical evidence- affected their decision to
not indict. Only a low threshold of evidence would have been needed at the Grand Jury level to indict. A
trial by Judge or Jury would have required much more to convict.
In the case of Trayvon Martin, the first harmful event was not that he was monitored or followed or
Zimmerman should or should not have exited his vehicle; it was the confrontation in which Martin
punched Zimmerman quickly in the face knocking him to the ground and mounting Zimmermans waist
and pounding Zimmermans head into the ground, according to evidence presented to the Jury.
The prosecution had to also show that Zimmerman was of a depraved state of mind at the time of the
shooting and had planned to kill Martin or act recklessly. The defense had to show that Zimmerman
legally defended himself with lethal force against an aggressor that he believed was about to cause him
great bodily harm or death. Florida law allows it under those specific circumstances.
The evidence in the Eric Garner case was determined to be in the favor of the NYPD officer and the
Grand Jury declined to prosecute after reviewing all of the evidence presented; including the medical
condition of Garner.
Again, the issue of armed or unarmed becomes an issue. Officer(s) confronted Garner and Garner
resisted; refused to comply and told the officer(s) to leave him alone. He was forcibly restrained when
he refused to comply with the lawful commands of the police, and it was not known if he was armed
under his clothing because they could not pat him down. Had Garner been armed and pulled a weapon
prior to being restrained or when resisting; and killed an innocent person; the officers would have faced
the wrath of being negligent or complacent. Contributing factors to his death were Garners weight,
chronic asthma and cardiovascular disease.
The duty of grand juries and courts (trials) are to separate fact from fiction. In the case of Brown, the
Grand Jury met on 25 days over a three-month period and heard all of the evidence, and applied the
testimony to the physical evidence and made their ruling. Calls prior to a grand jury from some in the
public wanted to have the prosecutor dismissed; for federal intervention, and other relief beyond the
jurisdictional authority in which the case was made.
The Trayvon Martin case in Florida went through the same maneuvering. Many wanted the police
department and Chief of police to stand down. They did not want the county of the jurisdiction to
prosecute; they wanted a state wide prosecutor. They wanted independent investigation(s); a change of
venue. They wanted federal intervention.
As in the cases of Brown, Martin, and Garner, President Barack Obama, as well as Attorney General
Eric Holder, have entrenched themselves into the cases, attempting to apply federal law in review and
oversight and making recommendations to discuss problems being experienced by black communities
at the hands of predominately white police departments. This all, with no verbal support of U.S. courts
that have performed according to the rule of law and made decisions. Much of their accusations and
3

12/5/2014

innuendos made well in advance of the factual evidence of the cases presented. As evidence emerges,
their calls are for civil-rights investigations for police across the nation.
Attempts to fundamentally transform law enforcement and essentially handcuffing police officers that
are comprised of men and women of a myriad of race and color throughout this nation; is a dangerous
precedent. These are people sworn by oath to protect and serve and on the front lines of life and death
scenarios daily. There is apparently a major failure at least at the Attorney Generals position to know
and monitor the numbers and reasons why so many police have been killed in the line of duty in a given
year of service alone.
Police are subsequently placed in a dark light by these actions and arbitrary assumptions and decisions at
the highest levels, and by some in the media to promote controversy and tease for ratings. This destroys
a system of justice. The message is that police cant be trusted- put cameras on them! We dont believe
them; they are racists; they are liars, and they are haters. In court, police tesimony is generally
considered in the most favorable light.
Many believe and have shown that they do not have to abide by police authority and the rule of law, and
some of those engage in criminal behavior in defiance and a sense of anarchy in protest about justice and
the law of the land.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATES

United States of America

Jerry Brewer is C.E.O. of Criminal Justice

International Associates, a global threat mitigation
firm headquartered in northern Virginia. His website
is located at http://www.cjiausa.org
TWITTER: cjiausa
BREWER Published Archives