Latest News & Updates On Twitter:

JUSTICE4KOFI

A DRAFT BACKGROUND TO THE CASE:

Please click here for details: A Background To The Case

JOIN THE CAMPAIGN! SPREAD THE WORD!!!

Events: JOIN IN THE ACTION!

Another demonstration coming soon!
Justin Wooten
For More Information: Dave Schneider- (407)-267-1419; Justin Wooten - (352)-213-6519

Meet Mr. Mann and demand Justice for Kofi!

Date:
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Time:
11:45am - 1:00pm
Location:
Plaza de Americas
After our last protest at the State Attorney's office, a representative agreed to meet with us this Wednesday at the Plaza de Americas to discuss the issues surrounding the shooting of Kofi Adu-Brempong. This is a public meeting, so feel free to come out and demand Justice for Kofi!

KOFI ADU-BREMPONG

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/object2/1760/33/n336549896343_3252.jpg

Friday, May 21, 2010

Statement from William P. Cervone, State Attorney, Eighth Judicial Circuit

-8">

Statement from William P. Cervone, State Attorney, Eighth Judicial Circuit

Since the shooting of Kofi Adu-Brempong, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has completed and submitted its report as to the facts involved to my office. Reports have also been submitted by the University Police Department. After reviewing those reports, obtaining necessary follow-up information, and considering the legal issues involved, I am today announcing that I will not pursue any criminal charges against any of the officers involved in this incident. Because the original charges lodged against Adu-Brempong remain unresolved, I must be circumspect in discussing this decision. Understanding the legitimate community interest in this matter, however, I can make the following statements.


First, I believe that the decision to enter Adu-Brempong's residence was legally justified by legitimate concerns for his well-being. Had that action not been taken and had he or others come to harm because of the inaction of law enforcement, an equal or stronger issue as to the propriety of police inaction would doubtless have been raised. That alternatives to entry may have existed is immaterial; I cannot speculate on events or decisions that were not made. It is also not the role of my office to direct policy decisions that may be involved in responding to crisis situations such as were involved in this matter as opposed to reviewing the legality of the course of action that was chosen. Policy discussions are for the agency involved and its leadership as well as the community (both the University and the greater community surrounding it), which in my view is best accomplished through public debate and dialog.


Second, the only credible evidence as to the circumstances of what occurred once entry was made into Adu-Brempong's apartment comes from the multiple law enforcement officers involved. No one else, civilian or otherwise, was in a position to see or hear anything directly relevant to those events other than Adu-Brempong, whose credibility is adversely affected because he was suffering from a significant mental health crisis at the time, although his subsequent statements to the media are generally consistent with the reports of the law enforcement witnesses, as is the physical evidence, which includes a metal table leg and a knife recovered from the immediate area of the confrontation. While differing from witness to witness because of their differing vantage points and focus of attention, the evidence is consistent with a circumstance where an individual armed with an object that could have been an effective and possibly deadly weapon threatened or appeared to threaten harm to others. Under Florida's self-defense laws, in such a circumstance, anyone, law enforcement officers included, has the right to use force, even deadly force, in self-defense. A debate about the propriety of this as opposed to other available options is again not for my office when the decision that was made is lawful.


Given these two conclusions, there is no basis upon which any criminal charges against the officers involved could be predicated, and it is my belief that the time has come to put that issue to rest. I would like to assure those who are concerned about the time required for this process to be completed that all involved, including Adu-Brempong's defense team, have been in frequent and productive contact aimed at finding an appropriate resolution of everything involved in this matter. I am confident that with the on-going participation of his attorneys the case against Adu-Brempong will also be resolved shortly. When legally permissible, additional information concerning that will be released. Pending that, dialog concerning the policy and procedural aspects of everything involved should certainly continue in the appropriate public forums, but all involved should be cognizant of the dangers of drawing conclusions before facts are established.


Source: http://www.gainesville.com/assets/doc/GS20337521.DOC
No charges against UPD shooter; lawyer sees case resolved soon
See Key Documents: Decision in UPD shooting (DOC - 25kb)

4 comments:

  1. 1. "First, I believe that the decision to enter Adu-Brempong's residence was legally justified by legitimate concerns for his well-being."


    Comment:


    Quote:

    Cervone determined that because Adu-Brempong had a table leg and a knife immediately available, he could be considered armed "with an object that could have been an effective and possibly deadly weapon ... Under Florida's self-defense laws, in such a circumstance, anyone, law enforcement officers included, has the right to use force, even deadly force, in self-defense."


    "Available (but not in possession or brandishing??);" "could be considered . . . ??;" "could have been . . .??"


    When the authorities start rationalizing that the "stand your ground" law applies to armed police officers, the ability of the police to ever be held accountable for citizen murders and shootings is effectively as dead as their victims, Lawdog88, Read more...

    That is why those "legitimate concerns for his well-being." is expected of them under the law. Surely William P. Cervone, State Attorney, Eighth Judicial Circuit is not trying to suggest that the best way to ensure his purported "well-being" is to shoot at him in the face in close range with an M-4 Bushmaster, a military assault rifle, and blow away a good part of his jaws, the roof of his mouth, explode his nasal cavity and cut his tongue into two? That this act was committed by a certain University Police Department (UPD) Officer Keith Smith, who had "previously been reprimanded for an incident in which he allegedly harassed and threw eggs at African Americans while off-duty", according to press reports should have made the point more pertinent.


    Is there no legitimate basis to believe in the interplay of motivations other than the much-touted "legitimate concerns for his well-being" such as racism and a residual urge to "shoot the nigger"? Is that what the State Attorney is giving his blessings to? What kind of crap is this? By refusing to the request for "An Independent Grand Jury investigations into the shooting" to clear the police officers, Bill Cervone has made himself a part of the problem rather than the solution.



    "Police could of very easily backed out of the room, closed the door, and called for a mental health expert or negotiator. How is taking a kill shot any better for him than letting him kill himself. Where was his taser? If there was ever an instance for non-lethal control, this would have to qualify."
    G8trGr8t

    ReplyDelete
  2. 2. "That alternatives to entry may have existed is immaterial."


    Comment:

    "Why can't they just aim for the leg in these situations? Why would you point and shoot a gun into someone's face???" - GatorHighlights John Brantley = the truth, Read more...


    If the legal basis of entry included "legitimate concerns for his well-being." then the alternatives to entry is material to the legal justification especially so, since his mental condition was already known to the police. You cannot simply approach a mentally disturbed person anyhow and blame your victim for your own stupid blunders, intentional or unintentional. This is a license to kill every genuinely disturbed citizen even when their mental conditions are known to the police.


    In a related article published on Monday, March 15, 2010, Nathan Crabbe of the Gainsville asks: "Was UF shooting avoidable?" and answers it in the subtitle: "Mental health experts: If police had used Baker Act, things may have ended better". Betty Strayer, who deals with Baker Act admissions as vice president for emergency services at Meridian Behavioral Healthcare, said she sees a difference in officers who receive the training. Those officers tend to show more knowledge about the Baker Act and mental illness, she said. She said law enforcement need to be aware that they can use the act without threat of lawsuit or repercussions. "If we decide after the evaluation that they don't meet the criteria, then we release them," she said.

    Is the ignorance of the police an excuse under the law?

    Points three and four to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  3. 3. "It is also not the role of my office to direct policy decisions that may be involved in responding to crisis situations such as were involved in this matter as opposed to reviewing the legality of the course of action that was chosen... is best accomplished through public debate and dialog."

    Comment:
    "The only thing missing in this tragedy was the Armored Personnel Carrier (APC) to transport these cowards to the war zone." DowntownGator, Read more...

    The use of excessive force is illegal under the law. It is not a subject of public debate. That is why "the legality of the course of action that was chosen" is not merely a matter of public debate. The police must be given the opportunity to contest this before a Grand Jury and be seen to be openly restoring its shattered image, as a result of this incident. The police had been informed of Kofi's mental problems the previous day, March 1st, 2010. According to a police report issued after the shooting, Geography Professor Peter Waylen contacted police to say that Adu-Brempong had sent an e-mail with troubling statements, which were redacted in the police report. Waylen told police Adu-Brempong had been having delusional thoughts for at least a year and that he had previously received help from a UF counselor because he was upset over a belief that the U.S. government was not going to renew his student visa, the report stated. Waylen and an officer spoke with Adu-Brempong at his apartment Monday. University of Florida police released a report from a police visit on Monday to the student and graduate assistant.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 4. "No one else, civilian or otherwise, was in a position to see or hear anything directly relevant to those events other than Adu-Brempong, whose credibility is adversely affected because he was suffering from a significant mental health crisis at the time, although his subsequent statements to the media are generally consistent with the reports of the law enforcement witnesses, as is the physical evidence, which includes a metal table leg and a knife recovered from the immediate area of the confrontation. While differing from witness to witness because of their differing vantage points and focus of attention, the evidence is consistent with a circumstance where an individual armed with an object that could have been an effective and possibly deadly weapon threatened or appeared to threaten harm to others. Under Florida's self-defense laws, in such a circumstance, anyone, law enforcement officers included, has the right to use force, even deadly force, in self-defense."

    Comment:

    What happened to the video and the number of seconds it took the police to shoot?

    "They didn't need to be there in the first place. If there was a medical reason for them being there, why couldn't they wait until he was willing to receive medical care? Are you saying that if the police decide to kick in my door, they then have the right to shoot me if I have a knife in my hand when they kick in my door, regardless of why the knife is in my hand?" philnotfil, Read more...

    'Thus, in cases where the police are allegedly conducting a "citizen welfare" investigation, the moral seems to be that the citizen should be prepared for this outcome, which is indicated by the phrase, "We are the government, and we are here to help you.' Read more...

    TAKE ACTION!

    Please, join the Coalition Against Police Brutality, Justice for Kofi Adu-Brempong to demand:

    1. UPD drops all charges against Kofi
    2. An Independent Grand Jury investigations into the shooting.
    3. Implementation of an independent review board for the UPD
    4. Indefinate unpaid suspension for the shooter, Keith Smith, pending investigation.
    5. Improvement of mental health and crisis services on campus to prevent future incidents.
    6. Elimination of UPD's Critical Incident Response Team (CIRT).

    Coalition members include Students for a Democratic Society, African Student Liason, Student Labor Action Project (SLAP), NAACP, Graduate Assistants United (GAU), International Socialist Organisation (ISO), Amnesty International. There have been three on-campus protests and marches. The first one was on Tuesday April 6th, the second 16th March, the last one was on Tuesday 20th March, 2010. The students of the University of Florida just returned from spring break (when the shooting occurred).


    Updates on further organizing, Adu-Brempong's condition, and more are regularly posted at the "Justice for Kofi Adu-Brempong" Facebook page, http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&gid=336549896343 (Facebook membership not required to view).

    For More Information:

    Dave Schneider- (407)-267-1419;

    ReplyDelete