an absolute phenomenal job at doing that the past ten years. >> dana: jon ponder, i'm running out of time. i love your story. thanks for coming on the show. thanks so much. thank you all for joining us. i'm dana perino. bill hemmer, over to you. >> bill: thank you. a lot moving today. see you at 5:00. good afternoon. i'm bill hemmer. about to hear about possible criminal charges in the deadly shooting of rayshard brooks. the d.a. in fulton county georgia set to speak at any moment. brooks was shot at a wendy's friday night. he resisted awrist, stole the taser and tried to take off. the officer says brooks fired the taser at him and that's when he returned fire. the shooting sparked more protests and more calls for police reform. want to bring in our team. former new york city commissioner howard safer is back with my and from fox news,

geral geraldo riviera. what is the legal issue in front of this prosecutor in atlanta? >> well, bill, the legal issue -- thanks for having me on. the legal issue is key. was it a deadly threat? did the officer believe that brooks posed a deadly threat to him or justifiable homicide? the guy was shot twice in the back. it's unlikely it's a justifiable homicide but that is the argument that the defendant will make. i believe he will be charged. i think the appropriate charges is manslaughter. he didn't set out to call rayshard brooks, but he did not have to use deadly force. the guy was a drunk driver, running away. where was he going to run? he had a taser that had been discharged. to whom did he represent a deadly threat? seems man slaughter is the

appropriate charge. in this political climate, it's possible, bill, that even a murder charge could be lodged against this officer. >> the d.a. is paul howard. howard, what is your view at this? >> yeah, i have to disagree with geraldo. we don't know all the facts yet. this was a 43-minute confrontation. it was somebody resisting arrest who went for possibly the officer's revolver. took the taser, did in fact fire the taser. i think the legal issue is going to be what was in the minds of the officer when he fired at this individual. did he think that he was in serious danger of losing his life or his eyes? or that this individual was growing to be a danger to the public. he may have been mistaken, but the crux here is what was in his

mind and why did he act the way he acted. it's not an ambiguous thing like the floyd killing. >> bill: i'll come back to geraldo for that. what do you think as the defense attorney? i've seen a statement. state law allows him to protect himself and others. that's what they'll argue. how do you see it now? >> i agree we have to get into this mind of this particular officer. i have a factual question. that is this. i represent a lot of people that get accused of dwi. when they get out of the car, they're not patted down by the officer. so bill, i'm wondering if perhaps the officer thought that maybe what was getting pointed at him was something other than the stun gun. maybe he thought that there was a weapon that had been hidden. we need to find this out to see

what was going on through his head. >> bill: you're saying there's a lot we don't know. that will play out in time. geraldo, respond to howard's disagreement with you and the legal side. >> it's a delightful to be reunited with commissioner safer. we worked together on many cases in the path. let me read you a portion of the manslaughter statute in georgia, a person was provoked to killing another individual without originally intending to kill the victim. certainly the office did not originally intent to kill the victim. so a murder charge is inappropriate. but this is very specific, bill. it has to be a deadly threat. did this man running away with that discharged taser represent in the officer's mind reasonably in the officer's mind a deadly threat to the officer or others? it seems to me that you have a drunk, that you've had a relationship with for 43 minutes. he's running away. where is he going to run? to his mother's house, his

house? he's going to run out of steam. he's not a deadly threat. it would seem the prosecutor will maintain. it was not the risk that would justify his being shot twice in the back it seems to me, bill. >> bill: so you'd go for manslaughter. do i hear you correctly? >> yes, that's right. manslaughter is appropriate. >> bill: and let the jury have it out. >> the jury has to -- this is a case for a jury, is no way seems to me in this political climate that this prosecutor will take it upon himself not to charge this officer under the circumstances. >> bill: in that consideration -- >> he will bring to it the jury. >> bill: howard, what about that view? >> well, i think that his description of the climate is correct. what the facts are still has to come out. just the other day, the prosecutor himself made a statement that a taser could be a deadly weapon. >> well, that is true. there was a taser used against

two college students a few weeks ago. brought a lot of national play. those officers in atlanta lost their jobs. i think a total of four in the end. does that factor in here in a court of law? >> absolutely. a taser can be a deadly weapon. given in climate, d.a.'s don't charge where they think they're going to end up. they charge what they think they can prove. if this district attorney's office think they can prove something more than manslaughter, they will charge that and then let the jury figure it out or perhaps negotiate it down to manslaughter. i agree with geraldo. i think if anything, it's manslaughter, not murder. that doesn't mean it will be charged that way. >> bill: steve harrigan is also on stand by in atlanta as we wait for the d.a. to come out. let's get a sense of what is happening in that community today. kwood afternoon. >> good afternoon, bill.

a lot of news crews out here. inside the courtroom is brooks' widow and the family attorney. we expect to hear from them later on today, too. they have given emotional press conferences speaking about their loss. we're looking at least four possibilities, murder, felony murder, manslaughter or no charges at all. the key question is how will the city react what will be enough to keep the calm here in atlanta. we've heard some hints from the district attorney. he said the taser was not a threat of deadly force. we'll know in a few minutes where the charges stand, by. >> hang on, steve. thank you from atlanta. back to geraldo. isn't that an essential question before a judge? was the taser considered a deadly weapon? >> i agree with commissioner safer. it has been used. the atlanta district attorney did mention it was a deadly weapon. but it had already been

discharged. once it has been discharged, it takes awhile for it to regenerate to get another shot out of it. it was not a deadly weapon at the time that brooks was killed. i believe that it's going to be extremely difficult given the fact that it was a bad shot. now, if brooks had been facing the officer, if he had been, you know a much more imminently threatening him rather than running away -- remember the case in south carolina a few years back. what was the name? walter scott in april 2015. in that case, clearly the victim had made some distance between him and the cop as he ran and the cop shot him. that cop pled guilty to federal charges and is doing 20 years in the penitentiary. i think this is close to that. maybe you can argue that a reasonable person in the heat of

that wrestling match that they had, the adrenaline pumping and the rest thought that the victim could represent a deadly threat. but that's going to be a very big jump for the defendant and then the current climate again, as steve harrigan describes, i saw a guy with "italia" on his back. there's new crews across the world. everybody is looking with baited breath to his case. george floyd is the atmosphere that permeates all of this. i don't know how the d.a. doesn't end up charging this man. if the jury down the line as in the author scott case deadlocked, the jury did that. the d.a., takes the political pressure off of him. >> bill: you said that interestingly. the d.a. has said, howard, voluntary manslaughter is a possible charge here. is that --

>> i guess it is a possible charge. again, we can slice and dice this thing a thousand ways based on some video clips. but what has to happen is relative to whether or not this individual is a danger. he taught two policeman and winning. you have to be concerned about who else was he in danger too and whether or not the taser was going to be recharging in 10 seconds or two minutes. that's a question of fact. >> bill: this question about whether the officer had a reason to fear from his life. do you factor that in based on the few facts that we know at the moment? >> you can't factor it out. that's the best we can do right now. it looked like my colleagues are saying, it was a 45 minute relationship with this person who all of a sudden went nuts. that will trigger the police

officers in question here and it's not like the police officer shot right away. what we see on the video have the victim in this case turning around and attempting to tase a police officer. using a police officer's taser. i mean, so we can't ignore these facts. i don't think the d.a. will ignore them. >> howard, the d.a., we'll hear from him momentarily. running a few minutes late in atlanta. when that does begin, we will take you there live. we're told that rayshard brooks widow is in the room there. we saw the family there a day or go or the day before when they got together in front of the cameras expressing remorse for the loss of rayshard books. back to geraldo. keep the conversation going. how about steve harrigan? his feel for what is happening in the city of atlanta. the city likes to say we're a city so busy to hate. that calling goes back decades in atlanta. we've heard a little bit of that. the focus of that city is

clearly been rocked by this event late friday night, geraldo. >> remember mayor keisha lance bottoms spoke out about the rioting that follow the george floyd decision in atlanta. she was magnificent. very calmly and scolding the perpetrators, violence in her city when the riots broke out. said there's no way to bring about social change, to destroy the city. to me she elevated herself to the front ranks of possible vice presidential candidates. now in this case she's called it murder. she's taken that leap. the police chief has resigned in atlanta. you have the police force itself in disarray. all of my police friends, including commissioner safer, are saying, you know, wait a second, this cop did what was reasonable to protect himself and others. this is a seven defense case. the way i see it, i see it in

the hard cold light, the practicingmatic life of today. on the anniversary of the emanuel church massacre, this will be a criminal charge, lodged against this officer, be very serious felony. might be murder. i'm thinking manslaughter will be more appropriate. >> one thing that is interesting to all three of you the amount of video we have. body cam footage, dash cam footage and surveillance video from the restaurant itself. howard, stand by. geraldo, back to you in a moment. more on this when the d.a. comes out in atlanta next. here's record-breaking news for veterans. va mortgage rates have dropped to near 50-year lows. newday usa can help you refinance your mortgage and save thousands a year. newday's va streamline refi makes it fast and easy because there's no income verification,

no appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. i urge you to call newday usa now. get relief finally, with magnilife® pain relieving foot cream. while also restoring cracked, damaged, and itchy skin. and get living. available at your local retailer.

if your child doesn't 1 iseem themself at times,ed. they may not be hydrated enough. wabba wabba!

all new, plant powered creative roots gives kids the hydration they need, with the fruit flavors they love, and 1 gram of sugar. find new creative roots in the kids' juice aisle. >> bill: so waiting for the decision from the d.a., the district attorney there in fulton county, georgia. martha maccallum joins my coverage. i'm told there's movement inside the room. this hat a time when the country is rather tender. martha? >> indeed. we wait for this decision on whether or not there will be charges for these two officers. we know for one of them, the situation that he has prior violations and that rings the alarm bells that we saw that came up with derek chauvin in the george floyd case as well. all of america will be very focused on the outcome of this and we hope that whatever it is

that there will be peace that follows this decision. it's obviously a big moment for the mayor, keisha lance bottoms. a lot of discussion about her as a potential vice presidential candidate on the joe biden ticket. so all of this as we saw with george floyd, these tragic circumstances and the losses played out on the national stage as america decides what should be done about greater equality, police brutality. it's all very much on the national stages. we're smack in the middle of an election year. >> we don't know a lot about george floyd if there's not a camera in minneapolis and we don't get the angles in atlanta unless we get so many dash cam video and body cam video and surveillance from the restaurant itself. i believe family members have come into the room now. that will play a role in this, martha. how the country consumes it. >> everybody saw both of those

videos, bill. it's a good point. we cannot -- americans cannot look away from these situations. one of the things in the george floyd case that came to light is the 911 call from the dispatcher that was watching the video in the george floyd case. she said that i don't want to be a snitch, which was an interesting choice of words for her. she was watching what was going on and she was obviously very disturbed by it. she wanted to bring attention to what was going on there. then you have this situation. we all can see when the handcuffs went on mr. brooks, that's when he started to struggle and led to the taking away of the taser from the police officer, which led to the death of this man and we know that the shots were fired in his back. all of these things bring to mind the michael brown case, which we thought in the initial go of that, that that was the

case as well. turned out not to be. everybody can see clearly what happened. it's the interpretation of it that will be up to the judge to decide how this whole case moves forward in minutes from now. >> bill: dwight howard from the lakers is in the room as well. also, geraldo is here, howard safer. i'm looking at the lawyers response to the officer here. according to lance leruso. they said the officers actions were justified under state law and goes on to state how many laws that he was able to use knowing his a felon on the run. you're a defense attorney. you would focus on something like that immediately is. that enough ultimately however to get a client acquitted? >> in this case, in georgia, it might be. so glad you brought this up. the georgia statute that defines

justification, which is what they call self-defense, said that not only are you justified in using it if you're think you're in fear of serious bodily injury or death, but also if you're preventing a forcible felony. now, we have the victim here, who had essentially committed an aggravated assault on the officer in the moment before the officer pulled his gun and shot. the question will be, okay, was there an opportunity in that interim, in between committing what could have been a forcible felony and shooting this victim in the back, was there an opportunity for this officer to reflect? was he no longer in reasonable fear? does the statute cover that time period? these are the things you have to throw in the mix if you're defending the officer in this case. >> bill: thanks. stand by. back with our team in a moment. quick commercial break again. the d.a. is running behind in atlanta. we'll have this for you when our coverage continues next. i...

hold on one second... sure. okay... okay! safe drivers save 40%!!! guys! guys! check it out. safe drivers save 40%!!! safe drivers save 40%! safe drivers save 40%!!! that's safe drivers save 40%. it is, that's safe drivers save 40%. - he's right there. - it's him! he's here. he's right here. - hi! - hi. hey! - that's totally him. - it's him! that's totally the guy. safe drivers do save 40%. click or call for a quote today.

theand we want to thank times, the extraordinary people safe drivers do save 40%. in the healthcare community, working to care for all of us. at novartis, we promise to do our part. as always, we're doing everything we can to help keep cosentyx accessible and affordable. if you have any questions at all, call us, email us, visit us online. we're here to help support you when you need us. take care, and be well. to learn more, call one eight four four cosentyx or visit cosentyx.com wherever you make go, lexus will welcome you back with exceptional offers. get zero percent financing and make no payments for up to 90 days on all 2020 lexus models. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

experience amazing it's totally not the same without you. we miss your let's do this look, the sound of your laugh cry screams, and how you make every day here the best day ever. we can't wait to get you back so we've added temp checks, face coverings, social distancing and extra sanitizing to get the good times going again. it's time to roll out the red carpet and kick open the universal gates. we're finally back... and can't wait until you are too.

>> once again, we're awaiting the decision from the d.a. in fulton county, georgia. from seattle, the police chief says the city is not under siege and there's no such thing as a cop-free zone. she's referring to the area occupied by protesters for more than a week. the chief's comments come after a business owner claim that he called 911. nobody came to save his shop from vandals. the city is now set up concrete barriers so emergency vehicles can access the area. jonathan hunt back on scene today. records of inside the protest zone. what is happening there, jonathan? >> bill, it's about half the

size it was. we want to give you a look directly inside. these are the concrete blocks. they're covered in plywood so that they can be used for whatever message the pro testers want to write on each of them. the blocks stretch all the way up the slope there. leads you to the seattle police department. that obviously the precinct that was abandoned by the police a week ago monday. now, this whole shrinking of the area and putting up the concrete blocks. according to the police chief and fire chief should make it safer for everybody, yet still preserve the protester's first amendment rights. >> tell it like i see it. a lot of young people there. some of them look like me, this is a movement of george floyd. the last thing on my heart as a public safety official is something bad happen in that

place for all of those young men and women who are trying to express their first amendment rights. >> the city officials hope by establishing this as a semi official protest zone, they may head off any further violence. we shall see. bill? >> we shall. jonathan hunt back on the scene in seattle. thank you, sir. jonathan was talking, the d.a. came into the room in full on the county, georgia. set to announce whether he's made a decision on the charging document with regard to garrett wolf and devin bronson, the two police officers on the scene late friday night at the wendy's. so here we go. paul howard, the d.a. at the microphone now. >> mrs. miller, the husband of rashard brooks. she's here today with her attorney. after we make our presentation,

she is going to make some remarks or mr. stewart. we also have with us today three witnesses from west memphis, tennessee. they are here with their lawyers, sean williams. we are also going to ask mr. williams to address you as well. so we have decided to issue warrants in this case today. i have with me copies of the warrants and after my presentation, we will let you know how you can get copies of the warrants to date. so the question have asked, why

were we able to charge this case now. so i want to explain that we have already had an opportunity to speak with three of the witnesses in this case. those are the three witnesses who were from west memphis, tennessee. we have had an opportunity to conduct interviews with seven other witnesses other than the three witnesses from tennessee. we've also had an opportunity to view -- we've had an opportunity

to review eight videotapes. two body cam tapes, two police department dash cam tapes. we've also had an opportunity to review a wendy's surveillance tape. we have also viewed three citizens cell phone video. with many videos, we had the opportunity to enhance the videos so that we could get a better look. the other thing that we have had an opportunity to do is to view some of the physical evidence, the chevrolet trail blazer was a vehicle that was in the line at wendy's on the night of this

incident and it received a shot from officer roth's gun. we've had an opportunity along with the gbi now to view that trail blazer. my office has had an opportunity to inspect the crime scene. we have conducted a canvas of the area. we started our investigation at about 1:15 a.m. on saturday morning. we have been working on this case around the clock since that time. we have spent some time examining the taser evidence in this case. we've actually examined and possessed the two tasers that were used. we have also had an opportunity to examine the taser logs that are prepared as the tasers are used and we have also consulted with a taser expert from the

company that manufactured the tasers. we received a preliminary medical autopsy. we received a preliminary ballistics report. in reaching our conclusions today, we have worked with both the georgia bureau of investigation as well as the atlanta police department. this will be the fourth time that we have asked that arrest warrants were issued in the case before an indictment. this lists the other three cases that we were involved with where an arrest warrant was issued prior to indictment. this marks the 40th prosecution of police officers misconduct in our county and the ninth time

that we prosecuted a homicide case committed by a police officer. eight of those cases involved black males and one of those cases involved a black female. so in reaching our decision, there were some that we considered important. one of the things that we noted from our evaluation was that mr. brooks on the night of this incident was calm. he was cordial and really displayed a cooperative nature. secondly, even though mr mrmr. brooks was slightly impaired, his demeanor during this incident was almost jovial. also, we noted that he received many instructions from the atlanta officers. he was asked many questions. some of the questions he was

asked repeatedly, but for 41 minutes and 17 second, he followed every instruction, he answered the questions. the fourth thing we noted is that mr. brooks was never informed that he was under arrest for driving under the influence. this is a requirement of the atlanta police department when one is charged with dui. the atlanta police department's own procedures require that that person is informed immediately that they are under arrest. then he was grabbed from the rear by officer roth who made an attempt to physically restrain him after the 41 minute and 17 second discussion. we concluded and considered it as one of our important

considerations that mr. brooks never presented himself as a threat. at the very beginning, he was peacefully sleeping in his car. after he was awakened by the officer, he was cooperative and he was directed to move his car to another location. he calmly moved his car. mr. brooks was asked whether or not he had a weapon. he indicated that he did not. without any resistance, he passed his driver's license to the officers and the officers then asked mr. brooks whether or not he would consent to a pat-down or a body search. mr. brooks allowed them to search him. the search yielded no weapon. we found that it was of interest that when the officers patted mr. brooks down, they noticed there was a bulge in his pants.

they didn't pull that item. they took his word that that bulge represented a number of dollar bills. mr. brooks never displayed any aggressive behavior during the 41 minutes and 17 seconds. now, this is another important consideration that we discovered as we evaluated this case. once mr. brooks was shot, there is an atlanta policy that requires that the officers have to provide timely medical attention to mr. brooks or to anyone who is injured. after mr. brooks was shot, for some period of two minutes and 12 seconds, there was no medical attention that applied to

mr. brooks. when we examined the videotape and in our discussions with witnesses, what we discovered is during the two minutes and 12 seconds that officer roth kicked mr. brooks while he laid on the ground. while he was there fighting for his life. secondly from the videotape, we were able to see that the other officer, officer brosman stood on mr. brooks shoulder while he was there struggling for his life. >> we were able to conclude that based on the way that these officers conducted themselves while mr. brooks was lying there, that the demeanor of the officers immediately after the shooting did not reflect any

fear or danger of mr. brooks, but their actions really reflected other kinds of emotions. so as we are drawing our legal conclusion in this case, we were led by the two foundational cases in this matter, one being tennessee versus garner and what that case points out is when an officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect that the officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses an immediate threat of death. or of serious physical injury to that officer. the next foundational case that we use in our analysis is graham versus connor, that says that

this test is based upon that of a reasonable officer on the scene and not the individual officer. but a reasonable officer on the scene. we concluded at the time that mr. brooks was shot that he did not pose an immediate threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or officers. if you would get the photograph . this is the first photograph that we were able to -- it's

crooked. get it straight. what that photograph illustrates is the point that officer rolfe at this point was firing a taser. this is mr. brooks firing a taser as well. i don't know if you can see it clearly, the prongs from the taser were actually fired above officer rolfe's head. i'd like you to look at the position of officer rolfe and mr. brooks, that they are here next to this red automobile. if we look at the next

photograph, photograph -- the positions of the parties have charged. mr. brooks has now moved away from his original position and we estimate the distance is probably 12 feet. officer rolfe has moved about 10 feet from the position in what is our exhibit number 1. this second video or second field shows the very instance that the shot was fired into the

back of mr. brooks. we have calculated the distance and the distance that they are apart at that time was 18 feet and three inches at the time that the shot was fired. so based upon that information, we have concluded that mr. brooks was running away at the time that the shot was fired. mr. brooks was shot twice in the back. one of the shots was a center shot to the back that penetrated his heart. it was done by a 9 millimeter glock. now, one of the things that we also are relied upon in our conclusion is something that is called under the law or referred to as an excited utterance. that's when someone makes an

immediate statement. because it's made without the ability to consult with counsel or to think about it under the law, an excited utterance is considered as highly reliable. so at the time that the shot was fired, the utterance made by officer rolfe was "i got him." that was the statement that was made at that time. we also noted that officer rolfe was firing a taser at mr. brooks. the city of atlanta sops in fact prohibit officers from firing tasers at someone who is running away. so the city of atlanta says you cannot even fire a taser at someone who is running away, so you certainly can't fire again or handgun at someone who is running away.

so in addition to our findings as many of you already know that the atlanta mayor, mayor keisha bottoms and the police department concluded that officer rolfe's actions were excessive and in violation of apd's sop. it's -- i believe it's 4.1 and after the analysis that their actions were excessive, officer rolfe was fired. we have also concluded that rolfe was aware that the taser in brooks' possession, it was fired twice. once it's fired twice, it presented no danger to him or to any other persons. now, we've had something quite remarkable to happen in this

case. it involves the testimony of the other officer, devin brosnon. now he's become a state's witness. he's decided to testify on behalf of the state in this case. what he has said to us, that is within a matter of days, he plans to make a statement regarding the cullability of officer rolfe. he indicated that he is not psychologically willing to give that statement today. officer brosden has admitted that he was in fact standing on mr. brooks' body immediately after the shooting. so these are the charges that we have had filed today signed by one of our superior court

judges. these are the 11 charges against officer rolfe. the first charge is felony murder. this is the death as a result of an underlying felony. in this case, the underlying felony is aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. and the possible sentence is for a felony murder conviction would be life without parole or the death penalty. he's also charged by -- in the arrest warrant with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. this is a count charging him for the shooting of mr. brooks. the possible sentence for aggravated assault is 1 to 10 years. the second of the third aggravated assault count is for the shooting towards or in the

direction of mr. melvin evans. mr. evans was the person who was seated in the car. we have the picture . if you would point out this automobile is the place that mr. evans and his two companions were driving. and a shot was fired. i believe we have also got a photo of the shot that ended up in the vehicle.

so with count 4 against officer rolfe, it charges him with aggravated assault for firing the weapon in or in the direction of daniel killians who was in the passenger's side of the front seat of the car. next slide. count 5 is an aggravated assault charge. this was a charge for shooting towards or in the direction of michael perkins. mr. perkins was seated in the rear of this same vehicle at this time. there's a charge for criminal damage for shooting 72 that vehicle. also officer rolfe is charged with seven violations of office. each carry as 1 to 5 sentence. these are violations of his oath of office of the city of atlanta, arresting mr. brooks for the dui without immediately

informing him of the arrest. shooting a taser at mr. brooks while he was running away, which again is a violation of atlanta's own sop. thirdly, excessive force when shooting a firearm at mr. brooks and number four is the failure to render timely medical aid. those are the four violations of oath. the eighth is for kicking mr. brooks and the possible sentence for kicking mr. brooks is from 1 to 20 years. we actually have a photograph .

there's a total of three charges. the first is for aggravated assault. this is for standing or stepping on mr. brooks' shoulder. and the possible sentence for this crime is 1 to 20 years. this is a photograph of

mr. brosden. at the time he is standing on the body of mr. brooks. as i indicated earlier in our conversations with mr. -- with officer brosden, he admitted that he stood on the body of mr. brooks. he said that he believes he was standing on mr. brooks arm. but that is what the photograph shows. we've charged him with two violations of oath. one is for the standing on the shoulder. that is an unauthorized weapon list control technique that the city of atlanta prohibits and the second violation of oath is for the failure to renter timely medical aid to mr. brooks.

we're asking officer breden and officer rolfe to surrender themselves by 6:00 p.m. tomorrow. because officer brosden is becoming a cooperating witness for the state, we're asking the court to grant a bond of $50,000 and to allow mr. -- officer brosden to sign that bond. as i indicated, that he would become one of indicate that he's willing to testify against someone in his own department. as for officer rolfe, the person who fired the two bullets, we're

asking -- we're recommending no bond for officer rolfe. if he is given a bond, that would be done by one of our superior court judges. because of the severity of his act and then following up that act with kick manager brooks, we're asking that he not be granted a bond. i do want to ask mr. sean williams. mr. williams represents melvin evans who was driving the vehicle from memphis. i have already apologized to mr. evans on behalf of the people of fulton county and the city of atlanta. he was only down here a short while. really unfortunate that he was -- his vehicle was fired upon that night.

>> thank you, mr. howard. i first want to on behalf of all three of my clients who not only witnessed this horrific and tragic killing of this young man, i want to offer the condolences from them for the rayshard brooks family and particularly his daughter. it has been very difficult for each one of my clients because they witnessed it. they themselves have a lot of emotion on what they saw and what they was a part of unvoluntarily. i want to thank paul howard personally and commend him. i've been doing these type of cases across the nation. mr. howard is one of the few prosecutors that will go on the line to investigate something like this as serious as this and to do it in a way that i believe makes the city proud as i'm a resident of this great city.

as he said, with greatness comes responsibility. the city of atlanta is a great city. and i wanted to apologize to my clients themselves. they came from memphis and witnessed this. they're not going to give statements here today. but i will confirm to you that they have met with the georgia bureau of investigation, provided them statements as well as information to support what you saw presented today by paul howard. it confirms that at no time was mr. brooks ever a threat to anyone including officers in that wendy's parking lot. my client's statement confirms that mr. brooks was running, his back was turned. he was never a threat to anybody. the only threat that arose is when officer pulled out a gun. two of the bullets entered

mr. rayshard brooks' body killing him. one of those bullets entered my client's vehicle almost killing them. we could be hear talking about four murders. for that, my clients have suffered a lot, but nothing compared the what this family has. with that said, my clients are here to join the fight of justice, to provide any assistance to this family as well as to the fulton county district's attorney's office and the gbi. they look forward to an opportunity where they have justice served. i want you to know that they were fearful for their lives. that bullet came very close to them and mr. brooks' body laid less than ten feet from their vehicle. keep in mind, this was in a crowded wendy's drive through parking lot.

when you take the actions of reasonableness as mr. howard said, reasonableness never has a deadly weapon being fired when you have innocent bystanders like my clients standing. all of those things as well as the fact that mr. brooks was not a threat to any officer that night should have gone into play but didn't. i hope and pray with this action by mayor bottoms and the task force, that we don't have to have any press conferences like this any time soon. thank you, mr. howard. >> ladies and gentlemen, mrs. miller, who is the wife of rayshard brooks is here today. i think her attorney, chris stewart, going to speak for her.

>> good evening. i'm chris stewart. my law partner, justin miller. tamika is not in a position to speak right now. she wasn't aware of all of this information like we weren't aware, just like i don't believe the nation was aware of all of this. that the shot happened after the deployment of the taser that you would kick another human being after you just put two bullets in his back. but even in dark times like this, you have to try to see the light. the positivity of this situation is the courageousness of the officer to step up. it's officers like that that change policing. i know he will probably catch all kind of problems and hate.

it's the courageousness of those officers that we love and support. it's craziness of district attorneys that will do their job. we were willing to accept whatever the findings were. that's why that's why you become a police officer. duets rent. so, it is not joy watching the charges of what is happening to this officer, because it shouldn't happen. so, it is heartbreaking. but it is an attempt to redefine justice. and like i said before, we don't have any idea what it is anymore in this world. and if this is what justice is going to start looking like, officer stepping forward to stop other officers coming forward and helping trying to get a family who now has their father