A pastor was shot and killed following a drug sting in Stephens County, Ga., on Tuesday, and the officers involved and friends of the pastor are giving different versions of what led up to the shooting.
The Stephens County coroner confirmed that 28-year-old Jonathan Ayers was pronounced dead at Stephens County Hospital on Tuesday.Ayers, a father-to-be, was the pastor of the Shoal Creek Baptist Church. He maintained a personal blog linked off the church's Web page, jonathanayers.blogspot.com.
Here's the official version of events:
Sheriff Randy Shirley said that officers had been involved in an undercover drug sting at an unnamed establishment in Toccoa. He said the target of the sting was a passenger in Ayers' car. Shirley said Ayers dropped the woman off and went to the Shell station. He said the officers followed Ayers there.
Shirley said, outside the Shell station, the plain-clothes officers identified themselves with a badge. The officers said that Ayers put his car in reverse and struck an agent. They said they opened fire on Ayers when he drove toward the second officer. Two shots were fired in the car, one hit Ayers. The officers said Ayers sped away and crashed about a half mile from the Shell station. They said they found him conscious and alert, but he died a short time later.
Here's another take on it, from one of many e-mails received by WYFF News:
Jonathon Ayers was shot and killed by a Toccoa police officer. Ayers was at a walk-up ATM machine to get money to have tires put on his wife's car. After getting his money, he saw men running at him. Thinking he was to be robbed, he ran for his car. He was shot through the door and the bullet went through his lung and liver. He eventually wrecked his car and was taken to Stephens County Hospital. The bleeding of his liver could not be stopped and Ayers died in surgery.
Guess which one I believe? Am I always against the cops, no, no more than I'm always for the criminals. But when policemen shoot innocent men, I'm very suspicious.
Isn't it interesting that the old police trick of shooting bullets at an approaching car comes up again in this case? I suppose that's become one of the things they say when the real story is too shady.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
MikeB,
ReplyDeleteOnce again, let's conduct an experiment.
You stand in a parking lot or a road. I'll be in my car 200 yards away and accelerate towards you.
Considering your unwillingness to believe that a car can and is used as a weapon, you should just stand there, right?
I mean, you trust the goodness of my intentions, right?
Then we'll change it up. I'll offer to let a random person off the street drive the car. Better yet, let's use your car.
Do you trust the intentions of a stranger driving at you?
Considering your unwillingness to believe that a car can and is used as a weapon, you should just stand there, right?
ReplyDeleteNo, you get out of the way instead of standing still and doing your best Hollywood action hero impression and empty an entire clip into the car.
Bob, Thanks for repeatedly giving us that example of how a car COULD be a deadly weapon. I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is all these incidents we've been seeing in the news seem implausible to me. They really seem like the kind of thing Bruce Willis does in the movies, as PhuckPolitics said.
ReplyDeleteToday's story is especially so because we have an alternate scenario which seems much more likely.
MikeB,
ReplyDeleteI am repeatedly pointing out that the "perception" of a car as a weapon depends on your perspective.
When you are staring at a car coming at you, your perspective matches that of the law enforcement officers.
You repeatedly question the correctness of the decision of the law enforcement to fire without you being there to see their perspective.
What I'm saying is all these incidents we've been seeing in the news seem implausible to me.
So, you have multiple reports of people being nearly ran over and you find it implausible.
That says more about your ability to think then it does about the situation.
A quick Google search for "hit and run murder" returned a staggering 2,960,000 hits. Even allowing for duplications, multiple sites covering the same story, you can see this is something that happens frequently.
Yet, you find it implausible that it happens.
That says more about your ability to think then it does about the situation.
Ppolitics,
ReplyDeleteThe cops have a legal obligation to stop the criminal, not let them escape to commit more crimes.
And in many cases there isn't any way to get out of the way, that is the problem.
Are you saying that the cops should just let a criminal go?
A criminal who is willing to kill or injure to avoid a drug bust should be allowed to run loose in society?
All those comments approved, new posts and yet don't respond to legitimate questions.
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that the cops should just let a criminal go?
A criminal who is willing to kill or injure to avoid a drug bust should be allowed to run loose in society?
Bob, Sorry for not answering sooner. No, I don't think the cops should just let the criminals go. But, I don't think the cops should abuse their power either.
ReplyDeleteOnce again WISQARS to the rescue. In 2006, just over 5000 pedestrians were killed by vehicles. More 170,000 were injured. Maybe we need background checks and not allowing people under 21 to drive cars.
ReplyDeleteMikeB,
ReplyDeletePlease explain how shooting at a suspect that is trying to run them down is abusing their power?
You realize that it is a legal requirement to follow the instructions of a police officer who is on duty, don't you?
If the cop acted illegally, then the court is the place to settle that. But a person is required to obey a cop....including stopping when told.
Now, do some cops go bad, yes. Is that a reason for people not to obey the law, NO.
Do you have any evidence besides the words of his disbelieving relatives that he wasn't breaking the law?
Do you have any evidence that the police didn't follow the law and their regulations in trying to make him stop?
Once again, your prejudice is showing. People with guns bad (unless they are criminals), people shot by guns good (unless the proof is so overwhelming even you can't spin it).
Should cops be required to let people try to run them over?