The LoRusso Law Firm, which is representing Rolfe, released a statement on the incident that said, in part:
“The loss of life in any instance is tragic. However, Officer Rolfe’s actions were justified under
O.C.G.A. §17-4-20 and O.C.G.A. §16-3-21. A peace officer may use deadly force to 1. arrest a suspected felon when he reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others, 2. to protect himself and others from a life-threatening injury, and 3. to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Mr. Brooks violently attacked two officers and disarmed one of them. When Mr. Brooks turned and pointed an object at Officer Rolfe, any officer would have reasonably believed that he intended to disarm, disable, or seriously injure him.”
The law firm argued that Brooks suddenly attacked Rolfe and Brosnan “without warning or provocation” when they placed him under arrest. The statement also said that the officers “used the least amount of force possible in their attempts to place Mr. Brooks into handcuffs,” which included Rolfe deploying his Taser twice.
“Officer Rolfe is well known to the courts and there is no compelling reason to bring any charges against them
before the GBI has completed its investigation and published its findings,” the statement concluded.
.
