logo
New documents shed light on police killing of Georgia ‘Cop City' activist

New documents shed light on police killing of Georgia ‘Cop City' activist

The Guardian28-01-2025

Previously unavailable records obtained by the Guardian shed light on the killing of environmental and social activist Manuel Paez Terán during a police operation aimed at clearing out less than two dozen people from an Atlanta-area forest as they protested against a training center planned to be built nearby known as 'Cop City'.
The incident was the first of its kind in US history, and Georgia authorities have released scant information about what happened during the police operation two-plus years ago. None of the Georgia state patrol officers involved were wearing body cams, so no video evidence of the shooting exists.
Paez Terán's death catapulted the broad-based movement against Cop City to national headlines, then in its second year. Apart from the so-called 'forest defenders' who camped in the forest, the movement has included efforts at mounting a referendum on the training center, record public participation in city council meetings, lawsuits, numerous protests and environmental and civil rights groups. Police say the center is needed for 'world-class' training.
The records appear to confirm that Paez Terán fired a gun at police from inside a tent, as Georgia authorities have stated since the 18 January 2023 incident – and that six officers fired back, filling the activist's body with 57 bullet wounds, instantly causing death.
But the records also show 'a series of events before and during the operation' that made such an outcome more likely, according to a use-of-force expert and veteran police officer consulted by the Guardian.
The expert drew attention to issues ranging from the legal basis underpinning the operation to the shooting of pepper balls into Paez Terán's tent immediately before gunshots began, as well as national 'best practices' in planning such operations.
The records include police planning documents, 'crime scene' photos, police deposition transcripts and other parts of the Georgia bureau of investigation's file on the incident. The state has withheld the file from the public, press and Paez Terán's family since the incident – even though it cleared the officers involved of any wrongdoing.
But journalists behind a podcast series premiering this week called We Came to the Forest obtained the records, and exclusively shared them with the Guardian.
Details drawn from the records paint a picture that Paez Terán was 'not the violent domestic terrorist who shot at police' or 'the martyred activist who was assassinated', said magazine journalist Matt Shaer, who created the series, together with radio and podcast journalist Tommy Andres. 'The reality is more complicated and tangled.'
Those details include: about 110 officers from five agencies took part in the raid, 50 from Atlanta, together with a helicopter equipped with an infrared camera, ATV vehicles, and a K9 officer – to clear the forest of about 20 people.
Officers were told they were clearing the future site of Cop City, but the operation took place in a 140-acre public park about a mile away. The activists in the forest were labelled 'domestic terrorists' in the operation's planning document – but only a handful had been arrested and charged with that crime, a month earlier. None have been found guilty, two years later.
The operation's stated location is important because the future Cop City site was private property, owned by the Atlanta police foundation and leased to Atlanta – so anyone found there would legally have been trespassing. But the park where the operation took place was open to the public and had no signs about trespassing.
Although the operation's planning document repeatedly calls the activists who were camped in the forest 'domestic terrorists', the only notation under the planning document's 'History of violence/ weapons' category is '[p]reviously attacked officers with fireworks and slingshots'.
Importantly, the document also authorizes officers to shoot pepper balls if they find a protester in a tree house, and that '[t]he pepper ball will not be targeted at the suspect, but at the area around them'. It says nothing about shooting pepper balls into tents. Pepper balls can result in permanent injury, according to research.
Other records show officers received a last-minute change in orders on the operation's goals, via radio – after they were already advancing through the woods. During the early-morning briefing nearby, they were told to allow any protesters they came across to leave, after checking their IDs. But an unnamed official changed the orders, telling officers to arrest everyone they came across, according to the deposition of Georgia state patrol captain Gregory Shackleford, who is listed on the planning document as the operation's tactical commander.
As for the shooting itself: ballistics evidence appears to confirm that a bullet that wounded one of six Georgia state patrol officers surrounding Paez Terán's tent matched a gun belonging to the activist. A hail of gunfire from the six officers followed, causing Paez Terán's immediate death.
But records also show that it had only taken about three minutes for the encounter between the state troopers and Paez Terán to get to that point. The activist had refused to leave the tent several times and the officers fired six pepper balls into the tent, big enough for one or two people. Then gunfire erupted.
The time element – three minutes – caught Steven D Remick's attention.
Remick, a retired police officer with 28 years' experience, current police trainer and expert on police use of force, reviewed some of the records for the We Came to the Forest podcast, and also spoke to the Guardian.
'The thing is, time's on your side here. No one's in danger, no one is calling for help. Did they have to fire the pepper balls? Were there other options? Why not get behind some cover, create some distance, and continue to talk to the person?' he said.
Remick speculated that the last-minute change in orders requiring officers to arrest everybody could have played a role in their behavior. 'If you're telling them to arrest everybody without telling them to exhaust de-escalation and communicate with everybody first – depending on the threat – they're going to rush,' he said.
As for the pepper balls, Remick told the Guardian that officers are generally trained to 'know your target and what's beyond it' – meaning that if they could not see exactly where Paez Terán was, and they were firing into a small, enclosed place, 'you can kill or injure somebody, and that's a pretty significant issue'.
'That doesn't negate the officers' right to fire to defend themselves,' he added, 'but at the same time, you may have precipitated [Paez Terán] shooting by ignoring protocols on the use of pepper balls and not pursuing more communication. You don't do these things, and there's a reason why.'
The untruth behind the planning document's stated rationale for the operation – removing protesters from land that was private property – also bothered Remick. 'That's a huge liability,' he said.
Similarly, preparing more than 100 officers in the operation's planning document to come upon 'domestic terrorists' without establishing the basis for the label is also a liability, he said. 'You can't just go into a forest and say, 'We're arresting everybody for domestic terrorism.' You have to tell officers in the plan – these people, at this time, were involved in this activity.'
As for why no one will ever be able to see what happened that day in the forest: 'One of the things that bothers me most is that every group [in the operation] didn't have at least one body cam. That's another planning error … Why didn't they think of that?'
The podcast also features the voices of some of the people from the Stop Cop City movement, and what brought them to defend the forest southeast of Atlanta.
Reflecting on the activists, Shaer, the journalist, said: 'I'm not sure I've ever believed in anything as much as them. The energy and life it gave them, the resolve they showed … People came to the forest and built a miniature city – it didn't work forever; but it worked for a while. There's something to admire there.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

James Cleverly's shadow Tory leadership bid heats up
James Cleverly's shadow Tory leadership bid heats up

New Statesman​

time2 hours ago

  • New Statesman​

James Cleverly's shadow Tory leadership bid heats up

Photo byIs James Cleverly making another bid for the Conservative leadership? That's certainly how his speech at the Conservative Environment Network's Sam Barker Memorial Lecture on Wednesday night, in which he talked about 'rejecting both the Luddite left and the Luddite right', has been interpreted by Tory watchers. 'James Cleverly takes on Kemi Badenoch over decision to ditch net zero targets', read the Guardian headline. The Mail went with 'Kemi Badenoch faces Net Zero revolt as Tory big beast James Cleverly warns her to ignore climate change 'luddites''. The Telegraph, meanwhile, wrote it up as 'Former home secretary directly challenges Kemi Badenoch on net zero'. Cleverly himself has pushed back hard against the suggestion that his speech was in any way a rebuke of the current Tory leader, calling it 'fake news'. In a punchy Twitter thread, he pointed out that he never once mentioned the term 'net zero' in the speech (he also didn't mention Badenoch), and claimed protecting the environment ('like Margaret Thatcher once did') was 'in our economic and security interests'. Indeed, the text of the speech itself was far more about foreign policy (in particular the threat of Chinese dominance and mass migration caused by climate change) than it was about carbon emission targets. But the fractured state of the Conservative party is such that any intervention from a high-profile figure will be read as a tacit (or not so tacit) criticism of Kemi Badenoch's leadership and attempt at positioning to be her successor. That applies to Cleverly's environmental speech just as much as it applies to Robert Jenrick's viral videos on confronting fare-dodgers on the London Underground. It is the latter who has drawn the most attention in the seven months since Badenoch became leader. Partly, this is due to the fact that Jenrick was the runner-up, after a mix-up over vote-swapping meant Cleverly was knocked up before he had the chance to face the membership. Partly it's down to Jenrick's place in the shadow cabinet, whereas Cleverly has taken a break from frontbench politics. And partly it's to do with visibility – once dubbed 'a very ambitious blur' by Andrew Marr, no one watching Jenrick's frenetic activity in opposition has any doubt that he still covets the top job. Jenrick's stance, in the leadership contest and since, has been to shift rightwards and attempt to neutralise Nigel Farage by moving onto Reform's turf. But as the Tory party grapples with having to rebuild from an election calamity that saw it lose hundreds of seats to Labour and the Liberal Democrats, Cleverly's name is increasingly being whispered by moderate Conservatives anxious about both the polls and the Reform-wards tilt. Cleverly's positioning as the 'One Nation' candidate in the 2024 leadership race came as something of a surprise to those close to him. A Brexit-backer first appointed to the role of foreign secretary by Liz Truss, he assumed the role of the moderates' champion almost by default, with both Jenrick and Badenoch running from the right. One friend in the party described his politics as 'to the left of Kemi, but not by much – his heroes are Thatcher and Regan', and called the One Nation label 'grossly simplistic'. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe But it is true that Cleverly saw himself as a unifier, someone who could bring different strands of the party together after its worst ever defeat and who understood that parties can only win by building a broad coalition of support. Another ally said his pitch to the membership, had he got to that stage, would have been to argue there is more mileage in listening to voters who abandoned the Conservatives over concerns about competence and values rather than chasing people who have found a new home in Reform. At the time, the received consensus was that Tory members always pick the more right-wing candidate of the pair offered to them and would do again. That consensus is the reason Jenrick is the now bookies' favourite, seen as the likeliest successor to Badenoch. But something interesting may be happening to the Conservative membership. Tory members are notoriously hard to poll (we don't even know how many there are), but Reform now claims to have over 200,000. A substantial chunk of these are understood to be former Tories who have quit the party since the 2024 election. That will inevitably have shifted the internal dynamics among those who remain, perhaps to the extent that more moderate members – those repelled by Farage who find Jenrick's talk of some kind of pact with Reform anathema – now hold the majority. A Cleverly candidacy now, I was told by an active member in one local association, would have a much higher chance of success than in autumn 2024. (Others have different perspectives.) The parliamentary party too is more nuanced than current narratives about the Tories' rightwards tilt suggest. In the penultimate round of MP voting, the two candidates coded as more centrist – Cleverly and Tom Tugendhat – received 59 votes together; Jenrick and Badenoch got a combined 61. (On the environmental front, the Conservative climate caucus in parliament boasts 49 MPs.) A former Tory MP referred to the remaining One Nation cohort as the 'sleeping giant' of the Conservative party – a group that, were it to band together, could be a serious force in parliament. It will not have escaped their notice that the Tories are spiralling situation under Badenoch. A poll last month put the Conservatives fourth – below Reform, Labour and the Lib Dems – on a popularity level not seen since 2019 and Theresa May's Brexit deadlock. One Tory insider called the figures 'extinction-level'. Some Conservatives are getting desperate: rumours are swirling of various plots to oust Badenoch, possibly even before her year's grace period as leader is up in November. A Survation poll last week suggested 60 per cent of 2024 Conservative voters thought bringing back Boris Johnson would be better than keeping Badenoch as leader. Against this backdrop, any signs of dissent are being seized upon. Earlier this week, eight Tory MPs (including Father of the House Edward Leigh) wrote to Keir Starmer saying they would support him if the government were to move to recognise a Palestinian state – another move interpreted as an attempt to 'defy' Badenoch. Cleverly gave his Conservative Environment Network speech the following day, and was similarly read as a rebuke. The rumour persists that a coup is just around the corner, and every intervention plays into that narrative. Any hint of a Cleverly revival, however, should be tempered with a few caveats, both personal and political. His wife Susie, who is herself much loved in Conservative circles, came through a difficult battle with an aggressive form of breast cancer two years ago, which would caution anyone considering what's widely considered one of the worst jobs in politics to think twice. 'I'm not sure he's really been able to be in that headspace,' was the assessment of one friend. More generally, while frustration with Badenoch is growing, even her fiercest critics acknowledge that changing leaders yet again would do 'irreparable damage' to the already wounded party and be 'a colossal act of self-harm'. And that's without taking into considering how difficult it is to rebuild so soon after an election. One former MP who lost their seat in July put it bluntly: 'She's doing an impossible job badly.' Even Jenrick, for all his obvious ambition, doesn't want a leadership challenge now. His video efforts are aimed firmly at attacking Labour figures (Keir Starmer, Richard Hermer, Sadiq Khan). Yes they can be viewed obliquely as presenting an alternative pattern for leadership, but it isn't Badenoch in the direct crosshairs. Axing a leader so soon would fuel Labour and Reform narratives that the Tory party is too dysfunctional to be taken seriously, and the new leader – whether Jenrick, Cleverly, or someone else entirely – would be facing the exact same challenges and the same uphill battle. Boris Johnson has in past years likened himself to Cincinnatus, the Roman statesman who 'returned to his plough' after leading the state at a time of crisis and was then called back to assume power a second time. But years before that the then London mayor described his ambition to be PM with the line that 'Obviously, if the ball came loose from the back of a scrum – which it won't – it would be a great, great thing to have a crack at.' A passionate rugby fan himself, this was the comparison made by several people close to Cleverly about his leadership hopes. That doesn't mean that the former home secretary was clueless as to how his speech might be interpreted. One of the major criticisms of Badenoch is not merely the direction in which she seems to be taking the Tories, but the fact this seems to be down to 'drift' as opposed to a conscious and deliberate strategy, leaving the party undefined and chaotic. 'The first stage of surviving is defining yourself,' one centrist Tory put it. They then quoted the line from the musical Les Miserables: 'It is time for us all to decide who we are.' Cleverly's bold defence of a Conservative environmental agenda – one that takes in both economic and national security concerns – should be read, they argued, as a reminder that there is another way of doing leadership, one that isn't afraid of taking stances that come with trade-offs, 'and someone has to be a flag-bearer for it'. Finally, there is the personality issue. While Badenoch's management style veers towards abrasive and her media appearances lack cut-through, Cleverly is respected from all wings of the party as a strong media performer who can bring people together. 'James was pointing out that charismatic leaders are available,' one Tory insider quipped. 'He can't help being likeable and human.' What the speech does reveal is how far perceptions of the Tory party have travelled in a very short space of time. When Badenoch announced the party's U-turn on net zero in March, Sam Hall, director of the Conservative Environment Network, noted the decision 'undermines the significant environmental legacy of successive Conservative governments'. Six years ago Theresa May was signing the UK's net zero commitments into law; three and a half years ago Boris Johnson was championing Britain's climate leadership at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow. Back then, Cleverly's insistence that 'the idea that we must choose between a strong economy and protecting our environment is outdated and wrong' or support of climate commitments as 'defences against energy shocks and geopolitical instability' would not have been considered remotely controversial in Tory circles. Now, it's interpreted as a leadership challenge. And until the situation improves the Conservatives, so will everything else. [See also: Kemi Badenoch is in a hole – and she keeps digging] Related

What the Trump administration doesn't get about the ‘fake news' media
What the Trump administration doesn't get about the ‘fake news' media

The Independent

time5 hours ago

  • The Independent

What the Trump administration doesn't get about the ‘fake news' media

It was the summer of 1997 – a few months after a notable marathon libel case in which our crime correspondent, Duncan Campbell, had successfully defended his exposé of suspected corruption at Stoke Newington police station. Around four in the morning, I was jolted awake by a burly policeman in the bedroom. We were living in Highbury, North London, and I soon worked out that the house was swarming with police officers, along with their dogs. It turned out that a burglar had smashed through our front door in the middle of the night. The police eventually left and, as the last one disappeared up the path, he said to me: 'You're the editor of the Guardian, aren't you? You might like to know we're all based at Stoke Newington nick.' My heart may have missed a beat. Duncan had, after all, just vanquished five of his colleagues in court. But I was wrong: as the copper tugged his dog into the van and drove off, he said: 'Tell your Mr Campbell to keep digging.' That was the thing some people struggled to understand about the way Duncan – who died recently – worked. You could expose bent cops and be in favour of the police. You could be dealing with the Met Commissioner as chair of the Crime Reporters' Association in the morning and have a drink with a bank robber in the evening. Of course, with Duncan, it went further, as anyone who attended one of his publishing parties would know. There would be chief constables, great train robbers, judges, barristers, old lags and old hacks. The art was to work out which was which. Everyone trusted Duncan – except Mr Justice French in the Stoke Newington trial. In the previous 33 months, the police union, the Police Federation, had fought and won no fewer than 95 libel cases in a row. They were called 'garage actions' because coppers would use the guaranteed settlement money for home extensions. If Mr Justice French had had his way, the score would have been 96-0. But Duncan went into the witness box to give evidence. The jury, like everyone else, trusted Duncan. It cost him a huge amount in sleepless nights and anxiety, but the stand he took did his colleagues in the British press a considerable favour. It was now much safer to write about police corruption; it was a game-changer. Duncan died within a week of another reporter, Andrew Norfolk, whose reporting on child-grooming gangs for The Times was similarly widely lauded for its courage and integrity. At a time when trust in the media is underwater, it's heartening to be able to celebrate the best among us. Duncan wrote about the world of crime like no other reporter could even dream of. How he did it, no one could quite explain. Nick Reynolds, son of the great train robber Bruce, told me: 'You know, most villains hate journalists. I mean, the whole point of it is to try and do something and get away with it and be discreet. But somehow, through his integrity, approach, sense of humour, diligence, and demeanour, he managed to get the Golden Pass to the underworld, and they all respected him. ' Freddie Foreman, who killed people for the Krays, loved him. Mad Frankie Fraser, who extracted the teeth of his victims with pliers, adored him. But so did lawyers and police officers who cared about the truth. He was very proud of the website he created, Justice on Trial, which ran until 2017 and covered numerous miscarriages of justice. He took an interest in so many. The Miami Five, the Craigavon Two, the Shrewsbury 24, the Birmingham Six, the Cardiff Three. The Torso murders, George Davis, and Gary McKinnon. Kiranjit Ahluwalia, who had been sentenced to life for killing her abusive husband. They and many, many more had reason to thank Duncan for swimming against the tide and taking the time and trouble to investigate their cases. But most of the time, when people think about journalists, they don't think of the Campbells and Norfolks. They don't think of the risks that reporters take in covering events in the Middle East, or Ukraine, or even, as a new Amnesty International report highlights, in Northern Ireland, where there have been 71 attacks or threats against journalists since 2019. When journalists are not being attacked physically, they are under attack verbally. It is now routine White House policy to denigrate, mock, discredit and delegitimise the so-called legacy media. The objective seems plain: if Donald Trump can persuade you that the New York Times is fake news, you might not believe them the next time they investigate his affairs. The White House press secretary is 27-year-old Karoline Leavitt, who believes that Donald Trump won in 2020 and who used her very first briefing to (falsely) claim that $50m a year of US taxpayers' money was going to fund condoms in Gaza. It's unclear whether she has any journalistic experience, although she did once apply for an internship at Fox News. This week, she took it upon herself to lecture the BBC on editorial standards, tearing into a report about deaths in Gaza and claiming the BBC had been forced to retract its claims. This was fantasy stuff, as the BBC's Ros Atkins demonstrated in a devastating three-minute film the following day. But, as the old cliche goes, Truth often takes some time to get its boots on. GB News presenters, for example, chortled with glee at the 'humiliation' of the BBC seemingly without lifting a finger to interrogate whether any of Leavitt's claims were actually, you know, true. Atkins works for BBC Verify, which GB News owner, Paul Marshall, incidentally wants closed down. Truth, lies – who cares? So journalism is struggling today. Which is why it's worth pausing to remember and celebrate the best rather than dwell on the worst. We said farewell to Duncan on Tuesday. He himself was a veteran of reporting on the funerals of the villains he'd known, including gangland figures such as Charlie Richardson and Ronnie Kray, as well as the Great Train Robbers, Buster Edwards and Ronnie Biggs. Though with one, Peter Scott, a noted jewel thief who died bankrupt and penniless in 2013, it was Duncan himself who ended up organising his funeral at Islington cemetery. He arranged it at 10.15 in the morning: 'There was a discount for the early hour,' he recalled. The undertaker demanded the deceased's occupation. 'Cat burglar,' said Duncan, who also chose the music for the ceremony. The coffin disappeared to the old gospel song, Steal Away. It helps to have a sense of humour if your life is spent covering crime. Not to mention today's White House.

Woman sues Atlanta officer for allegedly leaving her topless in squad car
Woman sues Atlanta officer for allegedly leaving her topless in squad car

The Guardian

time8 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Woman sues Atlanta officer for allegedly leaving her topless in squad car

A woman has sued an Atlanta police officer for allegedly leaving her breasts exposed while taking her from her house to a squad car – where she sat several hours, topless, while officers stopped and looked at her, with one masked officer opening the car door to take a photo. The incident took place during a pre-dawn, Swat-style raid staged by Atlanta police and agents from the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (or ATF), on 8 February 2024. The agents sought evidence related to the arson of police motorcycles and cars, carried out in opposition to a controversial police training center known as 'Cop City', which has attracted local, national and internet media attention. The raid – including the woman's experience of being left topless for hours – was reported on by the Guardian at the time. The lawsuit, filed 23 May by Atlanta-area attorneys Jeff Filipovits and Wingo F Smith, asserts that the woman's fourth amendment rights protecting her against unreasonable seizure were violated during the raid and draws on details laid out in the Guardian's story. The federal complaint is important as a test of the police's ongoing claims of qualified immunity nationwide – the 'only thing that stands between the government and people seeking to vindicate their constitutional rights', said Patrick Jaicomo, senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, where he works on the public interest law firm's 'project on immunity and accountability'. An Atlanta police spokesperson said it doesn't comment on pending litigation. The lawsuit names Amy Smith as plaintiff; Atlanta police officer Frances Raymonville-Watson is named as defendant, as she 'held Ms Smith in custody, unclothed and for hours for no purpose other than to embarrass and humiliate her'. Smith told the Guardian anonymously last year: 'They grabbed me, led me outside and handcuffed me – leaving me completely uncovered.' Officers put her in a squad car, where she remained for 'what seemed like hours', she said at the time. 'While Ms Smith was topless in the back of the squad car, an unknown male officer wearing a face covering opened the rear door of the squad car and took Ms Smith's picture,' the lawsuit alleges. 'While Ms. Smith's chest was uncovered, several officers came and went from the squad car, looking in at her through the window,' it continues. 'The security of the scene and the officers conducting the search did not require plaintiff to be held with exposed breasts,' the lawsuit concludes. Ms. Smith was eventually released. The February 2024 raids followed a publicity campaign lasting several months, including a $200,000 reward for information leading to arrests for arson and 450 billboards promoting the reward in New York, Seattle and other cities. The controversial training center – which officially opened its doors in an invitation-only ceremony in April – attracted global headlines after police shot dead Manuel Paez Terán, or 'Tortuguita', an environmental activist protesting against the project, in January 2023. Opposition to the training center, built on a 171-acre footprint in a forest south-east of Atlanta, has included local and national organizations and protesters, centered on concerns such as unchecked police militarization and clearing forests in an era of climate crisis. Atlanta police officials say the center is needed for 'world-class' training, and to attract new officers. Jaicomo said police raid people's homes across the country every day at hours when they are likely to find people partially clothed or naked, making the incident described in the lawsuit an important one. He pointed to a 2015 eleventh Circuit case out of Georgia affirming a district court finding of 'a broad, clearly established principle that individuals who have been placed in police custody have a constitutional right to bodily privacy'. The Atlanta lawsuit is meaningful, Jaicomo asserted, because 'any case where you have the opportunity to overcome qualified immunity has the potential to set a precedent'. Meanwhile, he said, the 'traumatic experience will stick with her for the rest of her life', referring to Smith. He called the incident an example of 'police doing things to humiliate and punish people' – and of 'the constitutional transgressions taking place thousands of times daily that, if left unaddressed, the government will use more frequently'.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store