Riots in California..

[SteamWake]

Wow what would they do if there had NOT been a conviction.

Oakland ... go figure.

The verdict prompted a peaceful protest by up to 1,000 people in downtown Oakland, which gave way after nightfall to some people looting stores, smashing car windows, throwing powerful fireworks at police and lighting fires in trash cans.


The police, numbering in the hundreds, made more than 50 arrests, but Oakland police expected that figure could double.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66763A20100709

[kiwi_2005]

...

[SteamWake]

Not to worry the Feds are on the case.. that will be sure to help!

LOS ANGELES -- The U.S. Department of Justice will conduct an independent review of the Johannes Mehserle case in order to determine whether or not the shooting merits federal prosecution, according the department.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...bay&id=7545102

[Molon Labe]

Time for the lawyer to bitch.

The conviction is for involuntary manslaughter. The mens rea for that crime is recklessness. Recklessness means the defendant didn't intend to cause the result, but was consciously aware of the risk (in this case, the risk of killing a person) and proceeded anyways.

Can anyone seriously believe that the officer did not intend to kill the victim, but was aware of the risk that he might and drew and fired his weapon regardless? The only way that could make sense is if he knew he had no idea where his gun/taser was and just guessed and didn't bother to look to make sure he had the right one.

No. He either intended to fire a bullet into that guys back, or he intended to fire a taser into his back and made a horrible mistake. There was no conscious disregarding of any risk, no recklessness. The jury had to make a choice, it was either murder or it was negligence (either an acquittal or maybe a lesser charge like criminally negligent homicide, if it exists in CA). And the jury was too chicken**** to make a decision, so it split the difference.

Verdicts are supposed to be about truth, not compromise. This is sickening.

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

Verdicts are supposed to be about truth, not compromise. This is sickening.

I agree.

[Ducimus]

Some of the elements of society in California don't need much of an excuse to riot. Personally i think that just under the seams of this states fabric, this place is probably as, if not more racially charged then the south ever was. I'll bet my bottom dollar, the riot was racially motivated. The news was very quick to point out the jury was white, and the punk who got waxed and his family was black. Bingo, instant race card! Time to start looting the stores.

Not the first riot (See Rodney King riots), and won't be the last.

[Molon Labe]

This is my favorite part of this fiasco:

Ben Franklin said Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Well, the LA jury apparently decided to trade Truth for Safety.

And ended up with neither.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

This is my favorite part of this fiasco:

Ben Franklin said Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Well, the LA jury apparently decided to trade Truth for Safety.

And ended up with neither.

Well said.

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Some of the elements of society in California don't need much of an excuse to riot. Personally i think that just under the seams of this states fabric, this place is probably as, if not more racially charged then the south ever was. I'll bet my bottom dollar, the riot was racially motivated. The news was very quick to point out the jury was white, and the punk who got waxed and his family was black. Bingo, instant race card! Time to start looting the stores.

Not the first riot (See Rodney King riots), and won't be the last.

Ja. Unfortunately, it's not just California, USA.

The cop isn't the only one who needs to be dealt with, much more sternly.

[August]

These Riots always seem to happen when it's hot outside. I think such racially charged trials ought to be postponed until the winter.

Wonder why white people didn't riot in the streets after the OJ ruling?

[August]

Originally Posted by thorn69

Wonder why white people didn't riot in the streets after the OJ ruling?

No instead they picked a black man at random, chained him to the bumper of a truck, urinated on him, then dragged him for a few miles until his body came apart in pieces. Feel better?

[Weiss Pinguin]

Originally Posted by August

These Riots always seem to happen when it's hot outside. I think such racially charged trials ought to be postponed until the winter.

Or conversely, held in Texas in the middle of August. (heh)

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

Time for the lawyer to bitch.

The conviction is for involuntary manslaughter. The mens rea for that crime is recklessness. Recklessness means the defendant didn't intend to cause the result, but was consciously aware of the risk (in this case, the risk of killing a person) and proceeded anyways.

Can anyone seriously believe that the officer did not intend to kill the victim, but was aware of the risk that he might and drew and fired his weapon regardless? The only way that could make sense is if he knew he had no idea where his gun/taser was and just guessed and didn't bother to look to make sure he had the right one.

No. He either intended to fire a bullet into that guys back, or he intended to fire a taser into his back and made a horrible mistake. There was no conscious disregarding of any risk, no recklessness. The jury had to make a choice, it was either murder or it was negligence (either an acquittal or maybe a lesser charge like criminally negligent homicide, if it exists in CA). And the jury was too chicken**** to make a decision, so it split the difference.

Verdicts are supposed to be about truth, not compromise. This is sickening.

As a cop myself, I have a hard time with this case. Most of us are very familiar with where our weapons and tools are located on our duty belts. This is not just so we know where to go when the time arises in an emergency, it's also a safety issue in case we're being pummeled on the ground and somebody tries to grab our weapon from the holster to use against us.

I can detect the feel of a foreign hand on my weapon and I have to know which self defense maneuver to perform on that individual to get out of that situation. If he's on my left, I've got a specific move for that, if he's on my right, I've got a specific move for that. Same thing for front and back. This cop was either a rookie and very unfamiliar with his own gear or he had a serious brain fart - which can and does happen under high stress situations.

If he was unfamiliar with his own gear then his employer needs to be held responsible. They should not have an officer out there with weapons and tools he's not familiar with. That makes him a liability to the city and you potentially end up with a problem just like this one.

But since none of us were there it's hard to say what exactly happened. It always amuses me though how society is so against law enforcement officers they want to see them burned at all costs! The ACLU, NAACP, and Hollywood sure have put a spin on who the real bad guys are and it's disturbing to see so many folks siding with the general thuggery crowd these days because of it. But when homeboy A shoots and kills homeboy B, who do these same folks call? The police of course! Where's your precious ACLU, NAACP, and Hollywood at THEN?!

Originally Posted by August

No instead they picked a black man at random, chained him to the bumper of a truck, urinated on him, then dragged him for a few miles until his body came apart in pieces. Feel better?

I don't remember hearing about this?

Are you talking about the white man that was beaten to death and dragged for miles over in Somalia?