Riots in California..

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

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

I agree, but verdicts are also about criminal intent. Maybe the jury was stupid, or racially biased, who knows? Maybe the jury had cause to believe that this officer would not intentionally shoot a man he knew to be no threat. I'll have to look into it more.

@thorn69

If you are a law enforcement officer, you should rethink your conduct. You are not Judge Dredd, and the sanctity of the law is violated everytime you choose not to uphold it or uphold it excessively. Your statement here alone is enough to call your character into question in a trial, assuming we can prove that thorn69 is you.

I don't want to bash on you, as I've served alongside enough law-enforcement professionals to know that their job is made unnecessarily difficult and even hopeless, occassionally, but "consummate professionalism" should be your standing order at all times, even in matters of opinion. It isn't fair, but as long as you hold a position in which you are publicly accountable, it is your duty to uphold the integrity and character of your service. This isn't a legal argument, just personal advice.

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

I agree, but verdicts are also about criminal intent. Maybe the jury was stupid, or racially biased, who knows? Maybe the jury had cause to believe that this officer would not intentionally shoot a man he knew to be no threat. I'll have to look into it more.

@thorn69

If you are a law enforcement officer, you should rethink your conduct. You are not Judge Dredd, and the sanctity of the law is violated everytime you choose not to uphold it or uphold it excessively. Your statement here alone is enough to call your character into question in a trial, assuming we can prove that thorn69 is you.

I don't want to bash on you, as I've served alongside enough law-enforcement professionals to know that their job is made unnecessarily difficult and even hopeless, occassionally, but "consummate professionalism" should be your standing order at all times, even in matters of opinion. It isn't fair, but as long as you hold a position in which you are publicly accountable, it is your duty to uphold the integrity and character of your service. This isn't a legal argument, just personal advice.

I do my job and I do my job quite well! But as I've already said, I get labeled an a-hole no matter which way I decide to go on a specific matter. Police work is always questioned one way or the other because it always intervenes between two differing viewpoints. So one side isn't going to be happy when an arrest is made and the other side is. That's just how it is!

I've never excessively done, or not done, anything unless you're talking about excessively tacking on more and more charges on a criminal violator? That's every police officer though. We all do that for the reason I mentioned in another post. We want arrests to stick and for criminals to go to jail for the longest duration possible and pay the heaviest fines. It makes the streets safer for people for a longer period of time.

Of course our very liberal justice system seems to have a big heart for these criminal lowlifes and consistently allows them to come back again and again to re-commit their crimes on our society. That's the part I've never really understood, especially when it's always the same old bozos out there doing the same old criminal thing. I've arrested some folks over 25 times for the same exact crime. You'd think they'd learn? But what it is - is they just don't care. The laws are too lax and it's all a joke to them. They know they will be out on the streets again to recommit their same old crime again. It's a way of life for them. I just wish we could suprise them and say, "That's strike 25 pal, time for you to get used to prison for the rest of your life!"


You know, I've noted there are quite a few bleeding heart liberals on this site with a "hug-a-thug" mentality. That's sad!

[GoldenRivet]

I've seen the video.

Hard to say if the shooting was accidental or not.

however, based on my observations of the video, he did quite abruptly blow this man away, but he also appeared to be surprised at what happened.



at 1:55 the officer clearly appears surprised by the discharge of the firearm.

It could have been either that he improperly handled the firearm or that he thought he had drawn his tazer (assuming he was so equipped) and in the adrenaline rush of the moment, fired expecting a "zzzzzzzzttttt" and instead getting a distinctive "POP".

If i were on the Jury in this particular case, after hearing the evidence of both sides and reviewing this video... i probably would have a hard time ruling this a "premeditated murder" however, when i first heard "involuntary manslaughter" i was suprised.

I know nothing about the case other than what i have seem on the above referenced video. so im not in a position - as the Jury would have been - to cast a verdict.

but upon my inspection of the video i would say that the transit cop appeared shocked or surprised by what had happened.

to me, that indicates an accident.

however, accident or not, a man is dead, his family now without him, and an officer's career and life ruined.

accidents kill people every day, the particularly troubling thing about this is that you expect a higher level of professionalism from a LEO than to accidentally discharge his weapon... least of all into the back of a disarmed and mostly subdued individual.

a sad situation.

Justice is a very funny thing... I'm 100% sure that if this officer had received any sentence other than the death penalty there would have been rioting.

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

I've seen the video.

Hard to say if the shooting was accidental or not.

however, based on my observations of the video, he did quite abruptly blow this man away, but he also appeared to be surprised at what happened.



at 1:55 the officer clearly appears surprised by the discharge of the firearm.

It could have been either that he improperly handled the firearm or that he thought he had drawn his tazer (assuming he was so equipped) and in the adrenaline rush of the moment, fired expecting a "zzzzzzzzttttt" and instead getting a distinctive "POP".

If i were on the Jury in this particular case, after hearing the evidence of both sides and reviewing this video... i probably would have a hard time ruling this a "premeditated murder" however, when i first heard "involuntary manslaughter" i was suprised.

I know nothing about the case other than what i have seem on the above referenced video. so im not in a position - as the Jury would have been - to cast a verdict.

but upon my inspection of the video i would say that the transit cop appeared shocked or surprised by what had happened.

to me, that indicates an accident.

however, accident or not, a man is dead, his family now without him, and an officer's career and life ruined.

accidents kill people every day, the particularly troubling thing about this is that you expect a higher level of professionalism from a LEO than to accidentally discharge his weapon... least of all into the back of a disarmed and mostly subdued individual.

a sad situation.

Justice is a very funny thing... I'm 100% sure that if this officer had received any sentence other than the death penalty there would have been rioting.

The point of this video and topic is not about whether the Officer was wrong or right in his actions. It's clearly obvious that he screwed up and he's going to pay a heavy price for that. The point of this video and the OP was that blacks in society often feel a need to riot and protest violently when the justice they're seeking is not administered to their liking. A white man was supposed to apparently die in this case!

Somebody else eventually posted in here that there's rarely a case where white people openly riot and protest violently when the justice they're seeking isn't carried out. He's right to point out the double-standard that's present here. He finds that this form of rioting and protest is grossly unwarranted in today's society. Why? Because it's racism against whites and white authority plain and simple. It's true, if a black Officer shot and killed this black suspect then this wouldn't have even made the news.

People on here shouldn't be bashing on GORPET for his opinion. Heck, they should actually be siding with him for pointing out the double-standard. The fact that this guy came out and voiced his opinion after 5 years of silence and finally spoke up about this should speak volumes about how silenced the white voice has become in our society. Apparently blacks in society are the only ones that should have a voice!

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by thorn69

The point of this video and topic is not about whether the Officer was wrong or right in his actions. It's clearly obvious that he screwed up and he's going to pay a heavy price for that. The point of this video and the OP was that blacks in society often feel a need to riot and protest violently when the justice they're seeking is not administered to their liking. A white man was supposed to apparently die in this case!

Somebody else eventually posted in here that there's rarely a case where white people openly riot and protest violently when the justice they're seeking isn't carried out. He's right to point out the double-standard that's present here. He finds that this form of rioting and protest is grossly unwarranted in today's society. Why? Because it's racism against whites and white authority plain and simple. It's true, if a black Officer shot and killed this black suspect then this wouldn't have even made the news.

People on here shouldn't be bashing on GORPET for his opinion. Heck, they should actually be siding with him for pointing out the double-standard. The fact that this guy came out and voiced his opinion after 5 years of silence and finally spoke up about this should speak volumes about how silenced the white voice has become in our society. Apparently blacks in society are the only ones that should have a voice!

Wow.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by thorn69

I do my job and I do my job quite well! But as I've already said, I get labeled an a-hole no matter which way I decide to go on a specific matter. Police work is always questioned one way or the other because it always intervenes between two differing viewpoints. So one side isn't going to be happy when an arrest is made and the other side is. That's just how it is!

That's how it is, is it? Is that as far as your dedication to duty goes?

I've never excessively done, or not done, anything unless you're talking about excessively tacking on more and more charges on a criminal violator? That's every police officer though. We all do that for the reason I mentioned in another post. We want arrests to stick and for criminals to go to jail for the longest duration possible and pay the heaviest fines. It makes the streets safer for people for a longer period of time.

This is what I am talking about. It is not your responsibility to make moral judgements about whether or not a person should be charged. Your job is enforcement. What you are doing is selectively enforcing laws, and that is a breach of professional integrity. I can't really blame you for that, though, as it is impossible to enforce all laws within a given area equally. There are just too many of them. I couldn't know them all and I'm expected to obey them. You don't know them all and you're expected to enforce them. The jury sure as hell doesn't know them all and they're expected to deliver a verdict based upon argument made by lawyers, of all people.

Still, it should be a matter of personal pride to hold yourself to a higher standard. You're supposed to be a public officer, and it is not your responsibility or priviledge to decide who is and who is not worthy of punishment by omitting or tacking on charges as you see fit. People look up to police officers, except for when they demonstrate the kind of conduct you advocate, in which case they look down upon them.

Of course our very liberal justice system seems to have a big heart for these criminal lowlifes and consistently allows them to come back again and again to re-commit their crimes on our society. That's the part I've never really understood, especially when it's always the same old bozos out there doing the same old criminal thing. I've arrested some folks over 25 times for the same exact crime. You'd think they'd learn? But what it is - is they just don't care. The laws are too lax and it's all a joke to them. They know they will be out on the streets again to recommit their same old crime again. It's a way of life for them. I just wish we could suprise them and say, "That's strike 25 pal, time for you to get used to prison for the rest of your life!"

I have the same problem with the justice system that you have, though you may not realize it. Where you see criminals going unpunished, I see the wisdom behind the mentality of "criminal intent". I see that criminals can be rehabilitated and lead normal lives. I also see how our justice system allows far too many criminals to walk free because the jails simply cannot handle so many violators. I see how the excessive numbers of laws make it simply impossible to create an effective system of rehabilition or punishment.

It scares me that someone as apparently vindictive as yourself is allowed to enforce the law. If it were up to me, I'd put your contract up for bid to private LE suppliers, and you'd change your tune or be out of a job in short order.

You know, I've noted there are quite a few bleeding heart liberals on this site with a "hug-a-thug" mentality. That's sad!

I haven't noticed the same thing. Most people here are fairly keen on criminal prosecution. You should have seen the last thread on the death penalty! However, most are not as draconian as you and some others, including myself, fault the system rather than the people. There are even a few that bother to look at underlying societal issues.