Police man convicted of Involuntary Manslaughter

[Maximilian]

JD so you don't feel there's any possibility this officer just freaked out in the heat of the moment, grabbed the wrong weapon and didn't realize it? You really think he intended on shooting this young man in the back?

Justice was done. I hate when people say that. The case went through the process of justice, the case was heard (including all evidence that we haven't seen broken down for hours), and the verdict was delivered: involuntary manslaughter.

My question for the jury is this: if they didn't buy the "grabbed the wrong weapon" argument, did they go with the option that he flipped in the passion of the moment? I mean, what else is your intent to shoot a handcuffed man in the back?

[Praxeas]

Did you guys see his reaction on the tape? It looks like he was shocked after shooting the guy

[Truthseeker]

It's possible it was a mistake especially with so many witnesses but even so it's mistake that is unexcusable. I'm a nurse and I'm paid for a certain skill level to not make mistakes that are nursing 101. Even if he meant to grap his taser it's an unexcusable mistake.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

It's possible it was a mistake especially with so many witnesses but even so it's mistake that is unexcusable. I'm a nurse and I'm paid for a certain skill level to not make mistakes that are nursing 101. Even if he meant to grap his taser it's an unexcusable mistake.

That's why he got involuntary manslaughter.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

The guy did not have a rap sheet-- he and his friends were rowdy on a commuter train.

Neither he or his friends "calmed down" when told to by a female BART Officer.

Grant, the 22 year old who was killed was HANDCUFFED before he was shot.

The jury rejected the notion that the "cop" meant to go for the taser.

So you have a man who was pinned down, surrounded by other officers, face down, handcuffed with his hands behind his back and for whatever reason, the ex-cop felt it was necessary to shoot the man.

Truth is, there is ABSOLUTELY NO JUSTIFICATION for the shooting-- none.

I hope the BART agency is sued to oblivion in civil court because justice has NOT been served and appears that it will not be served, in this life.

Then, the living ex-BART officer can repent and attain eternal life.

The 22 yr old was probably not saved and..... well, what can you say except nothing at all. He's in God's Hands.

BART had nothing to do with the shooting - the cop was an Oakland PD Police Officer. The suit was already settled and the man's survivors are millionaires.

The was no "justification" for the shooting. The cop himself didn't even try to justify shooting the man. He said it was "accidental." Despite your assertion about what the jury accepted - the jury, comprised of a majority of African-Americans, actually DID accept the "accidental" element when they voted unanimously for "INVOLUNTARY" manslaughter charges.

The cop got the same conviction that a drunk driver who kills another motorist often gets. There was personal responsibility and culpability of criminal nature found - however, that responsibility was found to be more of a "negligent" nature and not malicious.

In other words, you're showing more malice toward the Oakland PD than this cop was found to have showed toward his shooting victim. Keep that in mind.

The men on the train were more than "rowdy." They were grown adult gang members who had committed felony assault against passengers on the train. Keep that in mind when you ride the BART train next time.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Did you guys see his reaction on the tape? It looks like he was shocked after shooting the guy

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

It's possible it was a mistake especially with so many witnesses but even so it's mistake that is unexcusable. I'm a nurse and I'm paid for a certain skill level to not make mistakes that are nursing 101. Even if he meant to grap his taser it's an unexcusable mistake.

It appears to have been a horrible but obviously avoidable mistake. The cop will pay for this for the rest of his life. Oakland taxpayers have already paid a very large sum - but not tremendously large. It seems that the lawyers for the victim's kin didn't want another jury to see this tape so they settled early and out of court.

One really should consider the action of the family's lawyers here.

[pelathais]

Of further interest is the response to the recent shooting of four Oakland Police Officers by a black man.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6QKcARdl2w

Four cops were ambushed and gunned down with malice, and the African American community says, "That's cool..."

The cops were looking for Lovelle Mixon - the shooter - with an arrest warrant for parole violation. What was the "parole violation? The rape of a 12 year old girl.

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=3583

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...bay&id=6728974

JD - can you possibly see how that your rant comes off as dangerous and racist? Three white and one Asian-American police officers are out seeking the rapist of a 12 year old girl when they are gunned down in cold blood ambush style. The streets fill up with "demonstrators" SUPPORTING the murder of these cops.

A year later a cop accidentally shoots a black suspect and no one but the jury is willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. And then you rant about the "injustice?" Dude, is it really cool to rape 12 year old girls and then ambush and murder the cops sent to arrest you? Can you see why so many Americans - of all races - are sick to their stomachs with the way injustice is perpetuated by the "leaders" of the black community?

To be fair I guess, not even Al Sharpton seemed to have gotten involved in the more recent accidental shooting, but he did lead the rally a year ago supporting the murder of the police officers.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

That's beside the point. It wasn't a terrible struggle, the guy was already bound in fact.

To blame it on the teenager is a sad comment to make indeed.

Yes, to put any blame on anyone other than the police is always in bad taste.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Of further interest is the response to the recent shooting of four Oakland Police Officers by a black man.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6QKcARdl2w

Four cops were ambushed and gunned down with malice, and the African American community says, "That's cool..."

The cops were looking for Lovelle Mixon - the shooter - with an arrest warrant for parole violation. What was the "parole violation? The rape of a 12 year old girl.

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=3583

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...bay&id=6728974

JD - can you possibly see how that your rant comes off as dangerous and racist? Three white and one Asian-American police officers are out seeking the rapist of a 12 year old girl when they are gunned down in cold blood ambush style. The streets fill up with "demonstrators" SUPPORTING the murder of these cops.

A year later a cop accidentally shoots a black suspect and no one but the jury is willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. And then you rant about the "injustice?" Dude, is it really cool to rape 12 year old girls and then ambush and murder the cops sent to arrest you? Can you see why so many Americans - of all races - are sick to their stomachs with the way injustice is perpetuated by the "leaders" of the black community?

To be fair I guess, not even Al Sharpton seemed to have gotten involved in the more recent accidental shooting, but he did lead the rally a year ago supporting the murder of the police officers.

I don't recall this issue, but that is just sick!

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Esther

Yes, to put any blame on anyone other than the police is always in bad taste.

He didn't say anything like that. But did you see the video? Everyone will, I suppose, see differently, but to me it looked like the officer was waiting for the man to be held down so that he could shoot him. Only when the man was pinned down and immobilized did he even draw the gun.

What do you see?