welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Officer Mehserle shoots dangerous criminal, is convicted
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9556

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Diallo incident is a clear-cut case of thin-slicing failure on the part of cops which resulted in an innocent man being shot multiple times by multiple officers. Elements of that case, now well-studied, show how easily a person can fuck up and kill someone even if they are a well-trained officer.

This case highlights multiple problems on a number of levels, but a statement like "there's no way he would've mistaken a gun for a taser" is markedly untrue. If this is what you actually think, I can assure you that you have pretty much no idea what you're talking about.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
andrew



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 4495
Location: the raging sea

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
you have pretty much no idea what you're talking about.

This is pretty well established at this point, I think.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
Elements of that case, now well-studied, show how easily a person can fuck up and kill someone even if they are a well-trained officer.

But the situation was completely different in the case of Diallo, though. A chase, guy taking his wallet, cop tripping and accidentally firing, etc... that's completely different than in this case.

Here, you have a fight which is obviously over. You have a bunch of restrained people (handcuffed or knee in neck or whatever), nothing too chaotic and a bunch of cops. Grant resists but is restrained. Then Mehserle shoots him.

Spot the difference?

Quote:
This case highlights multiple problems on a number of levels, but a statement like "there's no way he would've mistaken a gun for a taser" is markedly untrue. If this is what you actually think, I can assure you that you have pretty much no idea what you're talking about.

Oh, sure. In a high stress situation with a clear and present danger, he could've mistaken his gun for his taser. Sure. But here? No way he did that. No way in hell.

And hey, Andrew, shut your whore mouth, okay? You've never been capable of not being a condescending prick to whomever you're debating and clearly you're not going to start now.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
andrew



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 4495
Location: the raging sea

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yep, my opening comment was an embarassingly self-deprecating admission, look at me being a condescending prick.

You, on the other hand:
Willem wrote:
He was never in any real danger, he was surrounded by colleagues who were also carrying guns and tasers and all other people in the area were either being restrained or were sitting on the ground. If a cop can't handle that, he shouldn't even be allowed to use plastic forks.

Why not just admit you have no substantive response to my reply, apologize for being a tool, and move on?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9556

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Oh, sure. In a high stress situation with a clear and present danger, he could've mistaken his gun for his taser. Sure. But here? No way he did that. No way in hell.


You're absolutely wrong. There are ways, in fact. This is why I said elements of that case, now well-studied, show how easily a person can fuck up and kill someone even if they are a well-trained officer. Here's where you're clearly ignorant about what we do know about human cognitive response in stressful situations. "clear and present danger," by whatever standard you are envisioning, is not a necessary requirement, and its an ignorant statement to say that there is absolutely no way that this could have been an accident. The recordings of what happened even substantiate this possibility to a degree, even though it's not necessary to establish the fact. You can see the cop immediately looking in horror that it was a gun in his hand. Several witnesses attested that it looked like a terrible accident in the midst of a crazy situation where cops are trying to stop a huge brawl.

The whole thing about him "getting off" is that the family/lawyers/activist groups insisted on pursuing murder charges, which would demand proof of intent and malice aforethought for a conviction. Those things just simple don't exist in this case, unless you want to assume that the cop decided that being surrounded by hundreds of cops and witnesses, many with cameras, was a good time to shoot a guy in cold blood. It just doesn't make sense. So the jury's choices were to convict him of murder (ignoring the evidence), declare him not-guilty of murder, or recommend a lesser charge.

But even that's getting off tangent. You're sticking to a completely untrue statement. You won't even concede that it is possible to have an event like this occur without intent on the part of the police officer. Your personal perspective on this is fatally flawed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam the Eagle



Joined: 02 Oct 2006
Posts: 2275
Location: 192.168.0.1

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem,

Yes a guy died, individually it's a tragedy, in numbers it's a statistic (bonus point if you find out who said that first).

Now, the guy is tried.

Srebrenica, 15y after, ...

That bugs me a lot more.
_________________
Meu aerobarca esta cheoi de enguias
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
its an ignorant statement to say that there is absolutely no way that this could have been an accident.

Which is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that it could've been an accident, but it wasn't.

Quote:
You can see the cop immediately looking in horror that it was a gun in his hand.

Could you link that video? The ones I saw didn't show a good picture of his face.

Quote:
Several witnesses attested that it looked like a terrible accident in the midst of a crazy situation where cops are trying to stop a huge brawl.

After they stopped the brawl.

Quote:
So the jury's choices were to convict him of murder (ignoring the evidence), declare him not-guilty of murder, or recommend a lesser charge.

Voluntary manslaughter. I'm not saying this is murder, but it isn't "just an accident".


Sam The Eagle: Relativism is an ugly thing.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

andrew wrote:
2. A friend of mine once got into a car accident because he stepped on the gas instead of the brake. When he realized what he was doing, his instinctive reaction was to step on the brake, but his foot was still on the gas pedal, so he just went faster. Time elapsed: about 5 seconds, from what he told me. Again, drives all the time, and again, smart guy, yet his ability to make extremely simple judgment calls was impeded.

If his gas pedal was on the other side of the car and it was actually shaped like a football, then yeah, that comparison works.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9556

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem wrote:
Quote:
its an ignorant statement to say that there is absolutely no way that this could have been an accident.

Which is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that it could've been an accident, but it wasn't.


Quote:
On the other hand, there's no way he would've mistaken a gun for a taser.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mizike



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 5133
Location: Iowa City

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem wrote:
Quote:
its an ignorant statement to say that there is absolutely no way that this could have been an accident.

Which is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that it could've been an accident, but it wasn't.

Quote:
You can see the cop immediately looking in horror that it was a gun in his hand.

Could you link that video? The ones I saw didn't show a good picture of his face.

Quote:
Several witnesses attested that it looked like a terrible accident in the midst of a crazy situation where cops are trying to stop a huge brawl.

After they stopped the brawl.

Quote:
So the jury's choices were to convict him of murder (ignoring the evidence), declare him not-guilty of murder, or recommend a lesser charge.

Voluntary manslaughter. I'm not saying this is murder, but it isn't "just an accident".


Beyond a shadow of a doubt, Willem. When we err, we are supposed to err to lesser sentences. Who knows if it's just, but it looks right.
_________________
Scire aliquid laus est, pudor est non discere velle
"It is laudable to know something, it is disgraceful to not want to learn"
~Seneca
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
andrew



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 4495
Location: the raging sea

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem wrote:
If his gas pedal was on the other side of the car and it was actually shaped like a football, then yeah, that comparison works.

Since you're trying to defend a fine difference, this kind of hyperbole hurts you more than it helps.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CTrees



Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 3772

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
The whole thing about him "getting off" is that the family/lawyers/activist groups insisted on pursuing murder charges, which would demand proof of intent and malice aforethought for a conviction. Those things just simple don't exist in this case, unless you want to assume that the cop decided that being surrounded by hundreds of cops and witnesses, many with cameras, was a good time to shoot a guy in cold blood. It just doesn't make sense. So the jury's choices were to convict him of murder (ignoring the evidence), declare him not-guilty of murder, or recommend a lesser charge.


Actually, as per the article I linked on the relevant statutes, the requirements for involuntary manslaughter seem to be met pretty nicely by the facts of the case, as you are interpreting them. It could easily be argued (especially with the video, etc.) that it was voluntary manslaughter (but probably not 2nd degree murder, the way I read it), but... with the possible cognitive impairment due to the stressful environment, I doubt it would be possible to meet the standards for that charge beyond a reasonable doubt (which is damn important here). That's... sorta directed at every, with little pieces being for different people. I'm sure you lot can sort it out.

Separate point: it would not have been reasonable for the officer to tase the victim in this situation, either, though I know not whether that would be enough to push it (reasonably) further towards voluntary manslaughter, but obviously the jury, being privvy to far more evidence than us, made that call. On the 2-4year sentence... California has a gun enhancement rule for sentencing which I would think could potentially increase that pretty significantly. My gut says, this guy should get 20 to life or something, but on the matter of law... I gotta say, this seems like the right outcome, and I'm glad that the civil suit is going to be brutal.
_________________
“Yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation”
yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation.


Last edited by CTrees on Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DeD CHiKn



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 10227
Location: Baltimore, Maryla*gunshot*

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willem wrote:
I'm saying that it could've been an accident, but it wasn't.


Why could it have been an accident, but wasnt?

Were you reading the guys mind as he consciously shot the guy?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9556

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CTrees wrote:

Separate point: it would not have been reasonable for the officer to tase the victim in this situation, either


Probably not, and that looks to be an issue of district policy. They seemed procedurally comfortable with tasing in a situation that had little in the way of actionable necessity (shown?).

Of course, this is problematic all over the place. Districts are getting too comfortable with tasers.


I can't watch videos at work. maybe this is it. can't say. it may be on liveleak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFNDK8PQGNw&feature=related

either way you can watch a host of them and see that the situation was certainly still elevated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Willem



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6306
Location: wasteland style

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
Willem wrote:
Quote:
its an ignorant statement to say that there is absolutely no way that this could have been an accident.

Which is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that it could've been an accident, but it wasn't.


Quote:
On the other hand, there's no way he would've mistaken a gun for a taser.

What I'm saying is that you're right in saying that in the heat of the moment, you can easily make such mistakes. What I'm also saying is that in this situation, it's very unlikely that he didn't know he was pulling his gun.

If his gun and his taser were both holstered on one hip and they were fairly similar, then he could've easily mistaken them in the heat of the moment. But that's not what happened.

Edit: I doubt it's that video, btw.
_________________
attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 2 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group