Jury delivers involuntary manslaughter verdict in Oakland shooting

everyone is right if this was a black man that killed a white person or say a white man and white woman and then ran from the police in his white bronco he would serve life in prison!

sarcasim off!

get over your selves this had nothing to do with race, this was a tril by a jury and the jury found the officer guilty of manslaughter there was no misscarage of justice here! not to mention this man still faces federal charges. so put your race cards back in the wallets folks and move along!!!

[edit on 7/9/2010 by Verd_Vhett]

The ignorance on this topic is mind boggling!

It was not an "execution"! It was a complete accident. Any fool should be able to see his shock and amazment after the shot was fired. You can even watch one of his hands move away from the gun in fear.

It was EXACTLY like this:



Watch the guys hand move away from the gun after the shot was fired. The BART officer did the same thing...

Here is what ignorant fools would say, "OMG that officer just executed his own foot on purpose!"

If you are allowed to call me a "police shill" then I'm going to call you an "ignorant lemming". GET A CLUE YOU IGNORANT LEMMINGS!

Now watch this closely:



You can see his hand move away after the shot in fear. Then watch him grab his head as if he were saying "oh no what I do?" . It was an accident, so he should be punished as if it were an accident.

Go ahead, call me a "police shill" because I am not a dumb lemming who sees "white cop + gun + dead black guy" and then automatically jumps in line to demand the cops life be destroyed.

I don't have a simple dumb mind like a lemming, I see the situation for what is really was. "officer + wild teenagers fighting + uncontrolled situation + fatal mistake". Simple as that... no reason to riot over it.

Why don't you go riot when a doctor makes a fatal mistake on his patient? Oh thats right, because its a doctor not a cop. You hate cops, not doctors... predictable lemmings, all falling in the same line...


[edit on 9-7-2010 by eennoo]

Originally posted by SpearofOdin
One black gang banger get killed by the cops - so the city riots.

30,000 blacks killed in the gang wars between Bloods and Crips, and MTV and Hollywood glamorises the gang bangers as 'Bling heroes' and role models.

The black community have a problem with their moral radar, and its whiteys fault as he treats them as children and makes perpetual excuses for them.

Watch the link here and see how the Al Sharpton race relations terrorists and extortionists like to blame whitey to get nice big chash payouts, but they never want to debate black on black killings.

tv.blinkx.com...

Folks dont want to here what you say but its true. Its ok, relativly speaking, for the brothers to kill each other in large quanity....they are thier own worst enemy by far as far as numbers go. There are probably about 200 blacks killed by blacks to every one black killed by a white man.

If we want to find who it is that treats a black mans life the cheapest its the black man. Where Holder when frank honest talk about racisim in america is being talked about?

The savage rioters don't care about Oscar Grant, police brutality, or justice. I bet they would have still rioted even if Johannes got the death penalty. They're just oppurtunists. If it had been a black cop who killed a black guy, a black cop who killed a white guy, or a white cop who killed a white guy, they wouldn't care in the least bit. I feel sorry for Johannes Mehserle. His life is ruined because of one accident. He can no longer feel safe when he is released because of these ignorant, uncivilized fools. Barbaric thugs have even threatened to kill his infant son. These gang bangers are far more trigger-happy and dangerous than cops.

Originally posted by HarmonicNights
The savage rioters don't care about Oscar Grant, police brutality, or justice. I bet they would have still rioted even if Johannes got the death penalty. They're just oppurtunists. If it had been a black cop who killed a black guy, a black cop who killed a white guy, or a white cop who killed a white guy, they wouldn't care in the least bit. I feel sorry for Johannes Mehserle. His life is ruined because of one accident. He can no longer feel safe when he is released because of these ignorant, uncivilized fools. Barbaric thugs have even threatened to kill his infant son. These gang bangers are far more trigger-happy and dangerous than cops.

Do you think he'll be released?
A cop going to jail for killing a black person is not going to make it.
While I do see it as the cop making an accident, I also think perhaps he should have been double checking to make sure he isn't going to kill someone next time.
The verdict seems right for me.

reply to post by hippomchippo


The sentencing will be next month. I've read he could get 2-4 years in prison and that an extra 10 years could be added because a firearm was used. He could also end up getting probation. I also agree with the verdict because of his reckless behavior. But he doesn't deserve to have to fear for his and his family's lives because of an accident. I think most of these thugs realize it was an accident, but they want to continue playing the victim.

I hate police officers that abuse their power as much as anyone. But........after watching the video, I have to agree with those who say it doesnt really look like it was intentional.

If I had been on the jury, I would have ruled the same way. The cops body language does look like he was surprised, and a bit freaked out by what he did, and moreover, he fired a bullet awfully close to his fellow officers, something I just dont believe he did purposefully.

Those who say you shouldnt be a cop if you cant tell a taser from a gun are right. He shouldnt be a cop. Whether the young men needed to be arrested in the first place is something I dont know, and may also be a problem. But, the shooting itself did not look intentional.

Call me a police shill if you must, but I do believe in fair. I hope the victims family receives a hell of a lot of compensation for this, however, they deserve it. It was a senseless death. But I do think the jury got it right when they said it was unintentional. Even in the crappy video, and I watched both angles several times, he sure looks surprised and upset about what he did to me.


I personally wish that there would be more action taken to make sure people arent being tazed needlessly. I think cops have gone a lot taser happy, and I hope this incident brings that to the public awareness as well. They could have easily gotten that young man subdued without a taser, and if they had done it the old fashioned way, this wouldnt have happened at all.

I don't care what anyone says. This was an execution. However, I will assume, for the sake of argument, that the actual firing of his weapon was unintentional...

Now, he would not have unintentionally shot and killed the victim, at point blank range, while the victim was face down, on the ground, with another officers knee on the back of his head, if he had not intentionally drew his firearm and released the safety mechanism.

Further, he drew his weapon after the (then) suspect had been subdued and restrained.

I wonder, does this officer butter his toast with a cleaver? I mean, If we are to believe his story, he's got a terrible problem identifying the the tools he uses to accomplish tasks. If he really confuses a taser with his firearm, are we also to assume he trims his fingernails with hedge clippers? Does he dry his hair with a leaf blower?

So, if all those here in support of the officer are correct, and it was completely unintentional, this officer should have never been issued a badge and gun (or a taser), and let loose on the street. If they're right, then his level of incompetence is astounding.

"This is a gun. It fires bullets. The bullets will put a hole in someone if you aim at them and fire." Did someone forget to tell this guy during training?

It's just impossible for me to believe that this guy can confuse a taser with a handgun. As for the "look of surprise" on his face that everyone keeps focusing on as the foundation for the unintentional argument, it's more plausible to me, that this "shock and amazement" had less to do with realizing he just killed a man, and more to do with the realization that the whole thing was just caught on multiple cameras.

Lets change history, and say he did draw his taser, and instead of killing him, electrocuted him. It's still would have been grossly unjustified. The guy was on the ground, face down, with another officer kneeling on the back of his head. He was violently subdued, and posed no threat, to anyone. I'm not saying he was an angel, or even a decent human being. That doesn't give these cops the ability to hover above the law.

reply to post by Unit541


I dont disagree for a minute that the guy did not need to be tased at that point, and the fact that ANY implement was in his hand at that point was really over kill.

And you are right, if you cant get your weapons straight, you dont need to be a cop. And I doubt he ever will be again. But thats not what the trial was about. It was about whether or not the guy was murdered on purpose, with intent and deliberation, or whether this was the mother of all screw ups.

And to me, it looked like the mother of all screw ups.

Im not defending the cop. I am defending the truth. (As it appears to me.) I loathe abuse of power, and tasing the guy at that point did look like an abuse of power. Thats not what he was charged with. That wasnt the question the jury was asked. They were asked did the cop intend to shoot and kill the guy, and it really just doesnt look like he did. He DID kill the guy, the family deserves a settlement, no one is saying what happened was okay, no one is saying the cop is not guilty of something. He just isnt guilty of executing the guy deliberately, imho.

I understand people get mad. I know that there are cops who would and probably have shot someone for less, purposefully. I just dont think this guy is one of them. He may be taser happy, and he may be incompetent, but he seemed genuinely surprised to hear the bang, I dont think he "suddenly realized" he was being filmed. I am sure they knew that the whole time. Dozens of people were screaming at the cops throughout the incident, which in MY mind, only makes it more plausibly an accident. A bunch of people screaming and adding to the confusion is not always conducive to keeping a clear head, not that that excuses him.

I do not believe that this two year police officer did not know where his pistol was located on his belt vs his stun gun.

If you are a cop for two years and you don't know where your gun is you are #ing mentally retarded.

This was not an accidental discharge like that DEA video. This was a "i thought it was my taser'

I don't buy it. He's lying.

Do you really think that he didn't know where the # on the belt he'd been wearing for two + years was?

I'd like to see the operating procedures on his stun gun vs his pistol as well as direct photography of the standard issue stun gun and side arm at his location.

I find it hilarious that this police officer shoots a man who's pinned to the ground in the back, killing him, and gets 2 to 4 years while another man who got pulled over for speeding decided to record being pulled over and is now facing up to 16 years in prison on felony "illegal wiretap" charges.

Record a police traffic stop when you get pulled over to be sure if you get shot 'accidentally' like this kid it gets known and then risk a 16 year prison sentence, lol.

source for the cop recorder btw:
www.washingtonexaminer.com...

eennoo, I don't see his reaction as abnormal.

After murdering someone in cold blood he realized that there would likely be consequences and didn't know what to do.

This was an execution style murder. The 'involuntary manslaughter' slap on the wrist is a show of complicity between the courts there and the police. Essentially in Oakland it's pretty clear that your life is in danger if you so much as are disrespectful to a police officer. All they have to do is handcuff you, pin you to the ground, pull out their pistol and execute you on the spot.

Oddly I feel like I am describing gangsters but instead I am describing a police force, that makes me pretty sad.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by sremmos]

reply to post by sremmos


He did not check his safety. Safety should be on. If he did not check it, he's incompetent.

Also, there is something abnormal. I've compared him to the King beatings. The King cops had a different body language, laughed at it, and were sick men. The Cop here in Oakland stopped after doing this. The fat cop ran back, not knowing what happened. This was not expected.

And finally, if it was an execution, why did he aim for the back and not the head. he was closest to the man's head.

Originally posted by sremmos


This was an execution style murder. The 'involuntary manslaughter' slap on the wrist is a show of complicity between the courts there and the police.

I disagree. Im not a cop, I have no cop friends, Im not a cop wanna be, I have had my share of grievances with cops, but if I had been on that jury, I would have ruled the same way.

Sometimes what looks like complicity is just your fellow citizens disagreeing with your take on things.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by sremmos

 

He did not check his safety. Safety should be on. If he did not check it, he's incompetent.

Also, there is something abnormal. I've compared him to the King beatings. The King cops had a different body language, laughed at it, and were sick men. The Cop here in Oakland stopped after doing this. The fat cop ran back, not knowing what happened. This was not expected.

And finally, if it was an execution, why did he aim for the back and not the head. he was closest to the man's head.

In my experience the majority of law enforcement agents do not carry their pistol with the safety on unless it is a grip safety or a secondary which does not require additional actions to disable. A police officer has his weapon ready so that all he has to do is 'draw and shoot', not 'draw, disable safety, shoot' because in a real situation the dude who is disabling his safety is going to die.

I know that's scary (it is) but ask some of the law enforcement on here they can probably explain better than me.

Fact is anyone who's experienced with a firearm would have to be absolutely mentally incompetent to not be able to distinguish their firearm from their stun gun, both in location on the belt and in weight/size/appearance of the two different weapons, and yes I know that stun guns can look like guns.

It doesn't matter, for instance what if that cop was really being shot at by an enemy?

Is he trying to tell us that he would have accidentally drawn his stun gun then too? If so, stun guns should be removed from the police arsenal because they are not properly trained on drawing their pistol vs stun gun and are at high risk of being killed in an actual altercation where their pistol was needed but they grabbed their stun gun instead.

Police should not be in that kind of danger if that is the case. One gun like weapon since apparently the human species is too stupid to differentiate.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by sremmos]

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Originally posted by sremmos


This was an execution style murder. The 'involuntary manslaughter' slap on the wrist is a show of complicity between the courts there and the police.

I disagree. Im not a cop, I have no cop friends, Im not a cop wanna be, I have had my share of grievances with cops, but if I had been on that jury, I would have ruled the same way.

Sometimes what looks like complicity is just your fellow citizens disagreeing with your take on things.

Also possible. Regardless of what you would have ruled, the story given to me from what I've read (not you, I mean articles and the youtube video, etc), he is a guilty bastard.

That said, it's VERY possible that I am uninformed, I wasn't presented all the evidence in the way that the jury was.

STILL MAD THOUGH!

reply to post by sremmos


Personally I do not buy that defense. They do look the same, but still....

And I understand what you mean, but still. The way he reacted tells me he has the "Wtf" feeling. No one there expected it. They all stopped moving. They all were in shock. Every one of them. If it was an execution, he would have aimed for the head. Head shots kill. He was on the guys head. Literally. And yet he aimed for his back. Tasers are not suppose to be aimed at the head because they stab. They are suppose to aim at the body where it will not cause as much injury.

I can't see it as intent. Reactions of all of them say it was no intended. Where it was shot says it was not intended.

He simply screwed up. Incompetence. That was his arrest and jail time for. Thus it was justice.

reply to post by sremmos


Or, its possible that two people can look at the same evidence and disagree. Thats why there are twelve people on a jury, not one. Not everyone sees things the same way, and sometimes our past experience influences one way or another the verdict. I just mentioned that I would not rule that way to show there didnt need to be complicity. Some people are seeing an accident, some people are seeing purpose, and it really just comes down to what the jury leaned towards, and clearly, they leaned towards accident.

I just think that rioting is a stupid response. Back way the hell up to OJ getting off for killing his wife, and there were not riots in the street when what many, many people thought was an unjust verdict was read. She and the other victim were both white, the alleged murderer was black, he got off completely in the criminal trial. No one rioted.

Even if those of us who think this was an accident are wrong, and justice was not served in this case, thats the way it goes in a trial by jury situation. Sometimes you dont get the verdict you deserve. I dont think that is the case in this instance, but even if it were, its no reason for some to be acting like fools. Unless they are just fools waiting for an excuse to act up anyway.

Originally posted by Gorman91
And finally, if it was an execution, why did he aim for the back and not the head. he was closest to the man's head.

Well, his partner's knee was on the back of the guys head. You wouldn't want to shoot your partner in the leg during your murder would you?