Originally posted by The_Phantom
I'm not crying about anything,

Actually you are by coming into this thread and bringing up a conversation from a different thread on a different topic while at the same time lieing to the people in this thread about what my position is.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
what I did in that thread was explain to people that you will defend a cop's 'right' to shoot somebody in the back of the head, and I was right.

Again, you would be lieing. Please show me where I ever defended an officer who shot anyone in the back of the head?

Originally posted by The_Phantom
Not a personal attack, I simply stated the truth of what you would say before you even said it.

Actually it is a personal attack. You have not stated the truth and you obviously dont take the time to read my responses based on your level of ignorance on the topics and my responses.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
Clearly I must comprehend why you take your position better then you think I do in order for me to read your mind like that, and seemingly foretell the future on the position would take. You are the one calling me a cry baby, now that is a personal attack.

You would be a cry baby, and I will be more than happy to add liar to that as well since you have done it in both posts here.

Its not my fault you dont understand how law enforcement or the judicial system works. You should actually learn that before coming in and opening your mouth. It might save you the embarrasment in the future.

Please, explain to all of us what your background is in (aside from being a liar and and ignorant savant).

So far you have called me a troll, an ass, a cry baby and ignorant. Mods will you do something about these attacks by Xcathdra please?

Originally posted by The_Phantom
So far you have called me a troll, an ass, a cry baby and ignorant. Mods will you do something about these attacks by Xcathdra please?

edit on 14-6-2011 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

So you have nothing at all to add to the thread aside from going after me? Why exactly have you come to this thread then if all you are going to do is troll and bait a response?

I explained to you in both threads what my view point is, and yet for obvious reasons you ignore them and continue to just make stuff up and lie about what I say.

Either back up your accusations against me, or appologize.

Either participate in this thread and remain on topic, or go away. It really is that simple.

I do admit... There is a rather obvious hypocrisy in the treatment of cops versus the treatment of those who are not cops, when going through the justice system. Cops seem to always have their word take over anyone elses.

Cops are CIVILIANS and need to be treated as such... I have seen so many crimes that cops have gotten away with, or just received a slap on the wrist, when anyone else would be getting the book thrown at them...

I see this and I do admit. What if it had been the other way around? A black man, shooting an unarmed cop.... That black man would not leave the court room with anything less that life in prison,I bet.

What does the cop get for shooting an unarmed black man? Reduced sentence and let out after 11 months...

Can they be any more obvious in the justice system with their bias in favor of cops?

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by The_Phantom
So far you have called me a troll, an ass, a cry baby and ignorant. Mods will you do something about these attacks by Xcathdra please?

edit on 14-6-2011 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

So you have nothing at all to add to the thread aside from going after me? Why exactly have you come to this thread then if all you are going to do is troll and bait a response?

I explained to you in both threads what my view point is, and yet for obvious reasons you ignore tham and continue to just make tuff up and lie about what I say.

Either participate in this thread and remain on topic, or go away. It really is that simple.

I'm just saying, that when it comes to cops you ignore the facts and defend them. That's all that I need to say, because it's true and I proved it. And you got so mad about it you starting attacking me.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
I'm just saying, that when it comes to cops you ignore the facts and defend them. That's all that I need to say, because it's true and I proved it. And you got so mad about it you starting attacking me.

And again you would be lieing about what I do. I am not defending this officer, nor did I defend the officers action in the other thread. Its not a difficult concept when I explain the situation from A to Z from a law enforcement point of view.

As I said in another thread, if you and I are discussing Adolph Hitler, and I make a comment about the number of death camps and how they worked, and you corrected me on the info, are we to assume that because you know the facts that you support hitler and his policies?

Nope -

However that is what you are doing to me. I explain how the law works, how law enforcement works, and instead of actually reading and learning, you ignore it and make false allegations against me that you cannot back up.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by The_Phantom
I'm just saying, that when it comes to cops you ignore the facts and defend them. That's all that I need to say, because it's true and I proved it. And you got so mad about it you starting attacking me.

And again you would be lieing about what I do. I am not defending this officer, nor did I defend the officers action in the other thread. Its not a difficult concept when I explain the situation from A to Z from a law enforcement point of view.

As I said in another thread, if you and I are discussing Adolph Hitler, and I make a comment about the number of death camps and how they worked, and you corrected me on the info, are we to assume that because you know the facts that you support hitler and his policies?

Nope -

However that is what you are doing to me. I explain how the law works, how law enforcement works, and instead of actually reading and learning, you ignore it and make false allegations against me that you cannot back up.

I have no interest in learning how the law defends people that shoot defenseless men in the back of the head. But you won't have to hear from me on this thread again, time for breakfast. But if you have any more of those personal attacks against me while I'm gone I expect the mods to take care of it.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
Maybe the other cops had nothing to do with the sentence he recieved, but they had everything to do with how he served it. All of your statements referring to the law by the books, are just fine and dandy, but we all know that reality is not done exactly by the books.

Please provide us with your source where the cops had anything to do with how he served his time? Secondly, and I dont know how many times I can say this before you guys comprehend, that cops have nothing to do with the court, sentencing or corrections process.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles

Out of concerns for his safety, Mehserle was kept at the Los Angeles County Jail throughout his 11 month sentence. He was never sent to prison.

While at the jail, Mehserle was kept in a private cell away from other inmates for his safety.

Which means he didnt get special attention because he is a transit officer in San Franciso area. He was sent outside the area. Secondly he went to jail which ois pretty much the same as prison. Third, as I already stated, the state has to release over 40k inmates to comply with FEderal Supreme Court ruling on overcrowding. Fourth - The califnornia system gives a person 1 day for every day they have good behavior removed from their sentence.

Yell at the California legislature if you dont like the length of sentence.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
I do believe that he needed extra protection. If Johannes Mehserle had stepped foot inside a real prison, and had not received any special benefits, he would never have stepped foot outside of that prison. On the other hand, it is most likely safe to assume that he had additional comforts given to him, while in his own private cell, and away from the other inmates. It is no secret that corruption exists inside the prison and jail systems.

All professions have their share of crooked people, including corrections and law enforcement. Secondly it will permate the prisons because the people who are sent their are..... wait for it... convicted criminals.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
I have no interest in learning how the law defends people that shoot defenseless men in the back of the head. But you won't have to hear from me on this thread again, time for breakfast. But if you have any more of those personal attacks against me while I'm gone I expect the mods to take care of it.

edit on 14-6-2011 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

Which is why you are uninformed an wrong. The truth is important, if for no other reason that it would show that the kid was shot in the back, not the back of the head.

Apparently details are not important for you, especially when they dont support your false claims.

Again you should deny ignorance instaed of embracing it. Also, you should stop coming into threads and just making info up and posting it.

So again, please show all of us where I stated I supported this officer. Please show where I said I condoned the officer shooting the guy in the back of the head?

I can save you the time and trouble, because I never said it. It is yet another lie by you in an effort to get your digs in and make a blanket assumption.

I am still waiting on your appology.

Please a little reminder here, lets keep to the topic at hand and not each other, Any such comments will be removed,

Thanks x
and lets carry on with the topic at hand.

Asala,

Originally posted by confreak
Firstly I watched the video and it looked like murder to me.

This is where people have issues, and where I say that people should learn how the law works. Its not as simple as one person shooting another, and charging the person for murder. You have different levels ofmurder, and manslaughter. Each takes into account the repsonible persons actions and mindset.

Murder requires a person to knowingly take an action that they know will result in the death of another person (causes grave bodily harm / death). Hence the term premeditated - or in other words the person plans out the killing and follows through with it.

If a person is driving drunk and hits another car head on and kills the person in the car, most states would charge the person with manslaughter because the intent / pre meditation is missing.

In this case with the officer, he said he was going for his taser, not his gun and his intent was to tase the person who they claim was resisting arrest. There was no intent to shoot this person nor kill him (based on their legal argument). From the research I did the trial was moved to Los Angeles County, and the officers was charged with manslaughter in addition to murder. The jury found him guilty on the lesser charge not because he is a cop, but because his actions did not meet the criteria of murder.

Originally posted by confreak
Secondly I thought the author of the thread said the murderer took his job back. I don't know, if I'm wrong I'm wrong, it isn't the end of the world.

I think I mis-read this part: "Un-Warranted Killings of Civilians and now the release of a killer with a badge? "

There is absolutely no way this person will ever be reinstated, or hold a job in law enforcement ever again because of the conviction in State Court. Secondly his legal battle is not overwith as a civil suit has been filed in the amount fo 25 million dollars and it looks like the Feds might be looking into it for a 42 usc 1983 violation (The cop violated the kids civil rights when he shot him - 4th amendment violation - illegal seizure).

And one last time, just for emphasis. I dont condone this officers actions, or any other officer who steps outside the bounds. All I have done is explained the legal technicalities that go with these topics and explain the side that people either dont know, dont care to know or what have you.

Originally posted by Thepreye
Is it murder to accidentally kill someone whilst carrying out another crime, I think it is and I ask because surely tasing someone lying face down with their hands cuffed behind their back is surely illegal, some kind of aggravated assault I would imagine.

As I said, it will vary from state to state. Murder requires a person to act in a depraved manner without considertion of their actions. A person who accidentally kills a person does not have the needed intent to raise it to murder. California actually has involuntary manslaughter, and voluntary manslaughter, and just as the names imply, one can be accidental, and the other can be intentional with circumstances.

Some states allow a person to be charged with murder if a person dies during the commission of a crime. Michigan is the example here and was a topic on the site. 2 people decide to break into a building and on their exit, they are confronted by the police with guns drawn. When the cops rodered them to put there hands up, one of the criminals refused, opting instead to make an attempt to pull his gun to shoot at the police. The Officer saw this movement, and ended up shooting and killing the suspect..

The other suspect was charged with murder, even though he was not armed and did not kill his partner in crime. Michigan law allowes for a person to be charged with murder if their actions result in the death of someone else. In this case, by being present with an armed suspect, he was charged for his death.


As far as deploying a taser into a person who is handcuffed, again it will depend on state law and departmental policy. I worked for an agency that did not allow a taser to be used on a person in handcuffs, however pepper spray was an option. The deployment of those items again have to be justified as its a use of force, and is subject to review byy superviors an IA.

Originally posted by Thepreye
Imagine a similar scenario wherein the protagonists are say a wealthy white guy, with superb legal representation, and a black mall security guard tasing him after whitey had been cuffed grounded and subdued, all for the suspicion that he may have been involved in a minor scuffle in one of the retail outlets.

Using private security as an example here does not work, as security officers are not commissioned and do not fall under state or federal laws theat cover people who are acting under the color of law. Security Officers, to an extent, have more authority than Police Officers because they are not subject to the same requirements. Law Enforcement has to have a reason to request to search, where as private security does not. If a person refuses a search request by private security, security can tell the person to leave the property since its private.

Originally posted by Thepreye
If that tasing was found to be illegal, I believe it would be, then the pigs defence collapses due to his claim that he was trying to tase the youth and that action was a crime therefore the shooting was carried out during an assault and would be murder.

Again this is where people need to research the law and understand how it works. There are affirmative defenses people can use depending on what crime they are being charged with.

Also, people need to learn how law enforcement works instead of jsut guessing. Im not trying to be a jerk towards you or anything, but saying he should be charged with Murder while not understanding the breakdown of the law, its elements or how its applied based on the situation and evidence.

Say you stay up for 36 hours straight and decide to go drive to McDonalds to get food. While driving to Mcdonalds, you fall asleep behind the wheel, cross the centerline and hit another car head on, killing its driver.

Should you be charged with Murder?
Did you intend on killing anyone while onyour way to get food?
Did you intend on falling asleep while driving your car?
Did you plot / make a plan where you decide you will stay up for 36 hours, getting no sleep, planning on going to mcdoanlds, and while enroute, planned on crossing centerline and killing someone from a head on collision.

If you answered yes to the last statement, then yes, you can be charged with murder, since that was your intent. You had a clear plan from A to Z - Premeditated - all planned out.

The Involuntary manslaughter charge is there when a person kills another person unintentionally through a careless or wreckless act. You are still held accountible for that death, and the punishment dolled out takes into account that it was accidental.

The law is not as black and white as some people think. A blanket law with absolutely no room to account for mitigating circumstances, lapses in judgement etc would theoretically be able to place every single person in jail.