Defense: BART Shooting Cop Meant To Use Taser

Defense: BART Shooting Cop Meant To Use Taser

www.ktvu.com

Mehserle was armed with both a Taser and a handgun. He then allegedly drew the handgun and shot Grant once.

The bail document later asserts that "the bulk of the discovery, including witness and officer statements, seem to indicate that this young officer, who carried a taser for only a few shifts prior to this event, may have mistakenly deployed his service pistol rather than his taser, thus negating any criminal intent."

(visit the link for the full news article)

Okay, now who buys this??

You have a video that clearly shows him yanking hard at his gun, pointing his gun and pulling the trigger. A gun and a taser don't even work the same, don't feel the same, don't taste the same... shall I go on about how they are just completely different??

Once they say this guy is innocent, they'll riot on this like crazy.

www.ktvu.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

If you can't tell the difference between your taser and your service pistol, you have no business carrying either. No business wearing a badge either.

Not buying this for a second.

I call shaninigans. He's an officer of the law and can't tell the diffrence in WEIGHT alone, of his handgun and his taser? Not to mention the obvious LOOk of the weapon? Back in history warriors didn't swing randomly, they knew their weapons well. This is an outrage and a cover story.

Even the average citizen can tell the diffrence between these two weapons on touch ALONE.

Well, this will make some of the folks here who were defending him giddy, as that was the excuse they were giving behind what happened. lol.

This guy was wrong no matter what ridiculous excuse he tries to come up with---The guy was laying face down with another officers knee pinning him into the ground. He posed no threat, so even the taser excuse is laughable. There was no need to draw ANY weapon at that point, he was subdued.

If this guy skates, expect all hell to break loose.

I like the part where they say he's been cleared of any 'criminal intent'.
Does that mean he's off the hook?

Well then, lets see..
"Sorry officer, I didn't mean to drive drunk but I forgot"

"I didn't mean to bash his brains out with his spade, I was showing him a move from UFC..."

"I wasn't stealing that old lady's pure, I was borrowing it..."


Are they 3 quotes from innocent bystanders?

Thing is, I'm sure the hypocrites behind this think they're being perfectly reasonable and still have no trouble sleeping at night.

The guy had no business tasering a man on the ground cooperating with them. Didn't see any struggling in the video. If he did taser, and not shoot him, it should be a crime as well.

He is full of it, that guy knew what he was doing.

reply to post by xstealth


At first I was in agreement that this cop couldn't possibly have done this by accident. But why on earth would he try and intentionally kill a guy who isn't struggling?

I'm not defending the guy so don't get that idea, I'm just as mind boggled as everyone else here.

The second the initial shooting became public news, a major television network had a former police officer as a guest commentator. He indicated that they might try this as a legal defense and he proceeded to explain why it would not work.

A Taser has a completely different feel than a gun. It has a different style holster, a very different weight and balance, and a different triggering mechanism. Tasers have bright yellow markings on the side to provide an instant visual weapons check for the officer. When the safety of a Taser is disengaged, a laser spot sight turns on and this would have immediately been visible to the BART officer. A laser spot is not something found on a typical BART service handgun(Sig Sauer 40 cal.). Hold a Taser in your hand and you will never mistake one for the other. Taser are specifically designed with that in mind to prevent such a situation. The training officers go through before they are allowed to be armed with a Tazer, has specific items that are designed to prevent this type of accidental shooting to happen. A Taser is worn on your non gun side of the body so you have to reach with your non typical weapon hand.

I this photo, you can clearly see that the officer in question was not even wearing a Taser or its holster.Photo shows BART Officer was not equipt with a Taser
If you scroll down on that link, you will also see how different the style of Tasers used by BART is from a Sig Sauer 40 cal. Comparison Photo of a Sig Sauer 40 cal. handgun, typical for BART officers

The News expert also went through the shooting videos step by step. The Bart officer who did the shooting pulled his service revolver and did not shoot instantly, He held it in his hands and paused. he had plenty of time to realize that he was holding a much heavier gun and not a Taser. It was not at all a rapid fire situation and in the former police officers expert opinion, there is no way anyone from a Bart officer to an inexperienced man on the street, would not have known the difference before pulling the trigger. He also comented on the reaction afterwards, where the Bart officer was not at all surprised with the bang of the gun as it went off.

With the new Photograph and information that the BART officer was not even carrying a Taser, this should be a slam dunk case.


My guess, is that while they are desperately trying to come up with some way to get him off, the shooter will do hard time for killing the victim and the family will receive a large settlement for wrongful death.


[edit on 30/1/09 by Terapin]

[edit on 30/1/09 by Terapin]

reply to post by Lazyninja


Well, I'm not entirely convinced he DELIBERATELY meant to actually pull the trigger, based primarily on his reaction immediately after he did it, but nonetheless, he had no reason to even DRAW a weapon and point it at the guy. None whatsoever. So he screwed up, and whether intentional or not, he killed the guy BECAUSE of his screw-up. The LEAST he should get, the VERY least, should be manslaughter.

If that was any of us civilians who did that, mistake or not, we'd be sitting on death row.

In the event that this even was viable, wouldn't it indicate a complete lack of training before being allowed to carry the Taser? And, if this is the case, why would he pull a weapon (the Taser) without being trained to use it? I see negligence in both cases, with a firearm & with a Taser.

reply to post by thomasblackraven


Before anyone is allowed to cary a Taser , they go through very specific and detailed training. It is not a simply 5 minute course. You can not carry one without taking this course. It is a legal requirement for all Police and Security officers in the US.

In many cases this training involves being shot with a Taser to understand its effects. This is typical in Law enforcement.

[edit on 30/1/09 by Terapin]

Ignorance of a weapon is not an excuse.


The evidence against him is overwhelming.

Originally posted by Terapin
reply to post by thomasblackraven

 

Before anyone is allowed to cary a Taser , they go through very specific and detailed training. It is not a simply 5 minute course...It is a legal requirement for all Police and Security officers in the US.

That's what I hoped would be standard...which goes against this guy's defense of inexperience.

If the jury acquits this guy then they were either bought off or intimidated - prolly the latter. Police forces are very good at "explaining" to jurors that if they convict a cop, then don't ever call the police for help.

Originally posted by Terapin

In many cases this training involves being shot with a Taser to understand its effects. This is typical in Law enforcement.

I've read that a million times, but i don't believe it. Just another cop lie. Maybe 1 cop in a 100 is tased during training.

reply to post by Make Speed Limit 45


I agree, The number of law enforcement officers who experience being shocked during training, is probably very low. With a subway Cop, that number is most likely Zero.

Officers shocked with Tasers during their training to use the weapon, call the experience the worst five seconds they've endured.

In any case, what they experience in a nice comfortable environment, with assistants, instant help, and a friendly atmosphere, is far far better than a typical Taser victim in the street.
Taser Training Offers Precautions

How come the OP's post states that the officer had both a tazer and a gun but the image posted later shows no tazer? Are they just plain lying in peoples faces?

[edit on 30/1/2009 by PsykoOps]

My buddy was telling me the other day that BART cops are pretty heavy handed. He was handcuffed and slammed up against a couple things and then searched because he fit the description of another guy someone had reported to be smoking weed on the train. My friend doesn't even smoke weed.

They never asked him anything or told him anything beforehand, they just gathered around him real fast and slammed him to the ground and cuffed him. He also mentioned that hes seen BART cops act like this towards others quite often.

So in short I don't believe this officer one bit. It seems to me they have a history of unnecessary roughness. I don't think the cop shot the guy on purpose. it makes no sense at all. But he definitely wasn't doing what he was supposed to and this time it got someone killed.

You know this guy is guilty as hell why?

Because the usual apologists that would've been all over this because the victim was black, have kept their mouths shut.