Cop Who Executed Oscar Grant Set Free at 12:01 This Morning After Serving 11 Months

What would people say if a bunch of rowdy drunk people (having celebrated the new year) hurt or killed someone waiting for the train? people would cry foul for there not being any police present. Whether the cop shooting the guy was an accident or not, I can't say, but the people there escalated the situation, if the people there had just remained calm and not have tried to act like hard asses or instigated and made a big fuss, then the worst that would have happened that night would be a couple of drunk people were arrested for disturbing the peace and released the next day.

Sadly, this is just my perspective and I am assuming it is not a popular one.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Please provide us with your source where the cops had anything to do with how he served his time?

........he didnt get special attention......

A white former San Francisco Bay area transit officer was released from jail.

Regardless if you are willing to admit it or not, you know as well as the rest of us that an officer in jail, is going to get special treatment.

[color=50EBEC]If he had not received special treatment, he would never have walked out.
He would have been zipped up in a bag, and rolled out on a stretcher.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Secondly he went to jail which is pretty much the same as prison.

Not even remotely close to being the same thing. Honestly, I don't even think that you actually believe everything that you say.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Yell at the California legislature if you dont like the length of sentence.

lmao. I'm not the one yelling here. The one who would be yelling, is most likely the one who is so angry that they are typing too fast, which is causing many typos and errors.

I said absolutely nothing regarding his charges, his conviction, or his sentencing. I am merely stating that he received special treatment between the time that he was given his sentence, until the time that he walked out a free man. If he didn't, he would never have walked out.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Something big must be wrong with the legal system if this man wasn't charged with murder, when clearly he took out his gun and shot the person with intention. I don't think a tazer looks like a gun, nor do I think tazers are held in the same area as the gun, on the same side of the body, nor does it have the same trigger.

The video also didn't show any immediate threat posed by the deceased man, he merely stood up and the cops pushed him back down, there was more than 3 cops in the scene, the deceased man was already on the ground.

You can't blame panic for the mess up because the deceased man was unarmed and was on the ground with the cop's knee on his back.

I could be wrong with my observation, that's why I'm talking to you, if I'm wrong somewhere, correct me. If you are wrong somewhere, I'll correct you.

Originally posted by Majestic Lumen
What would people say if a bunch of rowdy drunk people (having celebrated the new year) hurt or killed someone waiting for the train? people would cry foul for there not being any police present. Whether the cop shooting the guy was an accident or not, I can't say, but the people there escalated the situation, if the people there had just remained calm and not have tried to act like hard asses or instigated and made a big fuss, then the worst that would have happened that night would be a couple of drunk people were arrested for disturbing the peace and released the next day.

Sadly, this is just my perspective and I am assuming it is not a popular one.

If the cops didn't act like hard asses this wouldn't happen? did you see what I did ?

C'mon guys, the cop made an honest mistake - he is only human after all.

He meant to electrotorture that defenseless and restrained man, not kill him. We have to take into account the officer safety aspect of all of this; a cop can't protect you if he has been injured or killed by an unarmed handcuffed black man.

And who you gonna call when someone robs you? Exactly.

I'm not saying what he did was right or wrong, just that it was an officer safety issue and that you all have to realize how seriously police take that aspect of their jobs. That guy could have been a terrorist.... Just saying.

I for one love the new policing methods.

Praise Mao.

Involuntary manslaughter is of course unacceptable, especially by a policeman, but I don't think 11 months in jail is so outrageous. What is ridiculous is this man is allowed to continue to be a policeman and allowed to carry a gun. Involuntary manslaughter isn't the persons fault, and therefore the person isn't at much risk for being a repeat offender. But to be allowed to carry a gun and be a policeman after this is quite ridiculous. That the protest was declared unlawful is, of course, an outrage.

I think if this guy's police license and gun were taken away, if it was really an accident, I doubt he would be a repeat offender. It doesn't make sense to keep someone in jail a long time just to make a point if they're likely to do the same thing again.

Now, the policeman will probably be more careful if it was an accident, but I doubt it was. It is very true that if it wasn't a policeman, they probably would've been charged with voluntary manslaughter, perhaps even murder, but that may be that the current sentences are too long. They had two options: Put him in jail for a short time and revoke his police license and his license to carry a gun. Put him in jail for a long time and let him continue to be a policeman. In my opinion, the other options would either be not enough to stop it from happening again or too little. The first option is what makes more sense to me. Of course, they did neither.

It's hard to get angry about this when the government is constantly messing things like this up. Sadly, it's a odd day you don't hear about something like this. At least the guy got a jail term at all. In a lot of cases, there wouldn't have been allowed to be a trial or he would've been acquitted. That's probably what would've happened without the activism against this guy.

reply to post by jude11


Yup shot another sapiens sapiens in the back on the ground TRANSMITTED enjoy 3d. THERE is more to LIFE so Oscar sits and awaits his loved ones and he goes home to 3d... SMMFH its a 2 way street NO MATTER WHO DISAGREES. Hope his soul density is up.

Thank GOD there are REAL GUARDIANS. Who set examples for others to follow, Unless this is the example set to follow-AS LONG AS WE GOT POWER WE CAN DO WHAT WE WANT-hmmmmmmm EA

Reply to post by Xcathdra

I cant link to it on my phone but there is a thread doing the rounds which highlights the saga of one man who has gone to jail for a minimum of 20 years without parole for firing a warning shot into a wall in his own home because his daughter's boyfriend was beating her and destroying the house.

This police officer KILLED someone who was defenceless and he didn't even stay in jail for a year! Your statement does not add up.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

My statement does add up.. The problem here rests solely on the posters who, for some unkown reason, dont bother to do any type of research as to how laws work. I can give you other examples where people have discharged a weapon and went to jail, where as others did not.

The reason for the discrepancy is because each state has its own laws and legal system.
Each state falls into a Federal circuit, and when those courts rule on cases from the states, it creates case law.
Federal Appelas courts, when they make a ruling on th4ese types of cases, it creates case law for the appeals circuit only.
The US Supreme Court then can make a ruling, which affects everyone in the country.

You guys are more than welcome to express your opinions on what you think justice should be in cases like this. When you guys decide to be serious about the conversation and actually do research to understand how it works, get back to me.

In the meantime you guys feel free to continue making your snide remarks if it helps you out. I mean seriously, why take part in a debate, or better yet take part in the system, to have the laws you find insane changed?

Apparently its easier to not be knowledgable and to make uninformed comments rather than educate yourself and take part in the system to make the changes. Apparently thats to hard and to much to ask.

Deny ignorance... Dont embrace it.
Educate yourselves and take part in whats going on around you.

[color=CFECEC]Mehserle's Parole Conditions: No Supervision, But Searches Possible

The former BART police officer jailed for shooting an unarmed passenger is on unsupervised parole status. [color=CFECEC]Johannes Mehserle will have no meetings with a parole agent, no ankle monitor to track his location. But he can be searched without warning.

KQED

OAKLAND — Now that a white former San Francisco Bay area transit officer convicted of fatally shooting an unarmed black man has been released from jail, he is also free on [color=CFECEC]unsupervised parole.

San Mateo Daily Journal

[S] Yeah. He has been treated exactly the same as any normal civilian would have been, had they committed the same act. [/EndSarcasm]

reply to post by BrokenCircles


I love it.. You do the research on the conditions set forth for the officer, then make the claim he gets special treatment while showing absolutely NO OTHER information for anyone else.

If your going to do the research, go the full 9 yards instead of jsut cherry picking information that supports your argument.

Your hatred of the police is apparent.. However, again, your issue in this case is not with the Police, but the Prosecuting Attorney and the Judge, who are the ones responsible for the officers conditions of release.

Or is it just easier making uninformed comments in an attempt to continue attacking the police instead of actually taking your argument to the correct area, which would be the Judicial branch.

Do I need to give you a breakdown on how State Government works?

A state government (provincial government in Canada) is the government of a subnational entity in a federal form of government, which shares political power with the federal or national government. A state government may have some level of political autonomy, or be subject to the direct control of the federal government. This relationship may be defined by a constitution.

Executive branch of government is the part of government that has sole authority and responsibility for the daily administration of the state bureaucracy.[1

This is the branch Law Enforcement falls under - Enforcement of Laws

A legislature is a kind of deliberative assembly with the power to pass, amend, and repeal laws.[1] The law created by a legislature is called legislation or statutory law. In addition to enacting laws, legislatures usually have exclusive authority to raise or lower taxes and adopt the budget and other money bills. Legislatures are known by many names, the most common being parliament and congress, although these terms also have more specific meanings.

This is the Legislative branch, where laws are crafted by the peoples representatives. Laws passed by the Legislative are then sent to the Executive branch to either be signed into law, or vetoed and sent back. This is the section of Government that drafts the laws, including Murder / Manslaughter etc that you have issues with. You should start here if you want a law changed.

The judiciary (also known as the judicial system or judicature) is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary also provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the judiciary generally does not make law (that is, in a plenary fashion, which is the responsibility of the legislature) or enforce law (which is the responsibility of the executive), but rather interprets law and applies it to the facts of each case.

This is the Judicial branch, who is solely responsible for hearing arguments for and against a person accused of a crime. This is the branch that will find a person innocent or guilty as well as determining punishment for the crime the person is found guilty of.

This would be the other branch that you need to direct your issues at, since they are the ones who not only prosecuted the Officer, but assigned the punishment.

Also, direct your issues at the jury who came to the conlusion on what the officer is guilty of. Is the jury made up of police supporters as much as the PA or Jail is? Based on your argument to date, any person who seems to appear to even be remotely on the officers side is apparently part of the problem.

Its amazing.. You guys demand the law be enforced, and when it is, you guys complain that its not fair or that its rigged.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
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.

That's kinda true and kinda not. Cops are not part of that part of the process. However they are the stormtroopers of the same force. That same force always looks out for it's own.

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by Xcathdra
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.

That's kinda true and kinda not. Cops are not part of that part of the process. However they are the stormtroopers of the same force. That same force always looks out for it's own.

Its not a blanket response though, contrary to what people are trying to argue. The perception people have about preferential treatment is coming from a lack of knowledge of the law, specifically the statutes involved along with the elements of the crime. People do not understand that in order to charge a person with a crime, the person being accused must meet the criteria established to that crime.

People fail to notice that there is NOT a seperate law for law enforcement officers. This officer was charged using the exact same statute that is applied to everyone else residing in California.

The insinuation of preferential treatment with absoltely nothing to back it up is BS, no matter how you slice it.

The hypocrisy of some people (not you) is insane. To make comments that if they were present the cops never would have made it off the platform?? For people to demand laws be followed, while in the very same breath suggest that vigilante justice is acceptable if used against a Police Officer undermines their argument. Whats said is they dont even notice they are doing it.

That type of attitude tells me they are not intrested in anything other than going after law enforcement. They arent even going after law enforcement because of the incident, but instead they go after them because its all they do. In this case, the open door was the BART incident, which we see has spiraled into the blanket comments lumping all law enforcement together while screaming of preferential treatment.

Until people stop being lazy and actually educate themselves, the cycle will continue and nothing the people complain about in these forums will be fixed.

Whats the phrase - Actions speak louder than words.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Whatever you say. You can continue to scream from the book all you want.

Deep down inside, you know just as well (most likely even better) than the rest of us, that law enforcement officers who end up in the correctional system get special treatment when compared to everyone else. Of course you're not gonna find this 'unwritten' rule written in your book of law, but that does not mean that it does not exist.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Your hatred of the police is apparent..

I have no hatred for police. I despise hypocrites. If the 2 are one in the same, then.....

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Its amazing.. You guys demand the law be enforced, and when it is, you guys complain that its not fair or that its rigged.

Never in my life have I made a demand such as this.

the B.A.R.T. officer knew the difference between his TASER/GUN.

accident? think not.

Originally posted by SyphonX

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
reply to post by jude11

 

Cry me a river, it all started over a fight, he was resisting, funny, the stuff the thug does is never mentioned, just the outcome. The crowd stirred it up as well, and what paragons of virtue they were as well, one more dead noit being supported by State U. I agree, the cop should have done more time, I have no use for them either, however, for every thug life taken one more persons life won't be affected criminally.

I am so sick of seeing your posts everywhere. You're such a disgusting sociopath, and you never add anything of worth to any discussion you infect. Everything you say is abhorrent, violent, and sick.

Then you somehow claim to be standing on a morality pedestal of some form of perverted justice.

You really need a hobby my friend. It's pretty sad.

So only those bleeding hearts that agree with you should post? Telling the truth does not make one a sociopath. Had he not been fighting...cop not involved, had he not been resisting..... cop not involved, had he followed orders....cop not involved. See a common thing there, personally responsibility for ones actions. I never claimed to be standing on a pedestal, just pointed out the obvious.......I have several hobbies btw, however none of them involve enabling thugs, their behavior nor violating t&c on here, have a nice day now.

Originally posted by Lynexon

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
reply to post by jude11

 

Cry me a river, it all started over a fight, he was resisting, funny, the stuff the thug does is never mentioned, just the outcome. The crowd stirred it up as well, and what paragons of virtue they were as well, one more dead noit being supported by State U. I agree, the cop should have done more time, I have no use for them either, however, for every thug life taken one more persons life won't be affected criminally.

Wow your post just reeks with typical "i'm not going to use racist words but still be a racist" flavor. So a black man fighting in the subway and handcuffed by cops and YOU IMMEDIATELY call him a Thug? A man is dead, murdered, and you bad-mouth his name with typical racist bullsh*t like calling him a thug and that he's on welfare? In that case, you are probably a piece of trash on welfare, and if you so happen to get shot by a real jack-booted Gestapo thug, i hope people give you the same treatment and dismissal.

People who say sh*t like that deserve to be punched in the face because its your mindset that is why this crap happens in the first place.

Wow, school is out and the kiddies are here. Thug = racist....that tells me your mind set from the get go. As far as the rest of your other T&C violation comments, I'll just consider the source and laugh them off. Truth hurts doesn't it, and when it's pointed out this is the typical response, ah well 2 more months and school will be back in and ATS will return to normal. Have a nice day.

reply to post by BrokenCircles

If he had not received special treatment, he would never have walked out.
He would have been zipped up in a bag, and rolled out on a stretcher.

The officer was sentenced to jail time, not death.

Due to him being a police officer and the circumstances surrounding the incident, he absolutely would have been singled out and probably seriously injured or killed if put into general population.

Protective custody is not necessarily special treatment. It is the correctional system recognizing the need to separate a particular inmate from the general population because the risk to that inmate is substantially higher than a regular joe blow going to jail. Many inmates are put into protective custody for many different reasons. Sex offenders, gang members and many other are given protective custody due to the elevated chance someone will try to cause them harm.

I see no issue with granting protective custody in this case. I believe that the corrections system should promote someone's right to do their jail time safely, police officer or not.

This is such bull. Mehserle’s actions were accidental, its pretty clear from his reaction In the video, and the second degree murder and voluntary manslaughter charges sought by the DA were political theater for the consumption of the local ghetto denizens.

Oscar Grant was a fentanyl addict and parolee who had been fighting with another gang banger on a moving train filled with bystanders. Grant’s state of mind and his prior behavior was excluded from Mehserle’s trial. Grant’s been paraded around the media as some kind of hard working family man, but he was a drug addict, gang banging drug dealer. With two felony convictions under his belt, an arrest that night and another felony conviction would have put him behind bars for life.

I find it completely hypocritical of Oaklanders calling for retribution against Mehserle when they sit on their hands and turn a blind eye to the gang violence that kills 100+ a year.