Video of San Francisco BART police officer appearing to execute suspect who is lying on the ground

[Zebo]

Something else never addressed in these 'accidental' shootings is cops violate rule #2 of firearm safety all the frkn time, eg. Never point muzzle at something you do not wish to destroy. What do we expect with high stress and they got a gun pointed at someone? "Accidents" will happen. I've never heard of an accident actually I don't believe in them short of having a stroke rolling down the HWY, almost every 'accident' is preventable and following basic firearm rules, rules every child that goes through a hunters safety course knows - like stop pointing guns at people you don't want to kill would go a long way in preventing these fatal shootings of unarmed people.

 

[alphatarget1]

It would have taken him even less not to write it, if it was actually written by him.


What? His behavior after the shooting is 100% consistent with someone who experiences a traumatic event. He couldn't talk about it. What would you say to the family of someone you just accidentally killed? "Hey, umm, sorry about that one, dude! Uhh...whoopsie!"

People who've experienced a traumatic event often shut down emotionally and are unable to talk about it. Add in that he was almost certainly confused about what happened or how it happened.

Combat vets, police officers, and civilians are often traumatized after having to shoot someone in circumstances that were unquestionably JUSTIFIED. There are documented incidents of police officers, servicemen, and civilians committing suicide after having to take another life when they were JUSTIFIED in doing so.

If people can suffer from severe PTSD after shooting someone who was trying to kill them, how do you think people handle the psychological impact of realizing they just accidentally killed someone or caused their death, without justification?

Good to know you're on the side of the guy with a long repeated history of being a thug and dirtbag, and who had all the power to avoid placing himself in that situation, rather than the guy who puts himself in harms way and under extreme stress to protect the public from people like Grant. Well done, Sir!

Look, someone is trying to turn the table and make the cop look like a victim!

Mersehle's use of force was not justified in any manner. He stated in his letter that he could not apologize to the victim because of threats to his family and friends. That sounds like he was ready to talk. I have no sympathy for him having PTSD.

It truly sickens me that there are still so many racists. Grant might have been a thug, but that is not the question here. Grant got EXECUTED. Grant's race is repeatedly brought up as a matter of discussion, some even go as far as saying that Grant deserved to die.

This is not just any other police brutality story where the officer's action might have been justified. There is no justification whatsoever. If we can't trust the police to use their firearms properly, why give them guns? Is a cop going to get out of responsibility every time when they claim the suspect was "reaching for his pocket"?

As far as Mersehle's apology goes, it means fucking jack shit. He just wanted sympathy from the public. It's not like he had a press conference with his attorney a week or two after he shot Grant saying that he is deeply sorry. He was watching out for his own ass this whole time.

 

[SSSnail]

Race was only brought up by the people that want blood from Mehserle, you got that backward alpha.

Nobody is trying to make the cop look like a victim, most everyone in this thread is saying that the punishment is just. In plain English, that means we understand he made a mistake. You, and the others that wanted blood from him, want something more. Driven by stupidity, you and your ilk wanted to see him hang. Not because you want to see "justice" is done, but because you're blinded by your hatred.

Like it or not, you're the bigot here. Only if you can take a minute to think about what everyone is saying, then you'll see it. But, good luck going through life being hateful and cynical.

 

[tcsenter]

Juries don't want to believe a police officer would commit a crime, he said.

Its not that juries don't want to believe an officer would commit a crime, its that you have to PROVE to them the officer did commit a crime beyond any reasonable doubt.

Sure cops commit crimes, but if it is plausible that it was not overt intentional or witting misconduct rather than poor or mistaken judgment or an accident under stressful conditions, then I'm going to give the cop a lot of leeway. Even if it just a cop with an otherwise stellar record losing his temper on a rare occasion and manhandling someone excessively who is being insulting, belligerent, or uncooperative, given the officer is making a legitimate stop or investigating a reported crime, then I'm going to give the cop more leeway, unless there is a pattern of it.

If the cop is going around shaking drug dealers down for money, taking bribes, touching or propositioning women inappropriately or pressuring them for sexual favors, using racial epithets/slurs, has a pattern of targeting/profiling minorities, a pattern of excessive force/mistreatment, outright plants evidence, or fabricates things against someone (that could not remotely be explained by differing interpretation or faulty recollection), all of which are things bad cops have been caught doing and convicted for, then no I'm not going to give them leeway for witting misconduct that requires some forethought or formulating intent in advance.

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence or reasonable human error.

 

[waggy]

Keep telling yourself that.

Hey look at how fast the police where able to arrest and charge the protesters. Oh yeah how could I forget his suspension on paid leave.

there was no paid leave. he resigned

 

[alphatarget1]

Nobody is trying to make the cop look like a victim, most everyone in this thread is saying that the punishment is just.

We'll see how the judge sentences this cop. Anything less than 10 years would be a slap on the wrist.

The police gets away with their "mistakes", while civilians will most certainly be hung by law enforcement and the government.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

We'll see how the judge sentences this cop. Anything less than 10 years would be a slap on the wrist.

The police gets away with their "mistakes", while civilians will most certainly be hung by law enforcement and the government.

This is a completely laughable view point.

Basically what you are saying is if the sentence doesn't conform to your level of outrage and blood lust you won't be happy. So instead of wanting the correct sentence you want the maximum no matter what the facts or circumstances are in the case.

 

[waggy]

We'll see how the judge sentences this cop. Anything less than 10 years would be a slap on the wrist.

The police gets away with their "mistakes", while civilians will most certainly be hung by law enforcement and the government.

not going to get 10 years. Police shouldnt get special treatment. good or bad. he should get what a civie gets for involuntary manslaughter.

 

[tcsenter]

Basically what you are saying is if the sentence doesn't conform to your level of outrage and blood lust you won't be happy. So instead of wanting the correct sentence you want the maximum no matter what the facts or circumstances are in the case.

The subtext is obvious:

I (or my friends/family members) are sent to jail whenever we 'accidentally' rob someone, or 'accidentally' drink and drive, or 'accidentally' assault someone, or 'accidentally' steal a car...possess or sell drugs...etc. I (or my friends/family) made a bad choice, and nobody cut us any slack. So cops should go to jail when they make 'mistakes', too.

I've been exposed to people from the entire range of socioeconomic backgrounds, from blue collar families who never graduated high school, to households with two highly educated professionals. Black and hispanic, but a LOT more whites/caucasians.

Everyone I've ever met who hated cops were those with a penchant for breaking the law, almost always for their own selfish and antisocial purposes (thieves, thugs, drunks and druggies, reckless types who like to race on public streets or speed, being defiant for the sake of being defiant because they are angry/bitter/resentful about something in their personal life then take-it out on unrelated proxies, et. al.).

Going on 40 and haven't encountered a single exception to this rule yet.

 

[Zebo]

Race was only brought up by the people that want blood from Mehserle, you got that backward alpha.

Nobody is trying to make the cop look like a victim, most everyone in this thread is saying that the punishment is just. In plain English, that means we understand he made a mistake. You, and the others that wanted blood from him, want something more. Driven by stupidity, you and your ilk wanted to see him hang. Not because you want to see "justice" is done, but because you're blinded by your hatred.

Like it or not, you're the bigot here. Only if you can take a minute to think about what everyone is saying, then you'll see it. But, good luck going through life being hateful and cynical.

This.

I agree cop should be in prison but from all evidence I've seen which includes:
White cops shooting unarmed blacks
Black cops shooting unarmed blacks
Hispanic cops shooting unarmed blacks
White cops shooting unarmed whites
Do I have to go on? So many permutations you get the idea - go look videos are out there...

it's a Blue vs everyone else problem, I guess one can call it racial


Here is how I would mitigate it.
1. Head cams on cops.
2. Don't point gun at something unless you plan to kill it. Sometimes guns just go off in high stress situations.
3. Make Taser a different shape than gun, like a flashlight.
4. More public acceptance of tazing and physical correction so things don't escalate into having to use a firearm to end threat.

 

[Zebo]

Its not that juries don't want to believe an officer would commit a crime, its that you have to PROVE to them the officer did commit a crime beyond any reasonable doubt.

Sure cops commit crimes, but if it is plausible that it was not overt intentional or witting misconduct rather than poor or mistaken judgment or an accident under stressful conditions, then I'm going to give the cop a lot of leeway. Even if it just a cop with an otherwise stellar record losing his temper on a rare occasion and manhandling someone excessively who is being insulting, belligerent, or uncooperative, given the officer is making a legitimate stop or investigating a reported crime, then I'm going to give the cop more leeway, unless there is a pattern of it.

If the cop is going around shaking drug dealers down for money, taking bribes, touching or propositioning women inappropriately or pressuring them for sexual favors, using racial epithets/slurs, has a pattern of targeting/profiling minorities, a pattern of excessive force/mistreatment, outright plants evidence, or fabricates things against someone (that could not remotely be explained by differing interpretation or faulty recollection), all of which are things bad cops have been caught doing and convicted for, then no I'm not going to give them leeway for witting misconduct that requires some forethought or formulating intent in advance.

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence or reasonable human error.

I with this benefit of the doubt idea but I still have not seen video of him reaching for gun. What happened in video I saw was for some strange reason cop told suspect on the ground, a place where you want suspects ideally due to lack of mobility, to get up. Very odd. Almost as if cop was encouraging man to obtain a threatening position to be able to shoot. Malice, you bet. Jury was out of their mind....not the first time won't be the last.

 

[Attic]

Saw the video, accident. An intent to kill would have shown anger in the officer, instead we saw surprise and shock.

Grant shouldn't have died, but he was acting like an idiot and his actions provoked and led to the fatal mistake. He was resisting being cuffed and acting like a lovely human, generally going along his behavior that got him arrested 12 times between 2004 and 2008.

Situation is miserable and ended in such a way that I think everyone is sorry. But Grant is still an asshole who resisted arrest. The officer accidently killing him while intending to subdue him in a manner to control the situation is a terrible reality to face.


The other suspects didn't require 2-3 officers to subdue, what was Grant doing that required all that force?

Is it reasonable to assume the officer inteded to taze Grant to subdue him?

Is it reasonable to assume the officer shot Grant in the back in front of numerous people on purpose?


Race has nothing to do with it, it's a tool used by the racist and/or ignorant to leverage an unreasonable opinion passed on as fact in an attempt to avoid any responsiblity of proof or logic or anything reasonable to back up the claim. ie) The murder was racially charged even though all the evidence points to it being an accident. Proof being, "how could it be an accident when it was racially motivated?"

 

[WhipperSnapper]

biiiiiig bump... verdict to be read in 1hr.

Thanks for the bump! This might be the most-responded to thread I've ever started. Now at 463 posts!