Ex-officer found guilty of manslaughter in Oakland subway shooting - Polidicks

[quote]A former police officer who is white was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter Thursday in the killing of an unarmed black man in Oakland, California. Johannes Mehserle, who was a Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer at the time of the incident, was convicted in the shooting of 22-year-old Oscar Grant on a California train platform on January 1, 2009. Mehserle, who was on duty at the time, said at the trial that he intended to draw and fire his Taser rather than his gun, CNN affiliate KTVU reported. The shooting was captured on a bystander's cell-phone video camera. The video was widely circulated, and it spurred several protests and riots in and around Oakland.[/quote] [img]http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/CRIME/07/08/subway.shooting.trial.verdict/story.oscar.grant.gi.jpg[/img] [I]Oakland residents demand justice at a March rally honoring Oscar Grant.[/I] [B]Source:[/B] [url]http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/07/08/subway.shooting.trial.verdict/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1[/url]

I don't see what pointing out his skin colour will achieve. It suggests this was nothing but racially motivated. Perhaps it was, I don't know, but it seems very irresponsible to do that.

Wow I love how they point out his race immediately

How does one get convicted of "Involuntary man slaughter"?

White man kills a black man: riots Black man kills a white man: the black man is innocent he can't possibly be to blame But aside from that he'll probably get out of jail in like a year for good behaviour, thanks to the brilliant justice system. Honestly, racism is such a stupid thing

[QUOTE=Kyle902;23217618]How does one get convicted of "Involuntary man slaughter"?[/QUOTE] The source fucked up

Yeah, the source ain't biased. Either way, it covers very little of what happened during the shooting.

[QUOTE=ThePutty;23217660]White man kills a black man: riots Black man kills a white man: the black man is innocent he can't possibly be to blame[/QUOTE] You mean "black man gets life in prison"

Protests I can understand but riots jesus

Oakland is burning right now. Nothing was going to please them less than first-degree murder. [editline]10:42PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Helldoran;23217678]The source fucked up[/QUOTE] No, it is involuntary manslaughter, a.k.a killing someone without intention.

We're watching this on TV, it's good to know that there's still good people out there like students who go out and urge people to stop rioting, and leave their city in peace.

He's going to get 2-4 years in prison for killing an innocent man. Yay for racism.

[QUOTE=PrismatexV8;23223009]He's going to get 2-4 years in prison for killing an innocent man. Yay for racism.[/QUOTE] Do you want to explain why this was caused by racism? Just because one was white and the other was black? It was a stupid mistake (a [i]really[/i] stupid mistake), and he should definitely be going to prison, but there is no valid evidence to prove this was a racist killing.

He fucked up big, his life will probably be ruined by this whole thing.

face it, media outlets are trying to make this look like the LA riots v2

[QUOTE=Archy;23223750]face it, media outlets are trying to make this look like the LA riots v2[/QUOTE] Indeed, so far, only a footlocker was broken into.

[QUOTE=TH89;23217833]You mean "black man gets life in prison"[/QUOTE] Or dies on the electric chair and through the entire movie he was innocent.

Isn't this the one which was recorded by like 20 people? I swear I've heard/watched this case before.

"Shit, he's resisting arrest, I better taze him!" *bang* "Oh whoops, that was my gun :rolleye:" waw waw [I]waw[/I]. Is there a criminal charge for extreme, ridiculous stupidity? I think the minimum sentence for that charge should be 6-7 years.

People shouldn't put themselves in that position in the first place. I don't feel bad for what happened with Grant; if anything I feel bad for the officer. Grant was involved in at least [B]12[/B] different criminal cases, according to Alameda County Courthouse records, and served several months in prison (2007 - 2008). From the looks of it, I really don't think he would have done any good for this world anyways.

[QUOTE]said at the trial that he intended to draw and fire his Taser rather than his gun[/QUOTE]Ha ha oops! How do you even make that mistake, aren't guns quite a bit more weighty than tasers? [QUOTE=kekedakis;23231639]People shouldn't put themselves in that position in the first place. I don't feel bad for what happened with Grant; if anything I feel bad for the officer. Grant was involved in at least [B]12[/B] different criminal cases, according to Alameda County Courthouse records, and served several months in prison (2007 - 2008). From the looks of it, I really don't think he would have done any good for this world anyways.[/QUOTE] Oh shit, several months, he's a fuckin worthless monster, better dead than alive.

[quote]Mehserle, who was on duty when the shooting occurred, said at the trial that he intended to draw and fire his Taser rather than his gun, CNN affiliate KTVU reported.[/quote] How the hell do you fuck this up? Either he's really stupid and shouldn't have ever been a cop in the first place, or that's complete bullshit.

I don't understand why would there be a riot when he got convicted. Seriously, now if he was chose non-guilty, then that would be understandable. The news scene took over the whole 9:00 - 10:00 time slot, missing my episode of Rookie Blue. But that doesn't matter, I'm just confused why the hell would be do something like that, get a pistol instead of his tazer, couldn't he just get another guy to tase him. Who the fuck, mixes up his tazer with a pistol? They should just eliminate Pistols and replace them with tazers. For BART officers anyway.

[QUOTE=PILLS HERE!;23231958] They should just eliminate Pistols and replace them with tazers. For BART officers anyway[/QUOTE] NOOOO WAY, too dangerous. That'd end up costing them a lot more.

[QUOTE=kekedakis;23231639]People shouldn't put themselves in that position in the first place. I don't feel bad for what happened with Grant; if anything I feel bad for the officer. Grant was involved in at least [B]12[/B] different criminal cases, according to Alameda County Courthouse records, and served several months in prison (2007 - 2008). From the looks of it, I really don't think he would have done any good for this world anyways.[/QUOTE] wtf So just because he had a spotty past, it's OK for him to die?

It was a mistake, the officer pulled out what he thought was his Taser, it was his serviceweapon, and went to taze him Oops Involuntary Manslaughter seems like the right charge to me, besides, there is an old saying in court and it's even in movies, It's about what you can prove in court... You could *Possibly* 50-50 prove that it was Murder, BUT risk him not getting a day in prison, or you can positively get him to serve time for Involuntary Manslaughter The whole reason for the Riots, which happens all the time with cases like this, are Those rioting, and some that weren't, think it was Murder, Absolute pre-meditated Murder with vengence in the officer's eyes and the only reason he's getting 4 years instead of life is because he's White and the victim was black

[QUOTE=TheTalon;23233036]It was a mistake, the officer pulled out what he thought was his Taser, it was his serviceweapon, and went to taze him Oops Involuntary Manslaughter seems like the right charge to me, besides, there is an old saying in court and it's even in movies, It's about what you can prove in court... You could *Possibly* 50-50 prove that it was Murder, and risk him not getting a day in prison, or you can positively get him to serve time for Involuntary Manslaughter[/QUOTE] Did you see the video? No way was that a mistake. Should've been murder.

How was it not a mistake? See this is where Opinions differ and then it becomes Someone's word against someone else's word, and that doesn't fly in court It could just as easily been him mistaking his actual weapon with his taser, it wouldn't be the first time it's happened to an officer either, or he could have shot him in the back, in front of everyone in the public, execution style, But it comes down to what you can prove without a doubt, The evidence is there for Involuntary Manslaughter, but it's Iffy for Murder What if the Jury decided well he didn't mean to, and so vote him not guilty to the charge of Murder and he walks free? The Riots would be ten fold worse

If it was a mistake, don't you think the guy would've noticed he was holding a gun instead of his tazer? The two are completely different shapes and the triggers are in different places.

[img]http://gamyhan.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/glock231.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.impactguns.com/store/media/taser_m18L.jpg[/img] They're similar, and all it takes is both of them on the same side of your hip to get them mistaken, a lot, especially in the heat of some idiot being uncooperative, Hell even if you watch Cops, you'll see from time to time the officer go for his taser and grab the pistol grip of his service weapon first I'm just saying Involuntary Manslaughter is the correct charge, instead of Murder, given the evidence and the conditions it took place