Police Captain Convicted of 1-Degree Manslaughter - Polidicks

[quote]OKLAHOMA CITY — An Oklahoma jury Tuesday convicted a veteran police captain of first-degree manslaughter in the death of an unarmed teenager who was running away after scuffling with the officer. Del City Police Capt. Randy Trent Harrison shot Dane Scott Jr. in the back on March 14, 2012, following a high-speed chase that began when Harrison tried to pull over Scott's car. [...] The jury announced the verdict and recommended the minimum four-year prison sentence after deliberating for about 11 hours over two days. [...] Harrison, a 23-year veteran officer in the Oklahoma City suburb, testified earlier Monday that he feared for his life. "He had just tried to kill me. He would kill anybody to escape," Harrison testified. Harrison said he did not want to kill Scott. "I just didn't have any other choice," he said. Friesen told jurors that while prosecutors had tried to portray Harrison as "an out-of-control maniac," he was actually trying to protect his life and the lives of others. [/quote] [url]http://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/6626282-Jury-convicts-Okla-cop-in-death-of-teen/[/url] More information in the last thread: [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1327913[/url]

[quote]The shooting occurred just a few weeks after the death of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black teenager killed by a neighborhood watch volunteer in Florida, and the defense suggested early on that prosecutors were influenced to file charges to prevent the type of racial and another high-profile case in Tulsa last year. Harrison is white; Scott was black.[/quote] After reading that and then reading that "justice was served" in this case, one has to wonder how legitimate it is to believe that the defense may actually have a valid point.

Could be considered excessive but he obviously put other people's lives in danger. I wouldn't say punish the officer for the decision, because he did stop the threat. Who knows what could've happened had he let him go.

i have to agree with the courts decision. otherwise a very bad precedent would be set re: cops shooting unarmed people in the back because they MIGHT have weapons [editline]28th November 2013[/editline] can't agree with the amount of time he's sentenced too though, but that's more a problem with the american justice system giving out ridiculous sentences in general rather than this case

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43004520]i have to agree with the courts decision. otherwise a very bad precedent would be set re: cops shooting unarmed people in the back because they MIGHT have weapons [editline]28th November 2013[/editline] can't agree with the amount of time he's sentenced too though, but that's more a problem with the american justice system giving out ridiculous sentences in general rather than this case[/QUOTE] He punched the police officer then ran away. that's justified cause.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43004529]He punched the police officer then ran away. that's justified cause.[/QUOTE] no it's not

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43004538]no it's not[/QUOTE] In this case. Yes it is. The decision was made on the jury because of political reasons. [editline]27th November 2013[/editline] It was a carchase that led to the suspect having a fight with the officer than trying to escape. How is that not justified use of force?

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43004554]In this case. Yes it is. The decision was made on the jury because of political reasons. [editline]27th November 2013[/editline] It was a carchase that led to the suspect having a fight with the officer than trying to escape. How is that not justified use of force?[/QUOTE] i agree that the decision was made for political reasons because without any outside pressure cops get off on shooting someone the majority of the time. it's not justified use of force because resisting arrest and assault on an officer aren't grounds for being shot. maybe DURING the assault because there's no telling if he's going to stop but not after the fact

Just one?

At least they didn't throw him in jail for life, that would have been a bad thing.

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;43004839]At least they didn't throw him in jail for life, that would have been a bad thing.[/QUOTE] yeah i thought it was 20 years but i must be getting mixed up with the other thread about this. 4 years is alot more reasonable i guess

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43004870]yeah i thought it was 20 years but i must be getting mixed up with the other thread about this. 4 years is alot more reasonable i guess[/QUOTE] as soon as he is eligible for parole he will probably be approved. idk how long that is, but probably 5-10 years.

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43004554]In this case. Yes it is. The decision was made on the jury because of political reasons. [editline]27th November 2013[/editline] It was a carchase that led to the suspect having a fight with the officer than trying to escape. How is that not justified use of force?[/QUOTE] because if it was justified he would have been found not guilty?

I would not want to go to prison as a former police officer.

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;43004940]I would not want to go to prison as a former police officer.[/QUOTE] people prolly won't care as long as he isn't locked up with anyone he arrested.

you can't shoot an unarmed person who is running away from you because if they are running away from you without a weapon they aren't an immediate danger to your life. a lot of people seem to skip over the fact that most legal definitions for justified use of deadly force include the words "imminent," "immediate" etc. if someone punches you in the face, you can't justifiably shoot them 5 minutes later when the immediate threat has passed.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43004944]people prolly won't care as long as he isn't locked up with anyone he arrested.[/QUOTE] Somehow I don't think that's how being a cop in prison works. I don't have any stats to back me up, and I realize you and I see society very differently, but if you were locked up and suddenly someone showed up who represented everything you resented, wouldn't you make their life hell at the least? I can't imagine many people this captain's gonna be in with admire him for his job.

[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;43004971]Somehow I don't think that's how being a cop in prison works. I don't have any stats to back me up, and I realize you and I see society very differently, but if you were locked up and suddenly someone showed up who represented everything you resented, wouldn't you make their life hell at the least? I can't imagine many people this captain's gonna be in with admire him for his job.[/QUOTE] i can't say for sure...but i'v seen documentaries and shows(including msnbc's lockup) and they have involved former cops who were incarcerated and it didn't seem like they said that life was particularly shitty for them. i mean, yea, it would seem logical that a cop would receive a lot of shit from being in prison but i don't know that it's actually true. [editline]28th November 2013[/editline] i don't have experience with prison, only jail, but i know that in jail no one really gives a fuck. people wanna just serve their time and get out.

[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;43004971]Somehow I don't think that's how being a cop in prison works. I don't have any stats to back me up, and I realize you and I see society very differently, but if you were locked up and suddenly someone showed up who represented everything you resented, wouldn't you make their life hell at the least? I can't imagine many people this captain's gonna be in with admire him for his job.[/QUOTE] one thing i could imagine is on the flipside they'd probably get way more preferential treatment from the guards or whatever

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43004554]The decision was made on the jury because of political reasons. [/QUOTE] That's what people always say when a jury makes a decision they don't agree with. :v:

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43004945]you can't shoot an unarmed person who is running away from you because if they are running away from you without a weapon they aren't an immediate danger to your life. [/QUOTE] The thing is he thought that he was armed. He had just moments before attempted to kill as well. I do hope the appeal gets through

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43004577]i agree that the decision was made for political reasons because without any outside pressure cops get off on shooting someone the majority of the time. it's not justified use of force because resisting arrest and assault on an officer aren't grounds for being shot. maybe DURING the assault because there's no telling if he's going to stop but not after the fact[/QUOTE] It only takes one punch to kill you.

what a [I]cold[/I] blooded killer.

[QUOTE=kasmoke;43012565]It only takes one punch to kill you.[/QUOTE] and that 1 punch clearly didn't kill him so what's your point? and are you suggesting every assault should be treated as attempted murder?