Chrages against officer for shooting 7 yr old girl in the head during SWAT raid dismissed - Polidicks

With all this gun violence is its still safe to Holiday there?

[QUOTE=Passing;47052878]With all this gun violence is its still safe to Holiday there?[/QUOTE] I heard the safest places are ghettos filled with street gangs, because the police doesn't patrol there.

[QUOTE=KingKombat;47051728]how can charges ever be dropped against something like this. you can throw as many technicalities at me as you want, this has bullshit written all over it[/QUOTE] It was tried twice and both times it failed to produce a verdict. That is how most cases are handled. [editline]1st February 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=ossumsauce;47052842]The court should be run by the people, for the people, but it's not. Ask anyone if it's ok for a SWAT officer to shoot a 7-year-old that was sleeping on the couch, blame the mother for it and have that immediately dismissed as a lie, and not even get charged for it. They'll say "hell no". So why did he get off? Because the word of a police officer carries way more legal weight than a normal citizen. Police have, in the simplest of terms, an immunity to the law. This isn't always the case, of course, but there's no reason why this guy got off, why the guy who killed eric garner got off, unless police are "worth" more than civilians.[/QUOTE] It went to fucking trail and produced no verdict twice. He didn't have "immunity" to the law, he was tried by it.

[QUOTE=spiritlol;47051993]This is absolutely awful but the angle that this article taking is really upsetting me. The whole "militarization" of the police force is such a stupid idea. Police have been using military equipment since they've been formed, this is nothing new. Call me when a[B] police force gets an artillery[/B][B] piece[/B], then you can bring up militarization. By placing all the blame on the militarization you're externalizing it from the police and onto their equipment. The increase of Swat activities, especially for search warrants, is not militarization, it's misuse of power and poor decision making. If you have shit cops with military equipment they'll still be shit cops if you take it away. Also, referring to a flashbang as a "war-device" is such fear-mongering holy shit, it's one of the most effective non-lethal devices ever created.[/QUOTE] Germany's police during the cold war had artillery and tanks. But it was acceptable because they had just suffered from WWII, and if fighting broke out between Russia and the US, Germany would most likely be a huge battlefield. Along with the fact that the German army was smaller than the German police force.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47052932]It was tried twice and both times it failed to produce a verdict. That is how most cases are handled. [editline]1st February 2015[/editline] It went to fucking trail and produced no verdict twice. He didn't have "immunity" to the law, he was tried by it.[/QUOTE] ...And somehow managed to not convict him for shooting an unarmed, sleeping, 7-year-old girl in the fucking face? I guess she could have been hiding a switchblade, though, right? She was clearly resisting arrest, sleeping through a no-knock SWAT raid. It was totally justified, she would have grown up to be in a gang, because the only way to stop gang and illegal activity is to stop them before they've even done anything wrong!

This is a person who swore to fight against crime? And then he tried to blame the fucking mother for it?! I'm legitimately mad this is fucking disgusting

[QUOTE=ossumsauce;47053017]...And somehow managed to not convict him for shooting an unarmed, sleeping, 7-year-old girl in the fucking face? I guess she could have been hiding a switchblade, though, right? She was clearly resisting arrest, sleeping through a no-knock SWAT raid. It was totally justified, she would have grown up to be in a gang, because the only way to stop gang and illegal activity is to stop them before they've even done anything wrong![/QUOTE] Obviously it was an accident regardless of what happened. You have the cops word against the families word on what happened, that's it. Someones word against another's. That's hardly anything for the jury to go on. If you put aside your emotions for a minuet, you can see this isn't a fool proof case that the jury was hearing. [editline]1st February 2015[/editline] I'm not even saying the officer shouldn't have been found guilty of something, he probably should of been, but the lack of any solid evidence makes it easy to see why a jury would have a difficult time

any time i see stuff like this i think they deserve a little punishment. Like a lot of stuff happens during a raid and its not always entirely the guys fault but killing a kid is wrong. Maybe take him off the swat force for a while, or do a little jail time. I mean just a little shouldnt hurt

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47053123]Obviously it was an accident regardless of what happened. You have the cops word against the families word on what happened, that's it. Someones word against another's. That's hardly anything for the jury to go on. If you put aside your emotions for a minuet, you can see this isn't a fool proof case that the jury was hearing. [editline]1st February 2015[/editline] I'm not even saying the officer shouldn't have been found guilty of something, he probably should of been, but the lack of any solid evidence makes it easy to see why a jury would have a difficult time[/QUOTE] Someone's word against another? Let me get this straight. Swat raids a house looking for someone who isnt there. Flashbang is lobbed somewhere in that point. A little girl sleeping on the couch, who probably was startled awake by the grenade, is shot in the face with the officers weapon. The people in the house put up no resistance. The parents are later blamed for the daughter's death because according to him, she tried wrestling the gun away from him(while she was in another room, asleep) which caused it to go off and hit her perfectly in the head from an impossible angle, which was later refuted as a lie due to all the evidence supporting to the contrary. But yeah, the officer totally has any kind of legitimate defense.

[QUOTE=Gar92;47052332]No... I'm sorry, but I'll stick with my opinion. Any Country that could drop charges like this in the 21st century has totalitarian state written all over it.[/QUOTE] Good, we didn't want you anyway.

[QUOTE=Fort83;47053202]This is such an ignorant post. People are so quick to jump to conclusions here by only going off of what the article says. Internet detectives. You don't know the full story, or what exactly happened. You weren't there. Just like the jury. Thats why he wasn't charged, lack of evidence. It's the word of the cop vs the word of the family. Its no surprise the jury would have such a difficult time with it. also didn't know flash bangs could cause a blanket to catch fire.[/QUOTE] Flash bangs set shit on fire all the time. It's still an explosive. Flashbangs have notably caused several brush fires and even lit a plywood training facility on fire. Not unreasonable, for, say, a cotten blanket to catch fire from a flashbang dropped on top of it

[QUOTE=ossumsauce;47053179]Someone's word against another? Let me get this straight. Swat raids a house looking for someone who isnt there. Flashbang is lobbed somewhere in that point. A little girl sleeping on the couch, who probably was startled awake by the grenade, is shot in the face with the officers weapon. The people in the house put up no resistance. The parents are later blamed for the daughter's death because according to him, she tried wrestling the gun away from him(while she was in another room, asleep) which caused it to go off and hit her perfectly in the head from an impossible angle, which was later refuted as a lie due to all the evidence supporting to the contrary. But yeah, the officer totally has any kind of legitimate defense.[/QUOTE] The guy was there, he even latter admitted to the killing he was being arrested for, as for all the other stuff I haven't seen any solid evidence to support any of it. Perhaps a link

[QUOTE=goldenbuttocks;47051672]'Militarized' police, a.k.a. the purpose of SWAT. They've had this kinda stuff since forever. However, this is disgusting. Murdering children is almost never okay.[/QUOTE] it's not that they have SWAT teams, it's that they're used unnecessarily, implying that the police think they need to treat everyone like an active shooter or hostage-taker. [QUOTE]In the case of the night Aiyana was killed, many feel the situation did not call for a military-style bust at midnight. Chauncey Owens, the uncle wanted on murder charges, was said to be going in and out of the house as normal and could have been apprehended during the day. The presence of children in the house was known.[/QUOTE] what actually happened that night is irrelevant - this was a perfectly preventable death from the start. they knew they didn't need to go in and risk exactly this kind of thing happening, and then they did it anyway. that's what people are talking about when it comes to militarization, not that SWAT teams exist, but that they're used to the point that the mentality of the police devolves to kicking down people's doors and pointing guns at them and their families.

[QUOTE=goldenbuttocks;47051672]'Militarized' police, a.k.a. the purpose of SWAT. They've had this kinda stuff since forever. However, this is disgusting. Murdering children is almost never okay.[/QUOTE] The issue is not that swat exists, its that they are being used to serve warrants instead of deal with hostage situations.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47053350]The guy was there, he even latter admitted to the killing he was being arrested for, as for all the other stuff I haven't seen any solid evidence to support any of it. Perhaps a link[/QUOTE] Alright, sure. He was there. I think it would be obvious to anyone the difference between a grown man and a 7-year-old girl. No excuse.

[QUOTE=Fort83;47053395]It was for the prime suspect of a child murderer, they weren't just going to knock on the door. They don't want to risk their own officers lives or others that could have been put at risk if the suspect managed to run. Plus child murder is pretty huge. They use SWAT for this all the time, and going in the way they did was correct, though what happened inside is a mess and shouldn't have happened.[/QUOTE] but they didn't even need to enter the house is what i'm saying, he was still going outside regularly. even just waiting until he was outside the door would have completely avoided the risk that any of those kids could have been killed. like they can raid a house and arrest everyone in it, but they didn't have the resources to put guys at both ends of the street to box him off?

[QUOTE=ossumsauce;47053537]Alright, sure. He was there. I think it would be obvious to anyone the difference between a grown man and a 7-year-old girl. No excuse.[/QUOTE] Jeez your not grasping the concept that it was an accident regardless of who's story is correct. They didn't shoot the seven year old and shoot her because they thought she was a threat. More than likely it was an accidental discharge, from the women wrestling with the officer or just him being jumpy.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47053731]Jeez your not grasping the concept that it was an accident regardless of who's story is correct. They didn't shoot the seven year old and shoot her because they thought she was a threat. More than likely it was an accidental discharge, from the women wrestling with the officer or just him being jumpy.[/QUOTE] So? A seven year old is still fucking dead. He needs to be held accountable for what he did. This isnt a "oh, i tripped and broke my drinking glass" kind of accident. This is "oh, i just shot a little girl in the face and lied about how it happened to protect myself from any backlash" Still illegal. Especially for lying under oath. Stop hopping on the cop's dick and face the facts. And we already know the woman didnt even touch the officer at all, so thats bullshit. [editline]1st February 2015[/editline] If a civilian accidentally shot a little girl in the face, hed go to jail for life. Why is it okay for the police to accidentally shoot a little girl and not face even any kind of punishment?

police threads in a nutshell: internet detectives making baseless assumptions

[QUOTE=Fort83;47053898]Source?[/QUOTE] The fucking OPs source, it says that the woman was arrested for wrestling the gun but was released because there was no evidence that had occured. That and they made them sit in the girl's blood.

[QUOTE=Passing;47052878]With all this gun violence is its still safe to Holiday there?[/QUOTE] Just take your holiday in a town too small for police/gangs. Like [url=https://www.google.com/maps/place/St+Vrain,+NM+88133/@34.4170319,-103.4900464,3124m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x8702d453bba98ac9:0x69d5ac95a3f289dd]St. Vrain, NM.[/url]

why does shit like this keep happening :(

[QUOTE=Bird;47052303]How are people going to trust the authorities if they can get away with pretty much anything? I'd feel a lot safer if I knew that the police actually had to face the consequences of their actions.[/QUOTE] I firmly believe that, in cases involving a monumental fuckup like this one, the officer should be stripped of his badge and tried as a civilian for what he did. You can damn well bet anyone who barged into the house and shot the kid for no reason would face the wrath of the law and presumably every level-headed person in the country, and I see no legitimate reason for the police to be treated differently. If anything, they should be held to a higher standard. If you want to enforce the law you should be exemplary of it. Trying to justify your own fuckups with either your position or some other reason should be totally unacceptable.

How does the justice system fuck up so hard, like this ?

[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;47054112]I firmly believe that, in cases involving a monumental fuckup like this one, the officer should be stripped of his badge and tried as a civilian for what he did. You can damn well bet anyone who barged into the house and shot the kid for no reason would face the wrath of the law and presumably every level-headed person in the country, and I see no legitimate reason for the police to be treated differently. If anything, they should be held to a higher standard. If you want to enforce the law you should be exemplary of it. Trying to justify your own fuckups with either your position or some other reason should be totally unacceptable.[/QUOTE] Sadly that would be very hard to pull off. Making cops even more liable than civs would discourage the amount of recruits drastically. For the job they do, their wages are already low enough and get more and more cuts anyway. A lot of the police nonsense happens due to lack of proper training which is related to previously mentioned budget cuts. Last thing you want is for police to run low on recruits. Cops fuck up but it's nothing compared to criminal activity in understaffed regions.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;47052322]Wow, I knew people loved sensationalizing police actions but that is a whole new level that I never expected. There is barely a single sentence in this article that doesn't mention military, war, or 'tactical operations', and less than half of it actually talks about the case.[/QUOTE] Reads like a Tom Clancy novel

[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;47054112]I firmly believe that, in cases involving a monumental fuckup like this one, the officer should be stripped of his badge and tried as a civilian for what he did. You can damn well bet anyone who barged into the house and shot the kid for no reason would face the wrath of the law and presumably every level-headed person in the country, and I see no legitimate reason for the police to be treated differently. If anything, they should be held to a higher standard. If you want to enforce the law you should be exemplary of it. Trying to justify your own fuckups with either your position or some other reason should be totally unacceptable.[/QUOTE] Trying him as just some guy who broke into a house a shot a kid wouldn't make any sense. He was there legally because of the fact he was a cop.

[QUOTE=ossumsauce;47053777]So? A seven year old is still fucking dead. He needs to be held accountable for what he did. This isnt a "oh, i tripped and broke my drinking glass" kind of accident. This is "oh, i just shot a little girl in the face and lied about how it happened to protect myself from any backlash" Still illegal. Especially for lying under oath. Stop hopping on the cop's dick and face the facts. And we already know the woman didnt even touch the officer at all, so thats bullshit. [editline]1st February 2015[/editline] If a civilian accidentally shot a little girl in the face, hed go to jail for life. Why is it okay for the police to accidentally shoot a little girl and not face even any kind of punishment?[/QUOTE] you know even less than the jury yet you're running around with this emotional tirade as if it makes you any more right. calm down pal

[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;47054149]How does the justice system fuck up so hard, like this ?[/QUOTE] As I said before, either the prosecutor had no idea what they were doing, or the system didn't fuck up. This guy got a hung jury twice over the course of four years.

if you fuck up and kill an innocent as a policeman, you shouldn't be allowed back on the police force. Fucking period. I don't god damn care if you give them unemployment, but they should be fucking banned from service.