RavenSky
The Doctor's Wife
Which context is that? The one where this police officer then proceeded to shoot Smith FIVE TIMES?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ley-anthony-lamar-verdict-20170915-story.html
-
Features
Ex-St. Louis cop found not guilty of murder in on-duty shooting of black man in 2011
- Thread starter RavenSky
- Start date
Which context is that? The one where this police officer then proceeded to shoot Smith FIVE TIMES?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ley-anthony-lamar-verdict-20170915-story.html
Meh. Even if he'd been found guilty, he'd have gotten a pardon because he was only arrested for doing his job.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,577
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
I'm sure the adrenaline which caused such an outburst had long since subsided in the minute of so that took the officer to get Smith's car, and the officer was in a state that was clear minded.
Derec
Contributor
Here we go again. A thug gets shot by police, officer gets acquitted, and people are protesting, calling the thug "innocent". I wonder if there will be any rioting/arson/looting going on tonight.
While the officer did make mistakes (carrying a Kalashnikov, how he collected evidence etc.) that is very far from a "premeditated murder". This is another case where the prosecutor went off half-cocked on too ambitious a charge. It was an old case (the heroin dealer bit the dust in 2011!) and I think the new prosecutor just wanted to make a name for herself. I see no evidence that this was premeditated murder.
And the judge is right. A heroin dealer, doing a deal and having a stash of smack on him is not going to go in unarmed. And Smith had priors for guns too. Gardner's case pretty much hinged on proving that the gun was planted and she and Steele failed to do so.
While the officer did make mistakes (carrying a Kalashnikov, how he collected evidence etc.) that is very far from a "premeditated murder". This is another case where the prosecutor went off half-cocked on too ambitious a charge. It was an old case (the heroin dealer bit the dust in 2011!) and I think the new prosecutor just wanted to make a name for herself. I see no evidence that this was premeditated murder.
And the judge is right. A heroin dealer, doing a deal and having a stash of smack on him is not going to go in unarmed. And Smith had priors for guns too. Gardner's case pretty much hinged on proving that the gun was planted and she and Steele failed to do so.
laughing dog
Contributor
After all, saying out loud beforehand that you are going to kill someone before you go and kill them is not evidence of premeditation at all.
If it were Smith's fire arm, it would have had his DNA on it. For some reason, it only had Steele's prints on it. That is a mystery that I suppose can never be rationally explained.
I certainly hope this very lucky killer is not a police officer in another jurisdiction.
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
On the surface of it, there is something that seems a little odd e.g. used his AK-47 assault rifle rather than his service weapon and what the defence case was regarding the revolver as mentioned in your post.
No need to protest so much. In the US, a badge is a license to kill. If a killing can't be justified by the circumstances, it will be excused, because that's what a license is.
The policeman's intentions, his training, or lack of it, and the victim's actions prior to dying, are irrelevant.
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
Derec
Contributor
It could just be a meaningless exclamation of frustration with a suspect who led them on a high speed chase and almost ran him over. It might not be connected to the shooting at all. People who premeditate a murder do not tend to advertise the fact.
The judge did not buy it, and I think a judge has a lot more experience dealing with such evidence than you or I.
In the end, the DA should have been more modest in her charging decisions. It wasn't really a first degree murder case. More like voluntary manslaughter.
- - - Updated - - -
It's a little known fact that in US, all police badge numbers start with two zeroes.
Derec
Contributor
...
Last edited by a moderator:
laughing dog
Contributor
If this had been the words of the thug, you'd be singing a different tune.
That is difference between saying the evidence is not convincing and that there is no evidence.
But I will remind that a judge has a lot more experience in dealing with trials and sentencing than you or I the next time you whine about a judge's ruling you don't like.
- - - Updated - - -
If this had been the words of the thug, you'd be singing a different tune.
That is difference between saying the evidence is not convincing and that there is no evidence.
But I will remind that a judge has a lot more experience in dealing with trials and sentencing than you or I the next time you whine about a judge's ruling you don't like.
...
Last edited by a moderator:
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
...
CNN adds a bit of information which was not mentioned in the earlier reports:
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/15/us/jason-stockley-officer-shooting-verdict/index.html
Judge 'agonizingly' reviewed the evidence
Dramatic footage -- captured on the police vehicle dashcam, an internal vehicle camera and cell phone video of the shooting's aftermath -- played a key role in the trial that began August 1.
At the heart of the trial was the question of whether Smith was in possession of a firearm at the time of the shooting. Prosecutors argued that a revolver found in Smith's car had been planted by Stockley to justify the shooting, but the gun was never seen from the multiple cameras that captured Stockley and other officers at the scene.
The prosecution cited footage of Stockley rummaging through a bag in the back of the police vehicle. That was when Stockley retrieved the weapon, they argued. Prosecutors also pointed to the fact that Stockley's DNA had been found on the weapon.
But in his ruling, Wilson said the prosecution's argument was "not supported by the evidence."
"This court ... is simply not firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt," he wrote in his 30-page decision. "Agonizingly, this court has (pored) over the evidence again and again."
The gun was too large, Wilson said, for Stockley to hide it from the cameras at the scene.
Additionally, Wilson found that the prosecution had not sufficiently explained how Smith could have been wounded in his lower left abdomen, given he was sitting inside a car on the driver's side at the time he was killed.
The location of the wound, according to the doctor who conducted the autopsy and testified, could suggest Smith had been reaching to his right for something inside the vehicle, Wilson said.
The judge also cited two witnesses who testified during the trial that the absence of Smith's DNA on the weapon does not necessarily mean he didn't touch the gun.
Wilson said it wouldn't be unusual for Smith to have a gun.
"An urban heroin dealer not in possession of a firearm would be an anomaly," the judge wrote.
A bag with narcotics was found inside Smith's car, according to a responding officer's testimony. It was later revealed to be heroin, the judge said in a footnote to the ruling.
Prosecutors had asked for lesser charges to be considered if Stockley was acquitted of murder. But Wilson declined to consider charges such as involuntary manslaughter because he found the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Stockley's "use of force was not justified in self-defense."
Prosecutors argued Stockley intended to kill Smith, citing audio from the internal police vehicle camera during the car chase in which he told his partner, "We're killing this motherf***er."
But the judge noted in his decision that "people say all kinds of things in the heat of the moment or while in stressful situations."
CNN adds a bit of information which was not mentioned in the earlier reports:
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/15/us/jason-stockley-officer-shooting-verdict/index.html
Judge 'agonizingly' reviewed the evidence
Dramatic footage -- captured on the police vehicle dashcam, an internal vehicle camera and cell phone video of the shooting's aftermath -- played a key role in the trial that began August 1.
At the heart of the trial was the question of whether Smith was in possession of a firearm at the time of the shooting. Prosecutors argued that a revolver found in Smith's car had been planted by Stockley to justify the shooting, but the gun was never seen from the multiple cameras that captured Stockley and other officers at the scene.
The prosecution cited footage of Stockley rummaging through a bag in the back of the police vehicle. That was when Stockley retrieved the weapon, they argued. Prosecutors also pointed to the fact that Stockley's DNA had been found on the weapon.
But in his ruling, Wilson said the prosecution's argument was "not supported by the evidence."
"This court ... is simply not firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt," he wrote in his 30-page decision. "Agonizingly, this court has (pored) over the evidence again and again."
The gun was too large, Wilson said, for Stockley to hide it from the cameras at the scene.
Additionally, Wilson found that the prosecution had not sufficiently explained how Smith could have been wounded in his lower left abdomen, given he was sitting inside a car on the driver's side at the time he was killed.
The location of the wound, according to the doctor who conducted the autopsy and testified, could suggest Smith had been reaching to his right for something inside the vehicle, Wilson said.
The judge also cited two witnesses who testified during the trial that the absence of Smith's DNA on the weapon does not necessarily mean he didn't touch the gun.
Wilson said it wouldn't be unusual for Smith to have a gun.
"An urban heroin dealer not in possession of a firearm would be an anomaly," the judge wrote.
A bag with narcotics was found inside Smith's car, according to a responding officer's testimony. It was later revealed to be heroin, the judge said in a footnote to the ruling.
Prosecutors had asked for lesser charges to be considered if Stockley was acquitted of murder. But Wilson declined to consider charges such as involuntary manslaughter because he found the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Stockley's "use of force was not justified in self-defense."
Prosecutors argued Stockley intended to kill Smith, citing audio from the internal police vehicle camera during the car chase in which he told his partner, "We're killing this motherf***er."
But the judge noted in his decision that "people say all kinds of things in the heat of the moment or while in stressful situations."
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, that. You guys will do anything to excuse cops murdering people in the street. I bet that guy also pulled tags off of mattresses and didn't return the cart to the designated area after shopping.
It's as if it's physically painful to even entertain the idea of holding a cop accountable for his actions. That this goes on in so many heads in our society is why I call it a disease.
Right wing politics, Christianity, and Scientology are all examples of ideologies that punish questioning of authority and reward defending and excusing anything the authority says or does. The particular cognitive weaknesses that form the bases of these ideologies are what has made America so vulnerable to fascism.
It's as if it's physically painful to even entertain the idea of holding a cop accountable for his actions. That this goes on in so many heads in our society is why I call it a disease.
Right wing politics, Christianity, and Scientology are all examples of ideologies that punish questioning of authority and reward defending and excusing anything the authority says or does. The particular cognitive weaknesses that form the bases of these ideologies are what has made America so vulnerable to fascism.
Derec
Contributor
Again, rank nonsense. Smith really was a thug, with convictions for theft, drug dealing and gun possession. He was out on parole when he was killed, and heroin and a gun were found on him.
Sure, the cop made mistakes, but that does not make him a murderer, nor does it make Smith somebody on whose behalf people should be out protesting. The world is certainly better without Smith in it.
RavenSky
The Doctor's Wife
THIS is exactly the WRONG time to turn a blind eye, Derec. If you think it is fine for cops to summarily execute "thugs", what happens when the likes of V.P. Pence decides that men who frequent prostitutes are not "somebody on whose behalf people should be out protesting. The world is certainly better without [Johns] in it."
Derec
Contributor
But Smith wasn't murdered.
Do you really think that heroin dealing, theft and illegal possession of firearms is within a parsec's distance of these trivial things you mention? Or are you arguing just for sake of arguing, i.e. trolling.
A cop should be held accountable for his actions. Because of things like using an AK-47 and not securing evidence according to proper procedure he was drummed out of the force. But he should not be held accountable for things he did not do, i.e. murder Smith.
Nobody here is suggesting that we should not question authority. What I reject is mindless police-hatred you see on the Left. Even though cop in this case made mistakes, the death of Smith was caused by Smith. He chose to continue dealing when released on parole. He chose to run (hitting the police car and almost running one of the cops over in the process). He chose not to follow the cop's commands when the chase ended and he was cornered. But no, let's make a martyr out of Smith...
Mindlessly vilifying police when they encounter and engage dangerous suspects is no better than mindlessly refusing to question authority.
Derec
Contributor
If he had really "summarily executed" he certainly should have gone to prison. But the judge acquitted him, remember? And not even the prosecution advanced a "summary execution" theory in their case.
And even if the guy was "summarily executed" he was still a heroin dealing scumbag, unworthy of being glorified. Remember, some people even called him "an innocent black man". I hope that is going too far even for you.
Well luckily for me I only infrequent them.
Also, is Frikki busy and has to outsource his obsession?
laughing dog
Contributor
Apparently not. He was killed without a conviction or a trial. Nor was he armed at the time (there was no gun on his person). His car was stopped. Given the officer's statement prior to going to the suspect's car, summary execution is a reasonable description of the killing.
While I am not 100% sure about this, I am confident that "summary execution" is not a crime in Missouri, but premeditated murder is one. So, your response is rather obtuse to say the least.
Sigh, police are not supposed to summarily execute anyone. It is depressing to see so many people use the "ends justify the means" approach to these types of killings.
Derec
Contributor
Not that ridiculous canard again. Obviously a police shooting does not involve a trial and conviction. But if that makes it a "summary execution", then there can be no such thing as a justified police shooting. That is obviously nonsense.
Allegedly.
Says you.
You are being obtuse, to the extent you are almost 180°. The crime they allege is "premeditated murder" for sure, but prosecution can advance their theory of how the alleged crime took place. For example, they could have claimed "summary execution" as way the alleged crime of murder was committed, but they didn't.
Again, the cop was acquitted.
But if he had been found guilty, the ends would not justify murder, but that does not mean Smith becomes a "good guy" who should be celebrated. Had he been murdered, both of them would be bad guy. Under no scenario does Smith get exonerated or become worthy of glorification by #BLM.