Oscar Grant Trial

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 09, 2010 1:15 AM GMT
    So for those of you who didn't know about the Oscar Grant trial, last January, a man was shot to death by a BART police officer. It has turned into a racial issue as well. Today he was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/07/08/subway.shooting.trial.verdict/index.html?hpt=T1

    Thoughts? Here's video evidence of the shooting



    I remember when the shooting happened, there were riots in downtown Oakland. I hope there won't be any tonight. Be safe fellow norcalers
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 09, 2010 7:12 PM GMT
    So idiots ended acting violently last night in Oakland. So sad

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 09, 2010 8:28 PM GMT
    Reports show that Grant was causing a great deal of trouble on BART. The officers were trying to subdue him. The officer was trying to taze him and in the struggling, he pulled the gun instead of the tazer from his belt. That was what the jury declared. An unfortunate accident...........but one that wouldn't have happened at two-something in the morning if Grant (a parolee) had not been on BART causing trouble.

    I'm not usually a cop sympathizer at all, but this evidently was just an accident.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 09, 2010 8:49 PM GMT
    I think, based upon what I saw of the evidence, that the verdict of involuntary manslaughter was correct.

    For those who would rush to judgment and claim that the verdict should have been voluntary manslaughter or second degree murder, please remember you'd have to show "intent." You'd have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew at some level that he was about to apply lethal force and possibly/probably kill the guy.

    You'd have to show what was in his head. Of course, you can't do this. Now, according to what I have read in the evidence (but only someone at the trial could know for sure), there was nothing in his past that suggests he would have such intent.

    By the way, many of the wackos who demonstrated in downtown Oakland (that's where I live too, by the way) were not black but white. Many demonstrators had gone home, and there were only 20 or so that caused the damage. The police think that, as usual, the violent demonstrators didn't care one way or the other about the issues, but were hell bent on causing mayhem.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 09, 2010 8:56 PM GMT
    fastprof saidI think, based upon what I saw of the evidence, that the verdict of involuntary manslaughter was correct.

    For those who would rush to judgment and claim that the verdict should have been voluntary manslaughter or second degree murder, please remember you'd have to show "intent." You'd have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew at some level that he was about to apply lethal force and possibly/probably kill the guy.

    You'd have to show what was in his head. Of course, you can't do this. Now, according to what I have read in the evidence (but only someone at the trial could know for sure), there was nothing in his past that suggests he would have such intent.

    By the way, many of the wackos who demonstrated in downtown Oakland (that's where I live too, by the way) were not black but white. Many demonstrators had gone home, and there were only 20 or so that caused the damage. The police think that, as usual, the violent demonstrators didn't care one way or the other about the issues, but were hell bent on causing mayhem.


    This is so true, and one of the first intelligent things that I have heard in a long time.

    I wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, Oscar Grant being white and the cop being black, if people would be making such a big deal, but it seems like race is a deciding factor on both sides of the fence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2010 12:21 AM GMT
    Chainers said

    This is so true, and one of the first intelligent things that I have heard in a long time.

    I wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, Oscar Grant being white and the cop being black, if people would be making such a big deal, but it seems like race is a deciding factor on both sides of the fence.


    race definitely always come into play in these situations, unfortunately...in the interview of oscar grants mother after the verdict was over, she made it a racial issue, saying african americans will overcome this and started quoting Dr. Martin Luther King Jr....i know she was upset, but i think it was a little much

  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 10, 2010 1:55 AM GMT
    All along, all I could think of was that these damn stupid thugs refused to ride from point A to point B without causing so much trouble that the cops had to be called. And, I thought, in the heat of the moment, while struggling with the thugs, that Mehserle just made a stupid mistake.

    I was in favor of a "Not Guilty" verdict, until I saw the video.
    The cops already had Grant and his fellow trouble makers sitting on the ground. And, they appeared to be just sitting there, not causing any more trouble.

    Mehserle claimed that Grant was putting his hand into his pocket, and that Mehserle thought Grant was going for a gun. That makes zero sense since the scene was now calm and there were numerous cops standing right there over Grant and his buddies.

    There was no way out of the situation (for Grant) but to cooperate.

    I do believe that Mehserle was not cut out to be in law enforcement of any kind. He isn't able to size up a situation and react properly. He isn't able to think quickly and make the correct decision. And, he wasn't able to automatically know which of his weapons was which. I mean, simply keeping in mind that you always carry your gun on your right side, would be enough for most people to not make the mistake of pulling the wrong weapon.

    The real fault is in whomever approved Mehserle to be a cop.

    As for the looters, I think that they were planning on looting no matter what was the verdict.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 10, 2010 1:57 AM GMT
    Why does every career criminal's mother claim that her baby was an angel who never did anything to anybody ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2010 2:07 AM GMT
    What does Foot Locker have to do with "fucking the police?"
    Last time I checked they sold shoes and not strap-ons... icon_neutral.gif
    ...although I might be wrong- 'cause I have set foot in that store for years!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2010 2:38 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidWhy does every career criminal's mother claim that her baby was an angel who never did anything to anybody ?

    Right? Like the serial killer who lived next door who just the nicest, quietest neighbor!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2010 3:12 AM GMT
    I can't imagine how I would feel if someone I knew or loved was shot and killed, and videos of it got posted all over the internet.

    That being said.. I think involuntary manslaughter was appropriate. If this cop were some sort of racist, you'd think he would have been badgering and fighting with the guy the whole time. Instead it seems like a relatively normal arrest, until the guy starts to resist.. and then, apparently, is accidentally shot. It's horrible. The cop made a serious mistake, and unfortunately for him, that sort of error doesn't go unpunished.

    These riots however... are just an excuse for ignorant losers to steal a TV.

    Webster said a couple of things I wanted to react to.. First that the cop wasn't cut out for the job. I think his body language in the video makes that pretty easy to agree with. We all have our encounters with retarded ass policemen. Maybe they're not actually stupid.. maybe they're nervous, reckless, or badly tempered for no good reason. This 'bad' cop was just in the wrong situation. Had this not happened, there's a chance he could have lived through an entire career being just one more.. dumb ass cop.

    On the other hand.. Webster also mentioned something about how it wasn't likely that the kid was reaching for a gun. That's a little too arguable of a statement.. it honestly doesn't matter how many people are standing around you, or kneeling on top of you. This accident shows just how easy it is for one bullet to do irreversible damage. Handguns are easy to conceal, and easy to fire. Especially at the range those cops were at (or any of the others standing around).. if he DID have a handgun, and managed to randomly squeeze off a shot, then it's entirely reasonable that one of the cops would have been killed. I think the cop had the correct reaction to reach for his STUNgun, as those things are virtually harmless and would have ensured the protection of everyone in the area.

    Accidents happen every day. Sometimes you don't see the jogger until it's too late.. or know the gun was loaded.. or whatever..

    My opinion, is that this cop was only suspected of murder because he was white. The guy being arrested was black. And there were 20 trashy people standing around with cell phone videos rolling, screaming their worthless lungs out about police brutality.

    But I could be wrong.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2010 7:33 AM GMT
    A1EX saidWhat does Foot Locker have to do with "fucking the police?"
    Last time I checked they sold shoes and not strap-ons... icon_neutral.gif
    ...although I might be wrong- 'cause I have set foot in that store for years!


    The funny thing is, most of them were stealing the shoes on display...meaning 1 shoe