FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[QuikSand]

Wow.

Jury in Officer Porter trial was one vote from acquittal on most serious charge - Baltimore Sun

In addition to the final 11-1 split in favor of acquittal on involuntary manslaughter, sources said the jury split the following ways:

•They voted 8-2 in favor of acquittal on second-degree assault, with two jurors remaining undecided.

•On reckless endangerment, the jury split 7-3 in favor of conviction, with two jurors undecided.

•On misconduct in office, the jury split 10-1 in favor of conviction, with one juror undecided, sources said.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Wow.

Jury in Officer Porter trial was one vote from acquittal on most serious charge - Baltimore Sun

Been waiting for these numbers for awhile. This is brutal for the prosecution. I don't doubt for a second the overcharging on the major offense caused the hung jury on the lesser ones.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Interesting twist on the lawsuits we've seen in other cases.

Chicago Officer Plans To Sue Suspect He Shot - Law Officer

[jeff061]

If you are going to(rightfully) jump all over cops in unjustified shootings, you have to support them when it's justified. They shouldn't have their life ruined over it or even inconvenienced.

Generally speaking, I don't know the details here, but if you swing a bat at a cop you deserve to be shot.

[CU Tiger]

No problem with a dude swinging a bat at an LEO getting shot. However an innocent bystander catching an errant LEO bullet is unacceptable (IF THAT IS IN FACT WHAT HAPPENED)

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

No problem with a dude swinging a bat at an LEO getting shot. However an innocent bystander catching an errant LEO bullet is unacceptable (IF THAT IS IN FACT WHAT HAPPENED)

The person swinging the bat is equally liable then.

[CU Tiger]

Except that officers are trained at how to handle the situation and the firearm to prevent that from happening.


If your position is each should be charged with a crime (if the bat swinger survives) I am fine with that as well.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Except that officers are trained at how to handle the situation and the firearm to prevent that from happening.


If your position is each should be charged with a crime (if the bat swinger survives) I am fine with that as well.

I'm actually not okay with it, I was pointing our what I perceived as your unwillingness to give the instigator some credit for the death. Guns are not perfect aiming devices, especially pistols. No amount of training will fix that core problem of handguns.

[TroyF]

Second officer tried in the Grey case has been found not guilty.

Put on administrative leave until the rest of the other officers trials are finished.

[muns]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Second officer tried in the Grey case has been found not guilty.

Put on administrative leave until the rest of the other officers trials are finished.

Thankfully, the city (for the most part) was quiet last night

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by muns

Thankfully, the city (for the most part) was quiet last night

That is a positive I kind of expected but wasn't sure. Glad it was calm.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Second officer tried in the Grey case has been found not guilty.

Put on administrative leave until the rest of the other officers trials are finished.

It's absurd that all of them are on trial. Massive prosecutorial overreach, I'm glad she's crashing and burning.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

It's absurd that all of them are on trial. Massive prosecutorial overreach, I'm glad she's crashing and burning.

It was a massive, massive overreach from the start. They tried the first guy because they thought he would be the easiest to convict and that he would testify against everyone else and they were within inches of a full blown loss. It isn't surprising at all that they lost this case and it won't be surprising when more of them end up as losses. I expect they'll get a few convictions out of this still, but it would have been so much better if the charges were filed correctly from the start.

The case against this poor guy was laughable.

[muns]

Originally Posted by TroyF

It was a massive, massive overreach from the start. They tried the first guy because they thought he would be the easiest to convict and that he would testify against everyone else and they were within inches of a full blown loss. It isn't surprising at all that they lost this case and it won't be surprising when more of them end up as losses. I expect they'll get a few convictions out of this still, but it would have been so much better if the charges were filed correctly from the start.

The case against this poor guy was laughable.

I can't see getting convictions on any major charge. Goodsen is up next, and I can see him getting something small for being the driver, but I think that's all they are going to get here.

Porter and White and now suing Mosby for this. I doubt that goes anywhere as well, but its going to be fascinating to watch play out

Two officers in Freddie Gray case sue Marilyn Mosby - Baltimore Sun

[cuervo72]

So, #AltonSterling seems to be trending on FB.

[RainMaker]

Tough to tell from the video. He had a gun on him and was fighting with the police. I guess it comes down to whether they thought he could access that gun or not (something I can't tell from the video). The initial call came from someone who said Sterling threatened them with a gun. So they were probably on a little higher alert.

The guy is a convicted child sex offender (who failed to register) with a history of beating women and dealing drugs. He was illegally carrying a gun and had allegedly threatened someone with it. I don't know how the case will come out but the community is better off with him dead.

[RainMaker]

The claim that both their body cameras fell off sounds like complete bullshit though. Come on now.

[Groundhog]

Welp, that was one murder video I didn't need to see tonight before bed.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Tough to tell from the video. He had a gun on him and was fighting with the police. I guess it comes down to whether they thought he could access that gun or not (something I can't tell from the video). The initial call came from someone who said Sterling threatened them with a gun. So they were probably on a little higher alert.

The guy is a convicted child sex offender (who failed to register) with a history of beating women and dealing drugs. He was illegally carrying a gun and had allegedly threatened someone with it. I don't know how the case will come out but the community is better off with him dead.

So, the 2nd amendment says you are allowed to have a gun. But, if a cop stops you, tases you, and throws you to the ground in an "altercation," he's allowed to shoot you if you have one.

Gun laws in Louisiana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pretty liberal laws there. Doesn't seem like the officers had too much time to determine that his gun was illegal.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2700548

It’s unclear how Sterling obtained the weapon. His rap sheet dates back two decades with several drug, firearm, theft and assault arrests. He was sentenced to five years to prison for marijuana and weapon possession in 2009, the Advocate reported.

No, not a model citizen. But oooooh, marijuana possession! I don't see anything about beating women or child molestation there, would like to see the source (and don't give me friggin Breitbart).

“He’s got a gun,” one officer cries while the pair pinned Sterling to the ground.

Standard cop "get out of jail free" card.

Muflahi watched police kill Sterling, a father of three children and his friend of six years, he said.

Yeah. I bet those kids sure are better off and thankful he's gone.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

No, not a model citizen. But oooooh, marijuana possession!

You lose ALL credibility when you glaze past the weapon possession portion of the conviction just to act like marijuana was all he had in his background.

[cuervo72]

Fair. Though I wonder what the nature of the weapons possession charges are. Again, this is Louisiana.

Though..all credibility? Yeah, one comment automatically invalidates all other points I guess. That's how logic works!

[cuervo72]

Dola - the marijuana thing did jump out though. That's a great way to start rap sheets on folks - bust them for pot. Establish a rap sheet, then all the other charges come a little bit easier. Wonder if gun rights would be curtailed at all if you had a prior offense, for example.

[cuervo72]

Double dola - also love the fact that I have no credibility, but RainMaker is pristine.

[Groundhog]

I don't care what his wrap sheet was. That's supposed to be why there's courts.

Watching that video the impression I got was one cop felt a gun while they were tangled and called out "he has a gun", the other cop interpreted that as "he has a gun in his hand and is about to shoot one of us", fired, killed him, and then they both tried to cover it up with the "my body camera fell off" which just throws doubt all over their stories based on the footage that exists.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

So, the 2nd amendment says you are allowed to have a gun. But, if a cop stops you, tases you, and throws you to the ground in an "altercation," he's allowed to shoot you if you have one.

Gun laws in Louisiana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Felons can't own guns.

Originally Posted by cuervo72

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2700548

No, not a model citizen. But oooooh, marijuana possession! I don't see anything about beating women or child molestation there, would like to see the source (and don't give me friggin Breitbart).

Is the State of Louisiana a good enough source?

Louisiana State Police OffenderWatch® sex offender management, mapping and email alert program

How about the daily paper in Baton Rouge?

http://theadvocate.com/news/16311988...t-back-coroner

You're also talking about credible sources when linking to a tabloid.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Yeah. I bet those kids sure are better off and thankful he's gone.

A domestic abuser, sex offender, who deals drugs and carries guns illegally is probably not the best Father figure.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

A domestic abuser, sex offender, who deals drugs and carries guns illegally is probably not the best Father figure.

Good thing the cops made the judgement call to kill him then.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

I don't care what his wrap sheet was. That's supposed to be why there's courts.

Watching that video the impression I got was one cop felt a gun while they were tangled and called out "he has a gun", the other cop interpreted that as "he has a gun in his hand and is about to shoot one of us", fired, killed him, and then they both tried to cover it up with the "my body camera fell off" which just throws doubt all over their stories based on the footage that exists.

I agree with you. Supposedly there is a security cam footage from the business which hopefully will help. The initial call was for a man threatening someone with a gun. The cops were likely on high alert thinking he had a weapon.

The only scenario where the cop has justification is if he was grabbing for the gun with his right hand. It looks like they have his left arm secured but you can't get a good view of his right hand. I also think your theory has merit. Perhaps the one officer panicked when the other yelled gun thinking he was about to shoot them.

Even if the body camera fell off, shouldn't there be video leading up to it falling off. Even if it didn't capture the shooting, it'd be nice to know if their claim of it falling off was legit.

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Good thing the cops made the judgement call to kill him then.

I didn't say the cops had the right to do it. If they are at fault they deserve to face justice. Just that it's not a big loss to society that he's dead.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Felons can't own guns.




Is the State of Louisiana a good enough source?

Louisiana State Police OffenderWatch® sex offender management, mapping and email alert program

How about the daily paper in Baton Rouge?

http://theadvocate.com/news/16311988...t-back-coroner

You're also talking about credible sources when linking to a tabloid.

Without knowing the case he was convicted @ 21 for the Carnal. I'm assuming like most courts they don't convict in 48 hours so in theory he could have been 19 and slept with a 16 year old with consent. I don't think it's the most shocking thing in the world and if someone's parents are big enough dicks, they can get this stuck on you in the south. I guess you are assuming the worst case which would be he was 21 sleeping with a 13 year old.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Felons can't own guns.

Is the State of Louisiana a good enough source?

Louisiana State Police OffenderWatch® sex offender management, mapping and email alert program

How about the daily paper in Baton Rouge?

http://theadvocate.com/news/16311988...t-back-coroner

You're also talking about credible sources when linking to a tabloid.

Fine. BBC News, then. Pretty sure they use most of the same info and quotes.

Alton Sterling: Video 'shows US police shooting black man in Louisiana' - BBC News

Also, that charge:

Alton Sterling: Video 'shows US police shooting black man in Louisiana' - BBC News

The guy is 37. He was convicted in Sept 2000. I don't know how fast the legal wheels spin in LA, but let's say a conviction takes more than three months. So this means he was 20.

§80. Felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile

A. Felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile is committed when:

(1) A person who is seventeen years of age or older has sexual intercourse, with consent, with a person who is thirteen years of age or older but less than seventeen years of age, when the victim is not the spouse of the offender and when the difference between the age of the victim and the age of the offender is four years or greater; or

(2) A person commits a second or subsequent offense of misdemeanor carnal knowledge of a juvenile, or a person who has been convicted one or more times of violating one or more crimes for which the offender is required to register as a sex offender under R.S. 15:542 commits a first offense of misdemeanor carnal knowledge of a juvenile.

B. As used in this Section, "sexual intercourse" means anal, oral, or vaginal sexual intercourse.

C. Lack of knowledge of the juvenile's age shall not be a defense. Emission is not necessary, and penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime.

The misdemeanor is basically the same as a felony, only the difference in age is between two and four years. So it's entirely possible that this guy was 20 and had to register because he fooled around with a 16yo a couple of times. Man, I've never heard of that happening before.

Also, from that local paper:

Sterling had been living for the past few months at the Living Waters Outreach Ministries, a transitional living center and shelter at 4156 W. Brookstown Dr., two of his fellow residents said.

“Whatever he cooked, he cooked enough for everybody,” said Calvin Wilson, 56, who described the compound as a place for people to “get back on their feet.”

“I never saw him coming in here with a weapon, and I never saw him drunk,” Wilson said, adding that Sterling had another job as a cook.

“He wasn’t a bad person,” Solomon said.

“He was nice. He wasn’t a bad guy. He was respectable,” said Gardner, who called his friend’s death “tragic.”

Yep. Sounds like a real evil guy.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

Without knowing the case he was convicted @ 21 for the Carnal. I'm assuming like most courts they don't convict in 48 hours so in theory he could have been 19 and slept with a 16 year old with consent. I don't think it's the most shocking thing in the world and if someone's parents are big enough dicks, they can get this stuck on you in the south. I guess you are assuming the worst case which would be he was 21 sleeping with a 13 year old.

No, 19 and 16 would be a misdemeanor. He got charged with the felony which is 4 year or greater. He also got significant prison time for it which doesn't jive with a Romeo & Juliet innocent scenario.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

The guy is 37. He was convicted in Sept 2000. I don't know how fast the legal wheels spin in LA, but let's say a conviction takes more than three months. So this means he was 20.

The misdemeanor is basically the same as a felony, only the difference in age is between two and four years. So it's entirely possible that this guy was 20 and had to register because he fooled around with a 16yo a couple of times. Man, I've never heard of that happening before.

Listen, you can feel the shooting was unjustified without resorting to defending the rape of a minor.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

No, 19 and 16 would be a misdemeanor. He got charged with the felony which is 4 year or greater. He also got significant prison time for it which doesn't jive with a Romeo & Juliet innocent scenario.

RS 14:80 Felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile :: TITLE 14 Criminal law :: Revised Statutes :: 2009 Louisiana Laws :: Louisiana Laws :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia

or...

A person commits a second or subsequent offense of misdemeanor carnal knowledge of a juvenile, or a person who has been convicted one or more times of violating one or more crimes for which the offender is required to register as a sex offender under R.S. 15:542 commits a first offense of misdemeanor carnal knowledge of a juvenile.

and...

C. Lack of knowledge of the juvenile's age shall not be a defense. (because no teenager would ever claim to be older than they are).

Not saying it's the case but your cut and dry scenario isn't 100% true.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Listen, you can feel the shooting was unjustified without resorting to defending the rape of a minor.

Now it's a rape conviction? Think that is classified differently.

[RainMaker]

Carnal knowledge of a juvenile is statutory rape.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Dola - the marijuana thing did jump out though. That's a great way to start rap sheets on folks - bust them for pot. Establish a rap sheet, then all the other charges come a little bit easier. Wonder if gun rights would be curtailed at all if you had a prior offense, for example.

I lost all credibility back in 2000 for typing, "ya'll". It happens.

[Subby]

BREAKING: DOJ has opened a civil rights investigation into the death of Alton Sterling.

— Melanie R. Newman (@MelanieDOJ) July 6, 2016

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Listen, you can feel the shooting was unjustified without resorting to defending the rape of a minor.

Cool - you can justify the shooting without bringing up his prior record then.

[Logan]

Besides the body cameras "falling off", I think the craziest part of this story for what at least is known now is that the cops get to go home and wait 24 hours before providing the details of what they say happened. That stinks to high hell and I doubt is something a regular citizen be allowed immediately following a shooting.

edit: I know "right to remain silent" and all but that's not quite the same as allowing two officers, with the aid of union lawyers and who knows who else, to get stories straight outside of an interrogation room.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

I don't care what his wrap sheet was. That's supposed to be why there's courts.

Watching that video the impression I got was one cop felt a gun while they were tangled and called out "he has a gun", the other cop interpreted that as "he has a gun in his hand and is about to shoot one of us", fired, killed him, and then they both tried to cover it up with the "my body camera fell off" which just throws doubt all over their stories based on the footage that exists.

That sounds like a modern equivalent of the Derek Bentley case, which is famous over here

Derek Bentley case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Dutch]

Why are these cases always so blurry as to what really happened? If only there was some way to sort it all out before we go nuclear.

[nol]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Why are these cases always so blurry as to what really happened? If only there was some way to sort it all out before we go nuclear.

They're only 'blurry' because bystanders are able to capture video footage of the police killing someone. For hundreds of years the police (or lynch mobs) had no burden of proof beyond saying that the bad guy needed killing.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Listen, you can feel the shooting was unjustified without resorting to defending the rape of a minor.

Agree

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Watching that video the impression I got was one cop felt a gun while they were tangled and called out "he has a gun", the other cop interpreted that as "he has a gun in his hand and is about to shoot one of us", fired, killed him, and then they both tried to cover it up with the "my body camera fell off" which just throws doubt all over their stories based on the footage that exists.

Actually, the version that I just watched seems a little more clear. I'm fairly certain that one cop yelled "he's goin' for the gun" and that's what sparked the other one to shoot.

Ironically, it's linked at a Shaun King article in NY Daily News. I haven't seen anyone point this out. Maybe the people watching don't speak Louisiana???

Joking aside, my Daddy grew up in Louisiana, and they do talk funny there. It sounded fairly obvious to me, but I suppose with my background, I'm not the best judge of how clear it was.

Here's the link.

KING: Don't try to make sense of police killing of Alton Sterling - NY Daily News

EDIT: Sequence seems to be to me:

Officer 1: "He's goin' in his pock...HE'S GOT A GUN! GUN!"

{officer 2 draws weapon}

Officer 1: Hey bro, you fuckin' move I swear to God!


Officer 1: {not sure what the first word was, either "fuck" or possibly Officer 2's name} he's goin' for the gun!

{Officer 2 Shoots}

Unless I'm really missing something, the only one I can call into question is Officer 1. Officer 2 seemed to do the appropriate thing given the information he had.

EDIT2: The "call into question" meaning "did Officer 1 give Officer 2 correct information?"

[ISiddiqui]

Man, watching Sterling's 15 year old son break down and sob during the press conference is heartbreaking

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Man, watching Sterling's 15 year old son break down and sob during the press conference is heartbreaking

Better off without him, RainMaker says.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Better off without him, RainMaker says.

So would pretty much anyone with even a slight clue.

Worth noting here, however, is that the shoot does not have to be legally justified for the removal of the perp to still be a net positive. Those really are two different matters.

[cuervo72]

And anyone with a trace of empathy would feel otherwise.

[Ben E Lou]

It sounds like y'all are arguing two different things. Rainmaker said "the community is better off without him," and cuervo is talking about his family/friends.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

It sounds like y'all are arguing two different things. Rainmaker said "the community is better off without him," and cuervo is talking about his family/friends.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

A domestic abuser, sex offender, who deals drugs and carries guns illegally is probably not the best Father figure.

.