|
empty whippet box posted:Is it cool to openly call for the death of cops as a result of this verdict or should I just dogwhistle it? Do whatever's in your heart, friend.
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 23:58 |
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:Jason Stockley, the cop who said "we're gonna kill this motherfucker," had his partner ram and disable the man's car, then ran up and shot him 5 times and probably planted a gun in the car, was just declared not guilty in St Louis. Our judicial system is failing. It will only have its incestuous relationship with law enforcement to blame when it has lost all trust and control, and gives way to mob justice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:lol played yourself into a corner on that one huh Of course it's a violation of Japanese airspace. The NK regime has decided (probably correctly) that the US currently has no effective leadership and can't provide a coherent or credible diplomatic effort in response to these provocations. As such they're posturing more than usual to reassert that they are a serious threat to the people of South Korean and Japan in order to forestall US invasion and extract concessions now or at a later time. Maybe Trump should have actually staffed the state dept?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I apologize, I saw BetterToRuleInHell posting and assumed it was something stupid and offtopic, as is his normal thing to do. You are not a bad poster (the highest praise I can give any goon) and I apologize for being snarky af. I am just having ~one of those days~
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Javes posted:https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/908709196358660097 Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Honestly, it is pretty much in line with current 4th amendment law. Yeah, I'm not sure this decision is particularly crazy. I guess the next question would be, under what circumstances should open affiliation with a criminal organization be probable cause for a search? My gut suggests to me that it should be "we are investigating a particular crime believed to be committed by a member of your gang" because "you are in a criminal organization therefore you probably committed a crime at some point, let's go fishin' " makes me queasy outside of, like, a RICO or conspiracy case. although I guess gangs routinely do get nailed on conspiracy, don't they; that's an easy out that makes me less queasy even though the functional effect is very nearly the same for the unfortunate Facebooker
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Yeah the specifics of this case don't matter so much as the blatant guilt ruining faith in the judiciary. The governing body has a responsibility to terminate this cops employment if only because he's now prompted city wide protest and that's kind of the opposite of doing your drat job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
At a minimum we need to curtail civil immunity for cops. The idea that a cop can violate the law, departmental policy and direct supervisor orders but the people still have to pick up the tab is absurd. At least if we could sue cops and have the cops on the hook for the harm they cause that would be some incentive to not abuse and murder people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Moatman posted:HE USED A loving AK I think you probably meant something like "mortified"
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Yeah the specifics of this case don't matter so much as the blatant guilt ruining faith in the judiciary. He left and moved to Texas years ago
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:He left and moved to Texas years ago Uhh, I assume still employed as a "peace officer" he should be blacklisted at the very least.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
Radish posted:Is this one of those cases where the jury was mega racist, where they were super authoritarian and there HAD to be a good reason the cop did what he did, the prosecutor intentionally made a lovely case (maybe not this one since that sort of thing happens more often in grand juries where they don't have to make stuff public after), or half of the evidence was inadmissible so they missed the real story? You can download the decision here. The prosecution's theory was in part based on the idea that Stockley fired four times, then deliberately executed Smith with a fifth shot, but none of the witnesses testified to hearing a gap between shots and their evidence was a "puff of smoke" on the dash cam. The judge also makes a big deal of the fact that, on the video, Stockley only appears to have his service pistol in his possession when he returns to the Buick, and isn't wearing a jacket or pants with cargo pockets, but frankly I think that's an incredibly generous interpretation given that the revolver in question is a snub nose Taurus. The medical examiner testified that Smith's wound to the abdomen would be consistent with someone groping around to their right, and the prosecution never contradicts that assessment. The other piece is that Stockley approaches Smith's Buick and gives him commands for ~15 sec with his pistol holstered, instead of immediately firing. The judge's final analysis is that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Stockley wasn't acting in self defense. I think Stockley's lawyer probably did a good job in introducing reasonable doubt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:You can download the decision here. "goona kill this motherfucker, don't you know it." - Stockley during the chase, recorded by dash-camera.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
I'm no lawyer, but I can't square the notion of a cop saying hes going to "kill this motherfucker" while also claiming to fear for his life afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Uhh, I assume still employed as a "peace officer" he should be blacklisted at the very least. KickerOfMice posted:"goona kill this motherfucker, don't you know it." - Stockley during the chase, recorded by dash-camera. "The statement was not intelligible when the recording was played during trial. However, Stockley did not deny making the statement. He testified he could not recall making the statement and he could not recall the context. The context is not clear from the recording; it cannot be determined what was said immediately before and after the statement."
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Excuses It's like a Fishmech that only licks boots
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:There are people alive who remember Eisenhower. I'm assuming none of those people still have functional memories.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:During the chase, Stockley reported “shots fired” to dispatchers over a police radio. He says something about shooting Smith, which court records reveal as “Going to kill this (expletive), don’t you know it.” This case makes me furious. Well actually no, they all do. ACAB
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Oh good, DR is here to defend another killer cop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:It's like a Fishmech that only licks boots Short answer, the prosecution tried their best, but didn't convince the judge that all the elements of first degree murder were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. There was no jury because the defendant requested a bench trial. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Judge's reasoning from pg. 5, footnote 6: Oh okay then you heard it here first folks no way to know what he could have possibly meant when he said he was gonna kill that guy and then killed him
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
KickerOfMice posted:Well, that is not how it loving works. That is, actually, how it works. Self-defense isn't about reality in most states, which is why 'he was reaching for a knife' that he turns out not to have is often a defense. It is about reasonable fears. In St. Louis it is reasonable for a police officer to be concerned that a heroin dealer who just led them on a high speed chase and who is refusing to exit the vehicle might, in fact, be armed. The only parts of this whole thing that seem particularly egregious are the 'I'm going to kill that motherfucker' statement, and the planted weapon. The judge seems to have chalked up the former to an excited utterance (80 mph car case and all) rather than a statement of intent. The latter wasn't proven to his satisfaction. Is it a correct decision? Ehhh. From a legal perspective this judge has his head on a lot more straight than the jurors who refuse to convict someone who puts five warning shots in a fleeing suspect's back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I'm not making excuses, I'm trying to answer Radish's question of why the case went the way it did. We've seen this dance before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Judge's reasoning from pg. 5, footnote 6: I desperately want to know the context that statement could have been in that would render it something other than a plan to murder.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Legit I'm leaning toward burning down the precinct or the place the judge works out of as a reasonable response. If a mob went and killed this cop/the judge and I was on the jury I wouldn't vote to convict. This poo poo has gotten way out of hand. It's at the point where advocating for mob justice is more just than the actual legal system.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Caros posted:The only parts of this whole thing that seem particularly egregious are the 'I'm going to kill that motherfucker' statement, and the planted weapon. Understatement of the century
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Caros posted:That is, actually, how it works. Right, which is why I'm arguing this is a systemic failure and I would understand if the St. Louis judiciary and Police force suffered mob justice as a result.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Javes posted:I'm no lawyer, but I can't square the notion of a cop saying hes going to "kill this motherfucker" while also claiming to fear for his life afterwards. por que no los d- overwroughtness in the moment does not constitute sure and certain premeditation etc etc -- Okay, having skimmed the decision, I am not delighted with the prosecution's strategic choices, and if it were a jury trial and I were on it I'd be leaning towards involuntary manslaughter (he probably did not need to fire five times and was clearly at minimum sufficiently stressed to be in a reckless frame of mind) - but the prosecution basically fell flat on its face re first degree murder / the defense did an excellent job of presenting a sufficiently viable alternative scenario. Reasonable doubt's a motherfucker. I'm, er, not sure how you'd actually prove that a gun was planted by the cops without a witness, but the defense even took a swing at that one with "gun was big enough to be difficult to conceal from the video, no possible witnesses were called to the stand re gun planting, state's own witnesses testified that lack of victim DNA on the gun didn't necessarily mean victim did not touch gun". RuanGacho posted:Right, which is why I'm arguing this is a systemic failure This is where I'm at. It's possible this was murder and I'm pretty strongly of the opinion based on the judge statement that it was involuntary manslaughter, but the prosecution flubbed it, whether intentionally, semi-intentionally lazily, or just incompetently. Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Javes posted:https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/908709196358660097 If a Juggalo is friends with other Juggalos and posts about ICP, that is now legally probable cause. Woof, look out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
"I'm going to kill this motherfucker" *plants a gun on the guy to make the killing look justified* America: hurrah for our blameless boys in blue
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
All cops are bastards, and the justice system is an organ designed to uphold the ideologies and control of the state, which is in this case a racist oligarchy with a maliciously callous eye for human life. This isn't a new or interesting sentiment, but gently caress all of this. I used to be a big believer that a strong state monopoly of violence was better for its citizens, because then we could diminish it, and the state supposedly has some responsibility to its people, but I'm not as sure anymore. I dont think anyone is going to legislate this poo poo away. gently caress me if political power doesn't seem to in fact come out the barrel of a gun. I didn't want the oligarchs to have their own little war bands, but hell, I guess they've got them anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:We've seen this dance before. What the hell is your problem? Point to the part where I've condoned the officer or the decision in any part of this. All I've posted has been, "this is how the judge explained his ruling" and you're jumping on me like I'm end zone dancing on Smith's grave.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Right, which is why I'm arguing this is a systemic failure and I would understand if the St. Louis judiciary and Police force suffered mob justice as a result. It's at the point where a cop looking in a camera and saying "I'm going to murder this filthy criminal because I want to and I enjoy killing people" and then shooting a guy sleeping on a park bench in broad daylight is unlikely to see a conviction. Like, I am pretty sure we are at the point where the boot-lickers will justify literally any action a cop takes. ACAB
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
I'd like to think that the difference between me and the average government worker who's been at it for two decades is that when poo poo goes wrong I ask how we fix it instead of just shrugging our shoulders and going what can ya do? Right now if I was in any part of the Judiciary is be deeply concerned about how the pattern of rulings is undermining legitimacy with a significant portion of the population.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I would be extremely surprised, but we are living in the second darkest time line. I hope someone murders this judge too, that'd be cool
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:What the hell is your problem? Point to the part where I've condoned the officer or the decision in any part of this. All I've posted has been, "this is how the judge explained his ruling" and you're jumping on me like I'm end zone dancing on Smith's grave. / 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:I'd like to think that the difference between me and the average government worker who's been at it for two decades is that when poo poo goes wrong I ask how we fix it instead of just shrugging our shoulders and going what can ya do? Yep. This should be a DoJ crisis. When people would be happy about a mob killing a defendant and/or judge because of how badly these cases are handled you've got a serious loving problem. If people don't trust the justice system and/or the police (which I would argue at this point you absolutely should not) you've got a big loving problem.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
KickerOfMice posted:I desperately want to know the context that statement could have been in that would render it something other than a plan to murder. The context is that the officer was jacked on adrenaline and engaged in a nearly 90 mph vehicle pursuit. People say dumb poo poo when their blood is flowing. I've heard security guards say things like that almost word for word who haven't shot someone to death afterwards, and the fact that he exited the vehicle and kept his weapon bolstered doesn't suggest that he left the vehicle with the intent to kill.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Caros posted:The context is that the officer was jacked on adrenaline and engaged in a nearly 90 mph vehicle pursuit. People say dumb poo poo when their blood is flowing. I've heard security guards say things like that almost word for word who haven't shot someone to death afterwards, and the fact that he exited the vehicle and kept his weapon bolstered doesn't suggest that he left the vehicle with the intent to kill. The fact that he killed the guy suggests that he did
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
axeil posted:Yep. This should be a DoJ crisis. When people would be happy about a mob killing a defendant and/or judge because of how badly these cases are handled you've got a serious loving problem. Looks like they've got a serious loving problem then.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 23:58 |
|
|
RuanGacho posted:I'd like to think that the difference between me and the average government worker who's been at it for two decades is that when poo poo goes wrong I ask how we fix it instead of just shrugging our shoulders and going what can ya do? If nothing else this is another tally mark for body cams in the sense of in "if murder, universal bodycams would have let the prosecution argue more strongly for the gun planting if they felt like it". 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:51
|
|