Patterico's Pontifications

1/15/2009

More on the Oscar Grant Shooting

Filed under: Crime,Current Events — Jack Dunphy @ 10:34 am



[Guest post by Jack Dunphy]

Our host Patterico has asked me to amplify on a point I made in my Pajamas Media column regarding the murder charge against the former BART police officer accused in the Oscar Grant shooting. I said I believed it was plausible that that officer believed he was drawing and firing a Taser rather than a pistol. Such incidents have indeed happened in the past, and after viewing the various videos of the Oscar Grant shooting, this theory seems to me much more likely to be true than the one holding that former officer Mehserle decided to execute Grant in front of a train station full of witnesses.

Like most LAPD officers, I’ve been trained in the use of a Taser but I do not routinely carry one. A handful of officers on my department have been issued a Taser X26, which they carry in a cross-draw holster on the opposite side from their service weapon. But every patrol division has a supply of Taser M26 models that officers check out each day as they go on patrol. Most officers keep these in the trunk of their police cars and retrieve them only when needed, but some carry them in the provided holster, which is attached to the officer’s Sam Browne and strapped around his thigh. I’ve seen some officers wear them on the same side as their pistol and others on the opposite side. You can see from the linked images that both Taser models at least superficially resemble a pistol, the M26 more so than the X26. Both models are activated by pulling a trigger exactly as one does in firing a pistol.

Mehserle was a two-year veteran of the BART police force, a point in his career at which an officer is still considered very much on the green side, or at least would be in the LAPD. I would conjecture that he had not been in many physical altercations and, given the situation he was facing, with a station full of screaming New Year’s Eve revelers, may have been emotionally revved up as young cops often are. I’ve seen cops more tenured than Mehserle do some incredibly stupid things in such situations, though thank heaven without the horrific consequences.

I don’t know if Mehserle was in fact carrying a Taser at the time of the shooting, but if he was, I would conjecture that in the heat of the moment he simply deployed the wrong weapon.

Note that in the 2003 incident linked above, it was a female Hispanic officer in Madera, Calif., who accidentally shot and killed a male Hispanic suspect. No charges were filed against her. Sadly, the racial calculus in the Oscar Grant shooting will play as big a role in the outcome as will the facts of the case.

–Jack Dunphy

76 Responses to “More on the Oscar Grant Shooting”

  1. What? “Racial Calculus”? The hell you say, sir.

    Okay, I kid.

    But where the “racial calculus” will really come in to play is when the defense attorney rightfully motions for (and will probably be granted) a change of venue out of Alameda County, probably to somewhere in the Central Valley.

    And if we redneck jurors in the Central Valley acquit Mehserle…

    The Other JD (904e65)

  2. And if we redneck jurors in the Central Valley acquit Mehserle…

    Then the city. Will. Burn. Mark my words.

    Scott Jacobs (a1c284)

  3. If it goes to a largely or all white jury, the city will burn. Which is gonna suck pretty hard for a lot of honest, uninvolved black folks.

    Pablo (99243e)

  4. Would anybody notice if Oakland burned? I think its pretty much burned out already.

    PDizzle (ae87b6)

  5. I believe the author is correct; I also believe that Mehserle needs his day in court. Let the murder charges go forward. It is unfortunate, but that is the responsibility you take when you strap those weapons on. May the jury have mercy on him.

    Vatar (bf10a3)

  6. Pablo, why do you say that?

    Even if he *did* think he had the taser, he should still be liable for manslaughter.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  7. aphrael, if the officer made a mistake in what he thought he drawn, how is that a criminal error?

    SPQR (72771e)

  8. aphrael, I think that if this case is perceived as protecting a white guy from the community of offended black folks, certain elements of that community are going to raise holy hell. The recent “protests” in and around the Fruitvale station will be only a preview of the full theater to come. Why? Let me refer you to Sublime’s April 26, 1992.

    But if you look at the streets
    it wasn’t about Rodney King
    and this fucked up situation and the fucked up police
    It’s about coming up and staying on top
    and screaming 187 on a motherfucking cop

    And if it happens, when it happens, good people who have no reason to be targets will be targeted. Because they’re handy.

    Really, why would you loot to protest this or anything else? Because you’re a thief, that’s why. If the scenario I mentioned happens, this will be an excuse for anarchy.

    Pablo (99243e)

  9. I read that the BART PD had just issued the Tasers in the last couple of months.

    Peter B (81be16)

  10. according to various reports, the BART police were issued tasers just 2 weeks before this shooting. Several commentators on TV interviews have suggested that in the confusion he pulled the wrong weapon.

    jeff (e45581)

  11. Just out of curiosity, what taser manufacturer in their right mind would make a taser that looks and feels and operates just like a real gun? I mean, assuming this is the case, it seems like there might be quite a bit of gross negligence to go around.

    Sean P (e57269)

  12. SPQR, it’s criminal from my point of view because, first of all, tasering someone in that circumstance would have been felonious assault. That victim was well restrained already.

    Felony + death result = felony murder, at least in my view of this situation.

    Why in the world did he need to get up at all? Why did he need to taze anybody? He was escalating the situation for no reason.

    Though I doubt he did intend to use a taser. I think he’s just a nut. Note that there has been absolutely no statement about his side of the story. Some cops are nuts. Thankfully most aren’t.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  13. Sean P, Tasers do not look or feel or operate like guns. Virtually all police tasers are the X-26 or a close derivative.

    http://defensereview.com/1_31_2004/Taser%20X26_1.jpg

    It’s big, it’s yellow, and the trigger is in a weird place. It doesn’t feel like a pistol.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  14. Sean P, Tasers do not look or feel or operate like guns. Virtually all police tasers are the X-26 or a close derivative.

    Here’s a picture

    It’s big, it’s yellow, and the trigger is in a weird place. It doesn’t feel like a pistol.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  15. Well that would be the only plausible argument I could think of for arguing that it was an honest mistake. The X26 doesn’t look remotely like a pistol and I don’t see how a person with extensive police training could argue that he was confused, even if it was in the heat of the moment. But the article also includes an M26 taser that does look a bit more like a pistol. Don’t know how it handles or feels though. So which one do Oakland BART officers use?

    Sean P (e57269)

  16. Joco, tasing someone who is resisting arrest is not a felony. So other than namecalling, you don’t really have an argument?

    SPQR (72771e)

  17. I have two questions for someone who has operated and received training with taser pistols. Is it okay to stun someone while they are being restrained by another officer? I’m assuming the current wouldn’t travel to another person in contact, would it? Second, it’s my understanding that tasers don’t generally kick like handguns. If that is so, would it be common for an officer to brace himself (as the Mehserle clearly does) for a taser shot?

    Also, even if he did mistake his gun for a taser, would that not still make him negligent and responsible for Grant’s death?

    tjwilliams (cb1b1c)

  18. SPQR:
    192. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without
    malice. It is of three kinds:
    (a) Voluntary–upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
    (b) Involuntary–in the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to felony; or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and circumspection. This subdivision shall not apply to acts committed in the driving of a vehicle.

    Even if the gun were fired accidentally, doing so is the commission of a lawful act, which might produce death, without due caution and circumspection.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  19. Pablo, I understand the part of your claim that says Oakland will burn. But your claim “If it goes to a largely or all white jury, the city will burn” seems to imply that you think a largely or all white jury will acquit.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  20. aphrael, I don’t think that the negligence of drawing the incorrect sidearm during the heat of a struggle is anything like a criminal level of “without due caution and circumspection”.

    SPQR (72771e)

  21. Just out of curiosity, what taser manufacturer in their right mind would make a taser that looks and feels and operates just like a real gun?

    One that doesn’t want training on the weapon to take a damned eternity.

    The closer to a gun it is, the less time it takes to get proficient.

    Scott Jacobs (a1c284)

  22. Joco, I don’t think you can get felony murder on these facts, because you’d have to establish that the police officer was engaged in a felony *other than assault with a deadly weapon* … which, unless there’s some evidence which hasn’t been revealed, you can’t do.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  23. aphrael,

    I was just giving my opinion of how the law should be, but if a taser was not warranted, which it wasn’t (barring some new facts), then that was a battery. And if his defense is that he was committing assault with a taser, then he’s proven much of that case.

    SPQR, I didn’t call anyone a name. Are you mistaking my comment for someone else’s? And the guy may have been resisting (I have no idea), but he was restrained and the tasering was completely beyond what was called for. I would be delighted to let a jury decide this. Tasering someone who is already completely restrained and a risk to no one is a serious crime (and of course, this is an opinion, but every bit as valid as yours).

    Scott, while this is like a gun in the vaguest sense (point, pull trigger), it really isn’t easy to confuse with a gun. The officer either was using a Glock type weapon (which is even more unlike a taser, having no safety lever), or he had to thumb the safety lever and therefore almost certainly looked at the weapon before firing it. People do really stupid stuff all the time, but I’m just arguing against the notion that the Taser was so gun-like that the taser manufacturer is liable.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  24. Joco,

    There would certainly be no assault here for using a Taser on the guy in these circumstances. It’s a crowded train platform, with cops in equal numbers, at best, to the number of people being restrained or looking on with apparent sympathy to the suspects. One suspect appears to acquiesce to handcuffs fairly readily, but the deceased appears to resist, and even after the police had him on the ground, he appeared to still be struggling, with the struggle intensifying shortly before he was shot.

    That said, I disagree with you, SPQR, about how negligent this is, assuming that subjectively, the officer believed he was drawing his Taser. I think that drawing the weapon and firing it point-blank without double-checking to verify it was the Taser is indeed gross, criminal negligence, certainly far short of exercising “due caution and circumspection.”

    The amount of care required depends in part of the magnitude of harm which will result from error. In financial terms, greater “due diligence” is required for a billion dollar deal than for a $100,000 deal. The consequences of mistaking a gun for a Taser are severe for all involved. The suspect was not known to be armed at the time, though I certainly cannot tell from the video whether he appeared to be reaching for a pocket or into his waistband during the struggle. I don’t see anything in this video which would show that the suspect was posing such a large risk of imminent harm to the officers that a delay of one or two seconds to verify the weapon drawn would be too dangerous.

    In my area, I’ve noticed that the cops carry their Tasers on their right-hand side. My presumption has been that they do this so their instinct will be to draw the Taser, and they won’t draw the gun by accident.

    Personally, my bet is that he didn’t draw thinking it was the Taser. I think it’s more likely that this very new cop pulled the gun intending to use some sort of “make my day, punk” line to intimidate the suspect to calm down. Then he accidentally pulled the trigger.

    PatHMV (653160)

  25. I was just giving my opinion of how the law should be, but if a taser was not warranted, which it wasn’t (barring some new facts), then that was a battery

    OK, fair enough. In California you still can’t get felony murder; if the felony being committed is assault with a deadly weapon, and there’s no other felony, then the felony is merged with the murder in such a way that the enhancement doesn’t apply.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  26. PatHMV: that’s my read on the situation as well. But he has a right to have a jury look at the facts and see which theory they believe more likely.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  27. Well, maybe he did think it was a Taser. If you look at the second video clip, the first thing he does after the shooting is look down at the weapon in his hand. That look could be “why the hell did that go off,” but it looks more to me like he surprised to find the gun in his hand instead of the Taser. Also, if he was planning to threaten the guy with the gun, I think he would have been more likely to press the barrel against the back of his head or something, rather than stand up. I’m going to go back and look again.

    Oh, and Joco, look at that video again. There’s only 2 officers working on Grant, and Grant is clearly struggling with them. He is in no way successfully restrained at that point. Doesn’t justify shooting him, but it would justify Tasering him.

    PatHMV (653160)

  28. Breaking News: US AIRWAYS PLANE DOWN IN HUDSON RIVER! Happening now. Pray for the passengers for a safe rescue.

    love2008 who will now be known as Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  29. When the statute says “without due caution and circumspection” jurors will be read this definition: “a person acts with criminal negligence when the way he or she acts is so different from the way an ordinarily careful person would act in the same situation that his or her act amounts to disregard for human life or indifference to the consequences of the act.”

    If you can get 12 people to agree, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this definition applies, you have involuntary manslaughter.

    Patterico (cbcc1f)

  30. PatHMV, I admit I have a hard time seeing anything in these videos at all. If the kid was not well restrained, then it obviously wasn’t a battery to tase him, just extremely foolish to point a dangerous item at him while guessing that is was probably a taser and probably not a gun, and pulling the trigger.

    The officer’s reaction is also very hard to see. Is he just crazy, or is he genuinely shocked that the thing in his hand was a gun? Tasers are serious things to point and fire. They can be safe, but not with the attitudes many police departments have about their use (such as to coax a person to stand up and comply, or to stop yelling). Still, I’d like to know more about this officer’s service record and personality. We’ve heard nothing about it.

    Love2008, it’s looking like the plane didn’t go down hard. Thank God.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  31. Joco, I agree with all that. All I know about the officer is that he’s only been on the force for 2 years.

    From one of the videos, you can hear that the local population in the vicinity is very hostile to the cops. You can see people in the video keep coming up to the area of conflict, perhaps looking to intercede, perhaps just to observe (the cops have no way of knowing). In the 3rd video (the Raw Story one), you keep seeing a sort of heavy-set fellow in a gray sweatshirt who keeps walking up, is chased away, and walks back again.

    Those are all very stupid things for the crowd to do, because it understandably makes the officers consider a crowd attack more likely and increases the flow of adrenaline. It intensifies the situation rather than helping to defuse it. It also likely encourages resistance by the individuals being arrested. Young drunk males tend to like to impress a crowd. If they thought they had a sympathetic audience, they may well try to increase their show of defiance to the authorities.

    How are BART cops usually considered? Are they thought of as “real” cops, or something more akin to ticket-writers? In this area, do they regularly encounter fights and disturbances of the peace, or do they spend most of their time stopping fare jumpers and the like? A cop with 2 years experience walking a beat in New York would probably gain a lot of experience with situations like this in that time period, but I wonder whether a transit cop in Oakland has the same level of day-to-day activity, and thus the same level of experience.

    PatHMV (653160)

  32. Forgive us non-lawyerly types for butting in, but could one of you versed in the law enlighten me.

    Here’s my simplistic understanding:

    1) I do something that causes you to die because I want you dead. Murder.

    2) I do something that results in your death. You wouldn’t have died if I hadn’t committed the act, but because of what I did you’re still dead, even though it wasn’t my intent. Manslaughter.

    I point my gun out the window at you and shoot you. You’re dead. Murder.

    I point my gun in direction of the window while doing something to it and it accidentally discharges and the bullet hits you. You’re still dead, but it’s manslaughter.

    A little blurrier: I buy scaffolding for my workers and am offered training on how to properly assemble it. I don’t bother with training and I don’t read the instructions. I assemble it wrong and it collapses and someone dies. Negligence resulting in manslaughter on my part.

    My basic take on the situation:

    Grant was under control and sitting against the wall. For some reason officers moved him away from the wall and he ended up in a struggle on the ground with two officers. The officers seem to be bringing him under control by force. One officer stands up, draws the wrong weapon (for the sake of this argument), fires, and kills Grant.

    I’m OK with the idea that we put police officers in stressful, dangerous situations and need to let them exercise their judgment. That means I’m going to pass on their decision to move him out of a situation where he was generally cooperative into one that resulted in his death. I’m also going to pass on the decision to fire the taser, since that is generally considered a non-lethal way to control an individual. The department can review those decisions according to policy and current training standards. No crime.

    On the other hand, the decision to arm a police officer and give him certain authority means that “we” should expect him to be held to a certain standard. If he draws the wrong weapon in a situation where there isn’t immediate threat to life or person, should he get a free pass?

    If Mehserle actually intended to draw the taser but drew the wrong weapon and he did so in an situation where neither officer was in immediate danger of being injured, why wouldn’t manslaughter be appropriate? Whether he wasn’t sufficiently trained for the situation (and therefore shouldn’t have been in the situation), wasn’t sufficiently trained on his equipment (and shouldn’t have been carrying the taser), or some other reason, it still seems like he committed a grave error that resulted in someone’s unnecessary death.

    OK, folks. Make me smarter!

    Steve (81dc80)

  33. Everyone got out safely. Thank God. That is a miracle. Thank you Jesus.

    love2008 who will now be known as Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  34. Further info that I would like:
    What sidearm was the officer carrying?
    What taser was he carrying?
    Did he carry them on opposite sides, or on the same side?
    Did these weapons have distinct safety’s – other than the “safe trigger” safety as used on a Glock (and others)?
    Are there significant operational differences in the manner in which “safety”s are dis-engaged?
    How many hours of practical training had he had in the use of either weapon?

    AD (d614d2)

  35. #29 Comment by Patterico — 1/15/2009 @ 1:11 pm

    “a person acts with criminal negligence when the way he or she acts is so different from the way an ordinarily careful person would act in the same situation that his or her act amounts to disregard for human life or indifference to the consequences of the act.”

    When it comes to use of force, a police officer has training, knowledge, and legal authority that far exceeds an “ordinary person” (ie a non-police officer).

    As such, would not a police officer be held to a higher standard legally, as opposed to an “ordinary person”?

    Just curious—

    Pons Asinorum (b2b187)

  36. Pons Asinorum… Your point is covered in the portion of the instructions which refer to “in the same situation.” In this case, the situation would be that of being a police officer armed with deadly weapons and the associated training you describe.

    PatHMV (653160)

  37. Very good, thanks.

    Pons Asinorum (b2b187)

  38. A little blurrier: I buy scaffolding for my workers and am offered training on how to properly assemble it. I don’t bother with training and I don’t read the instructions. I assemble it wrong and it collapses and someone dies. Negligence resulting in manslaughter on my part.

    depending on how inherently dangerous the scaffolding is, I could see situations in which this gets you 2d degree murder.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  39. Mistaking a pistol for a taser may explain what happened but it doesn’t excuse it. Moreover why would even a taser be necessary? Grant was on the ground and quite easily cuffed and hauled away.
    The more I look at the various videos the odder the whole affair seems.

    But of course it’s all on another level now thanks to the fact that the shooting has proveoked a quite understandable public outcry. Putting the now-ex cop on trial is only part of the damage that must be repaired.

    David Ehrenstein (ca6f57)

  40. There were riots in San Francisco when the jury hearing the case on the shootings of Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk by Dan White decided on a manslaughter charge due to diminished capacity (the notorious “Twinkie defense”). If a manslaughter verdict is clearly possible after the closing arguments are done in the Grant case, Governor Schwarzenegger will be seriously committing a breach of his duties of office if he does not have the National Guard up and ready to maintain order when the verdicts are read.

    M. Scott Eiland (5ccff0)

  41. In Louisiana, we have murder (1st and 2nd degree), manslaughter, vehicular and negligent homicide (vehicular homicide is just negligent homicide committed while driving a motor vehicle).

    PatHMV (653160)

  42. M. Scott Eiland: I think Rodney King is probably, for a number of reasons, a better analogy than Dan White.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  43. Joco, #23. Read your own comment in #12, “I think he’s just a nut.”

    SPQR (72771e)

  44. Oh…. To be honest, I think you have no point, then. Obviously calling this man a nut is giving him a hell of a lot of credit, and also calling him a nut is basically making an argument on his behalf. It’s not mere name calling.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  45. Joco, its not my fault you have no control of your own commentary.

    SPQR (72771e)

  46. Comment by aphrael — 1/15/2009 @ 3:08 pm

    The cops in the Rodney King case got off completely–or at least had been acquitted of all charges pending at the time of the riots. I suspect that that result is very unlikely in this case. White was sentenced to seven years for manslaughter, but this was not enough to prevent rioting in San Francisco.

    Either way, the National Guard should be ready to move when the verdict in the case is impending.

    M. Scott Eiland (5ccff0)

  47. The cops in the Rodney King case got off completely–or at least had been acquitted of all charges pending at the time of the riots.

    I don’t think that’s right. My recollection is that they had hung as to a battery count as to Officer Powell.

    Not that it meant anything to the rioters . . .

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  48. Good catch, I had forgotten the hung jury on the one charge. Still, as you say, that didn’t mean anything to the rioters–and that’s still a rather different scenario from a manslaughter conviction.

    M. Scott Eiland (5ccff0)

  49. Joco, and I quote from your comment, #12

    “I think he’s just a nut.”

    JD (d1f299)

  50. aphrael,

    Pablo, I understand the part of your claim that says Oakland will burn. But your claim “If it goes to a largely or all white jury, the city will burn” seems to imply that you think a largely or all white jury will acquit.

    No, that’s not what I meant, though I can see how you could construe it that way. What I’m saying is that if the perception is that Mehserle is being delivered from justice at the hands of Oaklanders to a (white) jury in the ‘burbs, that will be enough of an excuse for anarchy. And decent black people who might be rightfully upset at that (or not) will suffer at the hands of thugs. That doesn’t presume an acquittal, though if there is one, the anarchy will happen again.

    Pablo (99243e)

  51. As anyone whose read my work knows, much like Jack Dunphy, I am generally an ardent supporter of the police. I have spent innumerable hours at crime scenes and in police cars as a journalist. I am also a combat experienced infantry officer of the Army National Guard.

    That said, I let me share my first reaction when I saw a photo of the Tasr M-26: “Oh Sh*t, that’s gonna get somebody killed.”

    In years past, the Taser was shaped like an old, bulky rechargeable flashlight with a handle. I have seen those used on more than one occaision.

    The M26 and X26 are very gun like. Put one of those in my hand in a stressful situation, and I won’t instinctively differentiate with my gun. Put that in my hand more often than a Glock, and I might just put a bullet in somebody instead of electricity.

    I’m no bleeding heart, but the tactile (not tactical) design of that instrument is way, way too similar to a deadly weapon for safety, epecially when cops are trained to react with instinct, and feel.

    When I first saw the video, my instinct was “he thought he has his Taser.”

    The only other plausible explanaition is insanity-based murder. No sane person would have shot him with all those witnesses.

    Robert C. J. Parry (c08820)

  52. Why would you taser someone in the head?

    the DA asks the jury 15 months from now……

    EricPWJohnson (7b1362)

  53. I just watched the first video again (of the 3 displayed in the previous post). The officer pulls his gun from his holster, aims, fires, then holsters the gun again. His actions don’t support the taser conjecture in my opinion.

    grs (fba0d0)

  54. Robert, you think an X26 is like a gun? You obviously have never used one.

    A glock 21 weighs about 6 times as much. SIX TIMES. It’s much larger, and the trigger is far lower. The X26 has a huge lever on the side that you have to thumb. It’s bright yellow. It hangs differently and is pulled out differently. And as a samrter person than me noted, you don’t shoot people int he head with tasers and it doesn’t seem normal to shoot someone with a taser while others hold them (although there is no risk of shocking the other people, it’s very unusual).

    Now, I ‘m not pretending to know that this guy didn’t think he was using a taser. but it would be extremely odd, and as many others have noted, kinda like getting in a car on the wrong side. How many times have you accidentally entered a car on the wrong side?

    That said, when I saw the video, I had the same gut reaction as you. But I tend to defend cops and think the best of them.

    I honestly just don’t find tasers to be any closer to a pistol than to a water hose with a trigger. Not saying you’re wrong… just saying I doubt it.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  55. M. Scott Eiland: even so, the position of the victim in this case is more like King than Moscone and Milk. The anger about Moscone and Milk would have been much, much more muted if it had just been a random gay guy in the Castro who had been killed.

    aphrael (9e8ccd)

  56. Why would you taser someone in the head?

    He didn’t hit him in the head. He shot him in the back, and the ricochet off the floor pushed the round into Grant’s lung.

    Pablo (99243e)

  57. Did they actually finish handcuffing him after he was shot, as the family alleges?

    nk (9097f8)

  58. As for the state of mind …. A sixty-year old man pulls a gun in a verbal street altercation and shoots the victim in the back as he is running away from him in full view of rush hour pedestrians and drivers. A barroom fight and as the two men are rolling on the floor, one takes out a knife and sticks it in the victim’s heart in full view of fifty or more people. Real cases.

    nk (9097f8)

  59. Joco-

    I am quite familiar with the X26 and M26 (though I’ve never fired either) and, yes, both are much lighter. But, both have pistol grips and finger-pull triggers. A water hose with no trigger is quite different. It’s amazing how light a weapon is when you’re full of adrenaline… an M-16 is like nothing, I can’t imagine a Glock being “heavy,” per se.

    That said… if somebody who runs a red light becuase he’s not paying attention to traffic kills somebody and is guilty of manslaughter, I don’t see how somebody who’s trained in he use of weapons — and the judgment requisite for their application — is any different. It’s one thing to honestly believe you are applying the right amount of force with the right weapon, it is another thing to be blissfully unaware of which weapon you are holding.

    There has to be acountability somewhere in the equation.

    Robert C. J. Parry (c08820)

  60. Would the family get more money out of this if it’s determined that the cop wasn’t mentally or emotionally equipped to perform the job or would they get more if it’s determined that the cop is a cold blooded killer? Seems to me that there would be more to prove negligence for the latter.

    There might be a practical solution for the authorities to pursue here where they can satisfy most people. Better training for the cops, more black BART cops, the people who hired him get demoted or fired, big bucks for the family. The cop can’t own a firearm or be employed in law enforcement again.

    j curtis (ab1a7b)

  61. Robert, you’re right, of course.

    It’s easy to see someone making an extremely dumb move in the heat of the moment. If you’re saying it’s plausible for someone to accidentally point their finger at someone and forget it’s a pistol, or vice versa, then of course you’re right.

    But that’s why we hire professionals to do this stuff. As you note, there has to be accountability, and the ‘oops’ defense should only go so far.

    J curtis, I would imagine that if this cop had problems in the past (seems pretty possible), or if his training wasn’t good enough, then the family will have a better case than the excellent one they already have.

    While it’s said he was resisting, and that lots of people were making trouble, the videos show that the guy was not a threat to anyone. I personally can’t accept that tasering him was anything short of battery, and if he died as a result of a completely idiotic method of tasering someone (pull random item and fire it), well, I think that’s worse than manslaughter.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  62. Joco, I continue to disagree with you when you say “the guy is not a threat to anyone.” There’s 2 cops trying to handcuff him, and he is clearly refusing to submit and refusing to put his hands behind his back. As murky as the videos are in some respects, it looks to me very much like, before the shooting, both officers are trying very hard to grab his wrists and arms and pull them behind his back, and he is doing his best to not comply. That’s not “under control” and it poses a significant risk to officer safety. They had not yet had an opportunity to frisk him and determine if he was armed with a knife or gun. It’s hardly unheard for drunk young idiots in major cities on New Year’s Eve to be armed for one purpose or another.

    And crowd dynamics are tricky, unstable things. Several of those crowd members are clearly VERY interested in what’s going on. I already mentioned the one guy in the gray sweatshirt who was chased off once by the female officer and then came back. Were it not for the continued efforts of that female officer and the other officer standing post, I have little doubt that a perimeter of angry Oaklanders would have quickly formed around the area. You can hear on the third tape that most of the bunch is anti-police generally.

    If 2 officers hadn’t had to be devoted to crowd control, there may have been more officers available to subdue Grant, and none of this would have happened.

    If the office had Tasered Grant, I’d be strongly defending him at this point.

    PatHMV (a00c3c)

  63. As murky as the videos are in some respects, it looks to me very much like, before the shooting, both officers are trying very hard to grab his wrists and arms and pull them behind his back, and he is doing his best to not comply.

    First, the video does not show much of such efforts by the officers or any fierce resistance by Grant. Second, there were two officers trying to cuff one face down man. Unless Grant had four or five arms, or was the size of Andre the Giant, there’s no reason two grown men can’t get a guy cuffed without resorting to weapons. The first cuff is easy to get on, and the second ain’t much harder. A person in that situation is not a substantial risk.

    Pablo (99243e)

  64. Pablo, ever actually tried to handcuff an individual who really doesn’t want to be handcuffed? I haven’t, myself, but I’ve talked to plenty of cops who have, and it’s not nearly as easy as you seem to think. A Taser is generally much less likely to do long-term damage than a prolonged physical struggle between 2 officers and a suspect. If nothing else, simply having the weight of one or two officers on one’s back can exert dangerous levels of pressure on the ribs and lungs.

    PatHMV (a00c3c)

  65. Pablo, ever actually tried to handcuff an individual who really doesn’t want to be handcuffed?

    Yup. And when you’ve got two guys and he’s eating the pavement, it ain’t all that difficult. You’ve got all the leverage, and he’s got none.

    If nothing else, simply having the weight of one or two officers on one’s back can exert dangerous levels of pressure on the ribs and lungs.

    Soooo…you tase the guy for his own good? Um, no.

    You get one cuff on, which ain’t hard to do, and then you’ve got a convenient carrying handle on one arm and three free cop hands to wrangle the other one in. No weapons necessary. Oh, and you’ve actually trained to do that sort of thing, a lot. If it were just one cop, then you’ve got amore difficult problem and much better cause to tase him.

    A Taser is meant to be an alternative to deadly force. You don’t tase people just because it’s easy. And yes, you can kill someone with a Taser. Google “Taser deaths”.

    Pablo (99243e)

  66. A Taser is meant to be an alternative to deadly force. You don’t tase people just because it’s easy. And yes, you can kill someone with a Taser. Google “Taser deaths

    I’m sorry, this is not a correct fact. The taser is a less lethal force option, not an alternative to deadly force. There is no alternative to deadly force. That is to say, in a sitation where you are met with deadly force, you apply deadly force in return. That is has uses in the gray areas is a given, and with most deadly force scenarios, 20-20 hindsight will find pleanty of gray areas. I think if you research the force contiuum, you will find that tasers are a relatively low level of force, usually applicable before impact weapons and K-9.

    You can and do, in many departments deploy the taser in the “drive stun” capacity to overcome passive resistance. For those unfamiliar with taser functions, there is a removeable cartridge that holds the darts, with the cartridge removed or expended, the taser can still be applied much like the “stun gun” of old. In this capacity is is a pain complaince level of force, much like a wrist lock or other “police holds”.

    Patrick (ad8c94)

  67. The taser is a less lethal force option, not an alternative to deadly force. There is no alternative to deadly force.

    An alternative to deadly force is by definition less lethal. Otherwise, it would still be deadly. A Taser is designed to immediately incapacitate someone in a way that no option other than deadly force will.

    Pablo (99243e)

  68. […] In the case of the officer above, there are several possible explanations as to why this man was shot while being filed from 20 different angles. Most likely is that the officer simply thought he had grabbed his tazer. […]

    Two Sides to Every Story - But don’t let that stop the slander « Something should go here, maybe later. (bcec6e)

  69. Pablo, as should all of us, be very careful about “Monday Morning Quarterbacking”.
    We weren’t there to feel the dynamic of the crowd, and the struggle, and it will be extremely difficult for the jury to sense that also when it comes to trial.
    The deceased was given a lawful command to submit to authorities, and resisted:
    Once that resistance starts, nothing good can come of it.
    And, No, I am not saying “he deserved it”.
    I am saying that the escalation in force-level was due to the actions of the person being put into custody.
    If excessive force was used, and the shooting would appear to meet that criteria (at this stage of the investigation, at least), then those who applied excessive force will have to be held accountable.

    AD (87db80)

  70. The “He thought it was a Taser!” excuse is so laughably stupid it doesn’t even warrant refutation.

    Even granting it’s true, how on earth does tasering somebody in Grant’s position (unarmed, face down on the ground with at least two burly cops on him, one with their knee on his neck)make any more sense than shooting them?

    I’ll say it again. If this thug was not in a police uniform in the video, nobody on the planet would question whether on not they were witnessing a murder in those videos.

    And as for the “It doesn’t make any sense to kill him in front all those people!” claim, people commit all sorts of crimes, up to and including murder, in front of multiple witnesses all the time. Why are you so surprised at this instance?

    CTD (7054d2)

  71. CTD, you cannot guarantee a struggling man on the ground does not have a concealed weapon. That “statement of fact” is ignoring the fact the person had not yet been searched for weapons because, after all, he was still struggling and not brought under control. You are also ignoring the fact many tasers have the same feel and firing mechanisms as side-arms. And from my understanding, this is the sort of taser he was trained to use and was wearing.

    Whether he knew he drew a side-arm instead of a taser, I will not form an opinion on that.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  72. I think he knew he was pulling out a gun and that he was going to fire it. Question is why he did it. He should be subjected to mental assessment.

    love2008 who will now be known as Emperor7 (1b037c)

  73. I think he knew he was pulling out a gun and that he was going to fire it.

    Quick! Call Jay Leno. He’s been looking for a new Karnak, the Magnificent.

    AD (87db80)

  74. AD,

    I am saying that the escalation in force-level was due to the actions of the person being put into custody.

    From what I can see on the video, I can’t agree with that.

    If excessive force was used, and the shooting would appear to meet that criteria (at this stage of the investigation, at least), then those who applied excessive force will have to be held accountable.

    Clearly, the shooting was excessive force, and the only (still pitiful) defense is that he thought he was tasing. So, there’s then a secondary question: Was tasing excessive force? It appears to be.

    The fact that there were obnoxious people spectating is really irrelevant. Mehserle doesn’t appear to be in any danger whatsoever. Being heckled at by onlookers does not justify excessive force against a suspect.

    Pablo (99243e)

  75. Some points:
    As long as Grant was resisting being put into restraint, the police would escalate the level of force to put him into that restraint.
    At any time, Grant could have stopped struggling, and the altercation would have ceased, or should have.
    If the officers had successfully put the cuffs on Grant, the altercation would have ceased, or should have.
    The use of deadly force (a firearm) would not be called for unless Grant possessed a weapon, or was attempting to acquire a weapon from one of the officers he was struggling with. This is the nightmare scenario for any physical altercation – that the perp grabs your gun and uses it.
    None of us know if Mehserle intended to use deadly force since he isn’t talking.
    None of us know what Mehserle was seeing, for he’s not talking.
    For that matter, AFAIK, none of us know what the viewpoints of the other officers involved are since none of them are talking.
    I think it is intriguing that Mehserle resigned from the force to avoid talking to Internal Affairs – in effect, lawyering up right from the get go.
    That could be interpreted as him knowing he was guilty as Hell, or, it could be interpreted as him knowing that no matter what he said, he was going to get screwed.
    Also, not having seen the video, I can’t comment difinitively on it, and don’t wish to since I don’t believe that any video we see on the internet, or on the MSM, will be entirely accurate or enlightening (the footage never shown of the Rodney King altercation is, I believe, on-point).
    This, like investigations into air crashes, will take time to sort through all of the evidence, and eventually the truth might become known, and someone (probably Mehserle) will be held to account.
    We’ll see.

    AD (87db80)

  76. For that matter, AFAIK, none of us know what the viewpoints of the other officers involved are since none of them are talking.

    I’m all but certain that they have been talking, we just don’t know what they’re saying. But I suspect that their statements played into the decision to charge Mehserle with murder, and that they don’t help his case. I also suspect that their contemporaneous reactions started with “What the fuck…!?!?!”

    Pablo (99243e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1064 secs.