Cop who shot Oscar Grant arrested for murder
posted at 1:35 pm on January 14, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Anyone else see the trainwreck coming here?
Mehserle was arrested in the New Year’s Day shooting of Oscar Grant, a 22-year-old supermarket worker from Hayward who was lying facedown after being pulled off a BART train by police investigating a fight. An Alameda County judge signed an arrest warrant alleging murder, and Mehserle surrendered without incident, authorities said…
Sources said Mehserle was in Nevada because he feared for his safety after death threats were made against him. Douglas County is 15 miles south of Carson City in northwestern Nevada and includes part of Lake Tahoe.
Mehserle’s attorney, Christopher W. Miller of Sacramento, confirmed early today that his client was arrested on suspicion of murder.
Over to you, Jack Dunphy:
One theory circulating in the Bay Area media is that Mehserle believed he had drawn a Taser and intended to stun Grant rather than shoot him.
It’s a plausible theory, and indeed there have been incidents where officers mistakenly shot suspects they intended to shock with a Taser. And as theories go, its infinitely more plausible than the one alleging that in shooting Grant Mehserle committed “murder,” which under California law requires “malice aforethought.” In other words, for Mehserle to be convicted of murder, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he decided, in front of several of his colleagues and scores of witnesses, that he had had enough of this guy he was trying to handcuff and chose to end the struggle by killing him.
I doubt it.
Me too, although Section 188 of the Penal Code leaves the D.A. with a back door to malice: “[Malice] is implied, when no considerable provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart.” It’s clear as day that there was “no considerable provocation,” but if the jury accepts the taser theory, they might ignore that and simply decide that there can’t be murder if there was no intent to kill. Result: Acquittal, and a backlash in the streets even fiercer than the one that’s already occurred. My guess is that they’re planning to indict him for a lesser offense like voluntary manslaughter and only opted for murder on the warrant to delay the announcement about reducing the charges until everyone’s cooled down a bit, but lawyers are encouraged to tell me if I’m wrong. Exit question: Will they roll dice on a murder trial or step back?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »
…and considering that we’re talking about Oakland, the question is whether it will eclipse LA.
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 1:38 PM
Seems to me like the situation calls for a lesser included offense, such as manslaughter.
This will result in the jury opting to convict on the lesser included charge. Thus he does not get convicted of murder, but he gets convicted- so that way the streets aren’t angry- I guess that’s the thought going on.
Sackett on January 14, 2009 at 1:38 PM
I know we’re all just bullshitting over the intertubes here….but I can’t see how this can be twisted into a murder conviction.
Negligent manslaughter.
I know this guy is guilty of the mother-of-all-F-ups, but I do feel sorry for him. His life is ruined. I wouldn’t be surprised to read about his suicide.
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 1:42 PM
He’s guilty… But of what,
being a idiot and
using the wrong weapon
Murder
being filmed
*** Riots no matter which way this goes… Not because the riot will “solve anything, but because “victims” need to hate, need to destroy thier own communities and bllame others for thier mesirable lives. This “victim” truly WAS A VICTIM, but not of murder, but of a horrible mistake. the Officer is guilty, he will pay forever. But riots and “victim” usurpers, clingers, looking for a cause, not even knowing this man rioters are just as guilty.
Internet Warrior
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Yep, go with the manslaughter charge
offroadaz on January 14, 2009 at 1:43 PM
The only way I’ll buy that this is murder is if Oscar insulted his mother or something right before being shot.
It just seems completely illogical to me that he would have done that intentionally in front of all of those people without going nuts and unloading on every single one of them.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 1:43 PM
dont think you can prosecute the dude for murder, but he prolly ought to be hit with voluntary manslaughter.
Mike D. on January 14, 2009 at 1:45 PM
They’ll work on pleading it down after a considerable amount of time has passed and people have cooled down.
BadgerHawk on January 14, 2009 at 1:45 PM
This is the best news yet, lock the SOB up and throw away the key.
The locale doesn’t change the end result – the guy is a dirty cop.
All dirty cops go to prison, especially cowards who shoot unarmed people – in handcuffs.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 1:46 PM
I hope not, these people need justice.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 1:46 PM
I know there are more bad people than you can shake a stick at, but to believe that he murdered this guy, in front of his colleagues AND in front of all of the subway crowd watching just doesn’t seem to jive. He should certainly be held accountable for this, but not against a murder charge.
funsutton on January 14, 2009 at 1:48 PM
It might also depend on where his taser was located on the cop’s belt in relation to the gun.
If they were near each other, you can bet your socks that P.D.’s all over the nation will adopt new regulations about the location for tasers on an equipment belt.
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Not that I’m a lawyer or anything, but by that definition, I’m thinking a plea to involuntary manslaughter. But it is California. They set OJ Simpson and Robert Blake (clearly guilty) free, for G-d’s sake. Who the H*ll knows what Cali will do with this guy???
mjk on January 14, 2009 at 1:48 PM
It’s not even manslaughter – it’s a negligent homicide.
And I don’t get your point of calming things down, AP. If charges are reduced (and they will be), there is a bigger chance for riots because of the raised expectations.
Aristotle on January 14, 2009 at 1:49 PM
It’s an ugly and very said situation. Unfortunately it is going to get uglier and sadder. Special interest groups and others are going to have a feeding frenzy over this situation. The media both local and national will fuel which ever fire they think will get them the highest ratings.
I do feel for the families of the deceased, I really do. This is a terrible loss that can never be made up. That being said; I worry that this will have a detramental effect on law enforcement. Will they now be more hesitant to use force? Will criminals now be brazen? Will Code Pink and other groups now openly oppose and taunt the police. This situation has many losers. The only winners will be the special interests and the MSM.
Tommy_G on January 14, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Do you seriously think he did this on purpose, fully intending to kill an unarmed handcuffed man in front of dozens of people with cameras?
Can you explain that one to me? I really don’t get it.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 1:50 PM
His life is ruined.
Come on, now. At least he’s still breathing. I certainly don’t think it’s murder, (don’t see the “malice,”) and I don’t want him railroaded. But he needs to do time.
When you point a gun at someone, and then fire it, killing them, even by accident, the repercussions should be serious. I feel sorry that the whole incident happened, but sorry for the idiot who shot a man in the back? Not really.
jdub on January 14, 2009 at 1:50 PM
This is the best news yet, lock the SOB up and throw away the key.
The locale doesn’t change the end result – the guy is a dirty cop.
All dirty cops go to prison, especially cowards who shoot unarmed people – in handcuffs.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Should we have a trial first or just frog-march the guy to the gallows? You did read the part about the taser, right?
You would fit right in at a North Korean “people’s court.”
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Yeah, it’s going to be tough for him to ever have a normal life, and that sucks. But he took a life, intentional or not, so he has to carry that with him. I bet Oscar Grant would be willing to take a ruined life, if he had the option.
BadgerHawk on January 14, 2009 at 1:51 PM
It was an accident and will be ruled as such. Too bad for the dead criminal. Let this be a lesson to all the other thugs out there that want to confront law enforcement and commit crimes against the public. Sometimes when you push the envelope you lose.
Guardian on January 14, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Time will hopefully tell, but at this point I don’t think the evidence points to murder. And charging someone for murder when the fact don’t warrant it isn’t justice. It’s vengeance.
BadgerHawk on January 14, 2009 at 1:54 PM
This reminds me of the Rodney King case. While what happened to Oscar Grant is tragic I seriously doubt the BART officer meant to shoot Oscar with his gun let alone intend to kill him, the taser theory is very plausible here, the other theory of him intentionally shooting Oscar to kill him with the number of witnesess present doesn’t make sense.
As for the Rodney King comparison, what I’m saying is that while Oscar did not resist to the extent that Rodney King did and there was no 100 mph car chase preceeding the incident it does appear Oscar was trying to resist and while I’m not a cop you have to place yourself in their shoes when something like this goes down. Adrenaline is pumping, you have someone that is resisting and could pose a threat to you and you need to take control of the situation before you or someone else gets hurt, the best thing Oscar could have done in that situation (innocent or not) was to comply and not resist.
aving grown up in the Bay Area and riding BART the Fruitvale, Oakland Coliseum, and other Oakland stations are not for the timid or faint of heart especially at night and the fact it was New Years morning there is a good chance alcohol and/or drugs were consumed on the part of Oscar and the others involved, that probably led to the fight on the train that ultimately led to this tragedy.
I think the officer involved should be charged with manslaughter at the most, not murder.
Liberty or Death on January 14, 2009 at 1:54 PM
Accidents happen.
That’s why pencils have erasers.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 1:55 PM
/salute
Very well said…
+100
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 1:55 PM
AprilOrit:
Why even have a trail, you’ve already judged him guilty. Just think of all the money that will be saved. We can use it to ’share the wealth’.
GarandFan on January 14, 2009 at 1:55 PM
Do you seriously think he did this on purpose, fully intending to kill an unarmed handcuffed man in front of dozens of people with cameras?
Can you explain that one to me? I really don’t get it.
Watch the video. He draws his gun and shoots an unarmed handcuffed man in front of dozens of people.
The taser theory could turn out to be what happened. But there’s been enough video tapes of cops taking out misplaced rage on civilians that is plausible that he meant to do exactly what he did. Why did he? That’s a much tougher question.
Tom_Shipley on January 14, 2009 at 1:55 PM
the cop’s actions during and after the incident are beyond odd. shooting a secured suspect w/o provocation? then quitting his job, refusing to speak to investigators and fleeing the state? the man is either a cold-blooded killer, mentally ill or just really stupid. he brought these under charges upon himself, and while he will probably be tried under manslaughter officials are doing the right thing in charging him with murder right now, if for nothing else it should get him talking.
Noneya on January 14, 2009 at 1:57 PM
Wait a minute. Tazers are carried in different holsters located away from an officer’s weapon. Secondly, they weigh differently compared to a loaded handgun. Thirdly, there are visual cues for a tazer that are different from a handgun.
I agree with Sackett, et al. A lesser included charge of manslaughter should be added.
SeniorD on January 14, 2009 at 1:58 PM
Doesn’t negligent manslaughter require the action to be one that is beyond a normal mistake? In other words, he has to be shown to be acting recklessly or without normal care.
While we may think the act is manslaughter, there is a good argument that the problem is the design of the taser (to mimic that of a gun). Given that 1) Taser’s are intended to be used in hurried and stressful situations and 2) Mistakes are frequently made in hurried and stressful situations, it is reasonable to argue that the officers actions do not rise to the level of negligence, but were inevitable given the design of the gun. This argument is given even greater weight by the fact that the officers had only been recently issued the “gun-style” tasers and that there have been other incidents where a police officer mistakenly drew and fired his “gun” instead of the intended taser.
Bigtime product lawsuit against the taser manufacturer though….
And also…….Fuck Oakland.
Kasper Hauser on January 14, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Sure but not to the point of death. A beating I get. Cops very often get away with that. There’s simply no reason to believe he thought he could get away with the cold blooded murder of a hand cuffed man.
Which is why it bothers me that he didn’t answer questions on this and chose to resign instead. Maybe it bothers him too much to talk about it, but he owes the public an answer.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Personally, I think malice does come into play here. After watching the tapes, I think he was kneeling there thinking “this is bullshit. I oughta just shoot this motherf$%ker”. He subconsiously stood slowly, pulled his sidearm, and did it.
Just wait, if they go for murder, the defense will be temporary insanity.
In any case, he killed the guy, whether by accident, insanity or on purpose. Hopefully justice will be done.
BacaDog on January 14, 2009 at 2:00 PM
No doubt we will see ANSWER leading the riots with plenty of people carrying “Send the Jews to the ovens!” signs.
J.J. Sefton on January 14, 2009 at 2:01 PM
I’ll say it again. I have no idea how anybody can see those videos and not see cold-blooded murder. The thug pulled a gun on a restrained, unarmed man lying face down on the ground. He took aim, placed his finger on the trigger, pulled it and shot the man in the back. On what planet is that not “malice aforethought?”
If that weren’t enough, he then fled the state. Face it, if he weren’t a cop, nobody would be arguing that he’s anything but a cold-blooded killer.
I don’t pretend to know why he murdered that man, but I do know when you have three or more video recordings of a murder taking place, finding a motive becomes rather unimportant.
CTD on January 14, 2009 at 2:02 PM
You’ve seen the video about why you should never talk to police, ever, right?
He no doubt knows that nothing he can say will make people think him innocent, it will only be used as evidence that he’s guilty.
apollyonbob on January 14, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Murder may be much (I think he screwed up and thought he was tasering as opposed to killing the guy), but it definitely looks like some level of homocide.
Mr. Joe on January 14, 2009 at 2:04 PM
The question now is will going for a lesser charge now cause less violence than goince for a more serious charge and losing.
tomas on January 14, 2009 at 2:05 PM
IANAL, but my guess is that they go with the murder charge and offer a manslaughter plea deal. If you’re Mehserle, do you want to roll the dice on a murder trial in front of an Oakland jury?
Pablo on January 14, 2009 at 2:05 PM
Caught on tape and witnessed by that many people? No, I’d still be guessing something else was afoot, again, unless the man opened fire on everyone else in there.
It’s extremely important when deciding what to charge him with.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:05 PM
With several videos and witnesses including his own co-workers, I just don’t think that’s something he has a reason to worry about.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:06 PM
I think the guy just shot him and is a scourge to our legal system. He didn’t care what was going on around him because HE was in charge.
tomas on January 14, 2009 at 2:07 PM
Motive is very import in determining the extent of someone’s guilt. It is also important when mating out punishment.
Tommy_G on January 14, 2009 at 2:07 PM
The problem is that the officer’s taser defense (if the jury buys it) is a defense both to murder and manslaughter, it seems to me. My guess is they’ll try him for murder with manslaughter as a lesser-included offense, in the hopes that the jury will convict on manslaughter.
Outlander on January 14, 2009 at 2:09 PM
All I can say is that I hope I’m never Accidentally shot in the back by a police officer.
–And the fact is, is that many cops are Taser-happy. They use any excuse (and they enjoy) Tasering suspects. And most of the time the Tasering is unnecessary.
So because a particular cop was taser-happy… an innocent man is dead.
Opinionnation on January 14, 2009 at 2:09 PM
meting
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 2:09 PM
ROFL That’s going on a T-shirt
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 2:10 PM
Don’t break the law and you won’t have that problem.
What was this ‘precious angel’, Oscar Grant, doing when he got shot in the back?
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:11 PM
Thanks, I knew I used the wrong word. Spell-Check just wasn’t giving me the one I wanted. Guess I’m getting lazy in my old age.
Tommy_G on January 14, 2009 at 2:12 PM
We have video to prove it.
He’s a murderer – he shot a young father – a little girl now will grow up with her Dad, which is the biggest crime in this story.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 2:13 PM
They’re don’t look that similar, and they feel even less similar. If you can’t instantly tell the difference between a taser and a gun in your hand, you have no business carrying either one. Further, they’re usually carried on opposite sides of the body, with the taser carried in a cross draw configuration on the weak side of the body. IOW, if you’re right handed, you carry the taser in a “backward” position on your left hip and the gun on your right.
If that’s what happened, it is nothing more or less than a monumental screw up on Mehserle’s part.
Pablo on January 14, 2009 at 2:13 PM
Does getting in a fight on New Year’s Eve justify homicide?
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
Whoops – meant to say –
which is the biggest crime in this story.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
No doubt we will see ANSWER leading the riots with plenty of people carrying “Send the Jews to the ovens!” signs.
J.J. Sefton on January 14, 2009 at 2:01 PM
Was this guy Jewish? Was the victim a Hamas Palestinian? OMG, it’s starting over here too! :) Seriously, I think that the guy is going to get manslaughter.
catlady on January 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
what was the precious angel doing…….
well he was being shot and killed while lying on his face.
dumb fuck
Opinionnation on January 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
If he accidentally discharged his weapon, it isn’t the same thing as murder.
apollyonbob on January 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
I do think that a lot of cops resort to the taser rather than get into a prolonged physical struggle with a suspect. I don’t think that is a bad thing, though. So long as officer is abiding by a reasonable use of force policy (i.e. they aren’t tasering complying subjects or don’t try and talk down mildly non-compliant people first), I don’t mind zapping people. Why do you?
Outlander on January 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
Only to sociopaths, nazis and those with no regard for human life.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 2:15 PM
No, but if you weren’t causing trouble, the police would still be at the donut shop…right, Esthier?
The butt of a gun and the butt of a tazer look an awful lot alike from above.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:16 PM
I’m guessing being black is what makes it ok to the right-wingers here….
Noneya on January 14, 2009 at 2:16 PM
Boy, you are laying it on thick…..you can take your heart off your sleeve and put it back in your chest now.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:17 PM
Motive has nothing to do with guilt or innocence, per se. It can be useful when theorizing if someone has murdered someone. In other words, motive would be important if we were trying to determine whether Officer X or Officer Y shot the man. But in this case, there is no controversy over the guilty party.
If you have multiple videos of me walking up behind someone and shooting them in the head, motive is pretty meaningless. Maybe I did it because he was messing around with my wife. Maybe because he cheated me at poker. Maybe I just didn’t like the cut of his jib. It doesn’t really matter. You have no need to convince anybody that I’m the guilty party.
CTD on January 14, 2009 at 2:17 PM
They’ll step back and go with voluntary manslaughter.
Jaibones on January 14, 2009 at 2:17 PM
It’s a pity that there is no state that Mehserle could go to that would refuse to extradite Mehserle for a San Francisco show trial. It will be useful for reporters on the trial to read up on Stalin.
thuja on January 14, 2009 at 2:18 PM
It was a mistake.
Or, he is following the very good advise of his attorney. He was going to get fired. He can’t give statements because he knew he was facing criminal charges. He left the state — did not flee- because of death threats. The authorities and his atty knew where he was.
Right. Because only cops are not allowed to make mistakes. And the charges are exactly what is preventing him from talking.
Grabbing X instead of Y should not be a prison sentence. I do it all the time. Luckily, I am not a cop.
I predict he will be acquit, there will be riots, the feds will recharge him and try to get their pound of flesh.
Blake on January 14, 2009 at 2:18 PM
There was no struggle with this young man – he was handcuffed for heaven sake. This cop should not have been serving the public, he’s obviously not cut out for the job.
The cop needs to be brought to justice – an eye for an eye a tooth.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 2:18 PM
Only to racist libs like you that see color.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:19 PM
This is positively Godwin-esque.
Maybe someone can codify the rule here. Is it that at somepoint in a thread involving conservatives, rascism will be invoked?
apollyonbob on January 14, 2009 at 2:19 PM
Whoops – meant to say -
a little girl now will grow up without her Dad
which is the biggest crime in this story.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
Actually I beg to differ, depending on what type of guy he was. The sad truth of life is that some people are just not good parents, but we will never know one way or another with this man. However, being out that late, and in such distinguished company is not a good reference for the father of the year award. Stop being such a bleeding heart liberal AprilOrit, and just realize that sh*t like this happens to good and bad people and we have to pick ourselves up and move on.
catlady on January 14, 2009 at 2:20 PM
Worse! Oakland. I think they will have to move the trial to another county. The DA will want it in LA and the defense in San Berdo.
Blake on January 14, 2009 at 2:20 PM
What? Because I think Oscar didn’t deserve to be shot, I also must think cops all eat donuts? Come on. I’ve read some of your posts. You’re usually better than that.
Again, that doesn’t justify killing someone. That could change the charge from murder to something else, but he still took a life. That’s still wrong.
Noneya, I’m a right-winger. Just go ahead and call me racist.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:20 PM
Drink!
Aristotle on January 14, 2009 at 2:20 PM
It looks to me like even a taser would have overreacting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RV_INHoFrg
He definitely should not be a cop. Shopping mall guard maybe, but not cop.
Even so, it looks like the cop knew he f-ed up right away. He looked to me to be trying to do a job that he was not cut out for. Not criminal.
pedestrian on January 14, 2009 at 2:20 PM
Of course, the camera didn’t show that you were aiming at large snake that was ready to bite the person you shot.
But thankfully it doesn’t matter why you shot the guy, YOU DESERVE TO DIE YOU RACIST.
apollyonbob on January 14, 2009 at 2:21 PM
They are allowed to make mistakes – within reason.
This is a Nation of laws and cops are not above them.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 2:21 PM
With a force greater than that of any super-massive black hole, you have reduced all ‘liberal’ intellect to a singularity.
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Sorry Estheir, between the Ramos and Compean debacle and this…the cops ALWAYS seem to be on trial and the criminals are posted as angels. Just tired of it, especially since my hubby is a cop. As far as the donut comment, it was a joke. Thought you’d like it.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:22 PM
All but color blind people can see color, and even they can see shades.
Yes, luckily for all of us.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:23 PM
The civil suit will provide her with more money than her dad could ever earn.
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 2:23 PM
Damn, it must feel good to be perfect.
Let’s just march this dirty cop out, put a blindfold on him, stick a cigarette in his mouth, and fire away….No trial…no fuss, no muss…
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:24 PM
As an employer, I have no trouble believing this DUMBASS pulled his gun instead of a TASER. The city needs to be held accountable. The hiring practice of police from state to city is a discrace today.
Redglen on January 14, 2009 at 2:24 PM
I don’t put people in “groups”. We are all Americans, Esthier. Only identity loving libs make that distinction.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Only to sociopaths, nazis and those with no regard for human life.
AprilOrit on January 14, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Boy, you are laying it on thick…..you can take your heart off your sleeve and put it back in your chest now.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:17 PM
Thanks for that reply! Honestly, what is this chick thinking?
catlady on January 14, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Lying face first on the ground.
That’s an amazingly stupid comment. But I’m guessing that being liberal allows you to make all the stupid comments you want without feeling bad about it (see what I did there?).
BadgerHawk on January 14, 2009 at 2:26 PM
How do you know that? He isn’t saying a word….
Right, because like O.J., only the innocent flee. He CAN give statements, that is ridiculous to say he can’t, maybe he wouldn’t face these charges if he ADMITTED to the mistake you claim this is…
They are paid and trained to be smart enough to know the difference between a gun and a taser. He didn’t need to taze the guy, either, he was on his back already. And yes we should all be glad you are not in a position of authority.
Noneya on January 14, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Agreed. An eye for an eye a tooth!
Whatever that means.
Ars Moriendi on January 14, 2009 at 2:27 PM
That’s pretty cold. Money doesn’t make up for something like that.
I couldn’t tell. I thought you were accusing me of feeling that way about cops. Glad that’s sorted.
I very much get where you’re coming from, and I’m beyond sick of people who can’t say a positive thing about cops. I just got into an argument with a friend this weekend because he kept calling cops pigs and saying they don’t do any real work.
I respect cops, and I’m actually giving this one the benefit of doubt. I don’t think he meant to do that. But I do believe firmly that he needs to be punished for this. We can’t claim to uphold the rule of law if we let cops break the law.
This should also go for cops speeding when not on duty. Kinda off topic, but it’s always bothered me.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Who is allowed to make mistakes that result in people being shot to death, in the back, while restrained?
Pablo on January 14, 2009 at 2:28 PM
It bothers me more when you see them running code to the donut shop.
Pablo on January 14, 2009 at 2:29 PM
Heh, as I mentioned in an earlier post I grew up in the East Bay and have had the “pleasure” of riding BART back and forth to work getting to my job in Hayward (where Oscar lived). I can assure you the experience of riding BART through Oakland at any time can be unnerving and there is no love lost on my part for Oakland or the surrounding cities of Hayward and Freemont, they’re all cesspools!
However, I triple-dog dare Kasper and Limey to wear that statement on a t-shirt in Oakland, or worse yet wear it around the Acorns housing project on the borders of Emeryville and Oakland…if you do take my dare please be sure to get video, I’d love to see…if you make it out alive that is!
Liberty or Death on January 14, 2009 at 2:29 PM
Never suggested that it did. Just clinically eying the bottom line.
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 2:29 PM
yes, but that’s usually done first by the conservatives themselves.
racists, homophobes, creationists. meet today’s party of lincoln!
Noneya on January 14, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Agreed. An eye for an eye a tooth!Whatever that means.
Ars Moriendi on January 14, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Biblical passage… an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth…
Sure, but you can still see it. I was really just teasing.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Great. You would probably scream like a little girl if you were being held at gunpoint and called the cops and they didn’t “SPEED” to help you.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:30 PM
How much would you have traded one of your parents for? What price would you put on your father’s life?
Pablo on January 14, 2009 at 2:31 PM
But, the question is Esthier…can you see dead people? :)
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:31 PM
Huh. I thought Obama was the new Loncoln.
loudmouth883 on January 14, 2009 at 2:32 PM
Fair enough I guess.
Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 2:32 PM
Then, why don’t you crawl back into your cesspool and comment on Kos? Get outta here.
HornetSting on January 14, 2009 at 2:32 PM
He was on his face, shot in the back.
Useful idiots, socialists, fascists. Meet today’s party of Pelosi.
BadgerHawk on January 14, 2009 at 2:33 PM
I’m only suicidal in the mornings.
I am going to go to one of those self-design T-shirt print shops and get one with “never go full retard” on it though….because every time I hear it, I laugh so hard my peepee-maker tingles.
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Somehow I doubt that indicting him for murder and then lessening the charges will cool things down; indeed I’d think it would have the opposite effect.
Buy Danish on January 14, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »