UNARMED man seeking help shot by police!

[U201491]

The cops didn't get a chance to plant a knife or a weapon on him? Bystanders must have been near.

Or no throwdown available.
That is a first lesson for LE to get them out of the hot seat.
Probably went into mind melt and forgot. Or like you say, too many witnesses to get it done.

 

[Adam12]

So, im just now seeing this thread. Let me make sure i have this right. A guy shoots someone and is arrested for manslaughter- and you're pi$$ed. A guy shoots someone and isn't arrested... And your pi$$ed. Either way- you're pi$$ed. Did I sum up this thread correctly? Lol

 

[Brutus57]

Absolutely and pigs should not be shooting people in shock, they should be getting them a blanket and reassuring them medical help is on the way or maybe we should just shoot people running out of a burning building too.

of course people running out of a building should be shot, no doubt they probably torched the building trying to destroy their conservative/birther/John Bircher/Christian/ Family Values/Anti Abortion/ War on women propaganda before the DOJ, DOE, NSA,FBI, CIA, DOE, IRS, NAACP, PETA, UN, NOAA, DF&W, NPS SWAT teams show up. :gun04:

Brutus Out

 

[U201491]

So, im just now seeing this thread. Let me make sure i have this right. A guy shoots someone and is arrested for manslaughter- and you're pi$$ed. A guy shoots someone and isn't arrested... And your pi$$ed. Either way- you're pi$$ed. Did I sum up this thread correctly? Lol

"manslaughter"
Too light of a charge. A civilian would get the book thrown at them. Most likely a murder charge with that scenario.
Two standards is not right.
Its like legislators in WA not getting speeding tickets but no one else is exempt, even someone going to a hospital emergency room. That in essence takes away the civil servant description of employed by the people. It makes them a "ruling class" and is wrong.

 

[PX4WA]

It makes them a "ruling class" and is wrong.

and that sums up everything...

 

[Adam12]

"manslaughter"
Too light of a charge. A civilian would get the book thrown at them. Most likely a murder charge with that scenario.
Two standards is not right.
Its like legislators in WA not getting speeding tickets but no one else is exempt, even someone going to a hospital emergency room. That in essence takes away the civil servant description of employed by the people. It makes them a "ruling class" and is wrong.

"Manslaughter versus Murder
As noted above, involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of another human. This differs from first or second degree murder in that the killing is accidental -- resulting from recklessness, criminal negligence or in the commission of a misdemeanor or low-level felony. However, an unintentional killing committed in the commission of an "inherently dangerous" felony, is treated as first degree murder in most states.

Similarly, involuntary manslaughter often is defined as the unlawful killing of a human without malice aforethought, which is just another way of saying "without criminal intent." Acts leading up to this charge, but not falling into the category of murder, range from running a red light and accidentally killing a pedestrian to cases of more serious negligence, such as a building manager's failure to install smoke detectors before the occurrence of a deadly fire."

- See more at: Involuntary Manslaughter Overview - FindLaw

 

[billdeserthills]

"Manslaughter versus Murder
As noted above, involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of another human. This differs from first or second degree murder in that the killing is accidental -- resulting from recklessness, criminal negligence or in the commission of a misdemeanor or low-level felony. However, an unintentional killing committed in the commission of an "inherently dangerous" felony, is treated as first degree murder in most states.

Similarly, involuntary manslaughter often is defined as the unlawful killing of a human without malice aforethought, which is just another way of saying "without criminal intent." Acts leading up to this charge, but not falling into the category of murder, range from running a red light and accidentally killing a pedestrian to cases of more serious negligence, such as a building manager's failure to install smoke detectors before the occurrence of a deadly fire."

- See more at: Involuntary Manslaughter Overview - FindLaw

I can't believe that you want to challenge the Fact that cops & civilians are two very different
species of people. One gets their hand slapped after caught committing a crime & the whole time the investigation takes place this type of criminal is paid in full while taking time off. Then Maybe under almost worst case scenario's has to move a few miles down the street & get another job doing the same thing they were doing when they committed their special crime and the other, also known to the police as "them" and lumped in with the real criminals who gets a ride to jail & priors for committing the same crime while also lacking the right to shoot back at the people who very well may victimize him.

Perhaps you have seen informationliberation? You can read all about many law-breaking police personnel there & you won't have to irritate anyone on here to do it.

 

[U201491]

"Manslaughter versus Murder
As noted above, involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of another human. This differs from first or second degree murder in that the killing is accidental -- resulting from recklessness, criminal negligence or in the commission of a misdemeanor or low-level felony. However, an unintentional killing committed in the commission of an "inherently dangerous" felony, is treated as first degree murder in most states.

Similarly, involuntary manslaughter often is defined as the unlawful killing of a human without malice aforethought, which is just another way of saying "without criminal intent." Acts leading up to this charge, but not falling into the category of murder, range from running a red light and accidentally killing a pedestrian to cases of more serious negligence, such as a building manager's failure to install smoke detectors before the occurrence of a deadly fire."

- See more at: Involuntary Manslaughter Overview - FindLaw

And in that zimmerman trial he actually was defending himself and was charged with murder.
There are many similar cases like that around the country that seldom make headlines. Most do not fare as well as he did.
Police seldom get charged with anything, and this is a rare exception.
I do understand it is a hard job, but that is not an excuse for what happens far too often.
Too many wrong addresses and innocent people killed and no consequences. Just happened in Portland not long ago, and has happened all over the country. It cannot be justified by any means. There are a thousand excuses and not one is valid in those cases.
There is a solid double standard. ie; that blue line is very real.
If police would hold their own accountable, there would not be the mistrust and anger against them. It really is that simple.
You always hear LE say we just want to go home at the end of our shift.
Well every citizen also wants to go home at the end of their shift and in the current state of this country that becomes riskier by the day, and then the left wants to restrict people's right to defend themselves. That is as wrong as that blue line.

 

[Father of four]

Adam12 probably thinks his self and his buddy cops should be able to do what they want, when they want and if they mess up and kill people we should just over look it? Being a cop is a very stressful job and some innocent non-police officers are bound to accidentally get themselves killed by the police? He probably believes that one cops life if worth many civilians lives?

I could be wrong though, see we very rarely agree on anything so I am not sure.

 

[Lush]

So, im just now seeing this thread. Let me make sure i have this right. A guy shoots someone and is arrested for manslaughter- and you're pi$$ed. A guy shoots someone and isn't arrested... And your pi$$ed. Either way- you're pi$$ed. Did I sum up this thread correctly? Lol

There are a lot of people in this group that are mad at the world and want everything their way. They are mad who the president is, they are mad that there are taxes that pay for schools and our military. Yes they are pissed the guy got shot by the police, but if the woman would have shot the guy on her front steps people here would have said that's 2A.

 

[Father of four]

So, im just now seeing this thread. Let me make sure i have this right. A guy shoots someone and is arrested for manslaughter- and you're pi$$ed. A guy shoots someone and isn't arrested... And your pi$$ed. Either way- you're pi$$ed. Did I sum up this thread correctly? Lol

Nope.

 

[Father of four]

It is Ok to be mad and not commit a criminal act.

 

[Father of four]

There are a lot of people in this group that are mad at the world and want everything their way. They are mad who the president is, they are mad that there are taxes that pay for schools and our military. Yes they are pissed the guy got shot by the police, but if the woman would have shot the guy on her front steps people here would have said that's 2A.

I disagree, you cant just shoot someone for knocking at you door late at night.

 

[U201491]

There are a lot of people in this group that are mad at the world and want everything their way. They are mad who the president is, they are mad that there are taxes that pay for schools and our military. Yes they are pissed the guy got shot by the police, but if the woman would have shot the guy on her front steps people here would have said that's 2A.

You know what they say about assumptions
You just made a doozy.

 

[CoastRange57]

That was near Sandy Oregon if I remember and it was a cop and a sheriff involved. They stated the guy frecked them out as he approached.

Sounds as he was probably blown out of his mind on drugs and all...

Clackamas County to pay $1 million in Fouad Kaady shooting death | OregonLive.com

 

[CoastRange57]

Even though the report said the officer's tazer malfunctioned, I wonder what justification there was for firing a tazer at a man seeking help. It might be worth while to figure out what the person wants before tazing them.

The whole point in knowing the difference between cover and concealment is that cover allows you the luxury of more time to figure out what is going on. I'm not suggesting that cover makes you invulnerable, I am suggesting that proper use of cover could allow the officer more time to ask the fellow what he wants or needs.

You are making some pretty broad assumptions here.

If he was advancing on them and ignored commands to stop advancing and explain his needs what the hell do you expect ?

Have you ever had some one advance on you with unknown intentions ? I have and sure as hell had to go as far as placing my hand on a holstered pistol to get my point across. That person complied with my commands and both of us walked away. Looking for and taking cover while I try to figure out what this a**clowns malfunction was was not an option.

 

[pokerace]

Here is the latest. <broken link removed>



Grand jury indicts Charlotte officer in shooting
.





Posted on January 27, 2014 at 10:02 PM






CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) &#8212; A grand jury has indicted a Charlotte police officer for voluntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of an unarmed former Florida A&M football player.

The indictment was handed down Monday hours after a judge ruled the North Carolina Attorney General's office could resubmit the case to a grand jury.

Investigators say Randall Kerrick shot 24-year-old Jonathan Ferrell on Sept. 14 as Ferrell looked for help after a car crash.

Attorneys for Ferrell's family praised the decision.

"There is a tremendous sense of relief for the family. We are very thankful that the grand jury carefully considered the evidence and returned the indictment," said Charles Monnett III.

In a statement, the family said it would continue to monitor the case.

"We will persevere in our quest for justice for not just Jonathan, but all law abiding citizens. After all, what happened to him that night could happen to any of us," the statement said.

Last week, a Mecklenburg County grand jury refused to indict the 27-year-old Kerrick, a former animal control officer, on a voluntary manslaughter charge.

Attorney General Roy Cooper decided to send the case to another grand jury because the first grand jury was missing four members.

Kerrick's lawyers filed a motion Friday to stop it, arguing prosecutors cannot resubmit a case.

During a court hearing Monday, Senior Deputy Attorney General James Coman said there was nothing in state law that blocks prosecutors from resubmitting the case.

"Our position is clear. We can go back to a grand jury," he said.

Judge Robert Bell agreed.

"They have the right to go back to a grand jury," Bell said.

At the end of the hearing, one of Kerrick's attorneys, George Laughrun, asked the judge to issue a gag order. He said public comments from prosecutors and attorneys for the victim's family were making it difficult for his client to get a fair trial.

But Bell refused, saying that issue wasn't in front of the court Monday.

The voluntary manslaughter charge carries a prison sentence of up to 11 years.

This is the latest development in the high-profile case.

Representatives of the Charlotte chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and other civil rights groups have questioned whether race played a role in the shooting. Kerrick is white; Ferrell was black.

Ferrell's family said he moved to Charlotte about a year ago to be with his fiancee and was working two jobs. He wanted to go back to school and eventually become an automotive engineer, they said. He had no criminal record.

Police say that Ferrell wrecked his car and went to a nearby house and banged on the door, apparently for help. The resident called police, and three officers responded. Investigators say Kerrick fired 12 shots, 10 of which hit Ferrell. Kerrick was the only officer who fired his gun.

Cooper's office declined to comment on the indictment. But in an earlier statement, the attorney general said he was going before a grand jury again because only 14 of the 18 members of the original panel heard evidence in the case.

Ferrell's family has filed a lawsuit against Kerrick and police Chief Rodney Monroe in Mecklenburg County Superior Court. The lawsuit says Kerrick used excessive force. The family said the city of Charlotte and the police department failed to ensure its officers are adequately trained and instructed in the use of force.

The city has declined to comment on the lawsuit.

 

[1337BaldEagle]

Here is the latest. <broken link removed>



Grand jury indicts Charlotte officer in shooting
.

Just so everyone is clear: being indited has nothing to do with guilty or innocent only that a jury found that there was enough prosecution material to build a case. It's more or less giving the DA permission to try the person at a given charge. This doesn't mean he was guilty, it doesn't even mean that it wont get thrown out. All it means is that there will be an arraignment.