-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
LE shoots man in the back when cuffed and down
- Thread starter Will Brink
- Start date
Which is why manslaughter or negligent homicide is the correct charge IMO... There was no premeditation nor "crime of passion" here. Just stupidity that cost someone else their life. That's what manslaughter is all about...
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 3,435
- Likes
- 401
Yup! It all comes down to his intent. This was the appropriate charge. There was certainly no evidence that this officer set out with the intent of killing this person.
p.s. Looks like there are some oddities of CA law/definition of "voluntary" vs "involuntary" manslaughter going on here...
Despite manslaughter being defined as:
"killing a person exclusive of premeditation or malice aforethought. "
They have defined "voluntary" manslaughter as:
"killing upon a sudden fight or in the heat of passion. "
So, in effect they've called what I generally expect to called "2nd Degree murder", "voluntary manslaughter" and what I call "negligent homicide", "involuntary manslaughter"
Given that, it sounds like the jury did what they were told...
4 years isn't nearly enough in the context of other things that would be classified as involuntary manslaughters though, that's for sure...
Despite manslaughter being defined as:
"killing a person exclusive of premeditation or malice aforethought. "
They have defined "voluntary" manslaughter as:
"killing upon a sudden fight or in the heat of passion. "
So, in effect they've called what I generally expect to called "2nd Degree murder", "voluntary manslaughter" and what I call "negligent homicide", "involuntary manslaughter"
Given that, it sounds like the jury did what they were told...
4 years isn't nearly enough in the context of other things that would be classified as involuntary manslaughters though, that's for sure...
From Doobie.
kevin9
NES Member
Beg to differ on this last point. If you'd actually read the whole thread, rather than just the first 3 posts, you would have read that the officer in question had not only been tried but convicted.
This seems like a textbook example of involuntary manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide. There is a clear duty on the part of the officer, the act was pretty obviously missing intent, and the victim died. Looks like the system got this one right.
Having said that, the situation is terrible, but I do have some problem with sending the guy to jail as a result. I don't see how that makes anything better. And absent intent, I don't see him as a "bad guy" in the first place. He just really screwed up. Maybe it has to be this way in order to get people to take their responsibilities very seriously. Humans, however, will fail regardless of the incentives, and I am not all that convinced that punishing those who do so accidentally will really create a safer or more just world.
Having said that, the situation is terrible, but I do have some problem with sending the guy to jail as a result. I don't see how that makes anything better. And absent intent, I don't see him as a "bad guy" in the first place. He just really screwed up. Maybe it has to be this way in order to get people to take their responsibilities very seriously. Humans, however, will fail regardless of the incentives, and I am not all that convinced that punishing those who do so accidentally will really create a safer or more just world.
This. It isn't as if he is some danger and will "accidently kill again". Put some real criminals away instead. Plenty of them around rioting after the verdict apparently.
No, you didn't.
Bill Nance
Banned
It's more than just appeasing the mob or justice.
The justice system is predicated on two things:
1. You don't victimize an individual, you victimize everyone with a crime. If crimes are against you, it's pretty hard to tell you not to go after vigilante justice. That's why we have the idea of collective harm. Why criminal complaints say "The people vs."
2. Because you've taken away the option of vigilante justice, the legal system has to be not just just fair and properly punish lawbreakers, it must be seen to do so and have the trust of the people that justice will be done. The farther we've strayed from that the worse it's been for our society. It's why I'm so against the notion of private executions. Let the people see that justice has been served.
When we send someone away to jail it's not just about that particular crime, it's also the circumstances surrounding it. If that judge had let the cop go and said "Go and sin no more," there would have been a nationwide outcry on all sides of the political spectrum and rightly so. He killed someone with absolutely unacceptable levels of personal negligence. And as a trained cop, he's supposed to be better than average at this stuff, not worse.
I think the verdict and the sentence were proper. Sending the guy up for 25 years would be way over the top. But yes, you are responsible for your actions.
That sums up the opposite of what I think pretty well. Collective harm makes so sense to me, I can get behind vigilante justice against violent criminals, and I don't see why a "nationwide outcry" should make any difference at all. The cop screwed up and a man is dead. There was no intent, however, so while he is absolutely responsible for his actions, sending him to jail as a punishment seems pointless to me. Now, if the dead guy's brother sought revenge, I would understand that too. Basically, here and in general, I find little good to come from collective governmental response to a problem, but I can see some logic in the private one. I'm not advocating anyone do anything illegal, but I do understand the motivation a lot better than I do the desire for government to get involved.
It's a no win no matter what. The guy was under-trained horribly. Because of this someone is dead. I agree with economist that jail time is a waste, however if you or I did that we would be in jail and because of that fact jail time must be served. LEO's can't get off easier for a mistake than the commoner... We are setting ourselves up for even more failure if we let him slide.
Bill Nance
Banned
What if the brother's idea of revenge is not only killing the ex cop, but torturing him to death? Or killing his child in front of him?
That's why we have government do this stuff and have since ancient times. Mob justice and personal vendetta has always been a disaster. Half the time the wrong guy gets hurt or killed. Certainly a lot more often than anyone should be comfortable with.
The system we have works pretty well compared to any other I've ever heard about. Far from perfect and lots about it could be improved, but it still beats any alternative out there.
That's the issue right there. Poor training, poor department policy on Taser placement. Expect this guy to be used in every in-service and academy Taser training across the US for the next 20 years.
+1
Similar threads
