The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Let's see, cops fire 50 shots into a guy who didn't have a gun in the early hours of the morning after he was coming out of his bachelor party, and they are found not guilty.....

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/judge-clears-cops-in-grooms-shooting/20080425085009990002

We could be looking at a riot in New York bigger than the Rodney King riots and Watts Riots combined.

Good ol' incestuous legal system!

Unreal...

I can' wait for the riots. I want a plasma TV...............

sweet...i'm gonna head to the city and see if i can grab some free loot while the brothas are rioting

Excerpts....
Did the victims know the strip club was "seedy"?  Are there any strip clubs that aren't considered seedy?

Location and time do affect suspicions.  Had they been coming out of a restaurant at 4:00 pm the no one would think twice about it.

Who was the NFL player (QB?) who, when asked about players and thier troubles at nightclubs, said that his parents taught him that "Nothing good happens after midnight"?


Al Jesse, and their ilk, have such a long history of crying "wolf" that I wonder if their involvement alone actually makes it LESS likely that authorities who shoot blacks will be punished.

Al Sharpton has stuck his nose into this?

NOOOOOOO.  That must be a typo!

50 shots because they "believed" the guys were armed? Sweet mercy...glad they didn't believe the guys were carrying a nuke or something, they'd have called in an aerial napalm strike.

I don't know though...Both sides' stories sounds a little shaky to me. I'm betting neither side is telling the whole truth in this situation.

This was a criminal trial. The cops won't fair so well on the civil side of things.

So based on runz's reasoning, don't get caught anywhere considered "seedy" after midnight.  50 bullets coming your way will be the consequence.

Realize where you are and what that implies to the police, and then act accordingly. 

What happened to these men was wrong.  However, whether intentionally or not, they allegedly escalated the situation.  A simple "Yes officer" and all this would have been avoided.   If only they could have for one second swallowed their anomosity for "the man" ...

There I goes bashing the police again.   ::)

I'm going to try to play the middle ground here.

I hear this kind of thing and I'm obviously horrified that an armless man can get shot up.  It screams excessive force.

That said, mistakes happen.  I make them.  So do you.  I have made terrible decisions in my job, and have paid the appropriate consequences.  I also learn from those mistakes and lacks of judgment and become better at what I do because of it.  Cops are doing a job.  The stakes are just way higher than a normal job.  These are probably shitty cops, and they definitely screwed up, but I don't know whether they are criminals or not.

I think it was Stroke who mentioned it above, but we don't really know what happened in this case.  I doubt the victims in the case were completely innocent.  Did they deserve death?  No.  But they probably deserved something, and in the moment, the cops lost control and made poor decisions.

I don't have the answer: It makes them bad cops, probably, but I don't know that they should go to jail.  It's a gray area.

Isn't it true, sir, that the appropriate consequences for killing people is jail or even the death penalty? 

If I run over a guy with my car "by accident" I get charged with vehicular manslaughter.  What makes this any different other than the killer is a law enforcement officer, and the weapon was a gun?

Actually, no that's not true.  People get killed every day by accident without going to jail.  Murder is different than death through a mistake.


This isn't true either.  If you're drunk and you run someone over, sure.  But if you accidentally plow over someone, you don't necessarily go to jail.  You'll more likely be held liable civilly instead of criminally.

The difference between murder and accident is intent. 

I'd love for some lawyer to convince me that cops fired 50 bullets at a guy and intended to NOT kill them.  What were they, warning shots?

But even "accidents" are punishable.  Especially if it was due to neglect or if laws were broken.  Somebody who kills someone else in an accident that was just that, an accident, will probably be pardoned before a putz who runs a red light while talking on a cell phone and eating chips.

Brian's right. It would be hard for me to not say that there was some murderous intent here. I also wonder whether or not the bullets were all fired at once, or if there were breaks in the shooting. I haven't seen that factoid anywhere. If there was a break, as in, the cops stopped shooting, and then started again, that would to my mind, be evidence of murderous intent depending on the circumstances.

To clarify, the difference is that cops are typically authorized to commit murder should they see fit.  This is where the problem lies. 

Its pretty clear that the cops shot to kill as was their intent.  However, the part we DON'T know is whether or not the cops' shooting was justified.  We'll never know that.  Apparently, the court decided that it was.

Sounds like conditioning to me.

Whether based on the reputation of the establishment, or the age, race and/or actions of the victims, the cops believed the patrons were going to be aggressive. 

Fifty shots is excessive.  The officer who emptied two clips was either an evil cop or scared beyond all ability to reason. 

Unlike our resident officer  ;) , most cops use restraint and react in-kind.  A simple "yes sir" or "no sir" can diffuse a misunderstanding.  Being drunk, beligerent and hostile at a seedy location is asking for trouble. 

I'm not sure I want to get in this.....

Let's point out a few things....Only 6 people know what happened there that night....

For starters,it was 3 police officers,3 suspects.....2 of which still fled the scene after being told to halt....Also,You don't yell...."Yo, go get my gun", and taken not to be a threat,or dangerous situation... The police have a right to protect themselves,when they feel like their lives or other lives are in danger....

It's interesting,IMO...That they were minding their own business,at a strip club @2am....

modified to add...In the article,Mentions that the judges states the Defense were more Crediable...Hmmm 3 guy's at a bachelor party at a strip club,No mention of Alcohol? Most people don't recall things so well after they've been drinking...things become hazy....They tend to Lip off,Become more Flippant....

Jesus if you are going to qutoe the article at least get it right.
The supposed remark that happened inside the club as they were leaving was only heard by one cop who got nervous, and when the guy put his hand inside his pocket he assumed he had a gun.
All three men were shot inside or just outside the vehicle, they did not run from the cops.
This was incredibley shitty police work and these cops are lying to save their asses. It is telling that they chose to have a judge decide instead of a jury. The fact that the judge said the cops had more credibility than the victims, because they were cops is a travesty.
Also it is not the first time this department has riddled an unarmed man. They have a wild west mentality because they have beaten the rap in the past.

I read from this article....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080425/ap_on_re_us/police_shooting (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080425/ap_on_re_us/police_shooting)

jesus man,Why don't you read the article First, before you attack someone...

Isnora claimed that after he warned the men to halt, Bell pulled away in his car, bumped him and rammed an unmarked police van that converged on the scene. The detective also said Guzman made a sudden move as if he were reaching for a gun.

Amazing you can form an opinion of the judges opinion,when he was actually listening to the testimony...and you heard zero testimony.....The Departments Past descretions can't be taken into account in this case..... ::)

They were repeatedly trying to wing them...every bullet was carefully aimed at an extremity. ;)

Not to knock you, Dave but what happens when you do a bad job in your line of work (not saying that you do)?  You lose clients.  That's your consequence. 

These cops used excessive force, and as a result, an innocent man died.  A girl lost her fiance, two children lost their dad, and two parents lost their son.  Those cops need to be held accountable for what they did, jail or not. 

I can see a civil lawsuit coming down the pike.....similar to the OJ situation.

The guy took off after the shooting started. What would you do if shooting started. You are assuming the cops did everything exactley as they said they did and made no mistakes. Plus they were all plainclothes. When you see someone walk up with a weapon, in a bad part of town you might not automatically assume it is an undercover cop. So the supposed ramming of an unmarked van means nothing.
They should have gotten marked units for backup, they did not, they fucked up and should lose their badges as a minimum.
It is funny you brought up past discretions but the judge used them against the victims, but not the departments history of gunning down unarmed civilians with massive overkill.
I did read it, and the only person who supposedly heard this guy YELL " yo get my gun" in a stripclub, with music playing, was one cop who started the whole ball rolling, and had everything to lose.
NYPD has a serious cowboy mentality running through its ranks that will now continue to get unarmed civilians murdered.

Perhaps he was innocent before the encounter ... but at once he committed vehicular assault he was no longer innocent and was a clear threat to the officers:

Again Bsmooth...It's called a court room...Only certain things can be submitted...and you're not talking facts,you're talking assumptions......

A question I have about a case like this:

Should the police be held to an 'everyday person' kind of standard? Ought they be able to say, "So and So made a movement like he was going for a gun, and therefore we shot." Or should they be held to a higher standard?

It would be a tremendous burden on police, I think, to tell them they have to be absolutely sure about someone's intentions and actions before they can act to defend themselves. On the other hand, they have a lot of training and conditioning they go through to be able to react properly to situations like this.

The only problem is if cops regularly hesitate they're eventually going home in a box. 

I don't like "innocent" people getting shot ... but I do like the "cooperate or risk being shot" message that incidents like this send.  People should have more respect for the authorities.  In the absence of respect, fear works too.

Spoken like a true Replublican!  ;D

Yeah, living in the real world just ain't as nice as the ideal world. 

Aren't police told not to shoot unless it is with the intent to kill anyway? 50 shots is out of hand though.

With tires screeching, glass breaking and bullets flying, the officers said they believed they were the ones under fire. Oliver responded by emptying his semiautomatic pistol, reloading, and emptying it again. Isnora fired 11 rounds, and Cooper four. Two other officers who fired weren't charged.

1) they thought they had guns
2) they were rammed by the guys so they knew they didn't want to give up
3) according to the quote above ... they were in fear for their lives and continued shooting, thinking they were being shot at as well.  I'm sure it wasn't well lit.
4) under the circumstnaces ... 19 shots by 4 officers doesn't seem totally unbelievable but the other 31 from Oliver shows that he freaked. I'm not sure that is criminal but it does show that he may be more suited for another job.

I don't think the guy needed to die but it obviously was a bad situation made worse by not following the officer's orders.  If you put yourself in bad situations the chances of something bad happening increases tremendaously.   It sucks but that it is reality.

Never bring a car to a gun-fight.  ;)

I think another hard thing about this particular case is how the actual story went down.  The cops could have been the aggressors, but maybe they were not.  We only have the conflicting testimony of both sides.

If this guy was drunk and rammed a cop car, then maybe deadly force was authorized.
If the cops got too big for their britches and were giving an otherwise innocent man trouble, maybe not.

We don't really have the facts, so it's hard to make a black and white judgment on it.

I wonder about the backgrounds of those involved.

If one side all had spotless records and the otherside had a history of trouble then we'd be better informed to decide which side was credible.

Just because you've been a lying scofflaw (or a saint) your entire life doesn't mean that you're lying (or being honest) this time ... but it is an indication....

BUMP

A protest rally today for the slain man resulted in 190 people being arrested...... among them the Rev. Al Sharpton

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/sharpton-arrested-at-bell-protest-in-nyc/20080507182309990001?icid=1615988631x1201825767x1200303802

Some interesting points made here for sure.  I wasn't there so I can't say for sure. I'm probably going to regret this but, Basically this is how I look at it......

I'm in a Uniform so I have a bulls eye on my back whenever its on. I'm going home at the end of the day. I would much rather be Tried by 12 then carried out by 6. Every time I show up at a domestic situation or an alarm there is always the possibility of someone being present that wants to harm me. 

 I have been to some pretty scary scenes with uncooperative people that refuse to follow simple orders like keep your hands where I can see them. I'm in their home and they seem to cop the attitude they are free to do what they wish, but in reality I was called to a scene in an environment I know nothing about. As far as I'm concerned danger lurks behind every piece of furniture and I need cooperation Immediately. If not you need to control it. if a gunshot breaks out all bets are off. That's why you train. We never go in alone . We never park out front and we know were our partners are and what jobs we need to do once we get there. But when shit breaks bad you have about 0.5 of a second to figure it out.......sometimes you make the wrong call. If we put someone in jail for that everytime we wouldn't have anyone to protect us. Doesn't mean we can't find them at fault and sue the shit out of the dept......but criminal action is completely offbase.

Its easy to say the man was innocent because he didn't have a gun. But for all we know he could have been a drunk asshole acting like he did. All I know is those cops didn't wake up that morning saying to themselves they were going to go out and kill a man today. Sounds to me like mistakes were definitely made. The dept will be held liable civilly. But why does Al Sharpton and others believe that the only way to get satisfaction is to put Cops in Jail for Trying to do their Jobs? Because he knows its not going to happen (deep down it shouldn't happen) and he's gonna make money fighting the injustice. BTW.......I believe 2 of the 3 cops were black.

1 was black 1 was hispanic...

I just hope that it was investigated fairly and truthfully.  Cops are placed in shitty situations.  But they at times make it shitty themselves.  As long as it was properly tried and no actual fault was found, I have no problem with the acquital.

I agree 100%. No doubt cops get put in bad situations with little or no experience and things can go from bad to worse awfully quick. To see a man die right before his wedding is extremly sad. I am glad I don't have to live with that shooting .  :|