Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
24 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Justice Served rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/18/us/chicago-police-laquan-mcdon...

This was an egregious case of police abuse, caught on video, the cop just opened fire on the kid who was probably 20 or 30 feet form anyone else. He proceeded to pump bullets into the kid even after he was grounded.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Yaure
United States
Plymouth Meeting
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
There is still a ways to go - indictments for several other of the police involved would seem to be the apropriate next step.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What's even more disturbing about the case, beyond the obvious killing, was the fact tht it took the police 400 days to release the video, and the possible witness tampering. The story does not indicate, but I am wondering if all other police officers at the site tried to cooroborate the shooters version, or did any have the guts to stand up and say, yes, he shot the kid with little thougt, or provocation.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Eig
United States
Huntington
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Chris, you pretty much have it right - they've chosen a rarely used charge that will be impossible to prove. The jury will acquit, and the cop will never be able to be charged for killing him again.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Russell
United States
Clarkston
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since you are calling the indictment, justice served, it seems to indicate that you trust the legal system. If the system later finds the policeman not guilty will you still feel justice was served?

Quote:
What's even more disturbing about the case, beyond the obvious killing, was the fact tht it took the police 400 days to release the video,


Why is this disturbing? Investigators don't have the obligation to titillate the public, only to uncover the truth and present it at trial, if appropriate.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
qzhdad wrote:
Since you are calling the indictment, justice served, it seems to indicate that you trust the legal system. If the system later finds the policeman not guilty will you still feel justice was served?

Quote:
What's even more disturbing about the case, beyond the obvious killing, was the fact tht it took the police 400 days to release the video,


Why is this disturbing? Investigators don't have the obligation to titillate the public, only to uncover the truth and present it at trial, if appropriate.



Yes my initial title was meant to indicate that justice was served when the indictments were brought. I will let the justice system determine their innocence or guilt, I am not advocating anything other than they be tried in a court of law. The system found OJ Simpson innocent, and I did not complain, depite the heaps of technical medical evidence that indicated anything but his innocence.

With respect to the release of the video, the article is unclear who it was released to (presumably up until then only police officials were privy to it). If the purpose of making a video is to record the events that night, what purpose can be gained by keeping it privy to only police officials, officials that may have a stake in what is shown in the video. The whole purpose of taking video is to achieve transparency, and ultimately let the video reveal what happened. Keeping it locked in a police safe, does not benefit the public, if the police are guilty of a crime, and does not protect the kid that got shot and killed. Titillate the public, no, inform them, most definitely, its the public taxpayer dollars that support those same policemen, that may have commited a crime, and that crime might only be brought out, thru that video.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

This prosecutor is making the same fatal mistake as Casey Anthony's, overcharging. 2nd Degree murder would be much easier to get a conviction for. Stupid.

Also, it is INCREDIBLY disturbing that every time one of these situations occurs, ALL of the cops involved cover for each other. Sure only 1% of cops might be terrible enough to shoot an unarmed civilian, but apparently at least 90% of cops will cover up for cops who murder civilians. Makes you wonder what else they'd be willing to cover up for each other for. Probably anything.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am not a lawyer, but I would think the prosecution seeks the highest most damaging charge, if the facts of the case outrule premeditation, does that mean he still cant be brought to justice on the lesser charge of second degree murder? I suspect the prosecution has to show that "murder" was commited first, which in my opinion, the video reveals, once that has been established, it only leaves to be detrmined if it was premeditated or not. If not, that doesn't change the fact that he murdered someone. But again, I am not a lawyer, and can be blowing smoke out my a*s, where are the laywers when you need them??
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:

This prosecutor is making the same fatal mistake as Casey Anthony's, overcharging. 2nd Degree murder would be much easier to get a conviction for. Stupid.

Also, it is INCREDIBLY disturbing that every time one of these situations occurs, ALL of the cops involved cover for each other. Sure only 1% of cops might be terrible enough to shoot an unarmed civilian, but apparently at least 90% of cops will cover up for cops who murder civilians. Makes you wonder what else they'd be willing to cover up for each other for. Probably anything.


Also the same mistake made by the prosecutors office in Baltimore in the Freddy Gray case. Seems like these prosecutors are a bit too aggressive in their approach, but I'm not an attorney so maybe there's some kind of logic to this approach. Just seems like you'd want to go for a charge that gives you a decent chance of securing a conviction, rather than overreaching and making it very questionable in terms of getting a conviction.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank
United States
Van Nuys
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
desertfox2004 wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:

This prosecutor is making the same fatal mistake as Casey Anthony's, overcharging. 2nd Degree murder would be much easier to get a conviction for. Stupid.

Also, it is INCREDIBLY disturbing that every time one of these situations occurs, ALL of the cops involved cover for each other. Sure only 1% of cops might be terrible enough to shoot an unarmed civilian, but apparently at least 90% of cops will cover up for cops who murder civilians. Makes you wonder what else they'd be willing to cover up for each other for. Probably anything.


Also the same mistake made by the prosecutors office in Baltimore in the Freddy Gray case. Seems like these prosecutors are a bit too aggressive in their approach, but I'm not an attorney so maybe there's some kind of logic to this approach. Just seems like you'd want to go for a charge that gives you a decent chance of securing a conviction, rather than overreaching and making it very questionable in terms of getting a conviction.


But isn't this a common tactic they use on us civilians? Overcharge the fuck outta someone in hopes of intimidating them into pleading to a lesser charge, avoiding a trail. Guess prosecutors haven't figured out that doesn't really work on cops.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Yaure
United States
Plymouth Meeting
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Frankiedamn wrote:
desertfox2004 wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:

This prosecutor is making the same fatal mistake as Casey Anthony's, overcharging. 2nd Degree murder would be much easier to get a conviction for. Stupid.

Also, it is INCREDIBLY disturbing that every time one of these situations occurs, ALL of the cops involved cover for each other. Sure only 1% of cops might be terrible enough to shoot an unarmed civilian, but apparently at least 90% of cops will cover up for cops who murder civilians. Makes you wonder what else they'd be willing to cover up for each other for. Probably anything.


Also the same mistake made by the prosecutors office in Baltimore in the Freddy Gray case. Seems like these prosecutors are a bit too aggressive in their approach, but I'm not an attorney so maybe there's some kind of logic to this approach. Just seems like you'd want to go for a charge that gives you a decent chance of securing a conviction, rather than overreaching and making it very questionable in terms of getting a conviction.


But isn't this a common tactic they use on us civilians? Overcharge the fuck outta someone in hopes of intimidating them into pleading to a lesser charge, avoiding a trail. Guess prosecutors haven't figured out that doesn't really work on cops.


The common approach is to charge in the alternative. For example, if there is an element that might be hard to prove that is part of a first degree charge, but not part of a second degree charge, a prosecutor will bring an indictment in the first degree, or in the alternative, in the second degree. Often, after the evidence has been presented, the prosector will only ask for instructins relating to the lesser charge.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
galad2003 wrote:
Frankiedamn wrote:
desertfox2004 wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:

This prosecutor is making the same fatal mistake as Casey Anthony's, overcharging. 2nd Degree murder would be much easier to get a conviction for. Stupid.

Also, it is INCREDIBLY disturbing that every time one of these situations occurs, ALL of the cops involved cover for each other. Sure only 1% of cops might be terrible enough to shoot an unarmed civilian, but apparently at least 90% of cops will cover up for cops who murder civilians. Makes you wonder what else they'd be willing to cover up for each other for. Probably anything.


Also the same mistake made by the prosecutors office in Baltimore in the Freddy Gray case. Seems like these prosecutors are a bit too aggressive in their approach, but I'm not an attorney so maybe there's some kind of logic to this approach. Just seems like you'd want to go for a charge that gives you a decent chance of securing a conviction, rather than overreaching and making it very questionable in terms of getting a conviction.


But isn't this a common tactic they use on us civilians? Overcharge the fuck outta someone in hopes of intimidating them into pleading to a lesser charge, avoiding a trail. Guess prosecutors haven't figured out that doesn't really work on cops.


Seeing as how cops get off of most everything anyway, my tactic would be to go for the lowest charge possible hoping it sticks. So I wouldn't even bother with 2nd degree murder and go for manslaughter.

the only thing I can think of is they are going to argue that putting 16 bullets in the guy was excessive. <shrug>


Right, it's a strategy to use with a homeless guy who can't afford a lawyer, not with a cop who knows the system.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
galad2003 wrote:
Ok, what i don't get is the cop is being charged with 1st degree murder. My understanding is 1st degree murder means you willfully meant to kill the guy.

Not in Illinois. Premeditation is an aggravating factor that triggers death penalty eligibility.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?ActID=1876&Ch...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Seguin
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:

This prosecutor is making the same fatal mistake as Casey Anthony's, overcharging. 2nd Degree murder would be much easier to get a conviction for. Stupid.

Also, it is INCREDIBLY disturbing that every time one of these situations occurs, ALL of the cops involved cover for each other. Sure only 1% of cops might be terrible enough to shoot an unarmed civilian, but apparently at least 90% of cops will cover up for cops who murder civilians. Makes you wonder what else they'd be willing to cover up for each other for. Probably anything.


Point #1 - EXACTLY. As someone else posted, is it a "ploy" by the prosecutor to make sure that the police officer is found "not guilty", thus making it look like he is doing his job (getting an indictment) all while absolving him of doing his job (getting a conviction)?

As to Point #2 - that is the perfect case of the BLUE SHIELD in action. It is well known that cops "protect their own", especially when it comes to egregious situations. Many people will give them a "pass" when the BLUE SHIELD goes up because of the otherwise very stressful and very difficult job they do. But that "pass" is getting thinner and thinner by the day, as some police officers continue to break the "trust" that the public has given them for so long.

People are getting tired of the police due to these high profile occurrences, even though the vast majority of police officers are really good people doing really good jobs. It's sad that the vast majority of cops are getting a bad rap because of the few who are doing the bad stuff.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bjlillo wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
What's even more disturbing about the case, beyond the obvious killing, was the fact tht it took the police 400 days to release the video, and the possible witness tampering. The story does not indicate, but I am wondering if all other police officers at the site tried to cooroborate the shooters version, or did any have the guts to stand up and say, yes, he shot the kid with little thougt, or provocation.


Rahm Emanuel had an election to win.


Weak, very weak.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bjlillo wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
bjlillo wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
What's even more disturbing about the case, beyond the obvious killing, was the fact tht it took the police 400 days to release the video, and the possible witness tampering. The story does not indicate, but I am wondering if all other police officers at the site tried to cooroborate the shooters version, or did any have the guts to stand up and say, yes, he shot the kid with little thougt, or provocation.


Rahm Emanuel had an election to win.


Weak, very weak.


Not at all. Look at who his opponent was.


Your implication that politics played a part, although possibly mildly true, is off base. More than likely the tape was whitheld for that length of time because it is fairly damning to the cops involved. More a case of the blue shield protecting it's own, than politics at play.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bjlillo wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
bjlillo wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
bjlillo wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
What's even more disturbing about the case, beyond the obvious killing, was the fact tht it took the police 400 days to release the video, and the possible witness tampering. The story does not indicate, but I am wondering if all other police officers at the site tried to cooroborate the shooters version, or did any have the guts to stand up and say, yes, he shot the kid with little thougt, or provocation.


Rahm Emanuel had an election to win.


Weak, very weak.


Not at all. Look at who his opponent was.


Your implication that politics played a part, although possibly mildly true, is off base. More than likely the tape was whitheld for that length of time because it is fairly damning to the cops involved. More a case of the blue shield protecting it's own, than politics at play.


My assertion that this was political is totally appropriate and correct. Rahm was directly involved with this.

Salon saying it: http://www.salon.com/2015/12/02/rahm_emanuels_nixon_moment/
Chicago Tribune saying it: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-garry-...

The "blue shield" didn't have the power to stop this video from getting released. That decision came from the mayor's office.


The first article can be read two ways, and to me it reads like he attempted, albeit too late, to reign in a police department that had gone astray on this one, by firing top officials. The letter states that this will be his legacy, I do not really see where it implicates him directly in the failure to release the tape. The police apparently ignored requests by the press for its release. You may like to infer from that that it was Rahm that orchestrated that, and politically, the incident is no doubt damaging to him, but from a standpoint of trying to infer that he was directly responsible for what happened to Laquan, and the aftermath, is a stretch. As far as the second article goes, should it surprise you that he attempts to clean house, to avoid the bad light shining his way? That's just politics as usual, and in the end, it doesn't really have much to do with the cop that killed a kid, with little or no provocation. He didn't put one bullet into him, he put 16 into him.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Les Marshall
United States
Woodinville
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
galad2003 wrote:
Ok, what i don't get is the cop is being charged with 1st degree murder. My understanding is 1st degree murder means you willfully meant to kill the guy.

Quote:
In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or "lying in wait" for the victim.


http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/first-degree-mu...

I doubt the cop woke up that morning and said "I'm going to kill Laquan McDonald." or even "I'm going to kill someone."

A charge of second degree murder seems more appropriate.

Quote:
Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as: 1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion"; or 2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life



http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/second-degree-m...

So when the officer goes to trial and is acquitted on first degree murder because it is the wrong charge, everyone will rage. Maybe that's the prosecutors plan? can the jury find him not guilty of 1st degree murder but find him guilty of 2nd degree on their own? Or is it an all or nothing situation?

Anyone have more knowledge of how it works?


First degree murder is, generally speaking, murder with premeditation or malice aforethought. There is no hard and fast rule about when, proximate to the murder, such intention needs to be formed. In theory, you could form the intent mere moments before the crime. Whether the charge is factually supported will be up to the court and the jury.

As the the prosecutors decision, it is worth remembering that the severity of charges can sometimes drive negotiations to lesser pleas. There is greater personal risk to the defendant in going to trial over 1st degree versus 2nd degree. Moreover, there is a political dimension and municipalities are struggling to overcome the perception that cops killing unarmed people are not getting sufficient corrective action.

While I am not a criminal attorney, I believe the jury would have latitude of convicting the defendant of 2nd degree murder (or manslaughter) as a lesser included offense.

In any case, we're still quite a distance from an outcome and it's way to early to judge whether justice will be served.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Foy
United States
Ellicott City
Maryland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
actuaryesquire wrote:
Frankiedamn wrote:
desertfox2004 wrote:
Shampoo4you wrote:

This prosecutor is making the same fatal mistake as Casey Anthony's, overcharging. 2nd Degree murder would be much easier to get a conviction for. Stupid.

Also, it is INCREDIBLY disturbing that every time one of these situations occurs, ALL of the cops involved cover for each other. Sure only 1% of cops might be terrible enough to shoot an unarmed civilian, but apparently at least 90% of cops will cover up for cops who murder civilians. Makes you wonder what else they'd be willing to cover up for each other for. Probably anything.


Also the same mistake made by the prosecutors office in Baltimore in the Freddy Gray case. Seems like these prosecutors are a bit too aggressive in their approach, but I'm not an attorney so maybe there's some kind of logic to this approach. Just seems like you'd want to go for a charge that gives you a decent chance of securing a conviction, rather than overreaching and making it very questionable in terms of getting a conviction.


But isn't this a common tactic they use on us civilians? Overcharge the fuck outta someone in hopes of intimidating them into pleading to a lesser charge, avoiding a trail. Guess prosecutors haven't figured out that doesn't really work on cops.


The common approach is to charge in the alternative. For example, if there is an element that might be hard to prove that is part of a first degree charge, but not part of a second degree charge, a prosecutor will bring an indictment in the first degree, or in the alternative, in the second degree. Often, after the evidence has been presented, the prosector will only ask for instructins relating to the lesser charge.


Do you know about the Illinois laws? My understanding is state laws can greatly differ, leading to different strategies by prosecutors.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.