Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2016 14:02:31 GMT -5
It is of course always the case that we aren't going to be seeing and hearing everything the jury does. And as a lawyer, I do believe people are innocent until proven guilty, etc.
But. Here we have a video of someone getting shot in the back while fleeing. That isn't he said/he said. That's pretty good evidence that the officer was not in reasonable fear for his life. I'm not sure what could override that for me, to tell you the truth. Whatever the officer was feeling, the suspect was running away, not attacking him.
And while I do not think that a cop should have to simply let himself be martyred if a suspect is genuinely putting him in mortal danger, I must agree with Rob on this point:
And as far as several jurors dithering over a verdict... as I noted above, jurors can be dumbasses. Sometimes their biases get in the way of justice. Sometimes lawyers don't do a good enough job of explaining charges. Sometimes jurors misunderstand the standards. While, as I said above, a mistrial doesn't necessarily mean the next trial will have the same result, it is also a mistake to think jurors will inevitably behave rationally and justly.
As I said above, I actually have a great story to illustrate this, but the more I think of it, the more I realize I cannot tell it without revealing details that I'm not permitted to reveal. Anyway, suffice to say -- most of the time, I think jurors do try hard, mean well and do a reasonable job coming to conclusions based on the evidence. But then there are those other times.
But. Here we have a video of someone getting shot in the back while fleeing. That isn't he said/he said. That's pretty good evidence that the officer was not in reasonable fear for his life. I'm not sure what could override that for me, to tell you the truth. Whatever the officer was feeling, the suspect was running away, not attacking him.
And while I do not think that a cop should have to simply let himself be martyred if a suspect is genuinely putting him in mortal danger, I must agree with Rob on this point:
Frankly, a cop can be in fear for their life every time they respond to a call that has a violent component. They can be in fear for their life every time they pull someone over. But that shouldn't lead to unloading clips at people as a matter of course. Cops who have that kind of response to these kinds of situations shouldn't be cops, imo. Because they're either trigger-happy cowboys or simply lack the mental toughness to do the job. And imo, we--as a society--need to stop cutting them slack. We need to hold them to the highest standards for their conduct. It seems to me that we're currently holding them--by and large--to the lowest ones.
And as far as several jurors dithering over a verdict... as I noted above, jurors can be dumbasses. Sometimes their biases get in the way of justice. Sometimes lawyers don't do a good enough job of explaining charges. Sometimes jurors misunderstand the standards. While, as I said above, a mistrial doesn't necessarily mean the next trial will have the same result, it is also a mistake to think jurors will inevitably behave rationally and justly.
As I said above, I actually have a great story to illustrate this, but the more I think of it, the more I realize I cannot tell it without revealing details that I'm not permitted to reveal. Anyway, suffice to say -- most of the time, I think jurors do try hard, mean well and do a reasonable job coming to conclusions based on the evidence. But then there are those other times.