Why "BR" hasn't come to a decision yet on Alton Sterling

The Tulsa thing is also way worse

I thought the Louisiana AGs office had it. I know Hillar Moore recused himself, but that only means that the LAAG takes it, unless West Point did something stupid.

I see someone has been following the OT's fave fatty

quote:

---

Tulsa charged the officer in less than a week. We are approaching 90 days in Baton Rouge. This shows you the leadership we elected in Baton Rouge and how they feel about police murder. Hillar Moore could've done something before now.

---

quote:

---

Maybe it's time we protest at an LSU home football game. Thousands show up to make a statement against the injustices in our country and our city. It's time to stop just venting and get to action...

---

Not a good idea Gary

I saw it. But he's not the only one.

Tulsa is an example of how the system is supposed to work. Not the shooting itself, of course, but the investigation. As soon as they determined that probable cause existed to charge the cop with a crime, they did so.

Cops are hired by governments and put into very difficult situations. But they have a huge responsibility to act appropriately in life or death situations. When they frick up, they must be held accountable.

However, why are we shocked when we have examples of human error in these split second and high charged situations? Let us not make the mistake of assigning nefarious motives where none can be discerned.

Sowing the seeds of distrust of, hatred of, and resistance to cops will only lead to more problems for that community, including the encouragement of more confrontations, and lessening the zeal with which cops are able to police and protect that community from crime.

Can we all agree that no matter happens, Gary's blood pressure will reach gulf oil drilling levels?

quote:

---

Why "BR" hasn't come to a decision yet on Alton Sterling

---

Most of "BR" has reached a decision.

quote:

---

Tulsa is an example of how the system is supposed to work. Not the shooting itself, of course, but the investigation. As soon as they determined that probable cause existed to charge the cop with a crime, they did so.

---

I disagree with this. I think they acted too quickly. Imagine if they had cleared her this fast. People would be screaming for blood. Do I think it should take six months or a year? Absolutely not. But it shouldn't be done in a week either. No way they have toxicology, forensics or even a comprehensive report written by this point. I am afraid that the indictment here was a political decision to please the masses.

For an overview of how that works, refer to Baltimore and the fiasco there. Charging a police officer should be a deliberate non-political decision based on a careful consideration of all the facts. Simply stating "let's just charge them and let the courts sort it out" is NOT OK. It is unfair to the person charged for one. This is the same reason that not every person arrested by the police is indicted. Because a post-arrest investigation reveals facts not apparent at the time of the alleged offense.

A proper prosecution decision is based not just on whether they believe a law may have been broken but on whether sufficient evidence exists to get a conviction. It is a waste of public resources to try something that isn't a winnable case.

imagine blm trying to block the team from walking down victory hill