- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tulsa cop charged with first-degree manslaughter
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:09 am to zsav77
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:09 am to zsav77
quote:
Ability, opportunity, imminent jeopardy, and Perclusion.
Ability: does he possess the means to commit deadly force
Opportunity: is he within range to use a weapon
Imminent jeopardy: are you in fear for yourself or others lives
Perclusion: have you done everything in your power to avoid using deadly force unless it's absolutely warranted
She had basically one out of the four elements since it seems she was in fear of her life.
You mention she had one, being in fear for her life. Could you describe why? I'm seriously asking from your perspective. Was it something specific he did that would make her think that, or is it something that is on an officer by officer basis? That is to say, does it really have nothing to do with the specific actions of the suspect but more to do with the make-up of the particular LEO? Would one LEO not fear for their life while another would, and merely that would make it fit the description?
I ask that because that is one that worries me most as a citizen. It seems that depending upon the officer, "fear for one's life" can be stretched to mean anything. Is there come concrete actions there or just a feeling on the part of the LEO?
quote:
It's not a perfect system, it's reactionary, and has the officer at a disadvantage.
Agreed...it certainly is. And while I can see why that would be a tough situation to be in as a LEO, as a citizen I have to be honest and say that sounds good to me. I don't want officers to be hurt in the line of duty, but I also don't want innocent (or even guilty citizens who have not yet been convicted of anything or who fit your criteria) to be shot to death because officers are not reacting but are being proactive so as to avoid the potential of being injured.
0
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:12 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Look a few posts up from yours on page seven and you will see it was up.
what is the importance of window being up or down?
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:17 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Yes because not obeying commands is not grounds for a shoot and kill.
What if that command is "drop your weapon"? (Weapon meaning firearm)
Can the cops shoot then?
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:20 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Look a few posts up from yours on page seven and you will see it was up.
That window is absolutely down
#1. The dark vertical line starting at the top right is the SEATBELT!
#2. The imaginary "blood line" starts higher up than the location of the gunshot wound.
#3. There is zero blood spatter. There would be a spray pattern in the area of the window he was near, especially if that "blood line" on the "window" was real.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:21 am to Topwater Trout
quote:
what is the importance of window being up or down?
The officer claimed in her police report that she thought he was trying/did reach through the window to get a weapon.
If it's rolled up that's an impossible scenario.
This post was edited on 9/23/16 at 8:22 am
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:24 am to NYNolaguy1
The window was down. The pictures that are being shared show the seatbelt through the open window, this makes it appear as if the window is up and blood is trailing down. The window would have a much different blood pattern if it were up.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:25 am to Ash Williams
Manslaughter is the absence of malice vs. receiving a murder charge.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:30 am to GeauxOCDP
quote:
The window was down.
At this point I will wait for it to come out at trial. Personally I am leaning toward it being up, but the photos the guys on the scene are way better than from a helicopter 500 feet away.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:32 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
The officer claimed in her police report that she thought he was trying/did reach through the window to get a weapon.
I still don't see the importance of it being up or down. If she thought it was down is all that matters.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:37 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
At this point I will wait for it to come out at trial. Personally I am leaning toward it being up, but the photos the guys on the scene are way better than from a helicopter 500 feet away.
You've got to get over your obsession with the window. The verdict will not rest on whether it was up or down. One small piece of the puzzle. Your brain is capable of processing more than one piece of information to make decisions, correct?
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:37 am to Topwater Trout
quote:
If she thought it was down is all that matters.
I believe the standard is what a reasonable officer thought at the time, not necessarily her (Graham v. Connor).
If it's just what she thought at the time that could be opened up to colorful imagination.
Also, keep in mind that if she was charged, there's something that the DA's office saw that led them to believe they could win at trial. I think it's telling that she was the only one to draw her weapon when the rest had tasers. Perhaps the other officers thought it was a bad shoot- that has lead to charges in the past as well.
My point is that there's obviously something the DA sees that the OT may not.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:39 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
My point is that there's obviously something the DA sees that the OT may not.
Yep an indictment is a good PR move. That's what the DA sees.
A jury will see what the OT sees. Not Guilty
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:41 am to dsides
quote:
Your brain is capable of processing more than one piece of information to make decisions, correct?
That depends on what/who I am looking at and what night of the week it is. Weekends, beer, and pretty women tend to make me short sighted
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:41 am to tgrbaitn08
quote:
A jury will see what the OT sees. Not Guilty
Not sure about that. Tulsa just convicted a sheriff of manslauther in a similar case.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:43 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
there's something that the DA's office saw that led them to believe they could stop riots by charging her
FIFY
quote:
My point is that there's obviously something the DA sees that the OT may not.
Could be but unless its really damning like other officers on scene saying she really fricked up, or she incriminated herself somehow I don't think the video will convict her.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:44 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Also, keep in mind that if she was charged, there's something that the DA's office saw that led them to believe they could win at trial
You must be joking right?? She was going to be charged no matter what. This is political maneuvering at it's finest. I'm not saying she is guilty or not guilty of anything. But she was going to be charged regardless of the evidence to appease the rioting and backlash of not even charging her with a crime.
Any time there is a case that gets national media coverage like this, the safe bet is to charge the officer with something (anything) and then let the court decide whether they are guilty or not. This buys time to let things settle down.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:44 am to Ash Williams
quote:
And why is this shite never in the news:
it was national news for a month.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:49 am to Topwater Trout
quote:
FIFY
If that's the case it will come out at trial, which I have zero problem with.
Part of my trouble with a lot of these cases is that too often a DA doesn't want to prosecute because of political reasons, so it gets buried at the grand jury level, after which it's all permanently under seal. That doesn't do anything but further the notion if you have a badge the system will protect you.
Here, it's all in the open for all to see. If she's innocent it will come out.
Also DA's abhor losing. I don't think this DA is a SJW like the Baltimore Mosby cases. He won a very similar case very recently in Tulsa.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:53 am to NYNolaguy1
my problem is it shouldn't be treated any different than any other case. DA should evaluate the facts and decide if they feel they have the evidence to convict (not saying that didn't happen here). It's BS if this is to appease the group that always cries they want justice meanwhile they are illegally protesting.
Posted on 9/23/16 at 8:54 am to reggo75
quote:
You must be joking right?? She was going to be charged no matter what.
I think you should pay a little more attention to the percentage of cops charged after every OIS.
The number is amazingly low.
quote:
Any time there is a case that gets national media coverage like this, the safe bet is to charge the officer with something (anything) and then let the court decide whether they are guilty or not. This buys time to let things settle down.
Why does it take national media for this to happen? If an average citizen did this they would have been in handcuffs immediately.
Also, the purpose of the courts existing is to figure out the legalities of events just like this. Are you upset that it's going to court? If so, why? Are you worried she will be convicted?
Page 8 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News