Ex-cop Mehserle who killed Oscar Grant at Oakland train station released

Black Smoke Trail · 06-13-2011, 10:40

11 months for shooting a cuffed man laying on his face in the back.

JUST-US has been served.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...y_release.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZBiI...layer_embedded

El_Ron1 · 06-13-2011, 10:43

Oscar would have cured cancer by now and been close to conquering AIDS as well.

ChuteTheMall · 06-13-2011, 10:51

He meant to use a stun gun on the handcuffed & face-down victim, but drew his pistol instead.

Oops.

If he wasn't carrying a stun gun, he wouldn't have killed anyone.

Black Smoke Trail · 06-13-2011, 10:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Ron1

Oscar would have cured cancer by now and been close to conquering AIDS as well.

On second thought you have a good point there. Apparently you think that anyone who does not meet your expectations or standards of humanity should be executed. Very efficient and effective.

This line of logic and superior thinking has been employed by very famous and effective leaders throughout history. Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler, and Joeseph Stalin just to name a few. .

Superior thinking such as that must not allow minor details like due process, natural born rights, and Constitutional freedoms to get in the way. These concepts and value are wasted on lowly minions like Oscar Grant. Right?

I am sure Mehserle will go on to perfect the cold fusion process and move on to solving global warming.

cowboywannabe · 06-13-2011, 10:55

baaa....punks murder intentionally and get 7 years served.....this is just par for that same course.

Black Smoke Trail · 06-13-2011, 10:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall

He meant to use a stun gun on the handcuffed & face-down victim, but drew his pistol instead.

Oops.

If he wasn't carrying a stun gun, he wouldn't have killed anyone.

That was the euphamistic rationalization given for the attrocity. Even if in fact true, there was absolutely no reason to taser a cuffed subdued man laying on his stomach.

Going with Mehserle's rationalization, he was intending to torture Oscar Grant with his taser. Still not exactly honorable intentions to say the least.

There will always be disagreement over the taser but in my opinion, when abused or used on improper persons, the taser IS a lethal weapon.

Black Smoke Trail · 06-13-2011, 10:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowboywannabe

baaa....punks murder intentionally and get 7 years served.....this is just par for that same course.

EXACTLY. Mehserle is NOT the focal point here. The focus should be on the judicial system that allowed this attrocity and abortion of justice to happen.

Natty · 06-13-2011, 11:06

Obviously officer Mehserle wasn't scared and fearing for his life, or he would have shot 15 times.

voyager4520 · 06-13-2011, 11:20

Maybe Tasers should be redesigned so you don't pull a trigger to fire them. And maybe they shouldn't be shaped like a gun.

With all the liability lawyers circling every aspect of life like sharks I'm surprised a "less-lethal" law enforcement weapon would be shaped like a handgun.

cowboywannabe · 06-13-2011, 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by voyager4520

Maybe Tasers should be redesigned so you don't pull a trigger to fire them. And maybe they shouldn't be shaped like a gun.

With all the liability lawyers circling every aspect of life like sharks I'm surprised a "less-lethal" law enforcement weapon would be shaped like a handgun.

its supposed to be worn on your "weak side" so you have to make a concious decision to use it instead of your handgun.

Mayhem like Me · 06-13-2011, 12:12

I'm glad he's out , however, he was criminally negligent, he shot a man he meant to taze.
Some people do not belong in this line of work becasue they vaporlock under stress I am sorry that he had to find that out on the job.

And sorry for the needless loss of life.

redneck1861 · 06-15-2011, 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by swatbwana

I'm glad he's out , however, he was criminally negligent, he shot a man he meant to taze.
Some people do not belong in this line of work becasue they vaporlock under stress I am sorry that he had to find that out on the job.

And sorry for the needless loss of life.

I agree

Brucev · 06-27-2011, 20:20

He's out. He got away with murder. Now that he's no longer being protected. He probably better pay a lot of attention to his rear view mirror.

***BonoVox*** · 06-27-2011, 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev

He's out. He got away with murder. Now that he's no longer being protected. He probably better pay a lot of attention to his rear view mirror.

Lame.

Brucev · 06-28-2011, 09:32

"Lame?" He is a murderer. He got away with murder. He is now out on the streets. He is no longer has any government provided protection. He has to take care of himself. He'll need to keep his eyes open. People have long memories.

chivvalry · 06-28-2011, 09:42

Wasn't "murder"... there was no malice aforethought... he made a hugely tragic mistake that cost the victim his life and him his career and future. Bad situation all the way around.

Brucev · 06-28-2011, 18:26

"Wasn''t 'murder'...?" Really. If a criminal had had a officer on the ground and put a round in the back of his head, it would be murder. This is no different.

***Sam Spade*** · 06-28-2011, 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev

"Wasn''t 'murder'...?" Really. If a criminal had had a officer on the ground and put a round in the back of his head, it would be murder. This is no different.

You gotta be ****ing me. No difference between the two---really? No difference between a guy who's a criminal from the start deliberately shooting someone and a guy who's trying to make a lawful arrest of an actual criminal and screws it up.

What a disgusting point of view, from someone obviously lacking in discernment and judgement. Next time, call MS13 instead of 911; we'll all be happier.

Brucev · 07-01-2011, 05:21

I am sure you and the other posters at this site are fine men. I do not doubt your commitment to professionalism and integrity. In the late 70's and early 80's I had a lot of fun working with friends who were in LE in New Orleans. There were fine men. In this case, I do not at all agree with anyone who wants to give this man a pass for blowing another man's brains out because he made a mistake. I count him a murderer without excuse. Had I been on his jury, he would have had to really "walk on water" to have made me see it any differently. Accident? The same thing from anyone else, a homeowner holding a criminal at gunpoint on the floor for instance, would have been judged far differently. There is no reason to cut this man any slack. Closing ranks? I understand the impluse. I also know that it is a mistake. I know ministers who have been accused of crimes. Some have been guilty. Others have been simply accused. Evidence collected by police proved them completely innocent of the charge. However, I do understand the impulse. It is hard to accept failure on the part of a colleague. Further, it damages the profession. Those with a high level of trust and responsibility must accept that they are held to a higher standard than simply that of a reasonable man. Failure to hold those who fail to the highest standards only makes things harder for those who hold to those standards.

chivvalry · 07-01-2011, 06:18

Did you watch the video and see the officer's expression and reaction when his "taser" went "bang"? Murder requires malice aforethought of which there was obviously none here. This was manslaughter and a tragic mistake and completely different than your example of a criminal executing an officer.

AA#5 · 07-01-2011, 06:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Smoke Trail

On second thought you have a good point there. Apparently you think that anyone who does not meet your expectations or standards of humanity should be executed. Very efficient and effective.

This line of logic and superior thinking has been employed by very famous and effective leaders throughout history. Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler, and Joeseph Stalin just to name a few. .

Superior thinking such as that must not allow minor details like due process, natural born rights, and Constitutional freedoms to get in the way. These concepts and value are wasted on lowly minions like Oscar Grant. Right?

I am sure Mehserle will go on to perfect the cold fusion process and move on to solving global warming.

Well said.

AA#5 · 07-01-2011, 06:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by chivvalry

Did you watch the video and see the officer's expression and reaction when his "taser" went "bang"? Murder requires malice aforethought of which there was obviously none here. This was manslaughter and a tragic mistake and completely different than your example of a criminal executing an officer.

The officer's expression & reaction were not visible on the video. If the suspect was in fact handcuffed, there was NO justification to tase him. That, alone makes his sentence a travesty.

chivvalry · 07-01-2011, 07:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by AA#5

The officer's expression & reaction were not visible on the video. If the suspect was in fact handcuffed, there was NO justification to tase him. That, alone makes his sentence a travesty.

You're right. The little snippet they showed within that posted video isn't sufficient to see the reaction. I was recalling the more complete video from when this first occurred. His reaction was one of obvious shock. It also seems a little out there to suggest that he deliberately executed the man in front of dozens of witnesses though, doesn't it?

Are you familiar with the current rules for use of a taser? I'm not saying that the use of a taser was or was not appropriate in that circumstance... I'm curious to know why you think it wasn't justified and why that alone makes his sentence a travesty.

Natty · 07-02-2011, 05:34

So the people coming to the officers defense here are saying that he could not tell the difference between his own handgun and his own taser.

Stupid is not illegal. Stupid is not criminal. But you cant fix stupid. And stupid has no place in Law Enforcement.

***Sam Spade*** · 07-02-2011, 10:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Natty

So the people coming to the officers defense here are saying that he could not tell the difference between his own handgun and his own taser.

Stupid is not illegal. Stupid is not criminal. But you cant fix stupid. And stupid has no place in Law Enforcement.

Yes. The two-year rookie with a taser for two days, policing a subway where his exposure to calls was minimal, vaporlocked. He went with muscle memory and repeated the draw he was most familiar with, thinking he was doing the right thing to employ another tool, carried in an unfamiliar place on his belt.

His act was criminal, it was a negligent action that caused the death of another. That's the textbook definition of manslaughter. His agency also carries a heavy burden for equipping him and training him as they did. Whether he's actually stupid or simply the forseeable result of the training provided, I don't know.

BTW, this has happened at least two other times---confusing the taser draw with the gundraw--- but neither of those guys died.