Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Cops Acquitted In Sean Bell Shooting Death
wcbstv.com — Three New York Police Department detectives involved in the shooting death of an unarmed man in a 50-bullet barrage, hours before he was to be married, have been found not guilty on all four counts.
sirmcdiznuts- 1102 diggs
- digg it
- quakerorts, on 04/26/2008, -47/+2743 cops unload their guns into a car of unarmed men who had done nothing wrong and get away with no convictions. That it just not right.
- vtobar, on 04/26/2008, -13/+65And what's even worse two of the officers were black, so they can't even say it was racial.
- ProfessorSYM, on 04/26/2008, -9/+33How does that make it worse?
- cheezintern, on 04/26/2008, -8/+19It would have been a lot easier for Sharpton to cry racism as he usually does.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4Which never helps the situation.
- ludar, on 04/26/2008, -9/+4they r some of those self hatin types thats what they are
- mefter36, on 04/26/2008, -12/+4White America were outraged about Rev. Wright, now where is the outcry for justice?. I hope you can look yourself in the mirror and fell like you are made in God's image. What kind of conscience do you have. If one of your family member is faced with the same crime, remember your comment . If you live long enough you will be faced with a crisis. I hope you are not a parent. If you are please teach your children to have compassion. But how could you if you don't show any. Your comment is so small minded. With such a narrow mind how could live with that type of attitude.
- ohhoe, on 04/26/2008, -1/+10What you're saying doesn't even make sense. I'm White, I live in New York City, and I know a LOT of other white people of all different ages that think this is ***** up. There is an outcry of justice, if you know anything about this whole story to begin with.
- ludar, on 04/26/2008, -2/+8How does rev. wright come into this?
- smotpoker, on 04/26/2008, -3/+6His point is there is a whole lot of controversy, primarily from white Americans, surrounding Wright's *comments* yet there is relatively little controversy surrounding this death and others which prompted Wright's beliefs/outcries.
It is a sound point, however inelegantly stated. This is way worse than what Wright did and in fact the very type of travesty Wright hopes to bring to light but everyone is fixated on words rather than actions and reluctant to hold those in power accountable. Where are all of the moral outcries over this? - lamiaconfitor, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5@smotpoker. right here. they are right here. please stop pretending like people don't care, the second this news hit it was big. you aren't the only person with a heart. just the only one claiming no one else cares.
- Gutterpunk, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Because no one can blame the current racial situation in the State this time, and it reflect much more poorly on the people we trust to "Serve And Defend" than if it was just a case of one of them being racist.
Plus, it makes people realize that maybe all the other incident of this kind might not have been racism but poor training.
- cheezintern, on 04/26/2008, -8/+19It would have been a lot easier for Sharpton to cry racism as he usually does.
- Klak, on 04/26/2008, -15/+46its not a whites vs blacks thing its a cops vs blacks thing. it just seems like all cops approach black males as if theyre criminals and have guns.
- akphidelt, on 04/26/2008, -22/+17Statistics!!! Learn em. I said this before... every case is unique, I watched some crazy white dude get drained with 12-15 shots by 4 officers when he went after them with a michete (On TV). It wasn't because he was white or black or yellow... it was because he had a michete and he was going after the officers. If some white kids were in this situation and drove at the officers... the officers would not be like "oh, these are white kids... they won't hit me!"
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -9/+20To akphidelt - you're right. If they were white, they probably wouldn't have even bothered them in the first place.
- Klak, on 04/26/2008, -9/+14i honestly dont think they would have created the situation where theyre pointing guns (not in uniform mind you) at a driver if the person was white.
- brycelb, on 04/26/2008, -17/+10Why isn't your statement being slammed for it's unacceptable racism? Is it because you are being bigoted towards a white person?
- Sinai, on 04/26/2008, -18/+12While not 'right', it's pretty sensible. Young black men are statistically more dangerous.
- ronjohn, on 04/26/2008, -4/+3Last time I check I didn't see a black young man shooting up his school or killing his family FYI.....
- smotpoker, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3It's only sensible if you intend propagate the cycle. Maybe once half of the people they know aren't unjustly beaten, killed or imprisoned by police by the time they turn 18 they will not have such strong reason to fear police, expect discrimination and engage in illegal activity
- MrCocktoasten, on 04/26/2008, -2/+4@ronjohn, that's because black young men are hardly in school, and have no family..oh sh** did i say that?
- fuze44, on 04/26/2008, -1/+0ronjon, that was an ignorant reply. Your personal observations don't make for any sort of proof/disproof. It's easy to construct "arguments" such as yours. Here's one: "Last time I checked I didn't see China trying to invade Iraq, so China isn't a threat to the US."
- pintomp3, on 04/26/2008, -6/+15exactly. it's not white vs black. it's blue vs black.
- staticneuron, on 04/26/2008, -5/+10Honestly, I never thought it would happen to me but then it did. Me and a whole bunch of geeky friends get pulled over and have shotguns pointe at our heads? I don't know why they assumed we were dangerous but what people say seem to be true.
- ohhoe, on 04/26/2008, -0/+6Shotguns??? Where the ***** are you from where the cops pull shotguns at a pulled over car?
- staticneuron, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2South Floridia. North Miami Beach area. Worst part about it, i am not even from that area. I live miles away.
- poopdigger, on 04/26/2008, -6/+14Excuse me, but you're saying its worse because you WANT the officers to be wrongly accused of racism? I'm not saying that the officers were right in what they did, but to wish criminal injustice on others because you simply don't like them is a horrible travesty. I think I hate you now.
- mefter36, on 04/26/2008, -6/+1If hate makes you feel good you should have a good life. In your frame of mind you will always find someone to hate. You will be busy. But if you find Jesus then you will have found a friend and someone to love and it requires less energy
- havocjaw, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4vtobar, you are the rarest kind of idiot.
- ghostrider012, on 04/26/2008, -5/+0lets see, late at night, black male drunk thugs, (being nice their), Justice was served. Its just too bad that all the ***** weren't shot dead
- sadilak, on 04/27/2008, -0/+0Well, it is a double edged sword for the cops. We only hear the media side of the story. I think the cops were doing their duty. You cannot act suspiciously when asked to put your hands up in the air. Also, It is not a case of being black or white since 2 of the cops were black. I am pretty sure did something he was not supposed to do..
- ProfessorSYM, on 04/26/2008, -9/+33How does that make it worse?
- ElAssoWipo, on 04/26/2008, -34/+65I'm pretty sure ramming police cars while driving drunk is something wrong.
- therightside, on 04/26/2008, -25/+12not if your black
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -8/+8Judging from quite a few comments on this page, you are correct.
- jroll8481, on 04/26/2008, -11/+26Who was drunk? Sean Bell had one Long Island Ice Tea at a strip club. Most strip club drinks suck to begin with so I can't see how it was enough to make him drunk.
- p0s3r, on 04/26/2008, -21/+12Do you know how much liquor is in a Long Island Iced Tea? Most strip clubs deliberately spike their drinks because drunks spend more money.
- zephc, on 04/26/2008, -6/+22No, most clubs water down/add extra ice to their drinks so they spend LESS per person on alcohol. They don't need alcohol to keep guys there - women grinding on their laps does the trick.
- ichbeineinrcg, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2It's always worked for me.
- Tyr7BE, on 04/26/2008, -4/+7Enough to cause a dude to lose it and start ramming his car into other cars? I think not.
- smotpoker, on 04/26/2008, -2/+6A man who refuses to identify himself pointing a gun to your head from outside the car... I think that would tend to make lots of people drive a bit erratically, drunk criminals or not
- logan074, on 04/26/2008, -13/+11Does it make it better that he was sober and still saw fit to ram a police car?
- smotpoker, on 04/26/2008, -1/+9It wasn't a police car, it was an unmarked minivan
- blackjack75, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1No, but it makes it less believable.
- atact88, on 04/26/2008, -4/+4Dude, a good long island ice tea will put you on the floor. At a bar, I went through 1 and a half before I was so ***** i knocked the rest of my 2nd one to the floor. I'm no lightweight either.
- rossinio, on 04/26/2008, -1/+9yes you are..
- FatherVic, on 04/27/2008, -1/+2You are seriously buying that the groom at a bachelor party IN A BAR that ended sometime in the morning was almost completely sober the whole night?
- p0s3r, on 04/26/2008, -21/+12Do you know how much liquor is in a Long Island Iced Tea? Most strip clubs deliberately spike their drinks because drunks spend more money.
- kansai22, on 04/26/2008, -7/+57Besides the fact that no one was drunk. The officers were in plain clothing and in an unmarked minivan. Sean Bell and his friends most likely thought they were being car jacked.
- Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -1/+22Cops should not be allowed to pull people over in unmarked vehicles for that very reason.
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/26/2008, -4/+13The devil's in the details. From all witness accounts, the cops never identified themselves. I ask you, what would you do if men approached you with guns and said, "Hey, come here!"? How do you distinguish the cops in this situation from car jackers? Exactly, you don't!
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5Not all witnesses said that.
- therightside, on 04/26/2008, -25/+12not if your black
- Ell3, on 04/26/2008, -42/+29"That it just not right."
Of course it doesn't look right since you have such an idiotic view of what really happened. Try doing what the judge did, and look at the facts.- jroll8481, on 04/26/2008, -19/+60Facts:
They had no guns
They tried to drive off when a plain clothed officer pulled a gun on them after they were just involved in an altercation. Would you really sit there if some one not dressed like a cop pulled a gun on you? Matter of fact if the cop heard them say they were going to get a gun, yet they got in the car to drive off....why did he pull a gun in the first place?
One cop had time to reload his weapon meanwhile not one cop took any fire since...they had no guns.
The judge discounted all of the witness testimony because of people having prior convictions. Keep in mind, almost all the testimony said the same thing, normally when people lie stories don't add up.
Looked at the facts........which trial were you following?- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -4/+4You are misstating some of the facts of the case and incorrectly classifying other points as fact which were really disputable.
Also, the testimony that was discounted was done so because it didn't make logical sense and at times was contradictory. Some of the testimony may have been presented by some of the witnesses in such a manner as to create a better civil case. They are not tried the same way and it is folly to present a case with both trials in mind. You focus on one first and then the other. Their are two completely different standards of proof.
There are a few things to consider:
-Not finding a gun is not proof that a gun wasn't present at one point. (Samuel Jackson/Pulp Fiction flashback...) Not finding a gun doesn't address the question of the allegation that one of the victims made a statement about getting a gun. That allegation, BTW, is related to your question of why the cop would have had his gun out.
-They didn't "just drive off". There was more involved than just that. Either you didn't know that or you are being sophist. ( I learned a new word, lol.)
-This was not a jury case and therefore was decided based on the evidence and not emotion. The judge is obviously well versed in the law and decided the case according to law. That is exactly why the defense opted for a judge trial.
-The verdict wasn't innocent. It was not guilty, which only means that the case wasn't proven. The are not the same thing.
-The number of shots fired is mostly irrelevant as the main point is really the legality of firing even one shot. The shot count is the new tactic for MSM to garner sensationalist attention. Again, the real point is should even one shot have been taken. It only takes one bullet to kill you. Also, I say mostly irrelevant as the issue of reloading is what's relevant. If it was a two shot derringer, reloading would be an issue, not the shot count.
-The prosecutor made, what some consider, to be a big mistake by reading the defendants testimony into record which, in effect, meant that the defendants no longer needed to testify as their story was already out there as provided by the DA. It was testimony that the defendants were okay with and was consistent with their claims.. There was no new testimony to trip them up with. In other words, the DA may have screwed up the case.
-Credibility IS related to whether or not you have a record of being arrested and convicted. Cops do lie (all professions have liars), however, I am more likely to believe a cop over a convicted felon. Also, credibility is related to keeping a consistent story. Some witnesses were not consistent in their testimony. "Almost all" is not the same as ALL. Not all witnesses said the same thing AND some of the witnesses slightly changed their stories. That's a problem.
It's horrible that he lost his life. Period. That's completely separate from whether or not the case was proven.- Linzee82, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3I like how you point out that there are more trials to come. It was found that they didn't do anything CRIMINAL. It was found that there were MAJOR deficiencies within the operation. From the NYTimes - "Inside the courthouse, a judge ruled that the three officers charged in the shooting of Mr. Bell were not guilty, but said noncriminal 'carelessness and incompetence' were not standards in his decision." They are not criminally responsible, but they still have to face the police commissioner. He will decide if the officers deserve to get their jobs back. From the NYTimes - "The Queens district attorney, Richard A. Brown, said that Friday’s verdict should not be taken as an acquittal of serious management weaknesses that he believes led to the Bell shooting. 'To the contrary,' Mr. Brown said, the trial 'revealed significant deficiencies in, among other things, supervision, tactical planning, communications and management accountability — insufficiencies that need to be addressed.' He noted that a special panel set up by the Police Department after the shooting of Mr. Bell recommended 19 changes in undercover operations. 'Virtually all of them had Sean Bell written all over them,' Mr. Brown said." This is not over. They will be looking at everything very closely. They still have to face a civil lawsuit after all of this.
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -4/+4You are misstating some of the facts of the case and incorrectly classifying other points as fact which were really disputable.
- JoeVet, on 04/26/2008, -1/+6However you look at it, 51 shots into a car full of unarmed men is excessive force and demonstrates either willful murder or blind fear. Blind fear is most likely but that does not justify their actions and they should have been sentenced for reckless endangerment and action unbecoming a paid law enforcement officer..
- Soulhuntre, on 04/27/2008, -2/+1That simply isn't true. I went into the shot count in a recent blog entry...
http://www.herdwatching.com/items/date/2008/04/26/ ...
( quoted in part here)
The problem is a simple one… people hear of a bullet count like "50" and immediately decide that must be a execution. They feel this because they see people shot on TV all the time and it always looks like they got hit with a hand grenade. Real gunfights aren’t like that, and it only gets worse when police are using the completely inadequate 9mm handgun round. Accounts abound of attackers continuing to fight with 5, 10 and 15 rounds from a 9mm in them.
Here is how it happens… When you are facing someone who you believe to be a threat and you begin shooting you have a single intention - remove that person as a threat. You keep shooting until you are sure they won’t shoot back. You keep shooting until you see them fall or stop moving. That isn’t "excessive" force once the shooting starts - that is the entire purpose of opening fire.
With a 9mm, especially in an age of cheap and common body armor, that means putting a lot of rounds downrange before someone falls. The fact that there may be a group of police on scene doesn’t change any of it. They are all going to react as individuals, each continuing to fire until the target goes down. It is almost inevitable that you will see bodies with dozens of bullets in them.
One of the witnesses in the trial was himself shot 16 times and survived. This is not at all uncommon. So if you were a officer and thought you were facing an armed assailant would you rely on a single shot? Or 2? Or 3? Knowing that in gunfights nationwide such small hit counts are virtually ineffective? I sure as hell wouldn’t.
When you have no confidence in your weapons ability to end a conflict you shoot much earlier, and much more often. You cannot afford to wait.
- Soulhuntre, on 04/27/2008, -2/+1That simply isn't true. I went into the shot count in a recent blog entry...
- jroll8481, on 04/26/2008, -19/+60Facts:
- GafferXL, on 04/26/2008, -16/+27A sad day for justice, to be sure.
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7What angers me the most is that the cops weren't even convicted of reckless endangerment, yet bullets were found lodged in apartment building walls!
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -2/+4Find a law book and look up the requirements for that charge. Being a bad shot doesn't necessarily make you guilty of reckless endangerment.
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7What angers me the most is that the cops weren't even convicted of reckless endangerment, yet bullets were found lodged in apartment building walls!
- BeefBaron, on 04/26/2008, -29/+10The honorable Judge Whitey presiding.
- Wakuko, on 04/26/2008, -8/+6What if the city gets burnt down to ashes in protest?
Nah, no balls in this generation...- Abomonog, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3Not a single ball in the whole lot of them.
- relic180, on 04/26/2008, -4/+2You're both retarded.
- NYPD, on 04/26/2008, -1/+0Thank you. Go look up "RECREATE 68" GOOGLE IT
- Abomonog, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3Not a single ball in the whole lot of them.
- TippyTom, on 04/26/2008, -14/+5WOW! You don't know what your talking about "3 cops unload their guns into a car of unarmed men who had done nothing wrong and get away with no convictions. That it just not right." If You read the article You would have learned "Oliver fired 31 shots in the incident, Isnora fired 11, and Cooper fired four times. " The only one guilty of anything here besides Bell and his Cohorts is Oliver Who got Nervous and let GO.(Yes he Reloaded)The other Cops Were reacting, which is what You do when Bullets are flying and everything happens in less than 30sec.and as to the start of it all Please ask yourself what would You do if someone is trying to run You down with a Car and You Happen to Have a piece.
- bruce86, on 04/26/2008, -4/+14WE aren't trained to shoot people. Cops are, i expect them to be above the average joe mentality if we are giving them the rights to shoot, kill and arrest people. If they can't handle stressful situations, HOLY ***** DON'T BECOME A COP!
- TippyTom, on 04/26/2008, -14/+2Youre Right "WE aren't trained to shoot people" but neither are "Cops". Please do the World a Favor and Do try and become a COP.
- relic180, on 04/26/2008, -2/+6@ TippyTom
I don't even know what the ***** you're trying to say. Cops are trained to shoot people. Period. That's why they have target dummies in the shape of ***** people. That's why they have training drills that involve entering an enclosed space with loaded weapons and scanning for hostile PEOPLE, then shooting them. Civilians don't get this formalized "people shooting" training in school, so how are you so confused? - CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -2/+4Cops do not get that training in NYC. Cops in NYC go to the shooting range ONCE a year and shoot approximately 100 bullets total for the day at a stationary target. Anyone familiar with firearms will tell you that is not a lot. There is no enclosed space as the range is an outdoor range. NYCPD firearms training is poor. It is done just for the sole purpose of indemnifying NY. I know A LOT of cops and most are not great shots. Firing under stress is not really taught. You need military training for that.
There is a difference between being trained to shoot and being trained to shoot people. That is what TippyTom's point was.- tatinthehat, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2There is a difference too, as to pulling the trigger, and actually THINKING about pulling the trigger. I suspect that a firing range, there are no decision making skills trained other than the "Shoot this target / Don't shoot this target" exercise.
- bruce86, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Holy *****! Why the hell are we giving these people guns if they really don't know how to shoot under stressful situations!?! Since when do you fire at people under NON stressful situations?
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7The better question would be, what would you do if you're behind the wheel of a car and men approach you with guns and do nothing to identify themselves as cops? Exactly, you'd hit the gas big time!
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4It's a matter of who you believe as to whether or not they identified themselves, convicted felon witnesses or cops. We are not talking about choir boys here. We are not talking about average everyday people. These people were violent criminals at some point in their lives. Cops are not bad by definition, felons are.
- ichbeineinrcg, on 04/27/2008, -0/+4When you say that we're not talking about choir boys, are you referring to the felons or the boys in blue? Because it's true either way.
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4It's a matter of who you believe as to whether or not they identified themselves, convicted felon witnesses or cops. We are not talking about choir boys here. We are not talking about average everyday people. These people were violent criminals at some point in their lives. Cops are not bad by definition, felons are.
- bruce86, on 04/26/2008, -4/+14WE aren't trained to shoot people. Cops are, i expect them to be above the average joe mentality if we are giving them the rights to shoot, kill and arrest people. If they can't handle stressful situations, HOLY ***** DON'T BECOME A COP!
- xlneoMAXlx, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3It's just like Grand Theft Auto IV, but in real life!
- Orision, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4I don't know what kind of guns they were using, but one of the officers fired 31 of those shots. If he's using his standard beretta or eq, that's between 15-17 bullets. That means that if he was using his pistol he had to reload and keep firing. I didn't see anything about their guns, or that, but maybe I missed it. Eitherway, 31 shots done by one officer, that's just a little excessive for someone who isn't shooting back at you.
- vtobar, on 04/26/2008, -13/+65And what's even worse two of the officers were black, so they can't even say it was racial.
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -56/+39I would love to chime in here with a passioned argument for either side, but you know what? I don't know what the hell actually happened. Nobody except the cops and the guys in the car do. Sure, 50 bullets always seems like a lot... but these cops may very well have thought their life was in danger. One of the guys *could* have had a gun. And, of course, the cops *could* have been trigger happy coked-up douchebags. But, once again, we don't know for sure. Such it is.
- Aitese, on 04/26/2008, -15/+24It's been proved none of the guys *could* have had a gun...can't hide much when you're dead...plus being the only men at the scene and fearing prosecution don't you think these cops would have moved heaven and hell to find that gun it it had just simply fallen under the car seat?
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -12/+18Yeah, obviously they didn't have one. That wasn't what I said. ...I said the cops may have *thought* they had a gun. Hence their "reasons" for shooting. Which doesn't make it any less horrible, of course. But again, we don't KNOW either way, what either party was thinking, or saying. Only they do.
- oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -17/+20Cops need to KNOW you have a gun. Why do we let cops get away with "oopps, my mistake". Civilians don't.
- hilikus34, on 04/26/2008, -8/+13And if someone claims to have a gun, and reaches for something, what is the cop suppose to do? Wait for the suspect to start shooting before reacting?
- FullTimer, on 04/26/2008, -16/+8YES. If you don't like the working conditions, do become a cop. The cop's first responsibility should be to the citizen NOT TO HIMSELF!
- fuhlavaflave, on 04/26/2008, -11/+17You're an idiot. Whether or not I'm a cop, if I believe my life is in danger in that situation, and I have a gun to use that could save my life, I'm going to use it.
I'll let natural selection take care of morons like you. - superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -2/+8where i'm from in montana, people have signs on their front-porch doors that read "i don't call 911".
***** or cop, you better back the ***** up when you're on my property. if some plainclothes or criminal steps in with attitude, he will meet the end of a mossberg 500 loaded with birdshot. if he persists, he should know that the rest of the loads are buckshot followed by slugs.
cops are like coyotes, they're opportunistic and think they rule any bloodshed. - zeebo, on 04/26/2008, -2/+4Cops should not just have to have a belief not only that a person has a gun, but see the gun and have it pointed at them or someone else before pulling the trigger. While it may be cold for me to say it, I'd rather have an occasional police officer wounded or even killed by a person who is legitimately a threat to them, than have situations like this one where clearly both sides panicked because of the threat of deadly force leading to this tragedy. This situation was the result of a clear lack of training and thinking on the side of the police officers.
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4Why not take your ridiculous thought further and say that cops have to know in fact that you intend to shoot them? "Oh, I had it out, I pointed it at him, but I had no intention of actually using it. I just wanted to scare the cop away. He shouldn't have shot me".
How about, "Oh sure , I pulled out a replica of a gun, but as everyone knows it was not capable of firing. If the cop had waited he would have known that it wouldn't fire. They should only shoot someone after they are being shot at".
Maybe this one... "Yes, I just assaulted someone... yes I had stated that I had a gun... yes I failed to comply with the police... yes, I pretended to have one... but that doesn't mean I should've been shot while almost running over a cop. The police had no reason to think I was a violent felon even if they had prior knowledge of me being one. I'm a good guy. It doesn't matter what the police believed they were seeing".
Here's the best one yet... "Sure, I had a real gun, but I painted it to look like a toy gun. That cop had no clue that I was really about to shoot him. Luckily he can't shoot until he is absolutely sure that I have a gun". or "That cellphone gun I had came in handy when that cop tried to arrest me...". (They exist.)
Oh, and as for civilians getting away with "Oops, my mistake..." It happens. Do you think all "guilty" civilians are found guilty? Of course not. - oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Some of you are pretty scary or scared... @Ceevay, who said anything about a replica or taking it further? I mean seriously? Is your argument that the police have a license to kill? I think you want to live somewhere else. In America the police serve us, not themselves.
@fuhlavaflave, you're not a cop either. I've been around longer than you and I always have a gun. So while you worry about "ifs", it'll be guys like me saving you from the gestapo when they come for you.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1reasons are not excuses. big ***** difference.
- oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -17/+20Cops need to KNOW you have a gun. Why do we let cops get away with "oopps, my mistake". Civilians don't.
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -12/+18Yeah, obviously they didn't have one. That wasn't what I said. ...I said the cops may have *thought* they had a gun. Hence their "reasons" for shooting. Which doesn't make it any less horrible, of course. But again, we don't KNOW either way, what either party was thinking, or saying. Only they do.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -16/+27It is people like who you allow such injustices to endure. None of the men had a gun, none of the men said they had a gun and no gun was found. "They had a gun" was a pathetic excuse by the cops to try to seem justified in murdering an unarmed man who had done nothing to provoke them. And so what if the cops thought they were in danger? That's part of their job. If they have to shoot an unarmed civilian 50 times when they feel they're in danger, then they should not be in the business of protecting people. And no, 50 shots does't "seem like a lot," - it IS a lot. It wouldn't take 50 shots to bring down an elephant.
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -20/+13It's people like you who allow ignorance to endure. This is not a black and white case. These were not automatically evil, cowboy cops who went out looking to shoot some black guys. And Bell and his friends weren't absolutely wannabe thug provocateurs who got themselves shot because they wanted to seem "tough". Like most things, it lies exactly in the muddy middle. Again, my point is simple: you don't ***** know. And neither do I. We weren't there. And no, you don't know "none of the men said they had a gun"... because you know why? You werent' ***** there! If they *had* said that, do you think they'd admit to it? I certainly wouldn't. And who are YOU to say wether 50 shots is a lot? Are you a cop? Have you been in the military? Have you been in an armed conflict? ...I know a bunch of cops and people who are, and have been in the military, and both of my grandfathers were cops... and I'll tell you one thing: you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
- oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -12/+22Yes it is black and white. Bell and friends left the bar laughing and joking. Cops are on surveillance and roll up blasting. The boys were unarmed. That means the cops are guilty. Its truly that simple. You can't shoot someone unless you can prove you are in fear for your life. We let cops continue to get away things. They should be held to a higher ***** STANDARD!!!
- mikelieman, on 04/26/2008, -7/+6Should be --..
This reminds me of the Cops who got a pass on the Amadou Diallo assassination.
The "prosecution" and "judge" crafted a very, very narrow set of conditions for the return of a Guilty verdict, which the Jurors are unable to overcome, given the explicit orders of the Judge in their instructions. - PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -4/+8You're leaving quite a bit out between the leaving the bar part and the roll up blasting part.
- mikelieman, on 04/26/2008, -7/+6Should be --..
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -6/+16"These were not automatically evil, cowboy cops who went out looking to shoot some black guys."
Please point out where in my post I mentioned race.
"And Bell and his friends weren't absolutely wannabe thug provocateurs who got themselves shot because they wanted to seem "tough"."
Huh? Who said they were thugs? Are you assuming people think they're thugs because they're black?
"If they *had* said that, do you think they'd admit to it?"
There was NO GUN. Not on their bodies. Not in the car. Not in the scene. What makes more sense? A cop lies about a civilian having a gun as justification for killing him or....an unarmed man lies and says, "Get my gun," even though there was none?
"And who are YOU to say wether 50 shots is a lot?"
LOL. I can only laugh at this ridiculous comment. The only time you hear about a man being shot at that many times is when people are outraged enough to have the media talk about (Amadou Diallo). 1 shot is enough to kill a man. 50? Come on bro. Even in your ignorance, it should be obvious that 50 is overkill.
"I know a bunch of cops and people who are, and have been in the military, and both of my grandfathers were cops..."
Ahhh...and now I understand why you're defending these pigs. Whether you have cops in your family or not - shooting at an unarmed person who has broken no laws is wrong.- hopperny, on 04/26/2008, -5/+4You don't know much about ballistics, and the stopping power of a 9mm round I take it? Then consider that the suspect was in a vehicle behind an angular windshield which will tend to deflect the relatively light 9mm round.
50 may seem like a lot, but it's not as excessive as you seem to believe.
I think you watch too much of the TV thingy. - Aensland, on 04/26/2008, -2/+6@hopperny: what the *****. I don't live in usa so I don't know how blaise you guys are towards gunfights... but it doesn't take 50 ***** bullets to kill somebody.
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/26/2008, -1/+3^hopperny, again the question becomes, why did they even approach bell and his partners? Why did they pull their guns? Once their guns are drawn and they haven't identified themselves as cops, they look like car jackers. Any reasonable person is going to hit the gas and try and get away.
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3Ah, so ramming people with cars is no longer illegal? Well, now I have something new and fun to do this weekend.
We get it, you hate cops.
- hopperny, on 04/26/2008, -5/+4You don't know much about ballistics, and the stopping power of a 9mm round I take it? Then consider that the suspect was in a vehicle behind an angular windshield which will tend to deflect the relatively light 9mm round.
- hilikus34, on 04/26/2008, -6/+9Uh, actually, he did say he had a gun in his car to an undercover officer. Then went to his car, and while trying to flee, rammed a police car. They aren't going to sit down for tea with you after you do that.
- staticneuron, on 04/26/2008, -5/+5No, they said they overheard one of the men say he was going to get a gun. And what would you do if some plain clothes people pull a gun on you. Even if they claim to be cops, without flashing badges it looks like an old fashioned robbery. In new york this is the second time something like this has happened. And its downright disgusting.
- FullTimer, on 04/26/2008, -7/+8Execution is a proper response? A few shots may be self protection. 50 is an execution. Wake up America.
- jackalsclaw, on 04/26/2008, -4/+5the 50 shots were fired in less then 10 seconds.
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -7/+4There's no "middle" on Digg. The left and the left alone is permitted to exist around these parts. Anything else is automatically wrong, ignorant, stupid, and whatever other names they want to call it.
- oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -12/+22Yes it is black and white. Bell and friends left the bar laughing and joking. Cops are on surveillance and roll up blasting. The boys were unarmed. That means the cops are guilty. Its truly that simple. You can't shoot someone unless you can prove you are in fear for your life. We let cops continue to get away things. They should be held to a higher ***** STANDARD!!!
- Sinai, on 04/26/2008, -1/+6You couldn't bring down an elephant with fifty 9mm rounds. Unless you got incredibly lucky, the elephant would barely pause.
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -11/+10So using your car to hit one of the cops in your attempt to flee the area means nothing? Really?
- jroll8481, on 04/26/2008, -6/+14Well when that cop is wearing plain clothes and pulls a gun on you at 4 am in the morning that means a lot.
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4The Altima, which was driven by Mr. Bell, sped away from its parked position, struck defendant Isnora and collided head on with the police van that had entered Liverpool Street. The Altima then went into reverse, backed up on to the sidewalk, struck a gate and then went forward and to the right, striking the police van again. As this was happening, defendant Isnora _ who testified in the grand jury _ observed Mr. Guzman, the front passenger, move his body as if he were reaching for a weapon.
Yeah, I guess this was an execution by the cops and not a horrible accident that happened due to a random collection of insane events. Things like this shouldn't occur because humans are perfect. - zeebo, on 04/26/2008, -3/+2You have to expect people to panic when they have a gun pulled on them by strangers out of uniform in the middle of the night. The point of the police is that they are supposed to be able to keep cool heads in situations like this and not give in to panic themselves.
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4The Altima, which was driven by Mr. Bell, sped away from its parked position, struck defendant Isnora and collided head on with the police van that had entered Liverpool Street. The Altima then went into reverse, backed up on to the sidewalk, struck a gate and then went forward and to the right, striking the police van again. As this was happening, defendant Isnora _ who testified in the grand jury _ observed Mr. Guzman, the front passenger, move his body as if he were reaching for a weapon.
- jroll8481, on 04/26/2008, -6/+14Well when that cop is wearing plain clothes and pulls a gun on you at 4 am in the morning that means a lot.
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -20/+13It's people like you who allow ignorance to endure. This is not a black and white case. These were not automatically evil, cowboy cops who went out looking to shoot some black guys. And Bell and his friends weren't absolutely wannabe thug provocateurs who got themselves shot because they wanted to seem "tough". Like most things, it lies exactly in the muddy middle. Again, my point is simple: you don't ***** know. And neither do I. We weren't there. And no, you don't know "none of the men said they had a gun"... because you know why? You werent' ***** there! If they *had* said that, do you think they'd admit to it? I certainly wouldn't. And who are YOU to say wether 50 shots is a lot? Are you a cop? Have you been in the military? Have you been in an armed conflict? ...I know a bunch of cops and people who are, and have been in the military, and both of my grandfathers were cops... and I'll tell you one thing: you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
- akphidelt, on 04/26/2008, -17/+10I like your reasoning because I feel the exact same way. It's a sad story that was clearly a misunderstanding but regardless a cop can not be held accountable for protecting their own life. And the fact that three cops all took aim tells me that they did in fact believe their life was in danger.
And 50 shots at a moving vehicle to protect your life is not all that alarming. It would be more alarming if it were 50 shots at someone outside of a vehicle. But I was watching most shocking videos the other day, and this one guy came at 4 cops with a michete and they definitely unloaded about 15-20 shots... so I don't see this as uncharacteristic... just a horrible chain of misunderstandings.- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -8/+23"Misunderstanding"? Having an undercover cop start harassing you when you're doing not anything wrong, then having them shot at you and your friends 50 times is a "misunderstanding?" I don't think so. And yes, a cop can be held accountable. If they hadn't bothered that poor man in the first place and make him scared enough to try and drive off, they wouldn't have been in that situation.
They "misunderstood" the way Hillary "misspoke." - superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4you evidently are not aware of the rampant ***** and corruption of the nypd when it comes to the legal system here. hell, it almost makes the boston pd seem like *****' mulberry.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -8/+23"Misunderstanding"? Having an undercover cop start harassing you when you're doing not anything wrong, then having them shot at you and your friends 50 times is a "misunderstanding?" I don't think so. And yes, a cop can be held accountable. If they hadn't bothered that poor man in the first place and make him scared enough to try and drive off, they wouldn't have been in that situation.
- cheezintern, on 04/26/2008, -5/+10I totally agree and unfortunately, all people see is the headline and jump to a conclusion. When a police office pulls over anyone, they're life is at risk. They don't know if someone is hiding behind the window tint and is about to shoot the cop when they walk up to the car (something that did happen in NYC recently).
Maybe they were justified, maybe they weren't. But chances are, nobody here on digg really knows what happened. I do know that as the son of a former NYPD cop who did have to defend himself by shooting someone, no normal person, cop or not, wants to shoot anyone. And when they do, even though they know their life is at risk, they are still traumatized for years after.- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4"nobody knows what really happened that night" kind of speak works well in the favor of those that survived to tell some tale. in this case it was the cops that did the shooting and witnesses the defense chose to discredit.
yeah, i see no bias there.
/sarc
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4"nobody knows what really happened that night" kind of speak works well in the favor of those that survived to tell some tale. in this case it was the cops that did the shooting and witnesses the defense chose to discredit.
- Aitese, on 04/26/2008, -15/+24It's been proved none of the guys *could* have had a gun...can't hide much when you're dead...plus being the only men at the scene and fearing prosecution don't you think these cops would have moved heaven and hell to find that gun it it had just simply fallen under the car seat?
- Jsmuli2, on 04/26/2008, -21/+78Great to know my tax dollars went to that.
- seldon452, on 04/26/2008, -2/+8Your tax dollars also payed the DA who prosecuted the cops.
- DemsFTW, on 04/26/2008, -3/+5So they couldn't figure out no one was firing back even while they reloaded?
I think the cops had a few drinks. Bastards. ***** em. ***** the judge as well.
NYPD is filled with bigots and pussies who are scared of the citizens they are supposed to protect. Of the maybe 60-80% officers who actually do their job correctly and don't have a chip on their shoulder I apologize for the comment, but the rest of your coworkers are screwing things up for you. - mcm020, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2Go read the facts of the case, specially the testimony of the prosecution's star witness, and you'll be thankful your tax dollars went to that.
- ragley, on 04/26/2008, -32/+118Didn't you know the cops can murder whoever they want.
- quakerorts, on 04/26/2008, -7/+20Reminds me of South Park's "They're headed right for us!"
- sirmcdiznuts, on 04/26/2008, -8/+3LOL
- bgrah449, on 04/26/2008, -4/+2It's chilling because it's true.
- FullTimer, on 04/26/2008, -3/+2Guess he 'just needed killin'.'
- NaziHatinChimp, on 04/26/2008, -5/+3Hello duh
- donatj, on 04/26/2008, -5/+5Cops are *never* convicted, I've followed a number of similar cases, and they are never found guilty. I think a cop shooting anyone, even in self defense should be at least an immediate your off the force. Make them a little less trigger happy maybe?
- AlphAssassin, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3Yes, because an officer defending himself is immediate grounds for termination. You are hearing about a few bad apples that take things too far and get away with it and are assuming that all cops are "trigger happy"
- quakerorts, on 04/26/2008, -7/+20Reminds me of South Park's "They're headed right for us!"
- SPR10, on 04/26/2008, -27/+50remember karma's a bitch. I give'em 1 month, tops.
- wishninja, on 04/26/2008, -11/+7I like the way you think
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -6/+4they'll be pencil jockeys for a few years and promoted to detective. by then everyone will have forgotten their names.
but know that gangs know where they live now. vigilante, meet vigilante. - JCPahl, on 04/26/2008, -3/+11Sorry to let you in on the sad secret, but karma isn't real; bad guys generally don't get what they deserve.
- MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -0/+7Remember Karma is *****.
- Aitese, on 04/26/2008, -24/+123I just posted this on a dupe of this before I found this one:
I'm quite sure...in fact I'm convinced these cops would not have shot if they knew the guys had not guns...that's not my issue. I'm in no way saying these men shot them on purpose. I'm sure the same is true in the Amidou Diallo case.
The problem is the way these cops are trained…what goes on in the stations they work at…what climate and culture do they work in every day. Sometimes on Digg we talk about cops like they are not regular folk just like all of us, but then we humanise them when the agenda fits. Some cop loses it at some snotty kids that you yourself would lose it at and it’s “yeah, but cops should show more restraint…they are in authority” but something like this happens and it’s suddenly “they are only human; what would you do in that position?”. The fact is we don’t know what we would do in either position…we’re not cops. But I do know about my job and how the opinions of others and the culture of the organisation as a whole shapes MY worldview.
The NYPD is institutionally racist.
The individuals don’t have to be racist or hate black people (some of them ARE black people) but if there is a culture of targeting black men…if they are trained to assume the worst of black males, not explicitly, but implied…if their superior and training officers have tainted their training with personal bias from years on the streets and all the other crap that we as regular people go through, an institution itself can become racist. At that point training goes out of the window and natural instinct kicks in. My natural instinct when faced with something that poses harm to me is to get as far way from it as possible and if flight is not an option, kill it.
I want to know what training cops get, what stories get traded back at the station that makes them basically TERRIFIED of young black men. So terrified they would actually see (and again I am convinced the guy saw what was not there) a gun or an armed man. I was once in a fight that broke out in a petrol station on my way to a wedding…my mother was there and started screaming “he’s got a knife!” about the guy who was at this point on the floor after I’d hit him…he was holding car keys. All logic went out of the window for my mother due to fear…he was a black man, I’m a black man. He was on the floor, I was standing…I had the fight over and done with, yet my mother, fearing for my safety…the safety of the guy least in trouble…saw more danger than there actually was. That’s what fear and other overwhelming emotion does to you, and the fact is the NYPD seem very scared.
Directly after the July 7th London Underground bombings here in London we were all on egde and in that climate the police shot an innocent man at point blank range in the head 7 times…total and complete illogical fear. None of the witnesses could give a coherent account of what happened, on a packed public transport vehicle…fear clouds the mind.
If the NYPD/London cops are that scared whether it be of gang violence, black men, 9/11 or 7/7 and therefore anyone who even remotely looks Arab…should they be protecting us?- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -27/+19They are "terrified" of "young black men" because "young black men" commit the majority of NYC's violent crime. A close second are "young brown men". Sadly.
- oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -12/+8Damn, with each comment you sound more and more like a part of the machine.
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -7/+19Are you seriously saying that "young black men" DON'T commit most of the crime in NYC? Ever read a newspaper?
- hilikus34, on 04/26/2008, -4/+10Or look at the incarceration rates among black males? Just the "man" keepin 'em down, right?
- artfiend77, on 04/26/2008, -18/+2Do YOU have any ***** credible statistics to back up your claims or do you just liek talking out your ass? You're pitiful in the respect that you don't have any ***** worldly knowledge, only what happens in your ingnorant patheitic mind. If you broadened your ***** horizons a bit more and stopped judging life on episodes of Cops and ***** see past all the brainwashing...ah ***** it..nevermind, you're ***** hopeless....
- pintomp3, on 04/26/2008, -8/+7so let's just shoot every unarmed "young black man" why don't we?
- hilikus34, on 04/26/2008, -5/+13Here you go, one example of many:
http://www.keithboykin.com/arch/2004/01/01/2004_ra ...
Btw, using ***** in your argument every other word just make you sound like a high school dropout/ huge douchebag...but you already knew that right? - ErrorS, on 04/26/2008, -9/+5More black men are incarcerated? You know who else's argument that might support, right?
I honestly use to believe it was a lot of ***** about nothing, that black people weren't being unfairly treated.. I've started taking a look around me and I'm starting to realize I was wrong. The black area in this town and in every other town I have ever been to, for some reason the roads are worse off.. potholes, less cops, etc. Here in Terre Haute the 'black area' isn't a crime ridden ghetto, so I honestly don't understand why? It was understandable in Vegas or Chicago, no cop wants to put their life on the line to write speeding tickets.
The white areas have all brand new roads? This little subdivision, expensive homes, all white population for some reason their almost new roads just got redone? I don't understand it.. in the black area you almost have to have a 4x4 to drive on their roads. it's a load of *****. These areas aren't even that poor, your typical $50,000 home (average in terre haute) with your typical $10-$12 an hour middle-lower class families.
By the way hilikus, using buzzword insults (douchebag) and internet shorthand (BTW) makes you look like a highschool dropout/ huge douchebag... but you already knew that, right? - "You said ***** you sopund like a kid btw you suck douchebag lololol", it's like I'm reading Youtube comments. Are you afraid your mom is going to read artfiend's comment over your shoulder? - staticneuron, on 04/26/2008, -7/+6Statistics are nice but there is always a reason "why". Unless you are just trying to put these numbers out there to prove how many black men are criminals. Here, since you like numbers so much why don't you do some research about how many black males have been released from prison after being wrongfully incarcerated in the past 5 years? There is a push going on.......... because people are not stupid. Its not even a question blacks aren't given a fair shake and more ( thanks to dna testing as well) cases are coming to light.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/ - artfiend77, on 04/27/2008, -1/+0@hilikus
Of course all I could see from those stats you posted was ( the negative things anyways, which I'm sure is what you wanted to bring to light) was that black men are disproportionately incarcerated, not mentioning poverty, the crimes and wrongful incarceration. Oh, and I'm really really really really sorry about using ***** every two words. I know I must have hurt your feelings. But if ***** racists, such as yourself and your little girlfriend edstate can actually get your ***** heads out of your asses instead of making stupid little comments about how "blacks this and blacks that" from the comfort of your own home and enlightened yourselves, tried to be a part of the solution instead of the problem, instead of spreading ignorance and tried to educate yourselves and others, we wouldn't have to read articles like this in the news. Until then ***** you, stick your stats up your ass.
/cue racists to digg me down now
- Jus7in, on 04/26/2008, -3/+5You obviously don't read the news much. Here, I'll give it to you in layman's terms, okay?
Black people comprise roughly 14% of the populace. They COMMIT roughly HALF the crime. Roll that around in your gray matter for a while, please, before proceeding to make another unsightly and ignorant comment. - oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -2/+2I didn't say ***** about who does what in NYC and I hardly see how your statistics are relevant. We don't pay police to be terrified. If thats the situation then lets get new police. We pay them to protect and to serve people of all colors regardless of racial stereotypes and crime statistics.
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -7/+19Are you seriously saying that "young black men" DON'T commit most of the crime in NYC? Ever read a newspaper?
- romistrub, on 04/26/2008, -12/+6What kind of ***** cop is terrified of another person?
- opkaos, on 04/26/2008, -4/+10What kind of cop is terrified of another person? How about a human being! Cops aren't inhuman robots, no matter how much they're trained. I can guarantee you that you'd piss yourself if you had to face what they do out there in the real world.
- ludar, on 04/26/2008, -0/+8one with intelligence. courage isn't the absence of fear; it is instead having fear but doing courageous acts anyway.
- jroll8481, on 04/26/2008, -5/+18The majority....wait all of the members of the KKK are white, should that mean it is okay for me to automatically assume every white man to be racist and want to hang me?
- Professr, on 04/26/2008, -4/+6In certain areas, yes. Just like, in certain areas, it is reasonable to assume that the majority of African-American guys have a criminal record. It's not racism, it's the fact that you're in the ghetto.
- Tahiri, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4Could say the same about the Black Panthers
- oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -12/+8Damn, with each comment you sound more and more like a part of the machine.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -12/+16Sooo....what about in other parts of the country where young white men commit the majority of the crime? I've never heard of a white man being shot 50+ times by a cop.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -4/+3Sorry, I meant to have this as a reply to EdState
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -5/+14Where in "other parts of the country" do "white people" make up the vast majority of a large, compact city's underclass?
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -5/+2Are you serious? Are you suggesting that in areas that are predominately white (or all white) there is no crime? Considering that "white people" are still considered the majority by a large measure, it's ignorant to think that non-whites commit most of the crimes. Not only is it not logical, it's not true. It's only true if you selectively look at crime and enforcement in certain areas. Numerically, whites commit more crimes. Percentages can be tailored to suit an agenda and therefore should be taken with a grain of salt. If you look at the percentage of crimes committed by Asians in chinatown in NYC, you would come to the conclusion that Asians are criminals.
- germ5150, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Please do some research on Randy Weaver.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge
- BigManOnCampus, on 04/26/2008, -5/+21I don't find that a fair comparison. If the cop is chastising a child, there is no potential threat to the cops life. In a deadly-force situation where you feel someone is about to unload on you, you do what you can to protect yourself, cop or not. I'm not justifying what happened, I'm just saying that your comparison is completely unfair. If a cop feels his life is threatened, then he/she is allowed to shoot back to protect themselves just as anyone else is. The question here is were they really justified? One of the cops ducked for cover first, the others seemed to just open up with their guns. That's where we should really be questioning motivations here. If one of the cops had the presence of mind to seek cover first and worry later about returning fire, then why weren't the other ones doing the same?
- lacronicus, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7No one but them knows the answer to that question. He may have hesitated, he may have been in the open whereas the other officers were already in cover, it could have been any number of legitimate reasons. I'm not saying they were justified, I'm simply saying that you can't draw conclusions based on that alone.
- pendrachken, on 04/26/2008, -4/+6Very true, one of the FIRST thing they drill into your head on the firing range when training an officer is "you do NOT shoot unless there is CLEARLY a barrel pointing within 8-10 degrees of you ( at 10 yards thats still about a 3 foot buffer zone for a line of fire)"
I see the local firing range everyday, they even let me do some exercises while I wait to unload my truck. The instructors there actually use this case as what NOT to do in that kind of situation. - peterapokotos, on 04/26/2008, -4/+4A police officer is suppose to use minimal force to stop someone. Even if they have to drawl their weapon they are not suppose to kill that person but incapacitate them. The main reason that some one joins the military is to shoot someone. The main reasons to become a police officer is as a lateral move from the service or to shoot someone. Or both in most cases.
- Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -4/+6"If a cop feels his life is threatened, then he/she is allowed to shoot back to protect themselves just as anyone else is."
Just as anyone else is? If I shoot a police officer because he's pointing a gun at me, or a friend, which is most definitely a threat on ine's life because it could go off accidentally, am I not going to go to jail? Of course I am.
Cops shouldn't be allowed to point guns at people when they don't see a gun in someone's hand. If I ever get a concealed weapon permit and a cop asks me if I have a gun during a routine trafifc stop, I am going to say no, because I don't want him to pull his weapon on me and put my life in danger so he can feel safe as he disarms me. ***** that *****.- BigManOnCampus, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Not quite right there. If a cop is off duty and is just randomly pointing a gun at you threatening your life, you are well within your rights to protect yourself by shooting first. If a cop is abusing his position and has no justification for stopping you or dealing with you at all, and he points a gun at you, you are well within your rights to shoot first. This almost never happens because cops are taught the law, so they know what they can and cannot get away with.
- dsiv, on 04/26/2008, -4/+3"If a cop feels his life is threatened, then he/she is allowed to shoot back to protect themselves just as anyone else is."
Not true at all. You need to have some concrete justification. Simply "feeling" threatened is not enough to justify deadly force.
- slightlygifted, on 04/26/2008, -7/+7well when the majority of people coming through your station are black then maybe they are a bit racist. but really who wouldnt be in that situation?
- 55mph, on 04/26/2008, -3/+12Cops are afraid of white people too. When my X had me removed from the marital residence on the invented grounds she feared for her life, 3 cops surrounded my front door and asked me a half dozen questions about guns. After entering the house, they wouldn't let me in the kitchen for fear i would grab a knife. ( All my X had to do was lie to local judge and poof, I'm homeless. It's common practice in my neighborhood. The women want the house to themselves. ) The cops followed a well rehearsed routine. Naturally, their safety was first.
- headzoo, on 04/26/2008, -3/+9There's a difference between cops and your mother: Cops are specifically trained to be cool headed and logical in tense situations. If a recruit can't prove he/she has that capability, then they shouldn't be allowed to become police officers.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1and the nypd is not desperate for new recruits and has the luxury of turning away potentials...
- Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1Yeah they're not even paying them well, and the they said recently that they didn't need to pay them better because cops would just flock to their doorstep because they have the best cops. Pfft!
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3Cops are not trained to be cool headed and logical. Where did you read that? (or was it something you saw on TV?)
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1and the nypd is not desperate for new recruits and has the luxury of turning away potentials...
- enchantedsky, on 04/26/2008, -6/+19Whatever!
I'm a Canadian (native of Toronto) who has lived in New York City for 15+ years, and I have been mugged about 4 times here. All of the suspects were either Black or Hispanic ------ it was never a white person or an Asian. It is wrong to be politically correct and say there is nothing wrong with black/hispanic youth when they are the very reason why neighborhoods are bad. Unless the problems are confronted, only then will change for the better occur.
Anyone from Queens, NY? I was once I was attacked by a 20 year old Black guy in Forest Park.......I was riding my bike, and he took out a baseball bat and starting hitting me with it. I almost died from that incident.......the NYC cops who stopped the attack (the guy got away though, but didn't get my bike in the end ironically after all that) and they told me that the Blacks in the area are problematic, and commit most of the crimes in the area. They weren't racist in saying that, they were telling the truth. Many women raped in the area described the suspects as being Black.
Blacks and Hispanics need to change their culture of hate and violence, and only then will other races of people not be afraid when you cross them on the street. And incidences like cops targeting them won't happen again- peterapokotos, on 04/26/2008, -8/+2I lived in Manhattan for some time in the 90's and I was never close to a situation of being in harm even at four in the morning.
Where were you mugged? - superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -8/+4i'm white and live in hunt's point, bronx. the roughest and brownest/darkest neighborhood in all the boroughs.
i've never been ***** with here and find everyone to be friendly. perhaps you're just a victimy bitch is all.
white people get mugged financially all the time in this city and i would rather risk the possibility of a black eye and losing $100 and a credit card or two than spending year upon year paying ramped up rent premiums which exceed market value. in other words, i would rather get rolled one time than ***** out of my money every month for years on end. - Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -7/+3You were on a bike, and a guy pulle out a bat and hit you? How is it you weren't able to outpace him, being on a bike? And how is it you failed to notice he had a bat on him? Not that I don 't believe you, but I ride my bike in the city a lot, and I tend to avoid people when riding, and keep my eye on them, so if I saw someone with a bat they wouldn't get anywhere near me.
Also, I'm 33 and never been mugged. But being mugged 4 times? That's insane. - CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -5/+3If you were mugged four times, that says a lot about you. You may not have "NY" common sense. That means for example... stay way from dark deserted blocks late at night and stay away from parks at night. I don't know the "facts" of your situation, but as someone who has lived in NY since birth, I have never experienced anything close to what you have. However, as a 8 yr old child, a white pervert did try to get me to go with him away from in front of my house. As a twenty something a white pervert tried to touch my feet and take my shoes in order to get off. Does that mean that whites have a culture of perversion?
What you are doing is making generalizations, and the wrong ones at that. Most of the crimes in ANY area are committed by teens and young adults. If you want to generalize, THAT'S who you should be afraid of. - Linzee82, on 04/26/2008, -1/+4I've never had anything physical happen to me (knock on wood) but I see where you're coming from. It was a BLACK man who stabbed one of my friends for a quarter (yes the attacker knew he was only getting 25 cents). It was a BLACK man who stabbed a 16-year-old kid almost do death at a youth gathering. (This was right across the street from me) It was a BLACK person who called death threats on me. (Because he wouldn't pay his bill due to the company) I hate racism as much as the next guy, but blacks and hispanics do the most of it. I don't judge a person to be good or bad by the color of their skin, but when life gives you a pattern it's hard not to.
- peterapokotos, on 04/26/2008, -8/+2I lived in Manhattan for some time in the 90's and I was never close to a situation of being in harm even at four in the morning.
- kinerry, on 04/26/2008, -3/+7the first cop to fire was a black cop
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -27/+19They are "terrified" of "young black men" because "young black men" commit the majority of NYC's violent crime. A close second are "young brown men". Sadly.
- trujillonorte, on 04/26/2008, -21/+35complete ***** if you ask me! cops literally get away with murder in ny...
- jackalsclaw, on 04/26/2008, -5/+7no they made a mistake at 3 am in the morning trying to stop a group of drunk people from hitting them with a car. if cops go to jail for mistakes with out proof of misconduct then who want to enforce the law. how do we have laws with out mistakes enforce them? if you make the penalty for a mistake to harsh the job becomes about cover your ass and lying when you make a mistake not admitting it.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2put the scotch down and walk away from the computer, sir. i will not ask you again. put it down and back away.
- Witchbaby, on 04/26/2008, -5/+3AGREED. This makes me SICK.
- enchantedsky, on 04/26/2008, -5/+150 bullets too little if you ask me
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Now you're just being a troll..
- jackalsclaw, on 04/26/2008, -5/+7no they made a mistake at 3 am in the morning trying to stop a group of drunk people from hitting them with a car. if cops go to jail for mistakes with out proof of misconduct then who want to enforce the law. how do we have laws with out mistakes enforce them? if you make the penalty for a mistake to harsh the job becomes about cover your ass and lying when you make a mistake not admitting it.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -14/+61I told my friend who is a cop that the Sean Bell's murderers were found not guilty. He had been sympathetic to Amadou Diallo, so I thought it would the same in this situation. Nope. He said, "We weren't there, so we don't know what happened. We don't know the facts. NY cops get targeted everyday, so I understand why they're trigger happy. It wasn't fair that everyone assumed from the beginning that the cops were guilty." It's exactly this type of cop mentality that results in this type of tradegy. Other cops know better than the average citizen what kinds of atrocities are being committed, yet they choose to perpetuate the Blue Wall of Silence (according to my friend, cops are afraid of losing their pension from their higher ups if they report someone). I told him that we DO know the facts; neither Sean Bell nor his friends had guns, said they had guns and no gun was found to back up the cops claim that Sean said, "Get my gun." We know that Sean wasn't doing anything wrong when he was harassed by the cop. And most importantly, we know that 50 shots is 49 more than necessary (actually, 50 more than necessary since Bell wasn't doing anything wrong). I said - it doesn't matter if NY cops "get targeted" everyday because that's NOT justification for being trigger happy. "Trigger happy" and "protect and serve" don't go together.
I don't even know what to say about this. I knew that it was a possibility they'd get off because we have a crooked system, but I guess that I thought, ultimately, Sean Bell's fiance and family would get justice.- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -17/+12Yes, and those evil cops also used mental telepathy in order to force the car into one of the cops, and then propel the car away in order to make it look like the fine young gentlemen were fleeing the scene.
With superpowers like that we should fear the cops.- Pake, on 04/26/2008, -1/+10*****, Magneto's working with the non-mutants now?
- jackalsclaw, on 04/26/2008, -3/+7they also never miss a target that has cover, during the middle of the night, so all they had to do was fire one bullet, that could go thought 3 suspects they thought were armed. GOD DAM they didn't stand over the bodies and fire bullets into them at point black range, they fired at a moving targets for less then 10 seconds
- staticneuron, on 04/26/2008, -3/+15Those "plain clothes people with guns"..... I don't know where you live. But I can tell you, people claiming to be cops, with the intention to do harm is commonplace in some area's. If some random dude pulls a gun on me while I am in a car and I think my life is in danger, you better believe I am going to run that bastard over.
You are trying to defend the cops but is still flakey in relevance to what went down that night.
- stubear, on 04/26/2008, -3/+7Hindsight's ALWAYS 20/20 you know. Perhaps you should put yourself in the moment and consider the evidence from that perspective, like the judge did. You're already starting off with prejudice, as you accuse the judge and the cops of ironically, that the cops are guilty based on some vague notion of the "Blue Wall of Silence". Was justice served? I don't know because I haven't poured through the mounds of evidence but then again, I'd wager that none of the people on this board condemning the cops have either.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -2/+1"mounds of evidence"? presented by whom?
that which was experienced by the now dead guys and the witnesses discredited by the defense or the evidence entered by the defendants? tell me about the missing and useful evidence that wasn't subject to the blue wall of silence.- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3Your name fits you. He was saying that he doesn't know because he hasn't gone over the "mounds" of evidence. With a trial like this there is going to be A LOT OF EVIDENCE for both sides.
As for the so-called "blue wall of silence"... you have no clue as to what you are talking about. Try not to get most of your info from TV. When you see a phrase like that keep in mind that it probably originated on TV (possibly a newspaper as well) to make a more sensational story. If the blue wall really existed, NYC would be a very different place. No cop would ever end up on trial. All the other cops would cover up for them. No evidence would ever make it to trial. Evidence would disappear. All crimes would be attributed to civilians. Think about it... who investigates police shootings? Other police officers. Who arrests officers? Other police officers. Would you like to buy a vowel?
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3Your name fits you. He was saying that he doesn't know because he hasn't gone over the "mounds" of evidence. With a trial like this there is going to be A LOT OF EVIDENCE for both sides.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -2/+1"mounds of evidence"? presented by whom?
- cheezintern, on 04/26/2008, -4/+4They also forced the guys to get drunk at the club before getting into the car...
- lacronicus, on 04/26/2008, -4/+7"the facts" relevant to this case go far beyond the absolute truths we know now. One must consider as much the misinformation of the situation as the real information. No one is omniscient, those officers did not know everything we know now. We don't know what they saw, we don't know what they heard, we don't know what was going through their heads. If Sean did say "get my gun," whether or not he had the means to back his statement, the police are trained to take that statement as "I'm going to kill you," and they are trained to act accordingly. What would you do in such a situation, where everything see and hear point to someone trying to kill you? You fight back with everything you have, be it one bullet or your entire magazine.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2bullet-happy hivemind is what happened. when one person discharges a round, you raise your sidearm and aim at what they're aiming at, likely you fire in support.
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -2/+6Sounds like your friend is a hell of a lot smarter than you. At least he knows not to pass judgment on emotion alone when he doesn't know all the facts of the situation.
- kakimiller, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2The verdict would have been quite different if not for the lies and potential rewards of civil suits by Mr. Bell's ahem friends.
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -17/+12Yes, and those evil cops also used mental telepathy in order to force the car into one of the cops, and then propel the car away in order to make it look like the fine young gentlemen were fleeing the scene.
- kemp34, on 04/26/2008, -11/+8650 shots? Is that ever needed?
- xerodustrial, on 04/26/2008, -5/+7Sometimes you have to be really really sure, yo.
:E!- comocomo, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -14/+26You don't even need 50 shots for an elephant. Those cops are animals and unfit to "protect and serve."
- Daniel591992, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5All you need is a bulldozer and a few friends!
- blackjack75, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2To be fair, they look like they are fit to serve... any vengeful mafia leader.
- Linzee82, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Do remember these are 9mm rounds. You have to be a damn good shot to take down an elephant with that.
- akphidelt, on 04/26/2008, -10/+14Try stopping a moving vehicle with 1 shot... you better have really really good aim!
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -6/+14They were trying to drive off because the cops were shooting at them.
- Sinai, on 04/26/2008, -6/+9They drunkenly attempted to drive off and rammed a police van before the shooting started.
- pintomp3, on 04/26/2008, -5/+6a guy jumped in front of their car with a gun in his hand.
- Tahiri, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4Yeah, to make him stop driving towards the police car
- Sinai, on 04/26/2008, -6/+9They drunkenly attempted to drive off and rammed a police van before the shooting started.
- oldhick, on 04/26/2008, -8/+24Yeah, don't you know that when the cops start shooting at you, you're supposed to sit still so they can kill you with fewer rounds. ***** retards trying to survive! Whats up with that *****. I'm surprised the survivors weren't charged with fleeing death.
- romistrub, on 04/26/2008, -3/+7I feel so bad for lol'ing at "fleeing death"
- peterapokotos, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2Great joke for the wake!
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Do some research and then comment. They weren't driving into a police vehicle repeatedly to survive. The shots came AFTER the first time and right before the second attempt at ramming.
- donatj, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1When did cops get the power of judge, jury and executioner? Trying to get away deserves a death sentence?
- meinhookah, on 04/26/2008, -2/+2about the same time the american people started worshiping the ground they walk on.
- Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Did you know they're legally allowed to kill you if you attempt to escape from jail to prevent your escape, regardless of what you're in for? We live in a pretty ***** up country. I hope the spread of stories like this on the net results in some changes occuring over the next decade or two.
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Stop being emotional when trying to argue a logical point. If they had those powers here would be no trial. Also, again... they weren't shot for trying to get away. You might as well say they were shot for speeding, it would be just about as true.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -6/+14They were trying to drive off because the cops were shooting at them.
- akphidelt, on 04/26/2008, -12/+10Now I don't know all the facts to the case, but assuming that the drivers were driving AT the cops, that's not technically driving away. And most likely since they were acquitted the judge believed that the cops in fact believed they were in danger and acted accordingly. The number of shots has no matter in this case whatsoever. Once a cop feels threatened, it's shoot now, protect yourself, ask questions later. And if a car were coming at me and I had just a gun to stop them, I would unload every bullet in my clip.
- 14justice, on 04/26/2008, -6/+18The car was parallel parked on the street. The guys got in and started to move the car. One cop, not in uniform, stood directly in front of the car, drew his gun and started yelling. It was dark. It was a bad neighborhood (i.e., it was New York). The windows were probably rolled up. Several guys in a car see a man pointing a gun at them and yelling something, they're going to be making noise too. Maybe someone yelled something like "It's a hold up! Punch it and run him down!" You're in a panic, what would you do?
The cops caused the incident 100%, and they are 100% guilty.- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2Your comment only takes into account the perspective of the passengers and completely ignores the perspective of the officers. Not only that, you started to make assumptions about the scene to fit what you feel most likely happened. That has nothing to do with the facts. I know that you feel bad for the passengers, but emotion has nothing to do with the facts.
As for who caused the incident, how did you reach that conclusion. Do you think those guys were chosen by random? Do you think those cops decided to go find someone to shoot? Don't be ridiculous. Those guys were not choir boys. They were previously convicted of crimes. They were involved in a dispute moments before the shooting... do you think they were well behaved? Do you REALLY believe that they each only had one drink at a BACHELOR PARTY?! Wow.
Ummm, would you like to buy a bridge. I can sell one to you real cheaply. People can pay you a toll to go from Brooklyn into Manhattan. You'll be rich...- 14justice, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1"Do you think those guys were chosen by random? Do you think those cops decided to go find someone to shoot?" Actually, yes, that is exactly what happened.
The cops were undercover and trolling for criminal activity. After an evening of watching strippers and having a couple of beers on the taxpayers tab, they needed to justify their jobs by showing some results.
- 14justice, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1"Do you think those guys were chosen by random? Do you think those cops decided to go find someone to shoot?" Actually, yes, that is exactly what happened.
- CeeAyy, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2Your comment only takes into account the perspective of the passengers and completely ignores the perspective of the officers. Not only that, you started to make assumptions about the scene to fit what you feel most likely happened. That has nothing to do with the facts. I know that you feel bad for the passengers, but emotion has nothing to do with the facts.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -5/+8Maybe you should read the facts before trying to justify the cops' actions.
- stubear, on 04/26/2008, -3/+5"Right back at ya". I'd bet anything that you haven't gone through all the court transcripts and volumes of evidence either.
- 14justice, on 04/26/2008, -6/+18The car was parallel parked on the street. The guys got in and started to move the car. One cop, not in uniform, stood directly in front of the car, drew his gun and started yelling. It was dark. It was a bad neighborhood (i.e., it was New York). The windows were probably rolled up. Several guys in a car see a man pointing a gun at them and yelling something, they're going to be making noise too. Maybe someone yelled something like "It's a hold up! Punch it and run him down!" You're in a panic, what would you do?
- mrgeekguy, on 04/26/2008, -1/+18Most cops will empty their guns in life threatening situations. There was a case in my town not to long ago where a kid aimed his gun a four cops, each cop emptied their 11 shot clips, and he was hit 36 times.
- donatj, on 04/26/2008, -2/+1They should be trained to disable, not kill
- comocomo, on 04/26/2008, -2/+0good idea, but how the ***** you gonna shoot a guy flopping around like a weebly inflatable flailing tube arm man in his arms & legs? that's reall ythe only places you can "disable" someone safely.
- 99er, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4WRONG- shooting is deadly force. You don't use deadly force to just 'disable'. If all you want to do is disable, you should use less than lethal options, and not deadly force. What if all you want to do is disable someone, and by accident, you kill them? No one in the world is a good enough shot to guarantee that in a dynamic, changing situation, you will not kill the person. I
- Snokage, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5training would help, but seriously....if someone was pointing a gun at you, threatening you, wouldn't you be a bit scared and just kinda do whats needed?
- donatj, on 04/26/2008, -2/+1They should be trained to disable, not kill
- 13B1303, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4Rasputin... absolutely, 50 minimum.
- soulkitchen, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2and then the poison, and then the freezing river, and maybe not even then.
- lacronicus, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7unloading their weapons is exactly what they're trained to do. Cops don't shoot to accomplish anything but kill their target, and if they're in a situation where they feel that's necessary, they're not going to take any chances.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -3/+2good for them. i retain the right to exhibit the same behavioral constraint when dealing with the reciprocal. and judging by the occurrence of transgressions and felonies committed by officers by the peace, there exists a distinct possibility of error on their part.
so if i'm the one that lives to tell the tale, i'll be sure to be just as honest about it as these new york city coppers.- 99er, on 04/26/2008, -1/+3If someone is threatening you with deadly force for no reason, you do retain that right. If what you're talking about is just shooting at cops because you don't like them, you're pissed off about this, they took your weed, arrested you, or gave you a ticket.... well, then, you don't have that right.
- superdoofus, on 04/26/2008, -3/+2good for them. i retain the right to exhibit the same behavioral constraint when dealing with the reciprocal. and judging by the occurrence of transgressions and felonies committed by officers by the peace, there exists a distinct possibility of error on their part.
- userperson, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Clyde Barrow & Bonnie Parker ... though I think they got 250 ... either way you have to be sure. /s
At some point it becomes merciful. - pyro789x, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5Cops don't shoot to injure or disarm, cops shoot to kill. If they didn't mean to kill him, they would not have fired. Of course, snipers may have different motives, but that's obviously not what these cops were doing.
- bengringo, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2There overachievers.
- 5159, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2Zombies.
- userperson, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1Dude, Thanks that explains it.
I knew there was a logic explanation. It's not like cops are just ego tripping sadists.
- userperson, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1Dude, Thanks that explains it.
- xerodustrial, on 04/26/2008, -5/+7Sometimes you have to be really really sure, yo.
- KenSPT, on 04/26/2008, -26/+20Al Sharpton wasn't up in arms with OJ got off for murdering his wife and Ron Goldman, but when a black kid gets shot justice wasn't served and it was a racist court system.
I'm sick and tired of this race-card *****.- bgrah449, on 04/26/2008, -7/+14There is a difference between a domestic dispute among a bunch of rich people who live in L.A. that escalates to homicide - and the murderer happens to be black - and a situation where a citizen, who happens to be black, is shot to death by agents of the government in the street and walk away. No matter your race, this should be frightening.
- ProfessorSYM, on 04/26/2008, -5/+19You seem to be the only one playing that card right now.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -4/+23Race card? What are you talking about? Two out of the three cops were black. And uhh...no, justice WASN'T served. How can you think otherwise when an unarmed man who broke no laws is shot at FIFTY times?
- Tahiri, on 04/26/2008, -1/+3Trying to drive over cops is against the law last I checked
- peterapokotos, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1Prove the guy knew they were cops.
- skigemit, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1trying to drive over ANYONE is against the law last time i checked.
- Linzee82, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Prove there was no way they couldn't know. See that's the problem. No one knows for sure. I will be honest and say I can pick out some cops simply by the way they speak and walk. If they were yelling orders at them, it seems that they would sound like cops. But that doesn't take away from your point either. I think the big problem exists in the department. There should have been better regulations in place that would have prevented this. If they had marked units come in just after the unmarked ones, there would be no questions. Changes like these NEED to be implemented.
- peterapokotos, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1Prove the guy knew they were cops.
- jmpeagle, on 04/26/2008, -4/+33I like how the trial had no jury....did the cops waive that right in hopes of a trial less biased with passion and hoping a judge just looks at the facts?
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -11/+6They probably had a deal with the judge.
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -3/+2Yeah maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnn
- edstate, on 04/26/2008, -5/+22They waived their right to a jury trial for the very reason that part of the country is known as "Lawsuit Alley". A jury of "peers" in certain parts of The Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn will ALWAYS turn in a verdict AGAINST "tha man". Be it the cops, or a company. And it doesn't matter if they're right, wrong, or sideways.
- mikelieman, on 04/26/2008, -3/+10Well, considering that at a minimum they were guilty of negligent homicide?
Remember how hard the Judge had to work to hamstring the Jury Instructions in the trial of the Diallo assassins? And that was in freaking Albany!
- mikelieman, on 04/26/2008, -3/+10Well, considering that at a minimum they were guilty of negligent homicide?
- Sinai, on 04/26/2008, -1/+25Generally, you only want a jury trial if the facts are against you. Normal procedure is to ask for a trial by judge if the facts and law are with you, and ask for a jury trial if they are against you, and then you appeal to emotion and irrationality of the jury, as you know the jury has a poor understanding of the law.
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -3/+11The reason why they waived the right to a jury is blatantly obvious from the reactions of the Digg.com populace. In cases like this individuals are far too prone to passing judgment based purely on emotion and not on the facts of the case. Not one of the people commenting here have heard the facts of the case yet they are entirely willing to pass the most rash judgments regarding it.
- Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -7/+2What facts do we need?
Cops jumped out of an unmarked car fired 50 shots into a van driven by an unarmed man when he tried to flee. Even if he knew they were cops and not carjackers, shooting someone just because they are trying to escape is not acceptable.- mcm020, on 04/26/2008, -1/+6I hope you're never on a jury.
- Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -5/+2Never plan to be!
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2Since when does anyone "plan" jury duty?
If you ever get called for jury duty I suppose we can all just hope you get dismissed because of complete utter stupidity.
- mcm020, on 04/26/2008, -1/+6I hope you're never on a jury.
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -2/+4So you're going to pass judgment on those officers based purely on that snippet of "facts" you heard on the news? You don't think there could be another side of the story that has a right to be heard? Ridiculous...
- Elliuotatar, on 04/26/2008, -7/+2What facts do we need?
- userperson, on 04/26/2008, -7/+3Who protects the judges in courtrooms everyday?
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -2/+7The job of court officer is an entirely different job with entirely different qualifications, training, and requirements than a police officer. Congratulations on an entirely lame attempt at making a point.
- userperson, on 04/26/2008, -5/+2Thanks! Congratulations on missing it.
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -1/+4No one missed anything. You asked a question you thought you knew the answer to in an attempt to make some stupid point. Turns out the answer to your question isn't what you stupidly assumed it was. Idiot.
- userperson, on 04/27/2008, -2/+1No, no one is smarter (or nicer) than you.
I bow down before your superiority, I hope that one day I have children and they grow up to be like you. - dan222555, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2That's it, mask your own stupidity by attacking me.
- userperson, on 04/26/2008, -5/+2Thanks! Congratulations on missing it.
- dan222555, on 04/26/2008, -2/+7The job of court officer is an entirely different job with entirely different qualifications, training, and requirements than a police officer. Congratulations on an entirely lame attempt at making a point.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -11/+6They probably had a deal with the judge.
- Klak, on 04/26/2008, -7/+30this is why we need to get rid of this deceptive way of policing. how am i supposed to know if some guy with a gun in plain clothes telling me to put my hands up is a cop or not? he yells "hands up police!" what if im in a car? whats to stop any criminal from carrying a gun around and robbing people blind pretending to be a "plain clothes" cop? if some guy was pointing a gun at me, i would try to run him over too.
- Tahiri, on 04/26/2008, -8/+2"whats to stop any criminal from carrying a gun around and robbing people blind pretending to be a "plain clothes" cop?"
Other cops, not having proof he is one.- Aensland, on 04/26/2008, -1/+9Let's see YOU wait for a cop to verify whether the armed nutbar holding you up at 4am is also a cop.
- Linzee82, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1Maybe we don't need to get rid of the whole undercover stings altogether. It is obvious that changes need to be made. I don't think that plain clothes cops should be the one doing the "busting". That nees to be left to uniformed officers for just this very reason.
- Klak, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2i agree totally. undercovers are very effective in certain situations. when the situation is somewhat controlled, undercovers work well. they should always be backed up by uniformed cops to eliminate confusion i think.
- Tahiri, on 04/26/2008, -8/+2"whats to stop any criminal from carrying a gun around and robbing people blind pretending to be a "plain clothes" cop?"
- Harboggles, on 04/26/2008, -28/+18Before ANY OF YOU condem these police officers go and read up on the incident. The police (at least, according to the record) had reasonable suspicion that a shooting was about to take place. It's easy for us to say he was just a victim. But none of us were there, none of us felt the tension in the seconds leading to the shooting. The police followed their training and did what they try to do best. Granted, I think the 50 fired shots it beyond excessive. I'd also like to point out that I'm a strong critic of the police as a Soc. minor but there needs to be room for fairness.
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -6/+18Why do you assume we haven't read up on it? They may have had "reasonable suspiscion" that there was a shooting about to take place (doubt that), but did they have ANY reason to suspect that Sean Bell was involved in it? And since Sean had no gun (and I VERY MUCH doubt that he said, "get my gun" since none were found), what was the purpose in even pulling out a gun on him?
And SO WHAT if there was "tension?" Cops are supposed to be trained to handle these types of situations. If a cop cannot handle a "tense" situation without shooting an innocent, unarmed civilian, then THEY ARE NOT FIT FOR DUTY and need to be fired.- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -10/+5You're right, he was completely innocent. That cop deserved to be hit by this innocent person as this innocent person was attempting to flee the scene in his car.
/facepalm- Ouze, on 04/26/2008, -5/+2Logic? In MY Digg?
- staticneuron, on 04/26/2008, -3/+4That innocent person was trying to get away from some dude in plain clothes trying to shoot at him.
Your stupidity astounds me. - Tahiri, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3Those people shooting at him were doing so cause he was trying to run them over in his car.
- Ouze, on 04/26/2008, -2/+3"Why do you assume we haven't read up on it?" probably because you say stupid ***** like "And since Sean had no gun (and I VERY MUCH doubt that he said, "get my gun")" when no one alleged he said that. That was Guzman.
Learn2read
- PolishLogic, on 04/26/2008, -10/+5You're right, he was completely innocent. That cop deserved to be hit by this innocent person as this innocent person was attempting to flee the scene in his car.
- jamelt, on 04/26/2008, -7/+1Shut your bitch ass up! ***** them ***** cops. These cops unloaded a firing squad on not only Sean Bell but his friends. They did nothing to deserve this! Those cops need to be in jail! They put away people for the most retarded ***** all the time and they get a acquitted after murdering this gentleman. You need to shut your ass up. They lock Michael Vick up for dog fighting! They get away with murder. They sentence Wesley Snipes to jail for three years for tax evasion misdemeanor! They get away with murder! You need a reality check you ***** dumb ass cop lover. You are so senseless!!!!!!
- hilikus34, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4"rope....closet..Go Now!!!
Thanks to whoever came up with that.
- hilikus34, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4"rope....closet..Go Now!!!
- queotic, on 04/26/2008, -6/+18Why do you assume we haven't read up on it? They may have had "reasonable suspiscion" that there was a shooting about to take place (doubt that), but did they have ANY reason to suspect that Sean Bell was involved in it? And since Sean had no gun (and I VERY MUCH doubt that he said, "get my gun" since none were found), what was the purpose in even pulling out a gun on him?
- iidestined, on 04/26/2008, -13/+28Aren't officers only allowed to fire when their lives are in danger? How did they prove that their lives were in danger?
"it takes shots to shoot back" - the game- akphidelt, on 04/26/2008, -12/+11Maybe it was the car coming at them... just a guess
- mikelieman, on 04/26/2008, -4/+13The one which was parallel parked?
And what kind of idiot MOVES to STAND IN FRONT of a car coming out pulling out of a parking spot?
So, you're saying the bad training goes back to "Don't stand in the street", even more than "Don't shoot unarmed men without any reason"- oMeSSiaHo, on 04/26/2008, -11/+4So it would have been a good idea to let a drunk drive away? The guy could have killed any number of people.
- pintomp3, on 04/26/2008, -3/+15i was unaware drinking and driving carried the death penalty
- jroll8481, on 04/26/2008, -3/+13yeah because I always see guns drawn when cops are doing their check point stops to arrest drunk drivers....that might have been the dumbest excuse so far
- SickofSects, on 04/26/2008, -2/+350 bullets for drunk driving sounds about fair..
- solid12345, on 04/26/2008, -4/+2You guys are clueless, you don't think if a drunk driver came by and swiped a highway patrol man's car on the road while writing a ticket he wouldn't pull out his gun and shoot at the driver if he could?
How is shooting at them any different than running them off the road, either way the point is it is worth putting the drunk driver's life at risk to save innocent lives. - oMeSSiaHo, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3How many of you vigilante assholes go nuts when an innocent person gets hurt by a drunk driver?
Maybe you are right. Maybe they should have let the drunk, erratic and angry guy who already almost killed someone drive away. - dema, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1At least if they had killed someone while driving drunk it would've resulted in a conviction...
- mikelieman, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2If these cops "Judgment" is so accurate -- that they were able to determine his supposed blood alcohol content was unlawfully high -- why did they draw their weapons against an unarmed man and murder him?
- oMeSSiaHo, on 04/26/2008, -11/+4So it would have been a good idea to let a drunk drive away? The guy could have killed any number of people.
- mikelieman, on 04/26/2008, -4/+13The one which was parallel parked?
- peterapokotos, on 04/26/2008, -1/+4So hard to move out the way of a car. And shooting at the car will make it stop in exact place you want it to stop.
- Bakebehe, on 04/26/2008, -0/+6You're quoting a ***** rapper on life on the street? Game needs to STFU.
- blackjack75, on 04/26/2008, -4/+4I think the internal rule in the NY police is that if there is any black person less than 100 miles away they consider themselves in danger of immediate death.
- TippyTom, on 04/26/2008, -3/+3WOW!! Your ***** Stupid!!
- akphidelt, on 04/26/2008, -12/+11Maybe it was the car coming at them... just a guess
- swrostmore, on 04/26/2008, -20/+35After firing 50 shots at the unarmed men (emptying multiple clips and reloading), the cops then handcuffed the victims as they lay dying on the street.
If the victims were white, the cops would have gotten the death penalty. There is absolutely no question about that. When was the last time an unarmed white person was shot by the police?- Falldog, on 04/26/2008, -8/+17What about a white woman? http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2 ...
Don't bring race into this, it's a non factor.- swrostmore, on 04/26/2008, -4/+14She wasn't killed, the cop hasn't been acquitted, and whats your source for her even being white? The cop who fired the shots into her arm was NAMED White, did that confuse you?
- Witchbaby, on 04/26/2008, -2/+3Race is already in it. You know that.
- ThatJayguy, on 04/26/2008, -10/+19sorry buddy, but race is a factor: for every white man or woman you can show me unjustly shot to death I will show you 2 dozen african americans shot then the cops
- Falldog, on 04/26/2008, -8/+17What about a white woman? http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2 ...