Bart Police shooting of a young man named Oscar Grant in Oakland (YouTube'd)

[Correction]

Worst part about arguing with Finesse is he won't even budge an inch. He's 100% right and nobody else has anything valid to say on the matter.

Yeah, someone's been sued as part of a wrongful death suit over a taser death, so got me there. Problem is, Finesse argued against a similar claim about whether or not this is a valid suit a few pages back:

(a wrongful death suit brought against the Bart cop) Names the officer as a representative as BART, not as a personal litigant. Derp.

So cop is named in wrongful death suit, but that's not the same as being sued. But cop in Louisiana gets named in wrongful death suit, and suddenly he's a convicted murderer which means taser deaths can be brought into a discussion of attempted homicide.

Got it.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

You did way more than that, you argued that the part of the law with the 'life sentence' penalty applies better than the part of the law with the 'ten years + fine' penalty.

So I posted federal law, made an opinion on the penalty of breaking that law, you started bitching about my post because I don't know the law, then intent, then this, then that. Now you agree I understood the law and you're pulling sementricks. What's your argument here again?

Let me help you. Your argument was this:

yes, let's hand down unconstitutional sentences any time a white cop injures a black person.

You still keep changing your argument even though it's been proven constitutional. Again, I gave an opinion - big word I know but lets roll with this here it gets good - on the punishment that should be handed down based off of what I saw in the videos.

Again, you claimed I didn't have evidence of intent while alluding you had a better grasp of the officers intent. Your - big word again here it comes - opinion on the matter is that the punishment fits certain words of that law while I feel that the law was broken in a manner to fit other language in the same law.


You're stomping around banging pots and pans telling me I'm wrong when all we're doing is disagreeing on the word of law. You're a fucking dunce that's trying to put his big boy hat on and sound smarter than he really is. You've proven yourself wrong using unconstitutional on the first stone you cast into this pond and now you feel bad for saying dumb shit. Don't get mad at me for pointing out dumb shit you've said.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Worst part about arguing with Finesse is he won't even budge an inch. He's 100% right and nobody else has anything valid to say on the matter.

Yeah, someone's been sued as part of a wrongful death suit over a taser death, so got me there. Problem is, Finesse argued against a similar claim about whether or not this is a valid suit a few pages back:



So cop is named in wrongful death suit, but that's not the same as being sued. But cop in Louisiana gets named in wrongful death suit, and suddenly he's a convicted murderer which means taser deaths can be brought into a discussion of attempted homicide.

Got it.

Indicted in federal court for criminal manslaughter is a wrongful death civil suit compared to the BART civil case you used earlier? Say what? Do you know what you're even saying anymore?

[miokomioko]

<correction> something
<finesse> FUCK YOU BLAH BLAH RACIST RACIST
<correction> no, something something
<finesse> YOU ARE STUPID WAH WAH RACIST RACIST
<anyone else> something something
<finesse> WAH WAH BLAH BLAH YOU'RE A FUCKING IDIOT BLAH BLAH BLAH RACIST RACIST


What's this thread about again? Oh, a cop accidentally killing an arrest-resisting douchebag in front of a a crowd of people.

Emotional black response is emotional.

[Correction]

Brick fucking wall

"Maybe if I'm the last person to post I can pretend I'm not even a little bit wrong and won the argument."

There are two suits here. One alleges wrongful death and is a civil suit. One is a manslaughter charge. Neither has played all the way out. Neither represents a clincher for your side of 'tasers = attempted homicide and therefore a life sentence is merited.' especially when the very fucking article you quoted says

Nugent could face up to 40 years behind bars if convicted on the manslaughter charge.

So clearly they're not charging him under the federal color of law statute, because the maximum penalty listed is not life in fucking prison

Get it through your thick fucking skull.

Again, school's out.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

"Maybe if I'm the last person to post I can pretend I'm not even a little bit wrong and won the argument."

There are two suits here. One alleges wrongful death and is a civil suit. One is a manslaughter charge. Neither has played all the way out. Neither represents a clincher for your side of 'tasers = attempted homicide and therefore a life sentence is merited.' especially when the very fucking article you quoted says



So clearly they're not charging him under the federal color of law statute, because the maximum penalty listed is not life in fucking prison

Get it through your thick fucking skull.

Again, school's out.

School must not be out because you're still begging for lessons. He's being tried in federal court for the taser death. Sup. He's obviously not being tried untl the color of law statute he's being tried for manslaughter. You just say random shit without reading facts and hope I fall for it every time. What a shitty tactic if I say so myself.

Let's try this. You read the whole article, or post, or whatever. Let it sit there and swirl around in that oversized yet underused melon of yours for longer than 5 minutes before you go giving us more brainbusting opinions and made up facts on the matter.

This will help you from getting all pissed off and frothing in your posts and you might, just might, say some shit that makes sense and holds water. Otherwise you're just allowing me to play tetherball on dat ass all night long.

Also, lol at mioko chiming in after the stomping I gave him earlier. CLASSIC

[miokomioko]

I received a "stomping?" Huh? What does that even mean? It must not have been very memorable.

Internet tough kid at its best.

[Nephlite]

Think the biggest laugh of them all is all these laws and statues get thrown around when the biggest issue is people just don't listen to the police.

Kidnapping? Really? When you're under arrest?
Nah i'm gonna fight more, maybe they'll let me go.
Taze.
Oh shit they Tazed me! Those mother fuckers!
Taze.
Fuck you I ain't goin to jail!
Taze.
Fuck you, you can't do this to me!
Taze.

I agree wholeheartedly and from the get-go that there's a lot of cases where police overabuse their power and suddenly it becomes a fiasco and unfortunately, people die and people get even. Whatever the case may be, there's always 99 problems with the law and the bitch just got 1 (Yay academy linguistics). Everyone interprets the law differently, it's up to the 12 or 6 people in the Jury and the Judge to determine what's what and who's who.

From what I saw in the BART video, the officer shot the guy once, did look up and have the "Oh shit what the fuck did I do?" expression, and only used ONE hand to fire the gun. The whole time the subject was resisting, continued to resist, and was kicking and moving even as the officer stood to taze him. Up till that point, it looked (from my opinion) that he was justified in going to a different option because plainly, trying to handcuff and subdue the guy by physical force didn't work. Shooting him was clearly wrong and he should definitely pay for that. But I doubt it very seriously if he meant to do that out of rage or had a premeditated response (Murder 1), and no where did it mention anywhere during trial that any racial indicators were present (Thus I refer back to my earlier post that people die every day in police custody, but it's only a problem when it's white on black).

Need some source on the trial information. Not showing up on law.com (hasn't been approved because verdict isn't set) and lawofficer.com is still showing trial as ongoing (as we all know he was convicted, they're probably just slow).

[Correction]

Finesse still wants a death sentence in a case for which it cannot legally be applied.

Finesse still wants a life sentence in a case for which it cannot reasonably be applied.

That's what the last, what, 60 posts were about, for those wondering how this thread grew so quickly.

Just a friendly neighborhood service.

[Melena]

Ok dear god the fucking retardation here from Finese is making my head spin.

1. The JUDGE said there was no evidence to convict on Murder 1. He allowed Murder 2, Voluntary Manslaughter, Involuntary Manslaughter, and Acquittal. Those were the options.

2. When the defense lawyer was arguing with the judge and prosecutor on what could be on the table after closing arguments, he wanted only murder 2 or acquittal.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_1...nclick_check=1

LOS ANGELES — Former BART police Officer Johannes Mehserle will not be convicted of first-degree murder, a judge declared Wednesday. But jurors deciding the 28-year-old's fate will be allowed to consider every other crime, including second-degree murder, associated with a homicide.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Perry said evidence in the case proves that Mehserle did not plan to kill when he shot Oscar Grant III, of Hayward, on the Fruitvale BART station platform in Oakland with a single bullet into Grant's back.
However, Perry said, there is enough evidence to allow the jury to consider if the killing was second-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter. The jury can
Vote



also decide that Mehserle did not commit a crime at all and acquit him.In making his decision, Perry said that even with a second-degree murder conviction, Mehserle would face a penalty of 40 years to life in prison because the Alameda County District Attorney's Office also charged the former officer with a gun enhancement.
That enhancement, purposely firing a gun during the commission of a murder, adds 25 years to the 15 years-to-life-in-prison sentence that accompanies a second-degree murder conviction. A first-degree murder conviction carries a 50 years-to-life prison sentence.
Meanwhile, the punishment for a voluntary manslaughter conviction ranges from three to 11 years and a conviction for involuntary manslaughter
conviction ranges from two to four years.Perry's ruling rejected a defense gamble to have the jury decide between only second-degree murder and acquittal. The gamble, legal experts have said, was made by the defense in hopes of preventing the jury from finding a way to punish Mehserle for the crime in a less severe manner.
But Perry said deputy district attorney David Stein presented enough evidence over the past month to justify having the jury consider lesser crimes.
In

general, the jury would have to find that Mehserle took the following actions to reach the following crimes: Second-degree murder: Mehserle knew the actions he was taking could cause a death but took those actions any way.
Voluntary manslaughter: Mehserle acted in the heat of passion or Mehserle believed his life was in danger but used too much force in defending himself.
Involuntary manslaughter: Mehserle committed an act that posed a high risk of death or great injury because of the way the act was committed. Or, Mehserle's actions could be found by a reasonable person to be reckless.Legal experts said the judge's decision to allow the jury to consider all the lesser crimes was a victory for the prosecution. Giving the jury more options to find guilt allows it to convict Mehserle of a crime even if the jury does not believe Mehserle intended to kill Grant.
"The difference between second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter is a subtle one," said Northern California attorney Michael Cardoza. "It gives the jury a chance to do whatever it wants."
After the hearing, Grant's uncle Cephus Johnson said he was pleased with the judge's ruling and asked supporters to remain calm regardless of the final outcome of the trial.
"I'm happy with the rulings today, we got everything that we wanted," Johnson said. "We thought it was second-degree from the beginning."
Johnson said that while the family embraces the support it has received since Grant was killed, he said the family denounces any acts of violence or destruction of property in the trial's aftermath.
"The message I have for the community is basically the same we had from the very start," Johnson said. "We as a family denounce violence in the street and destruction of property."

So please, get the fucking facts straight before you start spouting off with your bullshit. You've shown you have no idea what the fuck your talking about. But please, let us know how your foot tastes and your ass smells.

[Yabby]

This thread is less about what happened, right or wrong, or any injustice to the person's involved. It has simple become a person trying to have the last post.

[Atreides]

protests in the street, but then again 2 years is a fucking bullshit sentence for shooting a handcuffed man in the back

[jmc]

Really?

This gonna start up again?

[Melena]

protests in the street, but then again 2 years is a fucking bullshit sentence for shooting a handcuffed man in the back

Only he wasn't handcuffed. He had one arm free and another in his pocket. The prosecution didn't even deny that. But then again how people were throwing bullshit assumptions around like it was fact earlier in this thread *hackcoughfinessehackcought* it's bound to happen again. Just like his family came pouring out of the woodwork demanding justice when he was killed, but couldn't give two shits and let him run around like a hoodlum before hand. Call me an asshole, but live like a thug, die like a thug.

[Correction]

Bay Area is confused whether it should be rioting over Oscar Grant or the SF Giants.