Tasteless, sarcastic joke of the day:
How many cops does it take to change a light bulb? Two. One to shoot the bulb and one to testify that the light bulb was reaching for a weapon.
><DARWIN>
_L___L
Mr. Zambezi, because the points I have raised have not been addressed, I would have to say that the question isn’t “Why would they risk their careers?”
The question is “With all the blind support of the public, the obvious bias of the court system towards police, and the fact that the only possible witness to the event was now dead, what risk could there possibly be to their careers?”
You know that they approached him with guns drawn and pointed at him for no justifiable reason. You HAVE to know that he didn’t whip his wallet out as if it were a gun. And you would have to be blind not to see that firing 41 bullets in just a few seconds is reckless endangerment of the grossest kind.
But because they are the police, not normal human beings with weaknesses and prejudices, they couldn’t possibly have done the wrong thing.
Could they?
Who the heck has said they didn’t do the wrong thing? The question which the jury had to address was whether that wrong action fit the legal definition of the specified charges.
I read a news story today which cited an earlier report that 44,000 people die in this country each year because of hospital errors. Should we be arresting all the hospital personnel who made those mistakes? I read another story about a brain surgeon who operated on the wrong hemisphere of a patient’s brain (and it was the second time he had done that within 5 years) and the patient died. Should he be convicted of murder?
Even a lawyer for the Diallo family admitted today that two of the officers didn’t commit any crime. If the DA had really been interested in seeing justice done he could have brought appropriate charges against the officers based on each individual’s own actions. Instead he chose to pursue the demogogic option of indicting them for murder as a foursome. After presenting his case, and seeing how the defense was making shreds of it, he got the judge to allow an additional charge of reckless endangerment to be included for jury consideration. Big deal! By then the prosecution had made its case for murder, and the opportunity to present the case for reckless endangerment had already passed.
Furthermore, the defense had an expert witness testify the officers followed proper procedure. The prosecution did not cross-examination him, did not produce a rebuttal witness, nor any witness to testify that the cops actions procedures were improper. What can a jury do in that situation? Several of the jurors have told the media they were dismayed about that failure on the prosecution’s part, but under the rules therefore had to accept that unchallenged testimony of the defense.
How long does it take for 4 cops to shoot 41 bullets? 5-6 seconds.
There were blacks on the jury, this was obviously not a racial case.
The cops are innocent, but they are guilty of one thing; guilty of being singled out as racists.
you differ with that? email me: upstatic@hotmail.com
R.J.D.
No, upster, we’ll deal with this here.
Where was the need for four police to approach him with guns drawn and aimed?
Where was the need to fire 41 times in 5.6 seconds, thus assuring that most of the shots would miss him, ENDANGERING OTHERS?
Why do you believe that this man whipped his wallet out as if it were a weapon towards four large white men approaching him with guns drawn?
Most importantly, where does loyalty end, and blind faith begin?
I think I have made it clear how absolutely fucking disgusted I was with this case from day one. Turns my stomach, scares the fucking shit out of me, and I swear to God, this sounds horrible, but makes me sort of thank the heavens my children are typical white boys. I feel so sorry for the hard working immigrants that come into NYC who literally have to fear for their lives everyday. Not from hoodlums or psycho-killers on the street, but from the very people that were put in place to make them feel safe and protected. I feel sorry for their mothers who live with that fear. I feel God damn angry. Fucking bastard cops, what comes around goes around, their time to pay will come. I hope they can’t sleep at night, I hope they hate to look at their own reflections every day, I hope they live with the fear of a vigilante looking for justice every single fucking day of their bloated donut eating ignorant lives. Fucking lowlifes.
This life is a test. It is only a test. If it had been an actual life, you would have received further instructions on where to go and what to do.
Slythe said
Are you suggesting that these thoughts atually ran through their minds as they shot. Did they look at each other that day and say, “hey, with blind public support and biased judges, let’ shoot someone today.”
Do you think that facing murder charges was a picnic for these guys? Plus, can you imagine the fear they have of going out in public now? I doubt that they decided to go through all of this. Besides, you are begging the question that there is public support and that the judges are biased.
I do not know how he pulled out his wallet, nor do you. Having shot hand guns, and having held one while someone was breaking into my apartment, I can tell you that I can see very clearly why they would have emptied their clips. Because they were afraid and didn’t want to get shot themselves.
The problem is that people watch too many movies and do not know that guns don’t drop a person in one shot. THey are not magic wands. If you really fear for your life, you will keep pulling the trigger.
Has anyone here who thinks that the number of shots suggests culpability ever emptied a 9 mm handgun?
It is fast, easy and fun.
Slythe:
Since one of the cops fired only 4 shots, then only after one of his partners fell, and richocheting shots made him think Diallo was returning fire, does that make him guilty of reckless endangerment? Is he responsible for many other shots his partners made?
Recklessness endangerment charges may have been warranted against two of the officers involved. As I mentioned before, even a Diallo family lawyer now admits two of the officers weren’t guilty. It seems to me that those incapable of looking at the officers as individuals, and judging them on their own actions, and not the actions of their partners, are merely exhibiting their own deep biases and prejudices against police.
Nubuli, I will say this one more time.
All four officers approached this man with their guns drawn drawn and pointed at him, without just cause.
All four officers testified that he whipped his wallet out and whirlled around as if he had a weapon. Either he was extremely suicidal, or they are lying sacks of shit.
I don’t hate police. I hate all white, macho, paranoid, undertrained goon squads.
Slythe, I didn’t say you hated them, I said you seemed prejudiced against them. That is not necessarily the same thing. I still say you appear prejudiced because the only option you can see is that if Diallo was not deliberately suicidal, then the police must have been a macho, paranoid, undertrained goon squad, and liars also.
First, as far as the wallet goes- several suggestions have already been made that Diallo may have thought they were muggers, or he may have just panicked and tried to get his ID out pronto. Secondly, within the month preceding the shooting NYC police had received briefings about some dealer who was selling guns disguised as wallets. Did that briefing play any part in the officers’ reactions- probably not. None of them mentioned it in their testimony as far as I know. But it illustrates the potential dangers the police always have to keep in the back of their mind.
I’m not denying for an instant that there are extremely serious problems in police-minority relations, and that often it is the police at fault. As I said before, I think it is one of the most serious problems facing the US. But that does not justify automatically assuming that the police are always at fault, or that sometimes tragic accidents can occur without any individual being at fault.
Were these cops lying? I don’t know, and neither do you. All I know is that the testimony at their trial from a civilian witness established that one of them called “He’s got a gun” before they started shooting. It is very easy to criticize them for having guns drawn already, since as it turns out Diallo was unarmed, but how were they supposed to know that before hand?
As I mentioned before the officers’ defense presented a witness who testified they followed standard procedure in approaching Diallo. The prosecution did not, or could not, dispute that testimony. I agree that the procedure should be modified, but you can’t convict the cops ex post facto for following what was in place at the time.
I’m not denying that there are many bad cops, and that these four, or some of them, might have been among them. But if so, it was up to the DA to prove it in court- and he failed miserably in front of a racially diverse jury (and their verdict that was concurred with by impartial legal observers). The presumption of innocence applies to everybody- including policemen.
It’s really too bad that you are presumed innocent only if you are white and live in the right neighborhood. As he stood there in the doorway of his own apartment, did they presume HIS innocence? Do you believe that in any neighborhood in the country it is standard procedure for four plainclothes police to draw weapons on someone who is not a suspect, but is merely looking around? I heard the witness’s iffy testamony, and the “gun” reference was made AFTER they tried to take him down. This is your last chance to explain to me, and others, why their guns were drawn long before that.
Outside of the fact that he was black and alone, of course.
Slythe, I read that they had their guns drawn because they thought he fit the description of a rapist they were looking for, so they may have been preparing to apprehend him. That has led to everyone saying they were “racial profiling”, which was yet another problem with this whole incident. They saw a black man, who probably only vaguely fit the description of the rapist (of course “they” all look alike to some white people :rolleyes 
and decided he was their man.
FTR–I don’t necessarily agree with what they did, but I’m just trying to answer your question.
This whole thing gets uglier by the minute. At least three of the jurors here, in Albany, have gotten threats. Right or wrong, they were only doing what was in the best interest of the law.
Mt. Dew habit kicked since 2/21/00!
Sorry, I put :rolleyes: next to an end parenthesis. What was I thinking??
Mt. Dew habit kicked since 2/21/00!
Yes, it is a horrible problem but the solution is not to decide that therefore the presumption should also be withheld from white police officers.
But they did suspect he was a lookout for a robbery. The fact that they were terribly wrong shows they made a very bad judgment- if we are going to criminalize bad judgment then I repeat my earlier allusion to the number of innocent people killed each year by hospital errors. The numbers indicate we should be jailing health care personnel in droves.
Again, the unchallenged testimony stated the officers followed standard procedures. By all means, the procedures should be reformed, and probably better situational training should be instituted. Is it those four individuals fault that wasn’t done?
As a columnist I read several days ago pointed out, there are over 100,000 minorities in that precinct. Those cops were not stopping them left and right, pulling guns on them. They singled out one man because they believed his actions were suspicious- a judgment that was terribly in error- but they passed by hundreds, if not thousands, of other solitary blacks, so to say that was the reason they targeted Diallo is pure demogogery.
In addition to the statement by the Diallo family lawyer I cited previously, now the New York Civil Rights Coalition has said the verdict was proper.
Clearly police-minority relations must be radically improved. Police should be recruited from the precincts in which they will serve, local civilian oversight must be implemented, standard procedures and training must be improved, union contracts must be re-written to allow more stringent investigation of police misconduct. But trying to bend the law to convict persons in the face of the evidence and the statutes is not going to work. As this case shows it will fail, and only add to the bitterness and diviseness.
When you heard of this incident, did you presume the cops were innocent?
[QUOTE
Where was the need for four police to approach him with guns drawn and aimed?
[/QUOTE]
2 police officers initially approached the man, who did not raise his hands after the officers asked. Instead, he turned around holding, what looked like a pistol in his hand, waist high. One officer yelled, “he’s got a gun!” They began firing. The next 2 officers approached and openned fire.
It is so easy for you to criticize men doing their jobs.
(The moron should have listened to the officers.)
R.J.D.
I live in a suburb. I’ll tell you right now, cops do not patrol our streets because there is no crime. (Aside from riding a bicycle without a helmet.)
If you can’t accept the fact that most crime occurs in the urban areas around the country, move to Canada.
It makes me sick when citizens of America criticize the very men protecting their rights. Grow up, or get out.
New York City’s crime rate has gone down significantly due to Mayor Giuliani. I can’t wait until he represents me in the Senate.
R.J.D.
I waited a few days until the trial was over, read as much as possible, then stated my opinion. Just a bit more time then they gave him.
They suspected he was a lookout for a robbery? There was no call-in about a robbery, nobody told them about suspicious characters hanging about. There was one witness, after the fact, who testified that he “looked suspicious” by standing in the doorway and looking around. Police get these types of after-the-fact “I always suspected that man!” type of witnesses. In most cases they are dismissed as being useless, but in this case, they had nothing else to go with.
So now you have four police testifying for each other, and no actual independant witnesses.
Nubuli, I am surprised that you would bring up “There were other people in that neighborhood, and they weren’t harassed, therefore HE wasn’t harassed!” THIS man was alone, and there were no actual witnesses nearby.
Hey Slythe-
Get your facts straight, especially before repeating them one more time. TWO officers initially approached the man, WHO looked very similar to a man that committed a felony earlier that night. (That is just cause.)
NO, wait…you’re the expert, how would you define “just cause,” Big Sly?
R.J.D.
While we were living in Maryland, we had our deck enlarged. The contractor & crew who did the work were all African-American. While they were working, a cruiser with 2 uniformed police officers came to our house to serve one of the workers with a court-order for child support. The officers went around to the back, and as soon as they appeared in the back yard, 3 sets of black hands went up and the workers froze. The police served the papers without incident.
As a white person, it would never occur to me to be afraid when police officers approached me, but for these black men, it was an instinctive response. I wonder if police officers have come to expect that kind of response from well-intentioned, innocent blacks, and believe that any other kind of behavior is therefore suspicious. I think that major contributing factors to this tragedy was that a) the officers were not in uniform and b) Diallo perhaps had not lived in the US long enough to learn this. In an ideal world, of course, such a lesson would be completely unnecessary, since noone would ever be judged by the color of their skin. But this is the Bronx we’re talking about.
- Sue