Maybe if you don’t mind people mistaking a gun for a taser. Personally, I think its a mind-boggelingly stupid way to design something that will be on the same belt as a gun and used in similar situations when the user will be under stress and maybe not thinking as clearly as they would like to be, but YMMV.
How about this.Or this.Or this. Making a taser that feels & fires exactly like the gun the cop is using, and placing it on the same belt as the gun the cop is using is asking for something like this to happen. It is pure idiocy.
Of course none of this excuses the officer for shooting a detained, prone man in the back, even if it was just with a taser that would be uncalled for.
These are the specific options the judge gave the jury, each with two possible theories, per the SF Chronicle:
2nd Degree Murder:
Mehserle unlawfully intended to kill Oscar Grant.
or
He intentionally committed an inherently dangerous act, while knowing it was dangerous and acting with conscious disregard for human life.
Voluntary Manslaughter:
Mehserle killed Grant in the heat of passion.
or
He acted in “imperfect self-defense,” based on an actual but unreasonable belief that he needed to use lethal force.
Involuntary Manslaughter:
Mehserle committed a lawful act but with “criminal negligence.”
or
He committed a crime - using excessive force on Grant by deciding to shock him with a Taser - that was not in itself potentially lethal, but became so because of the manner in which it was committed.
My gut feeling is that Mehserle was probably guilty of voluntary manslaughter*, however even with that said I think I can easily entertain reasonable doubt on the issue. Having served on a couple of juries, I’m not going to second guess this one - frankly I suspect I might have voted the same in the end.
I am suspicious of his claims that he mistakenly drew his taser, especially since not only did he refuse debriefing in the aftermath of the incident, not speaking about it until weeks later, but he never once articulated that defense to his follow officers in the immediate aftermath. All he kept saying was " I thought he was going for a gun." I strongly suspect he actually panicked under stress and deliberately drew his firearm. But like I said, I certainly can’t be sure of that.
I imagine that was because that’s the first instinct for a cop who fucks up and shoots someone, “I thought he had a gun!”. Admiting that you shot someone because you didn’t know what you’re doing makes you seem a lot worse than shooting someone because you thought they were going for a gun.
That is what he claims and I think officer Pirone backed him up on that point. However the various videos ( with audio ) shows no trace of that ( as Mehserle admitted on the stand ) and I am inclined to regard Pirone as an unreliable witness for various reasons.
Like I said, it probably ( in concert with other issues ) is enough to sow reasonable doubt in my mind, which is a low bar. But I remain skeptical on the mistaken taser issue.
It sounds like involuntary manslaughter to me. The officer was criminally negligent in drawing his pistol instead of his Taser.
No offense, I hope, but this starts to sound a little like “he must be guilty - only guilty people invoke the Fifth Amendment”. If I ever shot anyone (God forbid) I would be damn careful about saying anything at all. Maybe he was hoping he would get lucky and the guy would wind up having a gun on him after all. Then he just says “I was gonna Tase him, but I felt the outline of a gun in his pants so I shot him instead”. Which would have put a whole different spin on it.
Absolutely. Silence should never be construed as guilt, especially in a society where the accused is presumed innocent, as a matter of law.
I think it’s quite interesting that the UK equivalent of the Miranda warning actually tells the accused that if they do not mention, when questioned, something that they later rely on in court, it could harm their defense. Or defence, i guess, being the UK.
No offense, i hope, but this starts to sound a little like you think that this sort of lie would be a reasonable and acceptable course of action.
Oh hell no - this thing was a cluster fuck of the first order, and the officer should not have gotten away with it. I just don’t think, based on my admittedly superficial knowledge of the case, that sufficient evidence exists to establish that Mehserle intended to shoot him.
None taken. While I think it was mighty odd he didn’t try justify himself to his fellow officers on such an obvious point ( " I thought he was going for a gun and Jesus Christ, I only meant to tase the guy" ), it’s not the only thing I was looking at, but more just part of a whole.
For example one of his defenses on the stand was the very small amount of time he spent practicing and being trained on his new taser. Which is fair enough. But he contrasted that with his constant quick-draw exercises with his pistol over a period of years. After years of constant practice drawing a pistol with a full load, he didn’t notice the difference in weight and feel of his taser? I dunno. For me it starts to add up wrong.
But I don’t really want to re-argue the case, mainly because as stated I don’t necessarily disagree with you. As I said I probably wouldn’t have voted for voluntary manslaughter either ( never say never, I don’t have access to all the material the jury did ) and I’m comfortable, pending sentencing, that some measure of justice has been done in this case. This is the verdict I expected and I can’t argue that strongly against it. My suspicions are just that - I’m not wedded to them.
If the officer had went with that defense, then he would have guaranteed himself murder-2. At least with “I thought it was my taser” he never admits intent to shoot the guy.
Maybe the gun and taser should be a single hand-held unit and you pull the trigger half way for taser and pull the trigger all the way for gun. That way, if the taser isn’t cutting it, you don’t have to waste time putting the taser away and reaching for the separate gun.
I can think of one way it could go wrong. You want to shoot the gun but in the process of pulling the trigger all the way, you launch the taser unnecessarily when the trigger reaches the half way point. Wasted taser… and you could trip over those wires if you’re in a foot pursuit.
First: seriously? You don’t think that some cop would pull the trigger extra hard in the heat of the moment? I believe that most cops now are issued double-action only pistols. The reason for this is mainly that training is easier because the trigger pull is consistent and they’re simpler. They wouldn’t want to add more complexity.
I don’t believe he intended to kill the guy and Idon’t think he meant to pull out his Taser. I think he went for his gun to have it ready, as a show of force whatever and due to lack of training in stressful situations or whatever, he shot the guy.
