BART police officer gets involuntary manslaughter for killing passenger

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Erk. You’re quite right. Okay, make that a bag with one orange, and a bag with four oranges.

[villa]

@Magiver

It’s a valid point but I’m not sure it’s relevant to the trial. It comes down to intent. Maybe it adds to the level of negligence andmay be considered during sentencing. Don’t know.

It’s definitely relevant to the trial…

2nd Degree Murder:

1. Mehserle unlawfully intended to kill Oscar Grant.

or

2. He intentionally committed an inherently dangerous act, while knowing it was dangerous and acting with conscious disregard for human life.

Voluntary Manslaughter:

1. Mehserle killed Grant in the heat of passion.

or

2. He acted in “imperfect self-defense,” based on an actual but unreasonable belief that he needed to use lethal force.

Involuntary Manslaughter:

1. Mehserle committed a lawful act but with “criminal negligence.”

or

2. 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.

Whether the individual is subdued goes directly to whether the act was lawful, and probably to whether the actor was criminally negligent. Tasering a subdued subject isn’t lawful. It also goes to the actuality of any claim of self defense, as well as its reasonableness, as well as to whether the killing was “in the heat of passion.”

Whether the victim was subdued is directly relevant then to a determination of at least the voluntary and involuntary manslaughter charges.

[descamisado]

This is what I was trying articulate (for myself as much as others) when I asked the question that elicited Magiver’s post above; I can’t figure out why it wasn’t considered in the charges, the trial and the verdict.

[villa]

It also goes directly to the second part of involuntary manslaughter - was the force excessive. You have a lot less leeway with a restrained suspect than one swinging at you.

[Clark_K]

I found this article interesting for its material on the officer’s previous use of the Taser and the contradictions inherent in the jury’s verdict.

http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/07/oscar_grant_verdict_whats_inside_the_jurys_ruling.html

I’m not familiar with the publication or the writer, so I can’t vouch for the accuracy, but the piece doesn’t read like an uninformed screed. I came across it via a link on Andrew Sullivan’s blog for the Atlantic, for what that’s worth.

[Clark_K]

I found an interesting passage in an earlier story by the same writer. She describes the prosecutor’s questioning of a witness on the Taser training the officer had received:

“Stein also underlined the fact that the X26 Taser Mehserle was using that night looked nothing like his gun. In fact, the X26 was 60 percent lighter than its predecessor, the M26. The X26 was a neon yellow, plastic thing, almost toylike with its light weight, buttons and LED screens. That night, Mehserle, who is right-handed, had his Taser holstered on his non-dominant left side so he could use a cross-draw pull. Stein made sure the jury knew that this configuration was explicitly suggested by the Taser manufacturer to decrease the likelihood that a cop would ever confuse their gun for a Taser.”

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Clark_K

I found this article interesting for its material on the officer’s previous use of the Taser and the contradictions inherent in the jury’s verdict.

http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/07/oscar_grant_verdict_whats_inside_the_jurys_ruling.html

I’m not familiar with the publication or the writer, so I can’t vouch for the accuracy, but the piece doesn’t read like an uninformed screed. I came across it via a link on Andrew Sullivan’s blog for the Atlantic, for what that’s worth.

Assuming that piece is accurate vis-a-vis “I thought he was going for a gun” and the Taser being holstered across his body, It just went from “probably deliberate” to “certainly deliberate” for me.