Kelly Thomas died as a result of injuries meted out by police officers.
The officers, charged with 2nd degree murder and manslaughter, were acquitedyesterday. The jury acquitted after deliberating for less than two days.
Not having followed the case, my primary familiarity with it is the security footage of his arrest (video here: obvious warning, it contains graphic violence).
Viewed in a vacuum, the video creates the impression that the police acted unlawfully (for a lay conception of ‘unlawful’). Following that, their acquittal has led to a substantial amount of RO.
I’m trying to figure out what the defence was. The net, though, is overwhelmed with, well, non-Dopers.
I tried to remain neutral in this OP and am posting to GD instead of the Pit in hopes that someone here has followed the case closely enough to be able to earnestly represent the defence’s case.
Did the prosecution suffer a miserable failure and did not prove some element of the charges?
Did the defence provide substantially more context than available in the footage?
Did the case turn on some aspect of California law regarding police actions?
Again, I didn’t follow the actual case, so cannot give an informed opinion (which I’d do if this were the Pit). I assume others can.