Personally, I am really tired of obsequious puppies who are so enamoured of their authority figures that they impulsively jump to defend the police whenever anyone dares to question their conduct. Furthermore, I’ve served on juries in criminal cases and seen first-hand how a jury can be railroaded by one loudmouthed asshole with an agenda and a foreperson too timid or incompetent to reign said asshole in. Or when one side is completly overpowerd and outspent and outgunned by the other.
“How can the jury possibly…” is a legitimate question (if rather pointless after the fact), particularly when police misconduct is in the equation (and is so often given a pass).
SS
Fucking grotesque miscarriage of justice. Disgusting.
Just for accuracy’s sake, Kelly wasn’t “beaten to death” so much as crushed and strangled. Which is abundantly clear from the video. As is the outrageous behavior of the what… 8-10 cops at final tally piling on a half-naked schizophrenic man apologizing repeatedly, begging to be allowed to breathe, and finally moaning for his father as he lost consciousness.
And of course, misjudgements never happen, so it’s entirely inappropriate to request some additional information on a messageboard.
Seriously, if there is any way that what’s shown in the video is proper police conduct, or even justifiable as such in the US, then I’m just glad I get to live in a more civilized part of the world. If those cops can’t safely detain a single mentally unstable and unarmed individual without bashing in his face such that he chokes on his own blood, then some questions should be raised about your system of law enforcement and how it trains and instructs those implementing it.
Also, it seems pretty clear to me that the whole thing would have taken a different course if the victim hadn’t been mentally ill and homeless, but rather, a proper person like you and me.
Another possibility is that the jury felt that there was wrongdoing, but the prosecution never fully demonstrated it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Either way, the policemen are “not guilty.” There has been some talk of a Federal case, but most legal analysts say this would only happen if there were new evidence, or evidence not introduced in this trial, or if there were some solid indications of misconduct. Since none of those things is true, there probably won’t be another trial.
DrDeth and Amateur Barbarian, how about you climb out of the OP’s asshole. The man is clearly not JAQing off, it isn’t ridiculous to wonder if justice was served based on viewing a short clip clearly showing abuse of power. Are you both under the impression the justice system in infallible? Did the Straight Dope change it’s mission statement from ‘Fighting Ignorance’ to ‘Don’t Ask Anything Here Until You’ve Read Hundreds of Pages of Court Transcripts’.
Cause if it did there isn’t an OP any of you have started that couldn’t be addressed with the same arrogance you’ve shown here.
Do you have a cite that he choked to death on his own blood?
Presumably if he had not been mentally ill, he would not have been attempting to find unlocked cars, and if he had not had a history of violence against family members, he would not have been homeless. So you may be right there.
More than anything else, I’d call the whole wretched affair an indictment of the state of mental health care in the U.S. post-deinstitutionalization. That we have an underclass of the mentally ill living on the streets, where they will have confrontations with police officers not equipped or trained to deal with them, is the real problem.
It should be noted that whether the conduct was proper procedure or justifiable as such cannot be determined solely from the outcome of a criminal trial. The jury is charged with determining whether the elements of a crime have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is quite different from evaluating whether proper procedures were followed.
I quote "Not having followed the case, my primary familiarity with it is the security footage of his arrest …
Viewed in a vacuum, the video creates the impression that the police acted unlawfully (for a lay conception of ‘unlawful’)."
In other words, all he knows is that he watched a short, heavily edited video snippet and he’s quite ready to say that the Jury- who watched all of that and days and days of other testimony- is wrong.
It is ridiculous to wonder if justice was served based on viewing a short clip …
Because of course, our justice system should be run on watching youtube vids rather than listening to that boring evidence crap.:dubious::rolleyes:
For the fun of it, would anyone like to offer some kinds of evidence they feel would compellingly change the perception of what is seen on the video? Because you can bring me stacks and stacks and my (admittedly limited) imagination still cannot conjure up anything that significantly changes what is plain to see, given that the video shows the entire incident, apart from a few seconds. Seconds which for me don’t matter all that much, because my horror is directed at what came after those seconds.
No, you’re utterly wrong. It is not ridiculous to seek more information, which is what the OP (both the post and the poster) did. There is no declaration that the jury was wrong or might be, or that the verdict was unthinkable, or that the system had failed. All there is is an admission of ignorance and a request for information, WHICH IS WHY THIS MESSAGE BOARD EXISTS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
He appeared to be saying that his country, whatever it is, is civilized. There, no one chokes on their own blood, so the anatomy of their throats apparently differs as well as their police training.
But I am asking for a cite of something he presumed, not I. The implication appears to be that things **like this **don’t happen in his country.
Therefore it is fair to ask if cases like this never turn out in his country like this one did.
It’s a serious response to your assertion. What country has police who are so good, that they can subdue a homeless person with serious health issues in ways that guarantee that he will not die in the struggle?