That sounds like good news. Guess we’ll just have to wait and see where it goes.
From the article: “None of the video showed whether the window was open or closed.” Is this accurate? What about that blown up still from the helicopter footage?
Seems like an odd charge.
Manslaughter is usually separated from murder, based on intent. If you have no intention of causing a death, then it falls into the category of manslaughter.
But that didn’t happen in Tulsa. The officer was pointing a firearm at the man, and discharged it, killing him.
That’s not an accident. She was intentionally aiming her firearm at him, and fired it. If it’s not a lawful shooting, then it’s murder. It’s not first degree murder, as it wasn’t premeditated. But it seems like it’d be second degree murder. Or it’s nothing.
A charge of manslaughter seems like some attempt to make some weird compromise charge, where she gets punished, but not really THAT bad, since she’s a cop. But that’s not how our legal system is supposed to work.
Wow, that’s interesting, although that image isn’t really the best one. At the one minute mark in the video, you can see glare on the drivers side window I think, showing that it’s up… which means he couldn’t have been reaching into the car.
The definitions vary by state, but I think that manslaughter can be applied in cases where there is excessive or negligent force used, rather than only applying to cases of accidental killing.
Fox News interviewing Trump on crime, with two banners running along the bottom:
“Gotham City Gone Wild”, crime increased after ending stop and frisk." Patently false, and
“Cities Under Siege.”
Even after Trump is defeated the reality deficit on the right will just continue to grow.
As others noted above, it varies by state. But most murder laws come with an element of “premeditation” in the statute, though most jurisdictions hold that the “planning” part of the crime could be almost instantaneous.
In this case, that might be the difference. If she panicked and squeezed the trigger because she falsely thought he was doing something nefarious, then that would probably not pass muster as “premeditation” in this context.
I suspect that a degree of Manslaughter is probably the best that could come out of a fair trial.
But I am pretty far from a lawyer, so please add salt to taste.
Manslaughter or murder, I’m just glad the Tulsa authorities are at least acting swiftly and transparently to show people that the encounter’s outcome was not optimal.
The question I keep coming back to is why some of these cops seem to be so close to panic that any switch of a muscle will cause them to gun someone down? Do they see a black guy and think they are facing some quick-draw supervillain? Do police training videos or culture tell police officers that they can be killed in an instant, even if facing someone with their hands in the air and no visible weapon?
She had a loaded gun with the safety off pointed at the guy’s chest and her finger was on the trigger. If he wasn’t an immediate threat to somebody’s life then that alone is ridiculously negligent. She may have accidentally pulled the trigger, but you should never be in a position where you can accidentally kill someone who isn’t threatening someone else’s life. If she pulled the trigger purposefully without the intention of ending his life, then she’s a blithering idiot who shouldn’t be in possession of a gun.
Still, I would hate to see them reach too far with a murder charge.
NBC released footage by wife of Charlotte NC victim (I can’t watch these, but I gather there is little in here that shows anything definitive.)
Lots of cursing but yeah, you can’t see anything.
One thing is definitive about the wife’s video: Seconds after the shooting, the gun is not lying on the ground at his feet. The Charlotte police had released a few stills showing the gun at his feet.
There are reasonable explanations for this, but the police need to present one.
Does it show a book anywhere?
I too have taken to not watching these videos. I find it kinda ghoulish watching a man die over and over again.
They’re going to say it’s hidden in the shadow - I guarantee it.
It does not show a book, but there is ample room for a book, gun or anything else to be lying in an obstructed part of the view. The issue is that the cop’s photo shows a gun, but that gun is lying in a spot near the body that was clear of anything just after the shooting. The photo released by police was taken a bit after the videotape.
So, they either moved the gun or… something less savory.
Honestly the gun could be just inside the left foot of the cop in red but it’s tough to tell. I’m sure much better video sleuths than me will be dissecting the hell out of this!
Which is the problem. There are cases with absolute video evidence showing police planted guns on the bodies of questionable shootings. So it is unfortunately entirely believable this happened here.
Probably relevant:
Barrett summarizes:
So we get the three troopers at the cruiser talking about what to do. Michael’s permit comes back as valid, they say “oh crap,” and one of the troopers says “we gotta punch a number on this guy,” which means open an investigation in the police database. And he says “we really gotta cover our asses.” And then they have a very long discussion about what to charge Michael with—none of which appear to have any basis in fact. This plays out over eight minutes. They talk about “we could do this, we could do this, we could do this….”
That sounds familiar.
Ah, must have missed that. Sorry, Telefrog.