Posted on 07/20/2017 10:17:35 PM PDT by conservative98
MINNEAPOLIS — The fatal shooting of an Australian woman by a Minneapolis police officer responding to her 911 call “should not have happened,” police Chief Janee Harteau said Thursday, adding that the officer’s actions “go against who we are in the department.”
In her first public remarks since the death of Justine Damond, a 40-year-old life coach and bride-to-be, Harteau defended Officer Mohamed Noor’s training but criticized his actions.
“The actions in question go against who we are in the department, how we train and the expectations we have for our officers,” Harteau said. “These were the actions and judgment of one individual.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Intent takes a split second. It was murder. Not manslaughter. I am a lawyer. You police officers always think you are so damn smart. If I could count the times I have heard a judge tell people “police are not lawyers” .....
Like I said, I don’t think he should have been in the US in the first place, as his cult is anathema to our founding principles.
But people are just ravening to find that this was some kind of muslim jihad and are not taking into account that Noor was background checked and psychologically screened, thus reducing the chance that his religious belief system would run counter to his statutory obligations.
Now, for the sake of argument, say his background and psychological profile was damaged AND he was hired over the objections of those officers and screeners whose duty it was to evaluate and report on such, then the ELECTED officials who so enthusiastically endorsed Noor should be exposed.
And indicted.
Assuming neighbors comments about his behavior are true, this guy was a ticking time bomb. Most likely fellow officers had concerns but knew speaking out would cost them their job. Nothing was learned from Nidal Hassan
Well, counselor, I guarantee goddamn tee I have written more murder cases than you have defended. And this one is not going to be true billed on the charge of murder.
And you know it.
Or you don’t.
MOLON... please do not be a MORON...
Do not use white bread assumptions on what has many sights and smells of rotten rye.
Who knows WHAT was sacrificed for the so called “background” and “psychological profile” screening. If it wasn’t already systematically weak.
This is the kind of thing that makes police “apologists” look quite sorry!
Oh??? Maybe your web of assumptions is about to BREAK.
I would say the same if it was YOU that did this. Or anyone.
We must not overcharge anyone because of emotion. That is mob justice.
And that last sentence of excuse making is inexcusable.
Like you can’t EVER hold a malice case responsible? Even if the government missed it? The government didn’t shoot! He did!
well goody for you. Why don’t y’all do a better job of policing yourselves so your control freak brethren aren’t killing kids and women and people who aren’t threats?
Thanks brother.
How about dispassionate evaluation of MALICE AFORETHOUGHT? Aside from any “emotion” that might be engendered by it?
The boom is lowering on you. Whether or not you like it.
Wow, I can see the thin blue line forming.
Watch for it to be effaced by the thick red line of Jesus’ blood.
You have to prove malice aforethought and that is borne upon the state. I contend that it will not succeed, you contend that it will.
We have differing opinions, but one of us is resorting to insults.
But its ok, I forgive you.
It looks like you are insulting our intelligence here.
I think that if carried out competently — big if — it will succeed.
And I don’t want your condescending “forgiveness.”
I bear no responsibility for Officer Noor, so why do seek to condemn all of us for the iniquities of one?
The CoP put the exempt public gun in the hand of the Jihadi.
The thorny situation, and you are insulting your own position by acting moronic about it and not acknowledging it, is that there is a P.C. barrier here.
But aren’t you the one who whines in his tagline about safe spaces?
Morality ultimately will trump even law, because law can be immoral, man stands behind law, but God stands behind morality.
Hey you were the one making common cause with him. Are you starting to saw him off now?
I don’t see how you are getting to manslaughter unless you are arguing imperfect self defense. Without imperfect self defense, this seems pretty cut-and-dry 2nd degree murder. The intent to kill (malice aforethought) is implied from the act of pulling the trigger while aiming at someone.
As for self-defense, that will be tricky and it would be probably good (under normal circumstances) for him to take the stand to testify regarding his subjective state of mind. Given his spotty past record, and statements from other officers from his department, he would get crucified on the stand.
my question was why are y’all so damn bad at policing yourselves? Surely you know the weak links in your own organizations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.