Posted on 04/29/2008 5:35:55 AM PDT by fweingart
(Rep. John Conyers (c.), chairman of House Judiciary Committee, gets tour of Bell shooting site from Joseph Guzman (l))
Three days after a trio of detectives were cleared of killing the young bridegroom in a 50-bullet barrage, Joseph Guzman led Rep. John Conyers through the pouring rain from the Kalua Cabaret - the Queens strip club where Bell had held his bachelor party - to the spot where he died.
"We walked down the corner here, we turned the corner," Guzman, who was shot 16 times and leaned heavily on his cane as he walked, told Conyers.
They stopped when they got to the spot on Liverpool St. in Jamaica where Bell was killed - and where dozens of bouquets and candles lay soaking in the rain.
With them were Bell's fiancée, Nicole Paultre Bell, his parents and Trent Benefield, the other survivor of the Nov. 25, 2006, shooting.
"We want to make sure justice is served, and we send a message not just to law enforcement but to young people that these types of tragedies have to end in this country," Conyers told them earlier.
What Conyers, a Democrat and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told them as they huddled under umbrellas was out of the earshot of reporters.
As Conyers turned to go, Ken Frydman, a spokesman for the Detectives' Endowment Association, approached him and said, "I'd like to respectfully request a meeting with the chairman on behalf of the [association]."
"If you are who you say you are, I accept," replied Conyers, who had been asked by the Rev. Al Sharpton to visit the shooting scene.
Sharpton is trying to pressure federal prosecutors into trying the detectives for violating Sean Bell's civil rights.
The African-American community is still seething after Detectives Marc Cooper, Michael Oliver and Gescard Isnora were acquitted Friday.
Cooper apologized for the shooting after the verdict; the other two haven't. All still face departmental hearings and civil suits and remain on modified duty, deprived of their guns.
In her first television interview since the verdict, Nicole Paultre Bell told Dominic Carter on New York 1's "Inside City Hall" that she accepted Cooper's apology.
"He looked like he was sorry for what happened," she said.
Benefield also accepted the apology, but Guzman shook his head and suggested "you should get him in here to find out what really happened." Oliver, who fired 31 of the shots, is riding a desk at the Manhattan Detective Borough. Cooper is doing clerical work at Detective Borough Bronx, and Isnora is performing similar duties at Detective Borough Brooklyn.
Bell, a 23-year-old father of two, was killed on his wedding day. While legal experts said it's unlikely the feds would intervene, Sharpton and the Bell family aren't giving up.
"We're the shot, not the shooters," Sharpton said.
Earlier, former New York Civil Liberties Union head Norman Siegel and members of 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care, an advocacy group for black cops, proposed a permanent state special prosecutor with the power to investigate allegations of police brutality and corruption.
Queens District Attorney Richard Brown said there was no need for a special prosecutor. Many in the African-American community believe prosecutors made a halfhearted attempt to convict the cops.
When is Rev J Jackson coming? I guess the Circus has returned to town, again! Send in the clowns! Wait, they're here already!
Lets see , this dirtbag tries to run over a cop and nobody can understand why shots were fired ? Are these people gods clowns or what ? It proves one thing .....................there are no limits to the stupidity that people are able to exhibit even when the facts prove otherwisePerhaps if these people had a job they wouldn't have all this time to march and protest. The silent majority meanwhile has no time for this nonsense because they have to go to work.
------------------------------------------------------ When is Rev J Jackson coming? I guess the Circus has returned to town, again! Send in the clowns! Wait, they're here already!
--------------------------------------------------------- Lets see , this dirtbag tries to run over a cop and nobody can understand why shots were fired ? Are these people gods clowns or what ? It proves one thing .....................there are no limits to the stupidity that people are able to exhibit even when the facts prove otherwisePerhaps if these people had a job they wouldn't have all this time to march and protest. The silent majority meanwhile has no time for this nonsense because they have to go to work.
---------------------------------------------------------
I am curious as to what the jury’s logic was in acquitting these guys.
Simple, when you try to run over a cop, you will be shot.
Self defense. Two of the cops are black, I'm sure there were blacks on the jury. He was taking a run at them with a car. Bang, bang, you're dead.
If it had been three blacks cops and a white teenager, would barely have made the evening news.
It doesn’t matter (by law) whether Bell was hit by a thousand rounds of .50BMG fire or shot once through the ear with a phonograph needle. But, the media love “hail of fire” angle. It seems so brutal.
From the website of the Revolutionary Communist Party, parent org behind World Can't Wait--Drive Out the Bush Regime, their "Mission Statement":
"Create Public Opinion, Seize Power! We are preparing minds and organizing forces for the time when there is a major crack in the system, whenever it comes and wherever it comes from: an opening that makes it possible to bring the future Revolutionary Army of the Proletariat (R.A.P.) into the field and wage a revolutionary armed struggle that actually has a chance of winning. And we have said that building our party itself is the most important part of organizing forces for revolution. This is true now, and it is true looking forward to the creation of that future R.A.P. and the waging of that armed struggle. ":
http://revcom.us/a/v20/1000-1009/1000/barw.htm
And...
"Throughout its history, one of RCP's principal objectives has been to foment civil unrest in the United States. The most notable example of such efforts occurred on April 29, 1992, when RCP members looted and trashed the downtown and government districts of Los Angeles, triggering the infamous Rodney King riots. During the days immediately preceding the violence, RCP -- which maintained close ties to the L.A. gangs known as the Crips and the Bloods -- had circulated throughout South Central Los Angeles a leaflet featuring a statement by RCP National Spokesman Carl Dix, titled 'It's Right To Rebel' -- a quote popularized by Mao Zedong.
Encouraged by Dix, RCP activists helped lead the riots that would leave 58 people dead, more than 2,300 people injured, some 5,300 buildings burned, and $1 billion in property damaged or destroyed. On the ten-year anniversary of the rioting, RCP member Joseph Veale fondly recalled the violence as 'the most beautiful, the most heroic civil action in the history of the United States.'"
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6197
From David Horowitz's
FrontpageMag.com /DiscoverTheNetworks.org
Profile: World Can't Wait--Drive Out the Bush Regime (WCW):
*Revolutionary communist movement that stages protests against the Bush administration
*Organizes college and high-school students
*Founded in June 2005 by Charles Clark Kissinger, a longtime leader of the Revolutionary Communist Party
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7213
On Oct 5, 2006, Democrat Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers Jr, *gave a speech* to the World Can't Wait--Drive Out the Bush Regime organization!
http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3114&Itemid=243
Finally, here's the Revolutionary Communist Party (see link) boasting of a FULL PAGE 'World Can't Wait--Drive Out the Bush Regime' ad of theirs which appeared in the New York Slimes. (either "rwor.org" or "revcom.us" takes you to the website of the Revolutionary Communist Party).
The NY Times has since allowed several additional full-page RCP/WCW ads.
Article title: "Who Hated the Bush Ad"
http://www.rwor.org/a/028/who-hated-bush-ad.htm
The cops asked for a judge rather than a jury.
"According to a motion filed by the defense team, Detective Gescard Isnora said he saw Bell, 23, and his bachelor-party buddies exit the strip joint Club Kalua early that morning and proposition the woman as she talked to a man seated in an SUV.
The woman "refused to go to a hotel with them where they wanted to have sex with her," the court papers say.
An argument broke out, and the man in the SUV made several "unpleasant comments" to Bell's group, according to the documents.
Isnora said he heard Bell's pal Joseph Guzman yell, "Get my gun! Get my gun!" and Bell add, "Let's f- - - him up!"
Sanford Rubenstein, who represents Bell's would-be bride, Nicole Paultre-Bell, as well as Guzman and the third pal, Trent Benefield, dismissed the court papers as "pure fiction."
"First, there was a fourth man in the car," Rubenstein said, mocking the NYPD's initial claim that a gunman fled the scene.
No weapon was found in the car, nor was a fourth person found to be involved in the shooting.
But the motion outlines what it calls a "valid defense of justification" for the slaying of Bell, saying Isnora was "convinced" the men were "going to do a drive-by shooting" in front of the strip club.
The papers say Isnora "saw Guzman reach down toward his waistband" after the trio got into a Nissan Altima, and yelled, "Police! Don't move!"
The car lurched forward, hitting Isnora's leg, and stopped in front of a van driven by Detective Michael Oliver. It then backed up into a wall before accelerating forward again and hitting the van.
"Convinced that if Guzman ever got to raise that hand, Detective Isnora would see a gun in it, he yelled, 'Gun!' and, 'He's got a gun!' and began firing," the motion states.
Isnora, Oliver and the third cop, Marc Cooper, are due in Queens Supreme Court this week.
It will be the first chance Judge Arthur Cooperman has to act on the defense's motion to dismiss the indictment against the cops.
'Their previous appearances were clearly no big deal. [But] this one, something is going to happen, something,' one source said.
Rubenstein said, "A grand jury indicted these police officers, and they testified before the grand jury."
"We look forward to a jury in Queens hearing this case and doing justice."
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09042007/news/regionalnews/bell_sex_shock.htm
________________________________________________________
BEFORE DEALING WITH THE BUSINESS AT HAND, I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO HONOR THE DECORUM OF THE COURT AND REMAIN QUIET AFTER THE VERDICTS ARE RENDERED.
snip
BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT WAS AFFECTED BY A COMBINATION OF THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES’ PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS, INCONSISTENCIES IN TESTIMONY AMONG PROSECUTION WITNESSES, THE RENUNCIATION OF PRIOR STATEMENTS, CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS, THE INTEREST OF SOME WITNESSES IN THE OUTCOME OF THE CASE, THE DEMEANOR ON THE WITNESS STAND OF OTHER WITNESSES AND THE MOTIVE WITNESSES MAY HAVE HAD TO LIE AND THE EFFECT IT HAD ON THE TRUTHFULNESS OF A WITNESS’S TESTIMONY.
THESE FACTORS PLAYED A SIGNIFICANT PART IN THE PEOPLE’S ABILITY TO PROVE THEIR CASE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT AND HAD THE EFFECT OF EVISCERATING THE CREDIBILITY OF THOSE PROSECUTION WITNESSES. AND, AT TIMES, THE TESTIMONY JUST DIDN’T MAKE SENSE.
YET, IT WAS APPARENT FROM THE TESTIMONY OF THE PARTICIPANTS THAT THE CONFRONTATION THAT TOOK PLACE IN FRONT OF THE CLUB WAS HEATED. THE SUV OWNER, FABIO COICOU, GAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT HE HAD A GUN, CAUSING AT LEAST ONE OF THE GROUP TO THREATEN TO TAKE IT AWAY FROM HIM.
AND, THE COURT FINDS, ANOTHER THREAT WAS MADE BY JOSEPH GUZMAN TO RETRIEVE A GUN. AT THAT POINT, NOTHING OF A CRIMINAL NATURE HAD TAKEN PLACE. BUT, HAVING WITNESSED THAT PROVOCATIVE CONFRONTATION BETWEEN MR. COICOU AND THE GROUP, THE UNDERCOVER OFFICERS BECAME CONCERNED AND FOLLOWED THE GROUP AROUND THE CORNER TO LIVERPOOL STREET.
DEFENDANT ISNORA APPROACHED THE NISSAN ALTIMA INTO WHICH MR. GUZMAN AND SEAN BELL, TWO OF THE MORE ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS IN THE HEATED EXCHANGE, ENTERED.
THE ALTIMA, WHICH WAS DRIVEN BY MR. BELL, SPED AWAY FROM ITS PARKED POSITION, STRUCK DEFENDANT ISNORA AND COLLIDED HEAD ON WITH THE POLICE VAN THAT HAD ENTERED LIVERPOOL STREET. THE ALTIMA THEN WENT INTO REVERSE, BACKED UP ON TO THE SIDEWALK, STRUCK A GATE AND THEN WENT FORWARD AND TO THE RIGHT, STRIKING THE POLICE VAN AGAIN. AS THIS WAS HAPPENING, DEFENDANT ISNORA -- WHO TESTIFIED IN THE GRAND JURY --OBSERVED MR. GUZMAN, THE FRONT PASSENGER, MOVE HIS BODY AS IF HE WERE REACHING FOR A WEAPON. DEFENDANT ISNORA YELLED, “GUN” AND FIRED.
OTHER OFFICERS, INDICTED AND UNINDICTED, JOINED IN FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ON THE STREET.
THE COURT HAS FOUND THAT THE INCIDENT LASTED JUST SECONDS. THE OFFICERS RESPONDED TO PERCEIVED CRIMINAL CONDUCT; THE UNFORTUNATE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR CONDUCT WERE TRAGIC.
THE POLICE RESPONSE WITH RESPECT TO EACH DEFENDANT WAS NOT PROVED TO BE CRIMINAL, I.E. BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. QUESTIONS OF CARELESSNESS AND INCOMPETENCE MUST BE LEFT TO OTHER FORUMS.
ALTHOUGH THERE WERE ASPECTS OF DEFENSE TESTIMONY THAT WERE NOT NECESSARILY CREDIBLE, THE FOCUS MUST BE ON THE PEOPLE’S PROOF TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY HAVE SATISFIED THEIR BURDEN OF PROVING THE DEFENDANTS GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
TO THE EXTENT THAT THE DEFENSE OF JUSTIFICATION WAS APPLICABLE TO THE CHARGED
CRIMES, COUNTS 1, 2, 3, 4 IN PART, 5 IN PART, 6, 7, AND 8, THE PEOPLE HAVE NOT PROVED, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, THAT EACH DEFENDANT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THE ACTIONS THAT EACH TOOK.
WITH RESPECT TO COUNTS 4 AND 5, TRENT BENEFIELD, WHOSE CREDIBILITY WAS SERIOUSLY IMPEACHED, TESTIFIED THAT HE WAS SHOT WHILE RUNNING DOWN LIVERPOOL STREET. FORENSIC EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATED OTHERWISE. THUS, ALTHOUGH THE JUSTIFICATION DEFENSE WOULD NOT HAVE APPLIED TO THAT ASPECT OF COUNTS 4 AND 5, IT WAS NOT PROVED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
ACCORDINGLY, THE COURT FINDS EACH DEFENDANT NOT GUILTY OF EACH OF THE RESPECTIVE COUNTS IN THE INDICTMENT OF WHICH THEY WERE CHARGED.
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/bell_verdict_statement.pdf
It would be a “tragedy” if it was a philanthropic pillar of the community who was gunned down.
The punk was just another thug wannabe who brought the gunfire on himself by claiming to have a gun and making a show of going out to his car to get it.
If anything those police officers probably saved an innocent life sometime in the future by confronting bell and his boyfriends.
“I am curious as to what the jury’s logic was in acquitting these guys.”
Um... there was NO jury.
The case was tried by a judge withOUT a jury, at the defendants’ request.
He heard the case alone, and pronounced the verdict.
- John
add this to the list, Sharpton paid witnesses to testify.
And, I believe he still owes money for his last presidential campaign.
There's still going to be a deparmental hearing (after which, they probably won't be cops any more) and a civil suit, which will come out in the family's favor, I'm sure.
Adding a federal hearing will just prolong everything and delay the civil suit further.
Defendants have a right to trial by jury when facing criminal penalties. The defendants here wisely chose to waive their right to trial by a jury and elected a “bench” trial - i.e., one in which the judge serves as a finder of law and fact.
Why? Did you read the judge's decision below? Or do you mean that this is what often happens in these cases despite the facts?
__________________________________________________________
BEFORE DEALING WITH THE BUSINESS AT HAND, I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO HONOR THE DECORUM OF THE COURT AND REMAIN QUIET AFTER THE VERDICTS ARE RENDERED.
snip
BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT WAS AFFECTED BY A COMBINATION OF THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES’ PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS, INCONSISTENCIES IN TESTIMONY AMONG PROSECUTION WITNESSES, THE RENUNCIATION OF PRIOR STATEMENTS, CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS, THE INTEREST OF SOME WITNESSES IN THE OUTCOME OF THE CASE, THE DEMEANOR ON THE WITNESS STAND OF OTHER WITNESSES AND THE MOTIVE WITNESSES MAY HAVE HAD TO LIE AND THE EFFECT IT HAD ON THE TRUTHFULNESS OF A WITNESS’S TESTIMONY.
THESE FACTORS PLAYED A SIGNIFICANT PART IN THE PEOPLE’S ABILITY TO PROVE THEIR CASE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT AND HAD THE EFFECT OF EVISCERATING THE CREDIBILITY OF THOSE PROSECUTION WITNESSES. AND, AT TIMES, THE TESTIMONY JUST DIDN’T MAKE SENSE.
YET, IT WAS APPARENT FROM THE TESTIMONY OF THE PARTICIPANTS THAT THE CONFRONTATION THAT TOOK PLACE IN FRONT OF THE CLUB WAS HEATED. THE SUV OWNER, FABIO COICOU, GAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT HE HAD A GUN, CAUSING AT LEAST ONE OF THE GROUP TO THREATEN TO TAKE IT AWAY FROM HIM.
AND, THE COURT FINDS, ANOTHER THREAT WAS MADE BY JOSEPH GUZMAN TO RETRIEVE A GUN. AT THAT POINT, NOTHING OF A CRIMINAL NATURE HAD TAKEN PLACE. BUT, HAVING WITNESSED THAT PROVOCATIVE CONFRONTATION BETWEEN MR. COICOU AND THE GROUP, THE UNDERCOVER OFFICERS BECAME CONCERNED AND FOLLOWED THE GROUP AROUND THE CORNER TO LIVERPOOL STREET.
DEFENDANT ISNORA APPROACHED THE NISSAN ALTIMA INTO WHICH MR. GUZMAN AND SEAN BELL, TWO OF THE MORE ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS IN THE HEATED EXCHANGE, ENTERED.
THE ALTIMA, WHICH WAS DRIVEN BY MR. BELL, SPED AWAY FROM ITS PARKED POSITION, STRUCK DEFENDANT ISNORA AND COLLIDED HEAD ON WITH THE POLICE VAN THAT HAD ENTERED LIVERPOOL STREET. THE ALTIMA THEN WENT INTO REVERSE, BACKED UP ON TO THE SIDEWALK, STRUCK A GATE AND THEN WENT FORWARD AND TO THE RIGHT, STRIKING THE POLICE VAN AGAIN. AS THIS WAS HAPPENING, DEFENDANT ISNORA -- WHO TESTIFIED IN THE GRAND JURY --OBSERVED MR. GUZMAN, THE FRONT PASSENGER, MOVE HIS BODY AS IF HE WERE REACHING FOR A WEAPON. DEFENDANT ISNORA YELLED, “GUN” AND FIRED.
OTHER OFFICERS, INDICTED AND UNINDICTED, JOINED IN FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ON THE STREET.
THE COURT HAS FOUND THAT THE INCIDENT LASTED JUST SECONDS. THE OFFICERS RESPONDED TO PERCEIVED CRIMINAL CONDUCT; THE UNFORTUNATE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR CONDUCT WERE TRAGIC.
THE POLICE RESPONSE WITH RESPECT TO EACH DEFENDANT WAS NOT PROVED TO BE CRIMINAL, I.E. BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. QUESTIONS OF CARELESSNESS AND INCOMPETENCE MUST BE LEFT TO OTHER FORUMS.
ALTHOUGH THERE WERE ASPECTS OF DEFENSE TESTIMONY THAT WERE NOT NECESSARILY CREDIBLE, THE FOCUS MUST BE ON THE PEOPLE’S PROOF TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY HAVE SATISFIED THEIR BURDEN OF PROVING THE DEFENDANTS GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
TO THE EXTENT THAT THE DEFENSE OF JUSTIFICATION WAS APPLICABLE TO THE CHARGED
CRIMES, COUNTS 1, 2, 3, 4 IN PART, 5 IN PART, 6, 7, AND 8, THE PEOPLE HAVE NOT PROVED, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, THAT EACH DEFENDANT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THE ACTIONS THAT EACH TOOK.
WITH RESPECT TO COUNTS 4 AND 5, TRENT BENEFIELD, WHOSE CREDIBILITY WAS SERIOUSLY IMPEACHED, TESTIFIED THAT HE WAS SHOT WHILE RUNNING DOWN LIVERPOOL STREET. FORENSIC EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATED OTHERWISE. THUS, ALTHOUGH THE JUSTIFICATION DEFENSE WOULD NOT HAVE APPLIED TO THAT ASPECT OF COUNTS 4 AND 5, IT WAS NOT PROVED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
ACCORDINGLY, THE COURT FINDS EACH DEFENDANT NOT GUILTY OF EACH OF THE RESPECTIVE COUNTS IN THE INDICTMENT OF WHICH THEY WERE CHARGED.
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/bell_verdict_statement.pdf
Yeah, that one.
It sounds almost silly, but true, to say that the cops have been traumatized by this, and they are no good for undercover work anymore. I'm not saying that they'll be fired, but they will probably leave the force one way or the other.
As for the civil suit, I'm betting that the city will try to settle it and get it over with sooner. That one will be a jury trial and verdicts in those things tend to be huge (and then appealed). Also, in that setting, the officers could and would be called to testify.
The judge's lengthy comments in his decision were very interesting, and haven't gotten a lot of attention in the media. He based his decision on two key points:
1. Many of the witnesses called by the prosecution had extensive criminal records and had very little credibility on the stand in their testimony.
2. Under cross-examination, many of the prosecution witnesses rendered testimony that clearly conflicted with points the prosecution was trying to make and actually supported the points the defense lawyers were making.
Certainly they've been traumatized by the incident, and also the trial and the phony outrage and attention from leftwing activists like Al 'uh uh' Sharpton. But I have confidence they'll be able to recover. These guys are tougher than that.
Too bad we don't beat them to it!
First order of business: execute these divisive troublemakers!
Too bad we don't beat them to it!
First order of business: execute these divisive troublemakers!
Too bad we don't beat them to it!
First order of business: execute these divisive troublemakers!
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.