Judge rules against first-degree Mehserle verdict {BART Shooting}

Oakland Tribune ^ | 6/30/10 | Paul T. Rosynsky

[umgud]

It will be interesting to see the effect of the verdict on the natives.

[mockingbyrd]

Is this the cop who shot the handcuffed man? And then the other cops tried to confiscate all cell phone videos?

If not, what’s the story here and why are they bracing for riots?

[ridesthemiles]

Adding a ‘using a gun enhancement’ against a police officer who is supposed to carry a gun is beyond ludicrous.

[ridesthemiles]

For those of you who believe that ‘mass transit’ is the answer to transportation in any large city- keep in mind that the blacks in this story were causing a ruckus & fighting with passengers on the BART train in the first place.
It was New Year’s Eve & they have passengers trapped in a moving rail car & they regularly terrorize passengers.

The entire area of Oalland, Vallejo & Richmond is a cesspool.

[Filo]

The judge is clearly an idiot. Mehserle is obviously guilty of 1st degree murder. He put away his taser, drew his firearm, aimed and fired.

Case closed.

[ßuddaßudd]

The local medias are inciting riots for the last few days imho.

[popdonnelly]

This is all political, i.e., intended to keep people from rioting. The officer has been overcharged, as there is no evidence he intended to kill anybody. Once again, governments are pandering to the lynchmob mentality.

[DCBryan1]

I saw a different video. He mistakenly pulled out his firearm rather than a taser. Thats why when we get certified to use a Taser, not only is it a diffrent color, it is on the opposite side of our belt.

On a legal note, for first degree murder, he must have purposefully, knowingly, negligently, or recklessly committed premeditated murder.

I saw an illegal act (actus reus), but I did not see mens rea or unlawful intent in premeditation.

He will get involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide. Not capital murder, not Murder in the First, Not Murder in the Second, Not Manslaughter.

/legal rant.

[RightOnline]

Dead on right..........but he may even walk entirely.

[libertylover]

That enhancement - purposely firing a gun during the commission of a murder - adds 25 years to the sentence of 15 years to life that accompanies a second-degree murder conviction. A first-degree murder conviction carries a sentence of 50 years to life.

The jury probably doesn't know any of this.

[DCBryan1]

The prosecution has to prove every element of it's case: 1) That there was a crime committed, 2) and illegal intent (mens rea) to do so, 3) the person on trial was not justified or permissible in doing 1 or 2, and 4) that it is the person that did it.

There are no clear circumstances before the crime that implicate the officer.

Any actions after the crime, do not appear to show that he meant to do the act, in fact, the actions and testimony of witnesses, confirm that he didn't mean to do the shooting.

He should walk...>LEGALLY, but should resign from any future law enforcement job.

Oh, and there will be a riot unless he is taken out back and lynched immediately after trial, because nothing will satisfy the racists marxists in the Bay Area.

[Filo]

I saw a different video.

Or you saw it through biased "cops can do no wrong" eyes.

He mistakenly pulled out his firearm rather than a taser.

After he put his taser away? Not bloodly likely.

On a legal note, for first degree murder, he must have purposefully, knowingly, negligently, or recklessly committed premeditated murder.

When someone that utterly stupid gets out of bed in the morning they are, in effect, premeditating doing negligent harm. You can't be that dumb and not do damage. Oakland would have been better served giving guns to a troup of chimps.

Meanwhile your case falls apart when you have the full story - he tucked his taser away before pulling his weapon and firing. That doesn't happen by accident.

I saw an illegal act (actus reus), but I did not see mens rea or unlawful intent in premeditation.

He will get involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide. Not capital murder, not Murder in the First, Not Murder in the Second, Not Manslaughter.

You saw what you saw through biased eyes.

Meanwhile he will get off clean. Why? 'Cause he was a cop and cops can do anything they want.

That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve the death penalty, only that our f-ed up courts won't do what's right.

[DCBryan1]

I can tell that either school is out and your parents are not home yet, or you need to tell your doctor to increase your dosage.

[Filo]

Oh, and there will be a riot unless he is taken out back and lynched immediately after trial, because nothing will satisfy the racists marxists in the Bay Area.

I am neither racist nor marxist and I'm in the Bay Area but I think he should have been lynched on the platform right after he murdered an innocent civilian. Of course, being a cop, he wasn't even arrested.

[Filo]

I can tell that either school is out and your parents are not home yet, or you need to tell your doctor to increase your dosage.

Typical brainless boot-licker. No surprise there.

[DLfromthedesert]

With good reason. See post #5

[benewton]

There’s a reason effective weapons aren’t allowed to be owned by citizens in CA...

[DCBryan1]

I'm in the Bay Area but I think he should have been lynched on the platform

I was wrong. I assumed an either/or supplication. You are both a child, AND you need to increase your dosage.

[Filo]

With good reason. See post #5

Not even close. The most telling fact is that none of the other cops (and there were many) even had their tazers out and here is this 'tard pulling a gun.

As far as I can tell the cops were just harassing the citizenry for their jollies which is fairly typical in Oakland anyway.

Detaining these folks was probably illegal to begin with. Shooting them was definitely out of line regardless of what went on before. This guy was pinned by two other cops and in cuffs and you’re calling shooting him in the back excusable?.