Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess you think it is "Guilty until proven innocent." Give the man his day in court, then judge all you want.
This is hypocrisy because many of you who are defended the cops actions, are doing so off the bases that some how Ferrell could have been trying to grab their gun and potentially harm them, i.e. making the dead guilty until proven innocent. None of my comments regarding this case is about guilty until innocent. It is about accountability for one's own actions. And officer Kerrick's actions led to the death of an unarmed man. A man shot 10 times. I don't know how saying that he should be held accountability for his actions is judging. No other job can one's mistake lead to death and there be no accountability.
Location: Charlotte,NC, US, North America, Earth, Alpha Quadrant,Milky Way Galaxy
3,770 posts, read 7,543,620 times
Reputation: 2118
Quote:
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.
A famous quote that comes to mind after reading a few pages of this thread...
Seems there are two schools of thought:
You belive that Kerrick's actions were justified because he felt his life was threatened
You believe Kerrick's actions were not justified and agree with CPMD that excessive force was used.
The police put their lives on the line each and every day, and as a matter of their job description, face the possibility of life threatening situation every time they leave the house. It seems though that those in the first camp presume that the officer had to be justified because it was unknown whether Ferrell was armed, and, what were his true intentions. Coupled with the fact that each decision the officer makes could me life or death - all happening in real time.
For those of you in the first camp, where is the line that was never crossed in your eyes? The Shelton/Clark shooting in 2007 was mentioned earlier in this thread. I actually thought about that after hearing about this story as well. I don't ever remember anyone saying there was a rush to judgement on proclaiming Montgomery a murderer, and that we need to let the facts on fold.
I'm not sure those in the first camp realize that in situations were the police shoot and kill someone there's almost always a rush to rationalize the officer's actions and thereby subtly blame the victim (if he simply sat down, or stayed in his car, let's wait for the toxicology because he must be drunk/high, etc. etc.) for his own death. Why is it when the officer's own department after looking at the available evidence conclude it was involuntary manslaughter that it must be placating the media and political interests? However if someone questions whether race is involved then they are Al Sharpton race baiters? It's contradictory.
No one knows what happened really happened and we have only the testimony of the officers on the scene since Ferrell is dead and can't speak on his behalf. Chief Monroe and his department objectively made the right charge with the evidence they had before them. Kerrick will have his day in court and the legal system was determine what happens next.
There are some highly immoral people in this thread. No wonder the nation is where it is at. I suspect in the long run this will break down along the lines of white conservatives thinking it was great, blacks and most other non whites believing he should go to jail, and white liberal sympathetic too the victim but still apathetic.
There are some highly immoral people in this thread. No wonder the nation is where it is at. I suspect in the long run this will break down along the lines of white conservatives thinking it was great, blacks and most other non whites believing he should go to jail, and white liberal sympathetic too the victim but still apathetic.
Ferrell didn't call for help. The homeowner (who declined to be interviewed; if I were being cast as a racist I'd decline too) said, through her husband, that not once did Ferrell say "I need help" "help me" "help"; nothing that would have given an indication that he had been in an accident.
Likewise, Ferrell never asked for help from the officers. As a matter of fact, no one has claimed he said ANYTHING. The officers didn't know he had been in a wreck; they knew what they were told. They were told that Ferrell had tried to kick down the woman's front door. It's clear from the audio of the call, that he was yelling at her- perhaps not intentional, but something that only further aggravated her fears.
You know, I had promised myself I wasn't going to bring this up, out of respect, but the point needs to be made. Demeatrius Montgomery didn't have a weapon on the night that he killed Officer Sean Clark, and Officer Jeff Shelton. No, he took one of theirs, and used it to murder them, in cold blood. Hold that in context, when you think about the few seconds that Officer Randall Kerrick had to make, literally, a life or death situation.
Yes Demetrius Montgomery did have a weapon when he gunned down officer Jeff Shelton and Sean Clark while they were responding to a domestic dispute, He was charged with two counts of murder if he had stole their firearms before doing so he would have also been given a grand theft charge.His case has absolute zero to do with the Ferrel case. You say Kerrick had to make, literally, a life or death situation, but how come the other two officers didn't feel the same way. After the first shot was fired, and the second, shot, and the third, and the fourth, how was Kerrick feeling so terrified that he had to shoot a fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, and a twelfth time? How is that not excessive, how is it that you are basing his actions off, "Ferrell could have been a potential Demetrius Montgomery" tell me what type of logic is that. So many innocent people are being murdered because of "shoot first ask questions later" logic.
My whole point has been this, In any job where you mess up there is accountability for your actions, and just because you wear a badge doesn't make you exempt from this, when your mistake causes someone's life, there needs to be accountability. I'm scared doesn't justify a officer shooting a man 12 times. Many of you want to make excuses every time cases like this occur, not understanding that as long as there is no accountability they will continue.[/quote]
I went back, and re-read the testimony from the Montgomery case. I acknowledge that I mis-remembered the details of the firearm; Montgomery did, in fact, have a weapon. I never said one had anything to do with the other. My implication was that the Montgomery case showed that it was possible to disarm an officer, and use his weapon against him. While I still stand by that implication, I admit that I was mistaken in the context of that particular case.
You ask why the other 2 officers didn't feel they had to make the same decision. Lets analyze that. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the 2 officers are the first to come across Mr. Ferrell. They also have heightened emotions. Wanting to be prepared, they draw their tasers. The aim that Mr. Ferrell, who makes motions that his family's attorney contends were to show he was weaponless. At the same time, Officer Kerrick arrives, but has no weapon drawn. Mr. Ferrell, for reasons known only to him, turns and run toward Officer Kerrick. Officer Kerrick retreats, to a degree (per Chief Monroe's account), and draws his service revolver. In the second or two it takes to close the distance between them, Kerrick has drawn his weapon, and with less than 5 feet between them, fires the first of 4 shots. Whether still intentional, or as a result of momentum, Ferrell continues to approach Kerrick. Kerrick fires an additional 6 shots. And then 2 more. Why didn't the other 2 officers fire their sidearms? Because they had their tasers drawn already. Do you think it's possible to hold both in your hands, at the same time? It is undisputed that the entire encounter last approximately 20 seconds. That's an awful lot of events in an awful short period of time, don't you think?
Ultimately the District Attorney will objectively weigh all of the evidence available. At that point, he'll either validate the voluntary manslaughter charge, upgrade the charge, or dismiss the charge. It will also be the responsibility of the Grand Jury to indict. Cases like these are determined by whether an officer acted in a reasonable manner; that is determined by how other officers would have reacted in the same circumstances. Accountability comes from allowing the legal system to process the case. It doesn't come from name calling, and accusations from people who were not, and have not, been in these types of situations.
This is hypocrisy because many of you who are defended the cops actions, are doing so off the bases that some how Ferrell could have been trying to grab their gun and potentially harm them, i.e. making the dead guilty until proven innocent. None of my comments regarding this case is about guilty until innocent. It is about accountability for one's own actions. And officer Kerrick's actions led to the death of an unarmed man. A man shot 10 times. I don't know how saying that he should be held accountability for his actions is judging. No other job can one's mistake lead to death and there be no accountability.
No one is saying he shouldn't be held accountable. It's not your job to do that. It's not my job to do that. It's not Chief Monroe's job to do that. That's what the legal system is for.
Do you know how the legal system works? Are you aware that, in most states, a felony case has to be brought to the DA to charge, and the Grand Jury to indict? That's why you always read about "arraignment hearings." Those are where the evidence is examined, to determine if the defendant should remain in custody, etc. Are you also aware, that NC is one of only a few (maybe none, at this time), where ANYONE can swear out a criminal warrant on someone else? That means, if you mow your lawn at 6 in the morning, and it pisses me off, I can swear out an arrest warrant that says you committed an illegal act. No proof required. And, the police are obligated to take you in to custody. Though you still go through the same process, from arraignment to indictment, and so on, there is no proof of a crime required. Under guidelines from the state's magistrates, felonies are only supposed to be handled with police involvement. And THAT, my friend, is how Monroe was able to file voluntary manslaughter charges against Officer Kerrick, based solely on a half-assed investigation.
There are some highly immoral people in this thread. No wonder the nation is where it is at. I suspect in the long run this will break down along the lines of white conservatives thinking it was great, blacks and most other non whites believing he should go to jail, and white liberal sympathetic too the victim but still apathetic.
The vast majority of people think this situation was anything but "great." You perceive a supportive stance for Officer Kerrick as "immoral," yet Officer Kerrick hasn't even had his day in court yet. For that matter, all of the pertinent evidence hasn't even been released yet. None of us has seen the dash cam video. None of us has heard the thoughts of the other 2 officers. None of us has seen the toxicology report. Some of us support Officer Kerrick because we understand the perils of the job, and the duty to protect. Others support Ferrell based solely on the skin color of the 2 actors. Still others support Ferrell because there is a bias against the police. Some fall in the middle. Until ALL the evidence is uncovered and released, decreeing immorality is nothing more than race baiting divisiveness. You should be ashamed.
It makes me sick to the stomach that there are people like you who are going to judge someone without having all the facts. I guess the cop is automatically guilty without benefit of a trial in your eyes.
Why are you allowing peoples opinions to make you sick? I doubt any of us will be on the jury... he will get his day in court but even then we will react to the verdict and continue to debate over the outcome.
The vast majority of people think this situation was anything but "great." You perceive a supportive stance for Officer Kerrick as "immoral," yet Officer Kerrick hasn't even had his day in court yet. For that matter, all of the pertinent evidence hasn't even been released yet. None of us has seen the dash cam video. None of us has heard the thoughts of the other 2 officers. None of us has seen the toxicology report. Some of us support Officer Kerrick because we understand the perils of the job, and the duty to protect. Others support Ferrell based solely on the skin color of the 2 actors. Still others support Ferrell because there is a bias against the police. Some fall in the middle. Until ALL the evidence is uncovered and released, decreeing immorality is nothing more than race baiting divisiveness. You should be ashamed.
I think most people support Ferrell because he was unarmed and just had a horrible car wreck...
You listed off a few positives for supporting Kerrick and listed off negatives for those supporting Ferrell.
Someone suggested if Ferrell didn't act aggressively he may have received help. If he didn't get in the accident maybe he wouldn't have acted aggressively or erratically.
Shame on Ferrell for getting in an accident and not shaking off the concussion or head trauma.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
