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.
What I don't understand in all of this is how the family's wishes were so blatantly disregarded by the journalist who got the video released. I know the journalist just wanted to break this big story, but the family received $5 million hush money and didn't want the video released to the public. Shouldn't the victim's family have a right to privacy since they are the ones who lost a loved one? Is it right to make them relive these events if they don't want them publicized?
Don't get me wrong. The officer should definitely be punished for his actions, and I'm sure he will be in a court of law, but releasing the video seemed more like a pathetic media attempt to incite a riot than anything. Kudos to the citizens of Chicago for holding mostly peaceful protests and for not giving the media what they expected or wanted.
I realize the story is much bigger than just a black guy getting shot and killed by a white officer, and it's so appalling how the CPD tried to cover the whole thing up and pretend it never happened. However, I believe, out of respect for the family, that this matter should have been handled solely in a court of law where the family could have received economic justice and the officer could have been punished somewhat privately.
The $5 million wasn't hush money, it was a wrongful death civil suit settlement. That's how these things work.
CPD didn't cover this up, either. The yanked this guy's badge and gun forthwith and stuck him on desk duty until he could be charged - as the union contract requires. And I believe Cook County ran the case, not CPD.
The delay in charging was the feds - they wanted to run a civil rights case instead of letting the locals prosecute they way they wanted to. Thank the administration for that (the current mayor is Obama''s former Chief of Staff).
The reason the video is typically not released pre-trial is because the defense can now argue that the jury pool is tainted. This actually hurts the prosecutor's efforts to put the bad guy away, not helps.
Other than that, I agree with you. The journalist is trying to incite a bigger story and the family's wishes are the first victims.
This is exactly the reason some people are resistant to body-cams for LEOs - they mean more murderers will be held to account for the murders they commit.
CPD didn't cover this up, either. The yanked this guy's badge and gun forthwith and stuck him on desk duty until he could be charged - as the union contract requires. And I believe Cook County ran the case, not CPD.
Baloney.
They spent a year claiming that the deceased lunged at the officer with a knife and was killed in self defense. That's is a flat out lie meant to cover up the reality - that the deceased was at a distance from the officer and moving away, and that most of the shots were pumped into the victim as he lay prone and wounded on the ground.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3
The delay in charging was the feds - they wanted to run a civil rights case instead of letting the locals prosecute they way they wanted to. Thank the administration for that (the current mayor is Obama''s former Chief of Staff).
More baloney.
The 'way the locals' handle these cases is to determine - no matter what - that the officer was in the right. The only reason there are charges is that the locals weren't allowed to cover this one up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3
The reason the video is typically not released pre-trial is because the defense can now argue that the jury pool is tainted. This actually hurts the prosecutor's efforts to put the bad guy away, not helps.
And more baloney still.
PDs release video evidence in a heartbeat if it supports what they're claiming - it's when the evidence demonstrates a cover up that the attempt to bury it. Video evidence is routinely release pre-trial and no one bleats about how it supposedly taints the jury. Boston Marathon bombing videos? All sorts of them publicly released long before the trial.
This is exactly the reason some people are resistant to body-cams for LEOs - they mean more murderers will be held to account for the murders they commit.
They spent a year claiming that the deceased lunged at the officer with a knife and was killed in self defense. That's is a flat out lie meant to cover up the reality - that the deceased was at a distance from the officer and moving away, and that most of the shots were pumped into the victim as he lay prone and wounded on the ground.
More baloney.
The 'way the locals' handle these cases is to determine - no matter what - that the officer was in the right. The only reason there are charges is that the locals weren't allowed to cover this one up.
And more baloney still.
PDs release video evidence in a heartbeat if it supports what they're claiming - it's when the evidence demonstrates a cover up that the attempt to bury it. Video evidence is routinely release pre-trial and no one bleats about how it supposedly taints the jury. Boston Marathon bombing videos? All sorts of them publicly released long before the trial.
Spare us the 'not tainting the jury pool was their real concern' excuses.
You should at least include all the conspirators in this effort to protect the cop:
"... the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s office in Minnesota released a statement on why that video can’t be released until the investigation is finished:
“Release of any evidence, including any video, during an ongoing investigation would be extremely detrimental to the investigation. We are conducting our investigation in a fair, thorough, and expeditious manner.”
What I don't understand in all of this is how the family's wishes were so blatantly disregarded by the journalist who got the video released. I know the journalist just wanted to break this big story, but the family received $5 million hush money and didn't want the video released to the public. Shouldn't the victim's family have a right to privacy since they are the ones who lost a loved one? Is it right to make them relive these events if they don't want them publicized?
Don't get me wrong. The officer should definitely be punished for his actions, and I'm sure he will be in a court of law, but releasing the video seemed more like a pathetic media attempt to incite a riot than anything. Kudos to the citizens of Chicago for holding mostly peaceful protests and for not giving the media what they expected or wanted.
I realize the story is much bigger than just a black guy getting shot and killed by a white officer, and it's so appalling how the CPD tried to cover the whole thing up and pretend it never happened. However, I believe, out of respect for the family, that this matter should have been handled solely in a court of law where the family could have received economic justice and the officer could have been punished somewhat privately.
The public's right to safety supersedes the family's wishes. People living in Chicago have a right to know if there is an alleged murderer running free with a city-sanctioned gun, and they have a right to know if the police department THEY PAY FOR is shielding one of their own from justice.
I think if they can find who erased the 86 seconds of Burger King security tape, that person should go to jail too, as well as whoever ordered it be done.
Thank God for the jury system. If it works like it's supposed too, this former cop will get at least thirty years to life.
The DA will screw up the case. Why would the prosecutors screw up the case they are prosecuting? Because the police is one of their own. DA will present a weak case. Jury will end up with reasonable doubts. Guy will walk. No one is the wiser.
The DA will screw up the case. Why would the prosecutors screw up the case they are prosecuting? Because the police is one of their own. DA will present a weak case. Jury will end up with reasonable doubts. Guy will walk. No one is the wiser.
Well done. Just in case a jury doesn't convict, you're already rejecting the verdict based on one of the old-reliables in cases like this --- the DA threw the case
The teen was high on pcp and brandishing a weapon. With that said, 16 shots was quite excessive! One shot to the leg to drop him or even a tazer would have been sufficient.
The cop has been arrested, held with no bail, charged with 1st degree murder and faces life in prison if convicted. Just saw the news of protestors rioting in Chicago. Justice is Shaping up to be served in this case. Isn't that what they claimed they want? Why take to the streets to create chaos?
I really don't understand the logic of some cops like the one in South Carolina who empty loaded his gun into the back of that black man fleeing from him and was caught on camera.
I agree with you. Why don't they use the least amount of force such as a tazer or shoot at the legs instead? This teen wasn't a close threat to the police.
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.
