Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Again....Who's policing the Police?

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/06 ... index.html

Only thing I can think of is this was a horrid mistake - he HAD to be reaching for a taser...

Only thing I can think of is that this is one of about 100,000,000 interactions police officers had with civilians on that day, and this is the ONE that you find that went bad. Doesn't make 'em all bad, John.

AZGrizFan wrote:Only thing I can think of is that this is one of about 100,000,000 interactions police officers had with civilians on that day, and this is the ONE that you find that went bad. Doesn't make 'em all bad, John.

Part of the problem....too many laws requiring too much police power...law of averages mean the more you cops you have, the more dumbass cops you have.....not the police's fault, but the fault of the nanny state....looking to government to solve our lack of parenting skills....

Appaholic wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Only thing I can think of is that this is one of about 100,000,000 interactions police officers had with civilians on that day, and this is the ONE that you find that went bad. Doesn't make 'em all bad, John.

Part of the problem....too many laws requiring too much police power...law of averages mean the more you cops you have, the more dumbass cops you have.....not the police's fault, but the fault of the nanny state....looking to government to solve our lack of parenting skills....

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

dbackjon wrote:Only thing I can think of is this was a horrid mistake - he HAD to be reaching for a taser...

Sorry, Jon...just saw this...

Absent a massively incompetent training, there's no mistaking. Per CA POST (Peace Officer Standards and Training) guidelines, firearms training is designed to be a "conditioned" response...i.e., very specific criteria must be present, and the response is virtually involuntary (i.e., an officer won't "accidentally" unholster their sidearm unless they have cause to use it. P.O.'s don't unholster sidearms for the purpose of "threatening" or "warning" people.). Most officers I've seen carry their taser on the opposite side in front or back, to avoid such a mistake.
Most likely, the officer was either an unqualified affirmative action quota hiree (i.e., did not possess the temperment), or genuinely was in fear for their safety.

They may have been in fear for their safety, but he was on his back. Struggling, yes. I still can't figure this one out.

The former police officer accused of shooting an unarmed man at a northern California commuter train station was arrested Tuesday in Nevada, authorities said.

Former Bay Area Rapid Transit officer Johannes Mehserle was arrested on a fugitive warrant connected to the fatal shooting.

Mehserle is accused of the shooting of Oscar Grant III at an Oakland, California, station on New Year's Day. The incident was captured on video by several witnesses and spurred violent protests in the northern California city.

Mehserle, 27, was taken into custody in Douglas County, Nevada at about 7 p.m. (10 p.m. ET), Sgt. Dan Coverly of Douglas County Sheriff's Office told CNN affiliate KGO-TV in San Francisco.

Mehserle resigned from his job as a BART police officer days after the shooting. The transit agency's police force and Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff are investigating the incident.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/14/BAR ... ng.arrest/

dbackjon wrote:The former police officer accused of shooting an unarmed man at a northern California commuter train station was arrested Tuesday in Nevada, authorities said.

Former Bay Area Rapid Transit officer Johannes Mehserle was arrested on a fugitive warrant connected to the fatal shooting.

Mehserle is accused of the shooting of Oscar Grant III at an Oakland, California, station on New Year's Day. The incident was captured on video by several witnesses and spurred violent protests in the northern California city.

Mehserle, 27, was taken into custody in Douglas County, Nevada at about 7 p.m. (10 p.m. ET), Sgt. Dan Coverly of Douglas County Sheriff's Office told CNN affiliate KGO-TV in San Francisco.

Mehserle resigned from his job as a BART police officer days after the shooting. The transit agency's police force and Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff are investigating the incident.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/14/BAR ... ng.arrest/

So he resigned, then boogied?

POS....he needs to fry.

Still haven't been able to find out details about the officer's history, i.e., years of service, training, etc...that's crucial.

Having read everything I can find that's not spin, conditions are:
New Years Eve, Public Transit facility in Downtown Oakland, most participants are likely to be under the influence of something.
1) Two officers respond to report of gang fight on train. Detain train at Fruitvale station, and remove 3 fight participants.
2) While attempting to control the three alongside back of platform, are approached by three other young men in a threatening manner (can be seen in the "right" angle video below, but is not visible on the "left" angle view video which has been used by most of the networks - no pun intended).
3) Within a minute or so of initial detention, second two person officer team arrives as back up and moves the three men who approached back.
4) First two attempt to control the three while others on the train begin shouting at officers.
5) Bedlam escalates with other on the train approaching then backing off from the group of officers.
6) Third set of officers arrive and display nightsticks in protective manner, causing other train riders to temporarily back off.
7) Noise and taunting continues to escalate until one of the three who had been approaching then backing off, apparently did something to provoke an officer from team #3, who "takes down" the subject and begins handcuffing him.
8) At about the same time as subject in #7, is being handcuffed, you can see the first two officers who were arresting the victim quickly stand up, and Officer Mehserle clearly is seen firing a round into the victim's back.
9) Crowd continues to shout, but appears shocked at shooting.

"Right" angle video
[youtube][/youtube]

"Left" angle video
[youtube][/youtube]

Thoughts are:
1) Video displayed via CNN and most news services show the "left" angle video, which does not show what it happening on the "right" side of the platform. Moreso, the video released by CNN and one of the Bay Area T.V. stations has apparently muted or filtered the audio, and several different KTVU reports display various "edits" of the video. This type of manipulation of facts to "inflame" public opinion serves no useful purpose.
2) The key appears to be Mehserle's and his partner's action moments before the shooting, after what appears to be a struggle with the victim while he's held on the ground, they suddenly both let go, then stand up and Mehserle discharges his sidearm. Three possible scenarios come to mind: First, that Mehserle did actually think he had a taser and they both let go and stood up during what they thought would a taser discharge (std procedure...hands off during a taser discharge), or second, that the victim either stated he had a weapon underneath him and was going to use it, or they thought they saw the victim pulling out a weapon, and stood up to move away and assume a defensive posture with lethal force, and the third scenario is simply Mehserle had unholstered while struggling with the victim on the ground, and after cuffing stood up, but rather that immediately re-holstering, pointed the gun at the victim in a reflexive manner, and accidentally discharged the sidearm.
3) I dismiss the idea that the discharge was intentional, having seen the video from the "left" angle which clearly displays Mehserle's reaction after the discharge...looking up at his partner for a couple of seconds, then down at the victim, then back up at his partner, appearing puzzled or confused, then looking at the victim, before slowly reholstering and attending to the victim.

This is going to be a tough case to decide, and will factor in all the circumstantial details such as training and experience, witness statements including character of the victim in the event the officers testify that the victim made threats during the struggle (goes to fear for safety), riotus conditions at the platform that night, but I think the core of the case will go back to training and experience.

I feel bad for the victim, and the officer, but agree with Appaholic on this.

Most of these incidents wouldn't happen if the parents raised their children properly...with the proper morals and self discipline.

1) Don't go out in public, drunk or partying with friends on New Years...
2) In downtown Oakland...
3) Then start a fight on public transit...
4) Then confront and resist police intervention...

Or you could wind up dead from any one of those four.

travelinman67 wrote:Still haven't been able to find out details about the officer's history, i.e., years of service, training, etc...that's crucial.

Having read everything I can find that's not spin, conditions are:
New Years Eve, Public Transit facility in Downtown Oakland, most participants are likely to be under the influence of something.
1) Two officers respond to report of gang fight on train. Detain train at Fruitvale station, and remove 3 fight participants.
2) While attempting to control the three alongside back of platform, are approached by three other young men in a threatening manner (can be seen in the "right" angle video below, but is not visible on the "left" angle view video which has been used by most of the networks - no pun intended).
3) Within a minute or so of initial detention, second two person officer team arrives as back up and moves the three men who approached back.
4) First two attempt to control the three while others on the train begin shouting at officers.
5) Bedlam escalates with other on the train approaching then backing off from the group of officers.
6) Third set of officers arrive and display nightsticks in protective manner, causing other train riders to temporarily back off.
7) Noise and taunting continues to escalate until one of the three who had been approaching then backing off, apparently did something to provoke an officer from team #3, who "takes down" the subject and begins handcuffing him.
8) At about the same time as subject in #7, is being handcuffed, you can see the first two officers who were arresting the victim quickly stand up, and Officer Mehserle clearly is seen firing a round into the victim's back.
9) Crowd continues to shout, but appears shocked at shooting.

"Right" angle video
[youtube][/youtube]

"Left" angle video
[youtube][/youtube]

Thoughts are:
1) Video displayed via CNN and most news services show the "left" angle video, which does not show what it happening on the "right" side of the platform. Moreso, the video released by CNN and one of the Bay Area T.V. stations has apparently muted or filtered the audio, and several different KTVU reports display various "edits" of the video. This type of manipulation of facts to "inflame" public opinion serves no useful purpose.
2) The key appears to be Mehserle's and his partner's action moments before the shooting, after what appears to be a struggle with the victim while he's held on the ground, they suddenly both let go, then stand up and Mehserle discharges his sidearm. Three possible scenarios come to mind: First, that Mehserle did actually think he had a taser and they both let go and stood up during what they thought would a taser discharge (std procedure...hands off during a taser discharge), or second, that the victim either stated he had a weapon underneath him and was going to use it, or they thought they saw the victim pulling out a weapon, and stood up to move away and assume a defensive posture with lethal force, and the third scenario is simply Mehserle had unholstered while struggling with the victim on the ground, and after cuffing stood up, but rather that immediately re-holstering, pointed the gun at the victim in a reflexive manner, and accidentally discharged the sidearm.
3) I dismiss the idea that the discharge was intentional, having seen the video from the "left" angle which clearly displays Mehserle's reaction after the discharge...looking up at his partner for a couple of seconds, then down at the victim, then back up at his partner, appearing puzzled or confused, then looking at the victim, before slowly reholstering and attending to the victim.

This is going to be a tough case to decide, and will factor in all the circumstantial details such as training and experience, witness statements including character of the victim in the event the officers testify that the victim made threats during the struggle (goes to fear for safety), riotus conditions at the platform that night, but I think the core of the case will go back to training and experience.

I feel bad for the victim, and the officer, but agree with Appaholic on this.

Most of these incidents wouldn't happen if the parents raised their children properly...with the proper morals and self discipline.

1) Don't go out in public, drunk or partying with friends on New Years...
2) In downtown Oakland...
3) Then start a fight on public transit...
4) Then confront and resist police intervention...

Or you could wind up dead from any one of those four.

Sorry Tman...whatever his reason, it doesn't excuse it....5-7 officers were not in imminent danger from a drunk lying on the ground with a knee on his head....granted the knee wasn't on his head when the shot went off...my question is why not? If the officers felt this person posed such a threat while two officers were on top of him, then why was the knee ever lifted? Or better yet, why wasn't he in cuffs yet....all they had to do was bumrush...7 on 2....the populace should be imflamed...these guys are supposed "professionals" in their line of work...there's no way to sugar-coat this, so quit being an apologist. Legitimate power only stays legit through responsible and proportional responses to volatile situations....this was irresponsible and non-proportional...if the officers cannot handle this situation, they shouldn't be in this line of work. And it shouldn't take a death in their custody to determine whether they can handle their job...they are responsible, their supervisor holds responsibility as well BART...

BTW...here's a relatively decent article that discusses how L.E. conditioned responses work under duress...as they pertain to this particular incident. The only thing left out is that Mehserle sidearm was a .40 Glock weighing 23 oz, and the taser (unk. make and model, however a standard issue M18L from Advanced Taser, pic below) weighs 21 oz.
This "taser confusion" is hypothetically possible, but again, goes back to training, experience and duress.

BTW, a Glock 23...what Mehserle was carrying...


...and an M18 taser (don't know what make/model BART carries...)...


...and Appa...I'm not "excusing" anything. This was a tragedy all the way around. Mr. Grant is dead, and former Officer Mehserle's life has permanently changed REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THIS WAS INTENTIONAL OR UNINTENTIONAL. I was resistant to make any prognostications about the trial, but being Alameda County, I expect he'll be charged with 2nd degree murder, and during trial, it will be plead down to Involuntary Manslaughter and he'll end up receiving 6mos to 2 yrs incarceration, from which he'll be released after 8 mos. His reason for resigning rather than waiting for the investigating agency to find him "at fault" goes to the inevitable "Wrongful Death" civil action that happens regardless of the criminal outcome, and protects him from most punitive damages via Brown Act P.O. Bill of Rights provisions, i.e., punitives shift back to employing agency for negligent policy, hiring and training. Absent a finding of Gross Negligence or Reckless Indifference (which under evidentiary rules doesn't appear to be supported in this case), Mehserles resignation will assure he has the prospect of financial survival once all the cases have been adjudicated.

... from a personal perspective, you have a contempt for authority which is palpable in your posts, Appa. I understand that, and respect your feelings, but this is all an extension of the "rearing" issue you brought up. Disrespect for all authority figures, merely because they possess "authority" is narrow minded. Further, playing Monday morning QB in matters of live or death confrontation, particularly before knowing the all the facts, belies ignorance. You can rant and rave all day about "cops bad", "cops wrong", etc...but they are necessary, and thankfully, 99% of them are far better trained in maintaining a peaceful and safe community than yourself, whether you acknowledge that or not.

There is a bit of a problem in recruiting decent police officer candidates, first;

Who in the hell would want the job- think about that. Your best hope is to find someone who truly wants to serve their fellow man, totally unselfishly, and is willing to put up with the hours and low pay to be able to serve.

Then there are the other 90%

1. No other jobs available
2. Just likes to be an authority figure, and to get paid for it.
3. Wants to bust heads and kick ass.
4. People used to pick on them back in the school days.
5. Sees opportunity on the side.
6. Thinks they will be a chick magnet
7. Etc, etc, etc


Worst part is, when a new rookie does enter the force from the very first group of people, they will be surrounded by, and governed by a lot of the characters in the other groups.

travelinman67 wrote: ... from a personal perspective, you have a contempt for authority which is palpable in your posts, Appa. I understand that, and respect your feelings, but this is all an extension of the "rearing" issue you brought up. Disrespect for all authority figures, merely because they possess "authority" is narrow minded. Further, playing Monday morning QB in matters of live or death confrontation, particularly before knowing the all the facts, belies ignorance. You can rant and rave all day about "cops bad", "cops wrong", etc...but they are necessary, and thankfully, 99% of them are far better trained in maintaining a peaceful and safe community than yourself, whether you acknowledge that or not.

You're right...I do have a problem with authority...illegitimate authority. It's not from "rearing", so no need to insult the parents. It is from "experience". When a civilian foks up, people support the cops enforcement as "the rule of law". But I see a tendency from you to explain away the issue when a cop foks up...explaining how this could have happened, etc. I'm merely taking the same hardline against the cops "mistake / lack of judgement" as the cops / D.A.'s have demostrated when it's a civilian breaking the law. By illegitimate authority, I mean people who have NO business walking around with a gun and arresting powers. And that speaks to Wedgie's response....look who's getting hired....they need more police to enforce more laws to maintain the "rule of law" everyone's clamoring for....there was probably a better trained officer available to handle that volatile situation, but he was on a drug stakeout or working a DWI checkpoint on NYE.....

Appaholic wrote:

travelinman67 wrote: ... from a personal perspective, you have a contempt for authority which is palpable in your posts, Appa. I understand that, and respect your feelings, but this is all an extension of the "rearing" issue you brought up. Disrespect for all authority figures, merely because they possess "authority" is narrow minded. Further, playing Monday morning QB in matters of live or death confrontation, particularly before knowing the all the facts, belies ignorance. You can rant and rave all day about "cops bad", "cops wrong", etc...but they are necessary, and thankfully, 99% of them are far better trained in maintaining a peaceful and safe community than yourself, whether you acknowledge that or not.

You're right...I do have a problem with authority...illegitimate authority. It's not from "rearing", so no need to insult the parents. It is from "experience". When a civilian foks up, people support the cops enforcement as "the rule of law". But I see a tendency from you to explain away the issue when a cop foks up...explaining how this could have happened, etc. I'm merely taking the same hardline against the cops "mistake / lack of judgement" as the cops / D.A.'s have demostrated when it's a civilian breaking the law. By illegitimate authority, I mean people who have NO business walking around with a gun and arresting powers. And that speaks to Wedgie's response....look who's getting hired....they need more police to enforce more laws to maintain the "rule of law" everyone's clamoring for....there was probably a better trained officer available to handle that volatile situation, but he was on a drug stakeout or working a DWI checkpoint on NYE.....

Tman takes another ass beating. Nice post Appy.