Can the cop who fatally shot a man at Oakland station be tried again by DoJ?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Office_Shredder
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the legal implications of a police officer's fatal shooting of a man at an Oakland subway station, specifically whether the officer can be tried again by the Department of Justice (DoJ) after being convicted of involuntary manslaughter. Participants explore concepts of double jeopardy, the nature of the shooting, and the potential for federal jurisdiction in the case.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants recall the incident where the officer mistakenly shot a man instead of using a Taser, questioning the validity of the officer's defense.
  • There is a belief among some that the shooting was involuntary manslaughter, while others argue it could be classified as second-degree murder due to the nature of the act.
  • Concerns are raised about the officer's awareness of the weapon he was using, with some suggesting that the difference between a Taser and a firearm should be obvious.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the officer's claim of confusion between the Taser and the gun, arguing that it does not meet the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" for intentionality.
  • Others highlight the role of adrenaline and stress in high-pressure situations, suggesting that these factors could lead to mistakes without malicious intent.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of double jeopardy, with some asserting that it applies only if the charges are similar, while others argue that separate federal charges could be pursued.
  • Participants debate the credibility of the officer's character and record, questioning whether it supports or undermines claims of intentionality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions on the nature of the shooting, with no consensus on whether it constitutes manslaughter or second-degree murder. Disagreement exists regarding the applicability of double jeopardy and the potential for federal prosecution.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexities surrounding legal definitions and the standards of proof required in criminal cases, as well as the potential for differing interpretations of the events leading to the shooting.

  • #61
cristo said:
If a cop cannot tell the difference between a taser and a handgun then clearly he has not received enough training, and should not be permitted to carry either!

Being convicted of manslaughter is pretty much going to be a career ender. When deciding between manslaughter or second degree murder, you're deciding on the length of the sentence; not whether to retain him as a police officer.


russ_watters said:
1. Adrenaline: is it reasonable to think that in a high stress situation, he forgot his training and lost awareness? It happens all the time. I think it is quite possible.

chemisttree said:
You are invoking an "adrenaline" defense? Should it be that easy to get away with second degree murder. "I was excited and therefore not guilty!"

Don't discount the adrenaline defense so fast. Looking at the video, it's hard to see why the situation would raise the officer's adrenaline to such a high level that he'd forget his training, but I wouldn't want to judge from a news report.

Here's a less serious example of an officer accused of using excessive force against 3 suspects:
http://www.fox8.com/news/akroncanton/wjw-deputy-kicks-suspect-arrest-dash-cam-txt,0,4105057.story

The raw video shows the same actions, but adding the rest of the video and the audio adds a bit of context that the news story is missing. In the raw video, the voice with the heavy breathing is the deputy that did the kicking of the suspects.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLPLi2xBwuA


The deputy in question was responding to a brawl at a party with his lights and flashers on while two cars were fleeing the party with their headlights off. They could see the oncoming police cruiser and could try to avoid him, but he couldn't see them coming until the last few seconds. One collided head on with his cruiser, while the other vehicle ran off the road to avoid a collision and flipped. Amazingly, the most serious injuries sustained in either accident was two broken arms and torn ligaments by the deputy, while the occupants that collided with his cruiser sustained several lacerations. The occupants of the flipped car were able to flee the scene.

The deputy was obviously very stressed and he obviously continued to kick the suspects even after they were laying on the ground. The adrenaline an officer is going to experience in a situation like this is something that's covered in training, but it's going to be almost impossible to actually create the same sensation. You can try to create similar feeling situations, but the training still winds up having to resort to telling officers that they need to be prepared for something they'll only experience once or twice during their careers.

The deputy in the video is my ex-wife's brother, which is why it caught my interest. He'll probably never have full use of his right hand again, which seems odd just looking at the video since he's holding his injured left arm with his right hand. Adrenaline makes a person ignore their pain for awhile, and by the end of the video, the pain is finally beginning to break through the adrenaline rush.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

News Is Recording Police Interactions a Felony?
  • · Replies 116 ·
4
Replies
116
Views
22K