Yes. I didn't focus enough on this discrepancy.I don't think this was brought this up yet, but the officer's account saying that they first identified themselves - a requirement in a "knock and announce" raid - is highly contested given that 11 out 12 nearby neighbors did not hear the police announce themselves. — Maw
Manslaughter for each police officer at minimum; perhaps 2nd degree murder, etc pending evidence of other aggravating circumstances (e.g. unannounced break-in with a "knock and announce warrant", etc). — 180 Proof
Yes. I didn't focus enough on this discrepancy. — 180 Proof
What would you say might be the responsibility of the police, then? Do they have any? How about not to kill anyone unless they had to? — tim wood
That, and the outcome. Does that tell you anything? Or an exact question: what exactly (in your opinion) justified the police discharging their weapons? Either they were all right or they were all wrong. If they were all right, then the exact reason should be easy to state. Hints: they did not have a target; after the first shot (apparently) there were no others; after the first shot they (apparently) did not announce themselves; and one of theirs wounded, condition at the instant unknown - what then did they do? They shot up the place.a no knock warrant. — Hanover
you'll notice that my citation of the publicly reported facts are in order, counselor. — 180 Proof
There's no room to hide in this except in irrelevant and gratuitous generalities. Which is just to say there is no room to hide in this. — tim wood
Reread my previous posts and my replies below. I stand by what I wrote. — 180 Proof
think we all feel relatively certain there's been a lot of lying surrounding the knock and announcement. Hanover what happens with his testimony if he'd be flipped to denying the knock and announce again? Is it then an untrustworthy witness or can you surpress all his statements and get them thrown out as evidence? — Benkei
That's actually wrong. They're definitely not instructed by a prosecutor. The prosecuter decides what subjects the grand jury investigates and drafts the indictment and interrogates witnesses. The grand jury can subpoena evidence and persons (and reach presentments). There's an obligation on the prosecutor to present evidence substantially negating guilt as well. The grand jury is advised on the law by the court. — Benkei
Again, Hanover, thanks for your professionally informed clarification and for corroborating my statement to our Dutch friend that "prosecutors instruct grand juries".In practice, the Grand Jury does whatever the prosecutor asks them to do. It's pretty much a rubber stamp. They offer political cover in instances where the prosecutor doesn't want to dismiss a case under his own name. They do not provide a reasonable protection against unjust indictments. — Hanover
And yet you persisted in arguing with me. :roll:Hanover I asked precisely because I don't know how it works in the US. — Benkei
And yet you persisted in arguing with me. — 180 Proof
and thereby know just enough about the American Injustice System /quote]
— 180 Proof
Why are you, my Dutch friend, like too many of my fellow Americans, refusing to accept this fact of Black (Brown Red & Poor) American life? :chin: — 180 Proof
On what grounds do you believe that the prosecutor presented the grand jury with all of "the" relevant, incriminating (if any), "available evidence"? Or that grand juries "reach conclusions" other than those presented them to, as Hanover points out, "rubber stamp"? What, Benkei, do you know that I and others here don't know about the U.S. grand jury system that you've already confessed to knowing nothing about?↪180 Proof What other conclusion was there available to the grand jury then the one they reached based on the available evidence? — Benkei
Prosecutorial judgment' in high profile politically explosive cases are not only based on how likely it is to secure a conviction - that, of course, is major consideration - but also whether more social disorder, or undermining of local authorities, might be caused by indicting (and proceeding to trial) than by not indicting at all (or appropriately (e.g. "wanton — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.