New (clearer) video of Oscar Grant shooting

[charlie]

This is a direct link -- you'll need a player that can handle Flash movie files:

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2009/01/06/bart_police_shoot_oscar_grant_1_.flv

Or here's an alternate with the video embedded in a webpage:

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/01/09/new-video-of-bart-shooting-emerges-offering-clearest-view-so-far-and-audio

You can see the cop pull out his gun while standing over Grant. It probably won't resolve whether the shot was intentional or not, but it seems clear his immediate reaction was of a man who knew he'd really fucked up.

[charlie]

1. YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al4w7YKHfms

[redstate_democrat]

2. The cop who shot Oscar should go down on first degree murder charges

the cop who had his knee on Oscar's neck is an accessory to the crime. Every other single cop on the scene should be fired.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

8. I see no reason to believe that this was premeditated...

...given what we now know.

[WeDidIt]

11. Exactly. He knew precisely what the fuck he was doing.

He had the guy down. The guy was subdued. The other cop had his knee in the guy's back.

The murderer reaches for his gun, aims, and fires.

Pre-meditated murder. No other conclusion.

But I guarantee you, his buddies will LIE for him in court to get him off easy.

Both cops should go down for murder, IMO.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

19. CA's definition of first degree murder is relatively broad.

However, I'm not sure it would pass muster for a first degree murder charge. More than likely they will seek second degree or manslaughter charges against him, if for no other reason than that it will be much, much easier to prove.

[WeDidIt]

29. Are you going to tell me he didn't KNOW how to handle a pistol?

A two year veteran law enforcement officer knows hwere his weapon is.

This officer removed his weapon knowingly from his holster.

He then AIMED it at the victim.

He then DISCHARGED his weapon.

This was CLEARLY an intentional act. That makes it first degree murder.

It's an open and shut case.

[slackmaster]

34. I don't agree that he aimed the weapon

I see his gaze not in exactly the direction the gun was pointed.

No trained person fires a handgun one-handed. All police officers everywhere are taught a two-hand grip, and one of two stances (isoceles or Weaver). His body was not in a proper attitude for a deliberate discharge of the weapon.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

42. It is most certainly not open and shut.

For reasons that have been pointed out elsewhere in this thread. Again, I think it's likely that they'll seek manslaughter charges, and second degree murder at the most (and probably only that if we get more information that might point towards intent - say a history of violence or racism.) They'll be going for whatever is most likely to get them a conviction, because if this guy doesn't get some jail time there's gonna be hell to pay.

[slackmaster]

3. The cop looks surprised to me right after the shot

Which would tend to indicate the shooting was unintentional.

Based on everything I've seen, I'm inclined to call it involuntary manslaughter (California Penal Code Section 192b), rather than murder (Section 187). It's certainly a crime IMO, but I don't see anything that indicates malice (actual or implied) on the part of the shooter. As a firearms expert, it looks to me like sloppy, negligent handling of a weapon. I could be mistaken, but it does not appear to me that he was even looking exactly in the direction the gun was pointed.

Obviously the cops, other suspects who were present, and witnesses will need to be interviewed.

[merh]

7. The cop who shot him shouts "Damn" just after he fired

he knows he fucked up (1:29).

He shot the man in the back, plain as day - 2nd degree murder, abuse of power, feds should charge him with civil rights violations and he should go to jail for life.

[slackmaster]

9. Second-degree murder is an intentional act

he knows he fucked up (1:29).

If he meant to shoot the guy it was murder. If he fucked up, it was manslaughter and not murder. Still a felony, still punishable by prison time.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199

[merh]

12. I agree, the murder charge would be hard to make

Though, I think anyone that abuses someone restrained in any way (with club or taser or gun) has malice in his heart.

188. Such malice may be express or implied. It is express when
there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away
the life of a fellow creature. It is implied, when no considerable
provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing
show an abandoned and malignant heart.

The man definitely abused the powers of his office and he violated the other man's civil rights. The victim was in restraint and the officer intended to inflict further abuse on him while restrained, not because he was a danger to the officer or others, not because he was a danger to himself, but because he wasn't as compliant as the cops wanted him to be.

Excess use of force for the situation and force used because they could. Civil rights violation and feds should try the man.

I am sure some audio experts are working on the sound now so we will be able to hear what the cops were saying to the victim and each other before the victim was killed. The jury will know what was said by all involved.

[redstate_democrat]

13. I think the fact he pulled the trigger was intentional

or did he "accidentally" pull the trigger? I guess his finger accidentally bumped against the trigger and it fired? No, this was an intentional act and he should go down. Me, I think it is a first degree murder charge.

Why the HELL was he reaching for his tazer, anyway? The guy was on the ground with a knee on his neck. His intentions were not good. He was intending, at the very least if you believe his lie, to at least physically assault this man for no apparent reason. But I believe this cold-blooded killer knew he held that gun in his hand and he knowingly pulled the trigger. The government doesn't listen to other people when they say, "oh, I didn't REALLY mean to pull that trigger, I actually MEANT to just do something else! I thought it was a fake gun!" How well would that work outside of this particular situation? I watched the tape and I didn't see any particular urgent response from the pig. He seemed not terribly interested in the fact that he had just shot in the back a man lying face down. He was turning the man over with his damn foot, kicking him to see if he was still alive. Fuck him and send him to jail.

[WeDidIt]

14. I agree, he knew precisely what he was doing.

He's a trained officer of the law. He knew he reached for his weapon, he aimed his weapon, he discharged his weapon.

Muder in the first degree. No doubts whatsoever in my mind.

[Statistical]

15. What planet do you live on?

How do you KNOW (as in proven beyond reasonable doubt) it wasn't an accident?
How do you KNOW (as in proven beyond reasonable doubt) he intended to murder the victim?

If anything the fact that he is video taped showing an expression of suprise and then visible upset would indicate (or at least provide reasonable doubt) that his actions weren't intended.

Did you happen to look up the difference between 1st degree murder, 2nd degree murder, and negligent homicide.

"Send him to jail" = sure after his day in court right?
"1st Degree Murder" = doesn't even come CLOSE to meeting the burden of proof required to prove 1st degree murder.

[redstate_democrat]

21. So I guess the fact he showed "surprise" at the finality of his act, he should be somehow rewarded

with a lesser charge? Please.




187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.


188. Such malice may be express or implied. It is express when
there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away
the life of a fellow creature. It is implied, when no considerable
provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing
show an abandoned and malignant heart.
When it is shown that the killing resulted from the intentional
doing of an act with express or implied malice as defined above, no
other mental state need be shown to establish the mental state of
malice aforethought. Neither an awareness of the obligation to act
within the general body of laws regulating society nor acting despite
such awareness is included within the definition of malice.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

24. We know what he did. We don't know why he did it.

And the "why" will be the determining factor in whether he's charged with manslaughter or first or second degree murder.

[WeDidIt]

31. We don't NEED to know why

Motive is not necessary to convict in murder in teh first, just like a body is not necessary.

This is a trained veteran law enforcement officer.

He KNEW where his weapon was.

HE INTENTIONALLY DREW his weapon.

He INTENTIONALLY AIMED his weapon.

He INTENTIONALLY DISCHARGED his weapon.

This is an open and shut case of murder in the first degree.

[slackmaster]

35. Why he did it is the difference between manslaughter and murder

It matters a lot.

[WeDidIt]

41. Nope, his actions speak loudly

A trained officer of the law drew, aimed, and fired his weapon at a man who was subdued.

Don't need anything more atall.

It's an open and shut case of murder in the first.

[slackmaster]

43. Murder, either first or second, requires malice aforethought

You can't infer that from these videos, IMO.

Well, you may think you can but I know I can't.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

45. YOU might not need any more...

...but the charge is not about what YOU need. It will be about what a JURY, subjected to his DEFENSE will need in order to convict.

[Xithras]

25. Charge him with 1st degree and he'll walk.

Murder charges, of any degree, require the prosecutor to prove that the officer killed him AND that he intended to do so. If the prosecutor proves that the officer killed him but fails to prove intent, he'll be found innocent and will walk away with a clean record. He could even become a police officer again. This video is actually a boon to his defense because it shows suprise on his part, which will support his claim that it was accidental. That introduces "reasonable doubt" as to his intent, killing any chance of a murder conviction.

Involuntary manslaughter can still land him in prison for a few decades and is much easier to prove. The prosecution merely has to demonstrate that he killed the guy and that it happened because he was careless or reckless. The prosecution, in that instance, would only need to prove that he was handling his firearm in an unsafe manner, which is OBVIOUS to anyone with eyes.

A prosecutors primary concern when charging someone is determining what can be proven to a jury. Accusations and gut feelings don't carry any real weight.

[slackmaster]

32. I don't see how you could tell intentional vs. unintentional by watching that video

I see sloppy gun handling. Simultaneous violation of two of the primary firearm safety rules. Negligently sloppy. Criminally sloppy. Maybe by an impaired officer - He was tested for alcohol and drugs in the routine course of the investigation. We don't know how those tests turned out. The shooting happened in the wee hours of the morning, when few humans are capable of working at their full mental capacity. His wife was about to go into labor. I think there is a good chance the man was sleep deprived. Those aren't excuses, but they are possible explanations of how the incident could have happened and not been motivated by malice.

Nobody is trained to shoot a handgun one-handed, "gangsta" style. (The US military used to train soldiers to do that during World War I, but the practice was replaced long ago.) If he really meant to shoot, anything other than a proper two-handed grip would be outside of his training.

The shooting was certainly outside of what the law allows. I don't dispute that a serious crime occurred, and that the former officer deserves prison time. My only issue is the technicality of whether the crime was murder or something slightly less.

[ColbertWatcher]

68. As far as I'm concerned, in order for it to have been an accident ...

... the cop would have had to accidentally pull Grant away from the wall, accidentally pushed Grant to the ground, accidentally stood on Grant's back, accidentally pulled his gun from his holster, accidentally taken the safety off, accidentally aimed it at grant and accidentally pulled the trigger.

[redstate_democrat]

16. No, the cop is NOT the person who shouted DAMN

It was the second kid who jumped back when that fucking PIG shot Oscar.

He is a COLD BLOODED KILLER and he needs to go to prison.

[merh]

17. Upon review (edit)

Upon further review, I do agree with you. The other fellow they had on his knees next to the shooting is the one that jumped back and said "damn".

You can bet that the tape is being analyzed and slowed down and voice enhanced. When all is said and done, it will be known what was being said by everyone concerned, the victim and the two cops.

[EnviroBat]

4. I can't really say what I hope happens to this asshole fucking pig.

He's resigned from the force. Hopefully some people will find him where he lives...

The police need to be sent a clear message that they are there to PROTECT and SERVE US. Somehow they feel like they are there only to brutalize us, it's what they live for.

[slackmaster]

6. It sounds like you are advocating a lynching

I want to see him charged with the appropriate crime, hopefully convicted of a felony, and never be allowed to work in law enforcement or posses a firearm again.

The victim's family deserves a BIG settlement for this wrongful death.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

67. So you support the death penalty?

and the lynching of people before they are judged by a jury of their peers? How progressive.

David

[NV Whino]

5. I saw something in this one that I hadn't seen before

Before the skin head cop comes over to the area, one of the cops strikes one of the guys sitting on the floor. Couldn't tell which cop or which guy, but I hadn't seen that part before.

[charlie]

10. Oh boy

I hadn't noticed that either. The cop who hit the guy is the cop who shot Grant. The guy who was hit is the guy on the right who stands up and back away after the gun goes off.

[charlie]

18. Third video

Unfortunately, it's an exclusive to a news station so it's embedded in a report, but it has an unobstructed, though grainy, view of the shot. Starts about 1'50" in:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOcARMTnzh8

[charlie]

20. Someone extracted the video

Here's a 45sec YouTube snippet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OJTa9F2O14

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

22. I'm Convinced It Was An Accident Now. I Feel For The Officer.

That officer will likely be charged with manslaughter and be haunted indefinitely by the realization he killed an innocent by accident. Based on his expressions though afterwards, I have no doubt in my mind that it was an accidental firing of the weapon.

[jmg257]

23. The problem I see, especially in other video shot from the train, is WHY the hell he took his pistol

out in the 1st place??

In this video you can not see as much of a struggle from Grant as the other, but they still had the him well under control by the time the cop drew his weapon, stood up and fired. I just can't imagine what he was thinking. The surprise reaction afterwards was there, but what the hell was he doing?

When struggling with suspects, you sure might have your gun out before contact (bad guy armed or not?), but after that it goes in the holster and you realize you have to get your hands dirty. This guy handled it ass backwards, unless he REALLY thought he was drawing a taser(???). I just don't get it.

It may or may not have been a deliberate & intentional execution (though that is what it looks like), but it was no true accident.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

26. Haven't Heard The Cop's Side, But From What I Saw I Think The Bald Cop Was About

to stand the perp back up, and the cop who shot was merely going to cover as is a somewhat normal procedure. I think he was taking out the weapon with intent to follow the perp with it as he stands, while the other officer helps him up. That's what it looks like to me is about to occur. But for some reason when the cop put both hands on the gun and put it in the start 'follow' position, the gun fired. Definitely accidental in my opinion. Some might argue about the need for the second cop to have to aim a gun on the suspect in the first place, but it's not really that uncommon in certain city's with higher than normal violence risk for the suspect to have a gun trained on them until the complete risk of resistance or threat is abated. In this case, I don't really think the gun needed to be trained on him at all, but it's really a judgment call. It is somewhat standard op for such covering to take place, though in this case it resulted in the accidental triggering of a weapon which in turn led to the death of an innocent person.

[jmg257]

27. Hadn't thought of a "covering" action. That would make some sense, as this taser mix-up seems a

stretch. Trying to find some idea of their (BART) equipment load-out. Doesn't seem he had any confusion he was drawing his pistol(although it seemed he messed up a smooth draw - messed with a snap or ?). It still looks like he deliberately backed-off, assessed, pointed and pulled.

[jmg257]

33. Taser vs SIG

"Burris and BART police Chief Gary Gee have said the facts remain unclear whether Mehserle had been carrying a Taser that day.

BART police began training to use Tasers about three months ago, BART spokesman Linton Johnson said.

The department does not have enough of the stun guns to equip every officer with one, Gee said. When officers do carry Tasers, he added, they are supposedly kept on a separate part of their belts from their service pistols.

http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_11389946

"They keep those Tasers on the opposite side of their gun hand, or in the middle, pointed the opposite direction so you have to turn your hand to get it," Burris said. "No movement (on the videos) suggests (the officer) was reaching for anything other than the location where the gun was."

Burris said he has not requested any information from BART police but plans to submit a request in the next day or two.

Standard-issue pistols for BART police are Sig-Sauer .40-caliber semi-automatic pistols, Gee said, and the department uses the X26 model Taser...A loaded Sig-Sauer weighs nearly three times as much as the X26 Taser and is taller by about 2 inches, according to specifications on a gun dealer and official Taser Web sites."


While the X26 is certainly gun-like http://www.taser.com/products/law/Pages/TASERX26.aspx
the bold shows this shouldn't have been a mistaken Taser grab, unless he REALLY REALLY f-up mentally.

I have confused the mag release on a new HK with the slide release on a 1911 while making a transition during training, but reaching for the wrong weapon? Wierd.


edit: link added

[KansDem]

39. Okay, but why then was he reaching for his Taser?

The man was 'cuffed and lying face down on the ground. Why go for the Taser then?

[jmg257]

54. Don't know - he was still struggling a bit, but was under control. IF he was

looking to tase him - doesn't seem like it was really necessary.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

62. According to the BART spokesperson...

...those officers who do carry tasers carry them on the side of the belt opposite the firearm. Therefore, he'd have to have mistakenly gone for the wrong side of the belt, and mistaken the taser for something that weights three times as much and has a different shape. Doesn't seem likely.

[Junkdrawer]

48. And the gun's safety is released how?

:shrug:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

50. Yes, Yes, Junkdrawer. When Cops Cover With Their Weapon They Are Supposed To Have Their Safety's On

:eyes:

:dunce:

[Junkdrawer]

55. Cover what? The cop's partner had the guy on his belly with his knee on his neck....

Why is the cop unholstering the weapon and releasing the safety?

:shrug:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

58. Do You Even Read Things Before You Reply?

If you don't, then I'm not even going to bother wasting my time replying to you.

[Junkdrawer]

64. "I'm not even going to bother wasting my time replying to you."

Tease...

[jmg257]

52. Typically isn't one...SIGs have a decocker to drop the hammer on DA/SA versions,

or have a DAO trigger pull.

Firing pin lock safety only (internal), releases when trigger pulled.

edit to clarify

[Statistical]

57. The weapon looks like a Sig P-226 which has no external safety

Then again I am no expert on Sig firearms, never owned one.
Maybe someone more familiar with Sigs can chime in.

If it is a Sig P226 or something in that line (which are fairly common as LEO sidearm) then it has no external safety.
There is no safety to "release".

[Junkdrawer]

65. I Googled around and you're right,...Cop guns typically have a trigger-activated safety....

could help explain why there's so many trigger-fingered shootings by cops - one more conscious process is eliminated in the favor of speed.

[WeDidIt]

28. A trained officer of the law KNOWS where his pistol is

This was no accident.

This was INTENTIONAL.

That makes it murder in the first.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. I'd Say The Chance Of it Being Intentional Is About One In A Million.

Try logic sometime.

[slackmaster]

36. A PROPERLY trained officer who is working with a full mental capacity does

His training may have been faulty. He may have been impaired in some way.

Neither of those would excuse the action, but it's possible that the shooting was not intentional.

[Uzybone]

37. Can anyone explain why he pulled the gun?

Is that standard procedure, to pull a weapon on a man who has another officers knee on his head?

Why pull the gun and place your finger on the trigger?

Whether or not he intended to pull the trigger can be debated. But he clearly intended to pull his weapon and aim it at Grant. Why?

For that alone he needs to serve some serious jail time. This is not like killing someone while driving drunk. This is like driving your car directly at someone at full speed and hoping you can hit the brakes in time.

[slackmaster]

38. There may be only one person who can explain it

I've seen a few ides thrown out, but they're pretty much wild guesses.

But he clearly intended to pull his weapon and aim it at Grant.

I know what aiming a gun looks like. I don't see any indication of that in any of the videos.

[Uzybone]

40. Aiming a gun: Pointing it at a target, clear as day

Come on now. Don't tell me his didn't purposely point his weapon at Grant. He didn't just pull a loaded weapon for no reason.

[slackmaster]

44. Aiming is not the same as pointing

He didn't just pull a loaded weapon for no reason.

No, he didn't. I'm interested to know WHY he pulled it and WHY he handled it in the manner he did.

When you intentionally shoot someone, you hold the gun with both hands and AIM the weapon. I see no sign of aiming in any of the videos.

I have personally taught more than 100 people how to safely handle and shoot handguns.

[Statistical]

59. Have you EVER fired a handgun before?

Bringing the weapon out of the holster is not same as aiming.

He almost shot his partner.
No LEO agency teaches anyone to fire single handed.
His line of sight isn't in line with pistol sights.
His footwork/body stance doesn't indicate someone intentionally preparing to fire.
His reaction when the weapon fires is one of shock.

Everything from the video indicates an accidental shooting.
Based on proper procedure he may be looking at negligent homicide.

As far as WHY he would draw the weapon
If his partner was planning on standing the suspect up in order to move him into custody it would not be that out of the odinary for him to draw his weapon to cover the suspect. We simply don't know. What I do know is if he was covering it was a pretty bad cover. He is in wrong position endangering his partner. He has poor weapon control (one handed & finger on trigger).

[Uzybone]

60. Yes I have fired a handgun

An innocent man is dead, for no good reason. The fucking cop needs to be arrested and jailed for all our safety.

You are right about the correct procedure, but following correct procedure is not supposed to end with a subdued unarmed man shot in the back while lying face down. That said accidents happen, and I hope that this officer serves a long prison term for this accident. He fucked up bad and a man is dead because of it.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

61. I don't think that anyone is suggesting that the guy shouldn't do time.

We're talking about the specific nature of the crime he committed.

[Junkdrawer]

46. Nope, it's the usual reaction of someone who, in a moment of rage....

shoots someone and then realizes it ain't kisses coming out of the barrel of that gun.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

51. Ummmmmmm, No.

[High Plains]

47. Of course you feel for the officer.

It wouldn't be a ridiculous contrarian OMC post if you didn't.

Funny, you didn't mention the guy your poor officer killed. Any feelings for him?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

53. Nothing Contrarian About It. Nothing Wrong With It Either.

And obviously my heart absolutely goes out to the family/friends of the victim. I've said as much in another thread, though lord knows I don't expect you to be thorough. That wasn't quite the point of the post though. After seeing the video I was convinced the shooting was accidental, so I limited my reply to that circumstance. It is quite decent to feel for the officer as well, since this will obviously have a large negative impact on his life and likely haunt him mentally as well. Saying that doesn't take away from the tragedy, sorrow and emotions felt for the victim and his family whatsoever.

[Connie_Corleone]

49. At least he's still alive.

I feel sorry for victim's fiance, 4 year old daughter and his parents.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

56. Is It Not Possible To Feel For Them All?

So much black and white mentality here sometimes.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

63. I think the look on his face after the gun goes off tells the story

He was surprised it went off. I don't think it was intentional. Nonetheless he did kill the guy and he should be charged with manslaughter. What is he doing pointing his gun at a guy on the ground? That is totally out of bounds and he should be punished.

[lib2DaBone]

66. Wow.. this is extrordinary....

he shot a handcuffed man in the back? (there it is on film..plain as day)

Did the handcuffed man have a marijuana cigarette or something? Maybe he had "drug Paraphernalia", other wise known and cigarette rolling papers.

This has all gone too far.