Hierophant
Banned
"Rule of Law" = "Can't let those blacks get uppity and think they have any right to justice"
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Jury in Michael Slager (cop who shot a man in the back) trial has been selected.
- Thread starter Enzom21
- Start date
- Status
"Rule of Law" = "Can't let those blacks get uppity and think they have any right to justice"
What does that matter here? It's not the judge's fault. Jury couldn't reach a unanimous decision.
Honestly do not think it would have helped in this case.
And? What does that matter?
Link
The Autumn Wind
Don't kid yourself. We never did.
Mammoth Jones
Member
Doesn't have to say it. It's implied. Got an open and shut case like this and mofos can't convict because in their eyes the life of a Black doesn't mean shit. Just like back in the day no one would put a White man in jail for raping a Black woman.
The more things change...
SolarPowered
Member
dave is ok
aztek is ok
I don't understand what the defense was. Suppose there was a scuffle the video evidence missed and Scott did have his taser. He's running away from you on foot. You have a car. There is no need to shoot someone in the back.
This. If justice ever existed in America, suspicious coincidences like this jury selection wouldn't happen.
They've let too many cockroaches reach the dangerous parts of the system. A lot of insitutions in the US need a complete cleansing imo.
What you quoted (not your comment), this has got to be a joke, who gives a damn about who he was celled next to?
"Ooh boo hoo, my cell was cold and I was scared and hungry... And I was jailed next to a lunatic that has nothing to do with the case, have mercy on me when I have not shown mercy."
GTFO.
theignoramus
Member
Pay attention to your social media accounts. Opinions on this decision by the jury is a good litmus test to determine who among your coworkers, family & acquaintances is a full fledged White supremacist.
Vincent Alexander
Member
White supremacist gives some assholes pride. I prefer "piece of shit"
Well at least this is sort of good news, the retrial is coming:
https://apnews.com/fb96e36846d1400b...est:-Prosecutors-plan-to-retry-police-officer
https://apnews.com/fb96e36846d1400b...est:-Prosecutors-plan-to-retry-police-officer
Vincent Alexander
Member
Thank god. Too bad shit won't happen. Being a murderer is the "in" thing nowadays.
Its kind of funny how bad America looks, it just looks freaking insane, its so unbelievable how can you react? Its like you knew something was wrong with a guy but they kind of tried to keep it contained but then when their caught with their pants down, instead of shame or embarassment they double down, rip their undies off and go running down the street screaming. WTF is wrong with these people?
Good. I'm glad the piece of shit holdout didn't bite on the lesser charges and risk a sentence reduction for the officer.
Vincent Alexander
Member
11 think he is guilty. That seems good enough to me. Not sure why we need 100% to convict. Going to be hard to have a jury with no racist pieces of shit. Lot more cops going to keep getting away with murdering minorities.
This situation reminds me of that horrific racist anonymous confessions post. The juror was never actually considering the case and lied their ass off to make sure they got in a position to tank it.
Eric Garner? Doesn't matter if it's clear as day.
kame-sennin
Member
The defense is also going to know what arguments influenced the jury, and be able to put up a better defense. That's true of the prosecution as well, but the defense just has to prove reasonable doubt. Also, the defense doesn't need to win. They just need another mistrial, and the whole case will be thrown out.
Wait... this judicial system sounds almost too stupid from a logical view point. In a situation like this where a man can wickedly throw a case by basically forfeiting against the others in the jury why the hell are they not required to logically explain against the ruling? This is too easy to exploit and makes a mockery of justice.
Edit: To further explain I mean that this dynamic seems too stupid to be an overlooked issue in the system it seems like it was purposely added.
Edit: To further explain I mean that this dynamic seems too stupid to be an overlooked issue in the system it seems like it was purposely added.
It's not. You need to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to be convicted in this country, so it needs to be unanimius. Stuff like this is bound to happen, and it's why we have the mistrial/retrial system.
I expect him to be found guilty; 11-1 means that once a half rational person is put on, the right verdict will be found.
kame-sennin
Member
This is what the prosecutor said to the jury during the trial:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/us/walter-scott-michael-slager-north-charleston.html
She also said this:
1. This pig didn't "mess up" he fucking murdered a man. Of course the jury would be reluctant to send a man to jail for life because of a 'mistake'.
2. FOH, this shit happens all the time. It's not rare at all. But you'd have to believe that it is to be a prosecutor because you rely on cops to bring you cases. Dat conflict of interest.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/us/walter-scott-michael-slager-north-charleston.html
She also said this:
1. This pig didn't "mess up" he fucking murdered a man. Of course the jury would be reluctant to send a man to jail for life because of a 'mistake'.
2. FOH, this shit happens all the time. It's not rare at all. But you'd have to believe that it is to be a prosecutor because you rely on cops to bring you cases. Dat conflict of interest.
theignoramus
Member
What do Blacks in the armed forces even think to themselves on a day like this?
We can guess what Micah Johnson said to himself and extrapolate from there. But lets keep assuming people are gonna put up with this bullshit forever instead.
undrtakr900
Member
^^^ Exaxtly, what the fuck does that Juror need to convict? I bet if one of the 3(of 8) bullets that missed Walter hit and killed someone he loved, he'd have a different tune. Not that I would want that, its just that some people have no empathy, unless it directly affects them.
("Close your eyes and imagine if Walter was your father"--McConaughey)
But when when it comes to the victim(Walter), the media's first reaction is to look for any criminal hostory....that has fuck-all to do with the incident. I remember headlines: "Walter Scott, who owed thousands of dollars in back child support(!!), was shot in back while running away."---as if that somehow justifies blatant murder.
("Close your eyes and imagine if Walter was your father"--McConaughey)
I love how the media made sure to emphasize that Michael "held back tears several times while on the stand", to show him as remorseful.
But when when it comes to the victim(Walter), the media's first reaction is to look for any criminal hostory....that has fuck-all to do with the incident. I remember headlines: "Walter Scott, who owed thousands of dollars in back child support(!!), was shot in back while running away."---as if that somehow justifies blatant murder.
Needing a unanimous decision is not a bad idea. You are looking at this single case and outcome but think of the of thousands of criminal trials each and every year. If you set the bar lower for the prosecution the conviction rate would be even higher. The difficulty in achieving a unanimous verdict also serves an additional purpose because it encourages juries to deliberate longer, which lead to discussions that might not otherwise take place.
We will get a retrial. The prosecution will be more diligent in voir dire and they will have refine and perfect their theory of the case. Hopefully leading to a just outcome.
……forgetit
Member
Anymore? The American justice system was designed to kill/lock up as many black men as possible. This is it working as planned.
Or as in several high profile shootings law enforcement shootings of minorities, not just this single cases, they will drop charges altogether after a hung jury or opt for a bench trial when they cant stack the deck. And that's if a clear cut case even makes it to trial.
This lone racist never had any reasonable doubts and he exploited one of several flaws in our justice system.
I mean, it was his fault for running away.
Obviously I was only mocking the prosecution.
gutter_trash
Banned
the jury system is such an antiquated system IMO.
I heard the audio of conflicted juror who couldn't call it guilty but then in the same audio clip said the words "killed by..." confirming that the cop killed a man
fuck the jury system
I heard the audio of conflicted juror who couldn't call it guilty but then in the same audio clip said the words "killed by..." confirming that the cop killed a man
fuck the jury system
The Last Wizard
Member
ftfy
If "I feared for my life because he could have turned back around and charged me" actually works, then there is absolutely no limit to this train-wreck of a defense. A dude could be on the ground and handcuffed, but still try to say some bullshit like "well, he could have gotten up and hit me later, I feared for my life!" and there is a decent chance that some dipshits will buy it.
hawkshockey11
Banned
Can't they kick him off and replace him with one of the reserve jurors?
Seth Enosh
Member
No, if you could just replace the individual jurors until you get the result you wanted, it would make a mockery of the jury system. Why even have a jury or a requirement for unanimous consent in that case?
They will get 12 new jurors and have a completely new trial instead.
AngmarsKing701
Member
Not 6 times, that's for sure. Ridiculous.
The number of shots fired is immaterial unless you want to argue that he reloaded the gun and continued firing. It is presumed that when a cop fires his weapon he or she does so with an intent to kill, not to injure or maim.
Angelus Errare
Banned
I have low expectation for the retrial.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Shot in the back caught on tape.
Doesn't matter.
Cops are above the law and black people have no rights.
Yup.
I honestly think we need a new radical militarized black movement.
Doesn't matter.
Cops are above the law and black people have no rights.
Yup.
I honestly think we need a new radical militarized black movement.
I hope justice is served on retrial but that is assuming they can get a fair jury.
Daniel Holtzclaw isn't 100% white though... FWIW
Pamplemousse
Member
Why? It was only one juror who wasn't cooperating. I think he'll be found guilty for sure.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked