Holy sh*t…body cam footage of murder gets released

Beyond any reasonable doubt, he murdered her.

That b*stard belongs on death row.

 

Considering the fact that he threatened to shoot her in the face ahead of time I'd say he wanted to kill her. That and the fact that he didn't want his partner to render aid.

 

Different states have different way of defining first degree murder. Here's the Illinois statue on first degree murder.
https://codes.findlaw.com/il/chapter-720-criminal-offenses/il-st-sect-720-5-9-1.html

I think it's pretty clear that the officer violated (1) and (2). The issue for the prosecution is proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer shot the woman "without lawful justification". So if the prosecution can show that the shooting was not in self defense, then I think the charge would stick.

The definition for self defense in Illinois according to this site is:

So even if the officer believed that the woman planned on throwing hot water at him, the defense would still have to show that shooting was equivalent to the threat.

Illinois doesn't have a stand-your-ground statute, but it does have judicial precedent for stand-your-ground.

However, it is clear that first degree murder conviction in Illinois does not require premeditation.

 

Thanks for the research. I know the dude will get 1st degree murder. You misspelled statute.

 

I'd also like to point out the following from that link.

Sounds fairly apt.

I don't think that shooting someone to avoid having boiling hot water thrown on you is unreasonable BTW. The main question for me is was he ever actually in any danger of that happening, and if he was, did his actions create that situation or make it worse.

 

It may not be unreasonable to you if that was an actual threat, but from the way the law is written shooting her has to come from a threat equal to being shot. I don't believe the threat of being scalded and the threat of being shot are equal.

I might be misreading but that is what it looks like.

 

Well throw my ass in jail then because I would 1000% shoot someone that was threatening to throw boiling water on me.

 

I get it. I'm not saying it is unreasonable. I'm just thinking of the wording of the law which is the only thing the jury can use as their basis for guilt or acquittal.

So what one believes they would or wouldn't do might play a part in sentencing but I don't think it has to do with guilt or innocence. I'm not a lawyer so I'm just using my leyman's reading of it.

 

This just did not happen.

 

That b*stard has had the intent to take a human life for as long as he's been a cop.

That's as premeditated as it gets - he just waited for what he thought was a good opportunity to present itself.

Glad his partner had the camera rolling. It's going to land him a conviction.

 

I read somewhere the suspect said that in his report

 

I don't know why/how the water got there, but it's on the film plain as day.

 

I'll have to watch the video again but from what I remember she was holding the pan of water when she was shot so the water splashing is probably from her falling while getting shot.

 

I don't IL law so maybe one of the lawyers here could answer this. Could Grayson be charged for both 1st degree murder and 2nd degree murder? Chauvin was charged with both 2nd and 4rd degree murder including 2nd degree manslaughter.

 

That is why I'm not claiming to know how/why the water got there. It could have been thrown on purpose, it could have simply been spilled/incidental because of, you know, the whole bullet to the head thing.

I'm not claiming anything that isn't shown directly in the video. The moment that is absolutely crucial to whether or not a crime was committed is not shown.

 

I rewatched the video of the moment of the shooting. She is holding a pot but makes no motion to throw the water at Grayson. I also don't see any water splashing.

More noticeable is that Grayson is probably at least 7' from her and diagonally across the peninsula counter from her. Even if she was going to throw the water at him from that distance it's unlikely to do much harm.

 

Vid link

8:59 -- gun drawn, command issued, pot shown in hand



9:00 -- Massey ducks behind/under the counter



9:02 -- officer advances, commands continue, view of kitchen/Massey completely obscured, shots fired



9:03+ -- hot water and steam shown exiting the kitchen and into the living area




MMQBing it a bit, I agree that he was not in substantial danger until he advanced on Massey. He had the ability to diffuse the situation and put the onus on Massey but instead he chose to escalate.

 

I think we have established the fact that he was not in danger nor his life was threatened( they always used that BS defense sometimes after they killed somebody) by the distance he has(at least 8ft or more) and a physical barrier(kitchen counter) between him and Sonya Massey.

His weird triggered behavior is the key to this whole senseless murder. The job of the prosecutor is to get this out of him. I’ve watched a few more versions of this tragic killing already and that’s the only conclusion that I can come up with. He snapped when he heard that phrase.

I don’t want to go too much into Christianity but the phrase “ I rebuke you in the name of Jesus “ is used quite a bit amongst believers as a way to denounce Satan, evil spirit, infirmity ect.

Maybe that cop has something something in him to make him snapped like that when he heard that phrase.