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

It will be interesting to see if the jury finds that statement to be a threat. I know I would in that circumstance.

 

Well, @rocketsjudoka wrote this originally:

I assumed he was referring specifically to Grayson saying he'd shoot Massey in the ****ing face, but perhaps you consider this to have occurred after the point in which Massey was acting in a threatening manner. The comes down to whether or not you view as a threat her saying "I rebuke you in the name of Jesus" while holding a pot of water (that she was apparently intending to dump into the sink). I think you indicated earlier that you do see that as a threat against the officer.

 

Obviously

 

Things were not exactly fine between him and Massey before he took her life. He clearly showed a dislike towards her and were being downright rude at some points in the video if I can recall correctly. Someone in here can help with that. His attitude sucked towards Massey. I have seen videos of many cops under threats and nonstop verbal abuse yet still remain calm, friendly and non threatening.

 

Yeah, @DonnyMost pointed that out too.

 

George Floyd should have nothing to do with it? Why - juries are made up of people that live in the world we live in, if the situation concerning George Floyd has influenced the public's view of police shootings, then it will impact jury verdicts going forward.

Yeah - I would have to think about it more, but I believe that first degree murder was the proper charge. In Illinois you need a lack of lawful justification and intent to kill or do great bodily harm. He flat out told her he would shoot her in the face/head.

He will have a good defense and they will attempt to chip away at the "lack of lawful justification" and that he never intended to kill her when he walked into the apartment, but that really isn't needed - when he told her what he would do, that kind of is at best a double-edged sword for him.

Illinois is mostly cornfields and large areas of VERY conservative people - with a few pockets of overall very liberal people. So, venue is going to be very important.

 

I'm extremely conservative, I don't see how a psycho cop shooting a woman in the face in her kitchen (where she belongs) is a left/right issue.

 

Everything depends on the circumstances.

The victim was fairly far away from the officer when he pulled his gun on her, she is a small woman, he had a partner present - I don't think many people are going to believe that the officer was reasonable in his assessment of the situation ...... also, the reality is that often times sympathy for the perpetrator plays a part when juries render verdicts. I don't think that the defense is going to be able to muster up much sympathy based on the comments of the shooter, how he responded afterwards (if it isn't kept from the jury) and how fast he shot.

He is probably going to be staring down spending more time in jail than you or I have on this planet.

 

It is - just like almost everything is. You are also more objective than a lot of people on both sides of the political/social aisle.

In general people have preconceived views when it comes to police officers, minorities, women etc.

Will a jury of Republicans convict an officer? Yeah, they do it all the time, but it is harder........ same is true on the other side of the political spectrum.

I do believe though that the overall tenor of the American people the last 5 or so years, across all political divides is to have more distrust of authority figures.

 

Not very fast when there is a large kitchen island between her and the officer.

Just because I am a trial attorney doesn't mean I am never wrong - but I feel pretty strongly that the officer is going to prison for a long time.

 

I don't think that island represented more than another 4 or 5 feet of distance.

Either way, it's always sad/funny/mostly sad to hear your takes on trials and how so much depends on things that have nothing to do with the law.

I think if they had gone after 2nd degree they'd have a much better chance at getting a conviction. We'll see.

 

Yes and no - the law is nothing more than instructions, but ultimately it often depends on an interpretation or standard held by the jury. For example - "the reasonable person" standard.... that in large part depends on what the jurors believe is and isn't reasonable. So - what is reasonable in 1920's Chicago may be different than what is reasonable in 1990's River Oaks.

So - it is only natural that there is some variance over time when it comes to the enforcement and interpretation of the law and the standards in the law.

I have learned over the last 20-25 years that for all the pomp and circumstance that lawyers and authority figures try to give to the law, that it is nothing more than general guidelines that can and will be broken by many people that can do it.... and the final nail in the coffin for me has been the Supreme Court and their rulings. The law for most people is only as good as it is useful to them.

I am not saying to go around breaking the law - but judicial decisions, laws and rules are not infallible or never changing.... we just like to act like they don't.

 

Reading the thread but I haven't seen the idea that after the cop threatened to shoot her in the face, she was lifting or using the metal pot as a shield to cover herself from getting shot, which would be a normal reactive instinct for many.

He also screamed at her to drop it before shooting her.
The idea she was scared also and dropped it also with two large cops pointing guns at her and she apologized and cowered. It's disgusting really

 

I agree with this criminal lawyer, this breakdown should have more attention imo.

 

I’ve read through the thread since my last post and will reiterate a couple of things.

Grayson drawing his firearm in response to the Massey saying she rebukes him is a key piece of evidence against him. My understanding from LEO is you don’t draw and aim your firearm unless you’ve already made the decision that deadly force is needed. This would mean an imminent threat towards your or others safety.

Massey is about 9’ away from him with a counter in the way. While a human can close a 9’ distance quickly a counter is a significant obstacle. The counter is probably 42” high with a lot of stuff on it. I’m not sure how tall Massey is but she doesn’t appear that tall. It’s not likely she can leap it to lunge at Grayson. Also a large pot of boiling water isn’t a very effective weapon. I think it is a very difficult argument that Grayson reasonably felt that Massey was such a threat at that moment that warranted drawing his firearm and threatening her with deadly force.

When Grayson goes around the counter Massey does appear to raise the pot in a motion that can be interpreted as trying to throw it at him. That could give him a self defense argument but it again goes to that he already removed options for less than deadly force once he drew his firearm.

 

The fact she put the pot down and then picked it back up (once he had moved in much closer, definitely within throwing distance) is going to make Grayson's self defense argument a lot more plausible.

I'm not sure whether him drawing his gun in the first place is going to be a liability for him in court or not. I think that will depend on several things, especially each juror.

 

For now on if I’m cooking and someone knocks on the door I’m gonna piss myself.

 

ONLY COPS are allow to be scared/human/startled/instinctual/Panicky
I mean they are trained for these type of situations right???

Untrained regular People have to have superhuman resolve and calm in these situations

Rocket River

 

Im ready to hear @Nook soap box on the problematic nature of prosecutorial discretion next

 

It is a problem, but there really isn't a simple solution.