I think it should be investigated, but my complaint is the hypcritical, self-interested, angry mob of "gimmie gimmie's" spearheaded by RocketRiver and Another Brother who insist on turning this into a racially motivated hate crime. They will really stop at nothing to jump to conclusions, cry racism and portray a race as being oppressed in a shameful effort to elicit guilt. It really is sickening. What's worse is that the majority just has to sit there and take it. Any rebuke is considered racist. That to me is the issue here. I support our men and women in uniform and because of their professionalism and training, I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt in matters like this. They put their lives on the line on a daily basis for our safety. As a result, they know how to deal with troublemakers. This "police are always wrong" mentality is just absurd.
Wow, have you no remorse for a woman who could have been raped? You dismiss it as 'bs' with no support for your claim. Again, molesting *children* is a very serious offense. Your outright dismissal of it is simply ridiculous, as you have no information on the matter. It is unfortunate that a kid is dead. However, let's investigate it thoroughly before we imply that a cop was wrong in using lethal force.
Suggestions...we have suggestions for what may foster ostensibly a better view from the proverbial other side of the fence. 1. Take a criminal justice course at a local community college. 2. Sometimes certain departments offer a citizens academy. It may very well behoove us to take full advantage of such an opportunity. 3. Sometimes local law enforcement agencies do in fact have a ride along program with officers. What better way for private citizens to experience firsthand knowledge of the trials and tribulations faced daily by peace officers? 4. Sometimes local police departments offer tours of their training academies...a good community involvement practice to be sure. It's been some time since I last checked the Texas Penal Code, but I was under the notion that citizens do not have the right to resist an arrest, even an illegal one, so that incidents of this nature do not occur with any real frequency. There's an old saying in law enforcement that somewhat pertains to this (I just hope I don't butcher it): You may be able to beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride downtown. Actually, I would argue that this statement is somewhat misleading. I would guess the single, most overriding factor to shape departmental policy on such matters would be indeed how great a threat the individual is deemed to be not only to the officer but to the general public as well. Often times such decisions are made in the space of a few seconds under unimaginable conditions / stressors. For example, if a high pursuit chase begins to unreasonably put the general public at too high a risk, for at best a misdemeanor offense, many departments retain as policy that the officer cease pursuit of a suspect rather then endanger an innocent's life. Umm, I know I saw this on Cops once (I believe it was on a Las Angeles location)... Perhaps no laws were broken, but... 1. Here in Austin, several police officers (including two supervisors) were busted for fishing on duty while supposedly guarding a local power plant as part of the war on terror. The pathetic part was that they were warned once to not engage in such activities. One supervisor was put on leave for having knowledge of such wrong doings but not doing a blessed thing to correct the situation. 2. A DPS trooper, as part of the capital police, was busted by the local NBC affiliate on camera for watching DVD movies in her cruiser (I believe Finding Nemo was actually playing at the time) while on duty. Her Sgt. actually came out on camera and tried to defend her actions by saying that as long as the officer was paying attention to her surroundings, she was free to in fact watch Finding Nemo. With all due respect AB, a peace officer is a highly trained professional; as such, I believe that they would never sanction the drawing of their weapon unless it is for the protection of an innocent life. I would dare presume that 'kicking ass' has very little to do with it. Just my two bits...
It urks me to hear about this kind of crap. The poor kid. The poor kid. I don't know what when on, nor is it my business until after the evidence has been pointed out. Last weekend, a trooper friend of mine when on a pursuit of a suspicious character. When he finally stopped, he proceeded to approach the car, weapon drawn. What happened next was close to a miracle. The guy pulled a short stock ak47 on him, but he was fortuate enough for it to jam on him. It took 15 shots and 3 wounds to take him down. The guy had 2 ak's and 14 clips. The police you see everyday never know when they will face something like this, and rest assure they NEVER want to pull their weapons.
Worse to me is the Dallas Police Department engaging in the following behavior: 1. Paying confidential informants money well above what department policy allows and creating an incentive for CAs to manufacture drug cases which led to fake drugs being planted on innocent Mexican immigrants and those immigrants being arrested AND convicted despite only being in possession of pool chalk. Instead of coming clean when these bogus arrests came to light, the DPD covered it up as best as possible despite the fact that innocent people were sitting in jail (and some had already been deported). And that's the generous version of events. 2. Beating and repeatedly macing a man (despite having him down and with his knee in the man's back by then) for sitting in his car in a parking lot. The official chrage? Failure to ID, a charge which the Dallas City Attorney's Office (they've issued five separate official notices on the subject all saying that Failure to ID is not a legal charge) and the Dallas Police themselves say is not actually against the law. After it is brought to light and the man, also Hispanic, decides to fight the charges, the DA's office fraudulently gets a guilty plea entered for the man without his knowledge and through an attorney who had illegally been assigned to the man. When the resisting arrest trial finally came about (after the lawyer that was duped into pleading the man guilty realized he was duped and asked to change the plea. Of course, that was also not immediately done even though the plea was likely illegal under Texas law), it took 15 minutes for the jury to determine that the officer was full of crap (of course, even the DPD's own IAD officer said the officer's various stories were inconsistent, but only on cross examination). Consequences to the officer for the illegal arrest? None. Throughout the arrest process, the officer's story changed. At first, he claimed the sleeping man slapped his hand away. Later on, that slap became a disabling martial arts move. And later that was amended to the very-common crotch grab. At first, the charge was failure to ID. Later it was amended to resisting arrest. 3. Arresting a man for standing on the street in downtown Dallas. He was also arrested for Failure to ID even though 1. that's not against the law, and 2. it's not even required to have ID when standing on the streets of Dallas. Two affadavits from unrelated witnesses claim one officer (and both witnesses identified the same officer) had used the n-word as the man was being arrested and as the police stuffed his 460 pound frame into the back of a squad car. And then even though no witnesses ever saw him flee or even resist, the man was charged with fleeing the scene of an arrest as a throwdown charge. Two of the four officers it took to arrest this man who wasn't resisting (but is probably too fat to easily fit into the back of a squad car) and wasn't against the law were very briefly suspended, but not the one who witnesses say used the n-word. And even though the man broke no law, he was convicted of Failure to ID, a charge, I might mention, that isn't even against the law. And that's just three big ones. Of course, also in Dallas we have code compliance officers who write tickets for violations on imaginary garages and other property features that don't exist, etc. And that doesn't even get into the big cases in the DPD, like the convicted criminals hired to be DPD officers, and so on. Of course, according to Channel 11, the Dallas Police Internal Affairs department isn't investigating cases as fast as policy dictates. Instead of the roughly 60 days they're expected, some are taking three years to investigate. They're still investigating a case from January, 2001 when a reserve deputy sheriff attempted to arrest a suspected drug dealer, the Dallas Police let the suspect go and arrested the deputy for impersonating an officer.... even though he showed them his ID (you get arrested in Dallas for not showing your ID, you get arrested for showing your ID) and his badge. Punishment to these officers? Zero.
Perhaps I should have stated in an earlier post that a good peace officer is a highly trained professional. None the less, there are many men and women of good character, hard working and diligent, that do serve and protect; but in saying this, there will always be those few bad apples that shall taint their achievements. Tension will always rise regardless if a department is "willing to go after their own when their own break the law". Caught between a rock and a hard place, I certainly do not envy our boys in blue.
But tension sure is worse when you treat innocent people very poorly and those officers are never forced to pay the consequences.
How can you be urked by people saying "the poor kid?" He was handcuffed and shot in the head. That's quite different from a guy pulling out an illegal assault rifle while in a car. Of course policemen have the hardest and most dangerous job around, but this situation is one that is almost impossible to not leave people suspicious. All people are asking for is an independent investigation.
You're stupid. I said nothing. Don't you have a titty bar to go to or something? Remember, they really do like you.
I think all shootings are investigated, aren't they? Isn't it SOP to temperarily suspend a cop (with pay) until the shooting is investigated and he is cleared? I just don't think any special measures need to be taken when there are standard procedures which should be sufficient.
Maybe the standard procedures aren't working. Perhaps the police departments here aren't trained properly and perhaps this area is populated with too many conservative judges who pack grand juries with people sympathetic to police. There were at least 130 deaths at the hands of various law enforcement agencies in Harris County, Texas, from January 1995 through April 2002. This includes deaths in custody, car crashes, jailhouse and other "suicides," etc. The Houston Police Department reportedly shot and killed 54 "suspects" in the past 5 years; the total number killed nearly triples when ALL deaths are considered. According to data compiled by the Washington Post concerning shootings by the nation’s 50 largest police departments, from 1990 to 2000 the Harris County Sheriff’s Department ranked first in the nation in the number of fatal shootings, with 3.47 fatalities per 1,000 violent crimes; the Houston Police Department ranked second, with 2.76 fatal shootings per 1,000 violent crimes. Houston Chronicle 11/4/01
I thought New York or LA would be ahead of us. I guess I watch too many movies. This gives me an idea for a movie script though.
But there is a lot of distrust of the police, especially in minority communities, since instances where police officers were at fault have been swept under the rug. Hence the desire for an independent counsel. I think there should be a truly independent investigation team that investigates all shootings. There's too much potential for back-scratching when the police investigate themselves as we've seen with so many previous instances where officers were not reprimanded in any way despite very obviously and admittedly having broken the law.
Sad story. It sounds like the officer panicked. Why do some think this might be a racist thing? It does make you think, though, when you read how often this seems to happen in Houston. Perhaps police training is not good enough?
It's not quite so cut and dry. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/view/GG/jlg1.html The district judge (or, in a county in which there are several district courts, the district judge designated for this purpose) appoints three to five citizens of the county to be jury commissioners. They serve either during the current term of court or during the succeeding term. These commissioners select fifteen to twenty persons from the citizens of the county to be summoned as grand jurors for the next term of court. Commissioners must, to the extent possible, select grand jurors who represent a broad cross-section of the population of the county, considering the factors of race, sex, and age. All potential jurors must meet certain other qualifications, including the ability to read and write. When twelve qualified jurors are found to be present, the court impanels them as a grand jury, with one juror appointed foreman. Before the grand jury has been impaneled, however, any person may challenge the entire jury or anyone presented as a grand juror. The term of the grand jury is the same as that of the district court that organized it, with some provision for extension at the judge's discretion.
Well, maybe it is... Justice Watch: Murder Case Testing Grand Jury Selection Judges Found to Skirt Elaborate Process Jan. 18, 2002 By Mary Flood Houston Chronicle A challenge to the murder indictment of a man accused of smothering an infant highlights a possibly illegal method of seating Harris County grand jurors that some judges are using. Stanley Schneider filed a motion in December to dismiss the murder indictment against Charles Richard Forshee, 55, accused of smothering a 23-month-old infant in his foster care, because of the way the grand jury that indicted him was chosen. State law, designed to keep grand jurors independent from both judges and prosecutors, requires judges to go through an elaborate and secretive process to impanel a grand jury with racial, age and gender diversity. By law, judges must appoint people to serve as commissioners. Those commissioners, from diverse parts of the county, gather behind a guarded door to nominate grand jurors. The commissioners produce a sealed list, given to a clerk sworn to keep it secret until 30 days before the potential grand jurors are summoned. But frustrated by the task of finding enough people willing to put in the required time, some Harris County judges have glossed over the legal requirements. Some have gone so far as to get lists of prospective grand jurors from the district attorney's office itself, screen them themselves, and assume that the commissioners will approve their list. "That violates the spirit and the letter of state statute," said Randy Schaffer, a prominent criminal defense lawyer. "It may be well intentioned. But for the district attorney's office to collect a bunch of names and for the judge to recommend them as grand jurors reeks." Schneider's motion in the Forshee case alleges that state District Judge Joan Huffman improperly chose the three citizen commissioners who then chose the prospective grand jurors. He complains the three commissioners did not represent the required geographic diversity and included the judge's court coordinator. "The grand jury is supposed to be a buffer. A fairly chosen grand jury might no-bill him. I think it's that close," Schneider said, noting that the chief witness against his client is a 3-year-old child. The lawyer said if he wins, which may be doubtful in a state dominated by a conservative Republican judiciary, it could affect hundreds of other cases. But Huffman is not the only judge to appoint someone from her court or even the prosecutor's office to help pick grand jurors. The practice is common. Another state district judge, Mike Wilkinson, who has a current grand jury, appointed his court process server, and a third judge, Debbie Mantooth Stricklin, picked a district attorney's office investigator to help pick her grand jurors. Andy Tobias, the assistant Harris County district attorney who heads the grand jury division, said he collects names from grand jury bailiffs and grand jurors who know people willing to serve and provides it to judges who ask for it. He said this is not to ensure jurors who favor the prosecution, but to aid in finding people who can spare several hours, two days a week for three months to be on a grand jury. Tobias discounts the motion to knock out Forshee's murder indictment. He said case law requires that a true error in seating grand jurors must involve fraud or injury to the defendant. "In this case it's pure speculation that there was any harm or error," Tobias said. He said that because the grand jury was presented with witness testimony in the Forshee case, that makes it even more likely the seated grand jury did the right thing. Grand jurors, who sit for three months, may hear only a few minutes of information from a prosecutor before issuing an indictment. They regularly issue dozens of indictments each time they meet. It is less common for witnesses to appear before the grand juries as in the Forshee case. Schneider argued in his Forshee motion, due to be heard next month, that although judges have some discretion, the higher courts have tested whether there was geographic diversity in a commissioner panel. Two-thirds of the commissioners who selected the Forshee grand jury were from Pasadena, which wouldn't pass the diversity test for Harris County, he argued. He also argued the judge's court coordinator was the judge's own representative. Huffman wouldn't discuss the Forshee case but said it is practical for judges to appoint commissioners from the courthouse. She said her coordinator meets many people and gets calls from people willing to serve on grand juries. "You almost have to know someone before you ask them to perform this task," Huffman said. Stricklin, a former prosecutor who appointed a district attorney's investigator to help pick her sitting grand jury, said she'd rather have someone she trusts than someone she doesn't know. State District Judge Bill Harmon acknowledged that he seeks out Tobias' list and takes suggestions from many people, including his own family. He said he calls the potential jurors to see if they can serve and submits a list to his chosen commissioners. Allen Tanner, a lawyer who regularly practices before Harmon, said he has been a commissioner at least four times in Harmon's court and each time approved the judge's list. "I think this way is less cumbersome and much more efficient," Harmon said. He said he doesn't force his chosen commissioners to follow his suggestions. But the statute doesn't appear to allow the judges to suggest a list. It requires that the judge not even see the commissioners' sealed list before the clerk takes an oath to keep it secret. Harmon is not the only judge to use the list from the district attorney's office. A survey of criminal judges shows many of them follow most, but not all, of the law. But all seem frustrated by the difficulty of assembling a diverse panel. For example, state District Judge Denise Collins once asked lawyers in her courtroom to challenge her grand jury pool because it was a largely Anglo panel. Grand juries are often composed of older and retired people who have time to serve. There is also a club of people who serve year after year. Schaffer once served on a grand jury and said, at 39, he was probably the youngest in the room. He also said because he was on the panel, it wound up with a reputation as being troublesome and question-prone. He found that prosecutors sent big cases on which they wanted to win indictments to other grand juries. But, Schaffer said, he was told by prosecutors that they purposefully brought his grand jury cases they did not want to take to trial and hoped would be no-billed. Grand jury selection How grand jurors are supposed to be selected 1. A judge picks three to five Harris County citizens from different parts of the county to be commissioners. These citizens will pick the grand jurors. 2. The commissioners are locked in a room secured by the sheriff. They are given the names of people unqualified to be grand jurors and the last county assessment roll. 3. The commissioners pick 20 or so people to represent a broad cross-section of the county by race, sex and age. 4. The commissioners seal the names in an envelope and all sign across the seal. The envelope is given to the clerk who takes an oath to not open it until 30 days before the potential grand jurors are to be summoned to the court. What some judges do 1. A judge picks three to five citizens to be commissioners, sometimes from the same part of town, often picking their own court personnel or lawyers who practice regularly in the judge’s court. 2. The judge gets a list of people who want to be grand jurors from the prosecutors who present cases to the grand jury. The judge gives these names and others he or she has found willing to serve and gives it to the commissioners. 3. The commissioners approve the judge’s list with a few or no changes. Many people serve on grand juries year after year. 4. The letter, sometimes sealed and signed, sometimes not is given to the clerk.
"I think this way is less cumbersome and much more efficient," Harmon said. He said he doesn't force his chosen commissioners to follow his suggestions. "And sure it's against the law, but who really cares about that?" He added. "This is just so much easier."
If there is some truth to this, then we the people have huge amount of culpability in this affair by not performing our civic duties. Served jury duty in Austin this past summer, and the judge said that Austin had a pretty high citizen participation rate going...
This is talking about grand juries, not regular juries. As far as I know, they don't just go to the voter rolls to select grand jurors like they do juries. I don't know how they usually get the names for grand juries, but I've never, ever known anyone who asked to be on a grand jury. For what it's worth, I've never been called to sit on a regular jury.
