Quite true, but since one can still be summoned by county commissioners to potentially serve on a grand jury, the easiest form of noncompliance is to ignore your summons and just not show up. Although I have no figures to back up my statement, I just extended the large audience participation here in Austin for regular jury duty to grand jury duty participation. Although how one's name is acquired in this scheme is a mystery to me also. Just as a side note, if I recall correctly, I had a professor in college once mention in a lecture that since grand jury proceedings are secretive, sometimes a politically savvy prosecutor will advise the jurors that a potential case does not have the evidence needed for a conviction in his opinion. He may subtly advise the jurors for a non indictment, and ofcourse the jurors would follow through on such sage advice. Though once convened, the prosecutor is free to harp to any and all who are ready to listen (i.e. the media) how he really wanted an indictment, but ofcourse the jurors thought otherwise; the hapless jurors are bound by oath not reveal the proceedings and wind up looking as the not so good guys...
Quite true, but since one can still be summoned by county commissioners to potentially serve on a grand jury, the easiest form of noncompliance is to ignore your summons and just not show up. But the issue is how they get their list of potential grand jurors. If they go from a list of registered voters or whatever and they can't find enough people through that method to do, then yes, that's a problem caused by the public. But if the original list is just a bunch of people suggested by prosecutors, then it's the fault of those doing to picking for not expanding their list of potentials to a larger portion of the general population. I cannot ask to serve on the Collin County Grand Jury, I gotta wait for them to ask me. If my name is never in the hat of potentials, I'll never be asked even though I'd be willing to serve on the grand jury.
No one in this thread has addressed the issue of why a cop felt the need to pull out a gun on two kids who had been playing a playstation when they reached the apartment.
He feared for his life. Is that not HPD policy? You may not have pulled out a gun but apparently he felt he needed it.
One more thing, if the DA wants to file charges against the officer, that's fine. If he doesn't, that's fine too.
Houston cop aren't prepared in shoot-don't shoot scenerios. I 've seen it too many times where HPD pulls out a gun when there is no need for it. Some cops have only one gear, there is no room for negotiation. If their ego isn't fed by your acknowledgement that they are superior, then you will probably pay a hefty price. Sad but true.
So pgabriel, RocketRiver and Another Brother, are you rushing to judgment as quickly on Kobe as you are on this police officer? DEFEND YOURSELF
So when are you going to enroll at the Police Academy? If this officer was having an ego trip, he should be punished, but I'm not going to judge him for pulling out a gun when he puts his life on the line everyday to protect people like us. 14 year olds can kill cops as funny as it may sound to you.
What judgement have I rushed to. Yes I do believe he shouldn't have had his gun drawn, just like I believe Kobe shouldn't have had that girl in his room to begin with, just like I believe Jacko shouldn't be sleeping in the same bed with kids. But those aren't overall judgements on the outcomes of the separate cases. As usual, your post is invalid.
Well, at least one of them is rushing to judgment just as quickly based on his "bs" response in this thread, just in the other direction. However, regarding this case with the police officer, I have to say that at least, it does sound VERY odd to hear that a police officer shoots a 14 year old kid that was playing Playstation in the head. This calls for a very thorough investigation. It's true that 14 year olds can kill cops, but the situation as described does not sound like the 14 year old was threatening the police officer in a manner that the police officer would have had to fear for his life at all.
While they're playing a playstation. Was he going to hit him over the head with the controller? What does my not being a cop have to do with anything? I'm a taxpayer, so I have a right to voice my opinion. Again, explain to me why his gun should be drawn while arresting apprehending to kids, whom he doesn't even know if they're suspects, while they are playing a playstation. Does that sound dangerous to you, if it does, I'm glad you haven't enrolled in the Police Academy.
Gee, why single out these posters, especially when they make reasonable posts. AB, for instance, was simply posting an honest assessment based on his time on the force. Whatever could T_J be thinking grouping them together? Yes, I suppose I agree with bigtexxx: racism is alive and well in Texas.
We don't know what exactly happened. An investigation will reveal the facts. I heard the shooting happened outside the apartment not in front of the console inside the apartment. The kid refused to cooperate and took off running. There was a struggle and the kid was shot in the head. The officer was taken to the hospital with injuries so something happened. You think the cop is a pu$$y cause he could not subdue the 14 year old without his gun. Just because you would not have pulled out a gun does not mean he shouldn't have. It is within policy...right?
The other problems I have with this incident, is that the cop apparently was told that the kid wasn't the suspect. And the only crime that was committed was that some kid threw a brick threw a window. That's the assult that happened. Its not like they running in a crackhouse.
If all that is indeed correct as you report it, pgabriel, which I have no reason to doubt, it does make the whole thing sound very fishy and odd, regardless of the race of the people involved on either side (I don't even know what race the cop belongs to, nor should it matter, I think). It is tragic for the parents of the child who apparently lost their only son. Very sad.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe the cop who shot the kid was hospitalized for taking a blow to the gonads that was so violent that his stay was more than a couple of hours, but instead a couple of days. Whoever it was that mentioned that those who scream the loudest for increased protection and vigilance are also the first to jump on the cops when something goes wrong is right on the mark. And whoever mentioned that this never happens in River Oaks is completely off-base. It never happens in my neighborhood either, but that is because I am fortunate enough to live in an area where teens don't routinely bust out the windows in homes and punch out their classmates.
Not so much off-base (re: River Oaks) as irrelevant. Obviously in higher crime areas, there will be a proportionately higher rate of incidents such as these.
Excellent post. A potential solution may be to quit wasting our taxpayer dollars by trying to protect selected areas of the community which are perpetual troublespots. If these people can't reform themselves, why should I have to pay for the city to devote increased resources to oversee their bad behavior? They then have the *gall* to complain about it? Ridiculous. Let me get this straight: They can't behave. They waste taxpayer dollars by forcing the city to devote more police cars and time to the area. A juvenile delinquent resists arrest and sucker punches a policeman in the balls. The officer must resort to using force. Then the entire community claims that the *police* are the problem? Wow. Here's a solution: BEHAVE YOURSELF.
Well, do you think he might have been so pissed off that he took revenge? I know I would be pretty angry if someone kicked me in the nads (not angry enough to shoot someone, but...)...
