Former transit cop pleads not guilty to murder

[sasquatch]

Source: Associated Press

OAKLAND, Calif. – The former transit police officer charged with murder in the shooting of an unarmed black man on New Year's Day pleaded not guilty Thursday.

The attorney for Johannes Mehserle, 27, entered the plea on his client's behalf in an Alameda County courtroom, where Mehserle was kept behind a glass partition, out of view to most people during the 10-minute hearing.

Sheriff's deputies escorted Mehserle's relatives into the courtroom, which was filled with family members and supporters of the victim, 22-year-old Oscar Grant. The Mehserle family has reported receiving several death threats since the shooting.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090116/ap_on_re_us/train_station_shooting;_ylt=AmTx.fOKzzXVA0TKriDXuuhbIwgF

---

I still say prosecutors should pursue the death penalty.

[Cronus Protagonist]

1. I wonder why the other officers didn't arrest him at the time

If it was as clear cut a murder as most people claim?

[slackmaster]

3. They cover each others' asses, just as do people in other professions

No surprise to me.

[Cronus Protagonist]

5. Not ONE of these officers who were right there and saw it happen though it was an execution?

Or they did see it was an execution but sought to cover it up? That sounds way off base to me. I'd lend more credence to the thought that they were stunned by it and rationalized it to save face.

[slackmaster]

7. I'm saying even if they did think it was an execution, they would likely have covered him

That's the truth.

[elocs]

6. Meaning also, as do people here. We don't get a pass from that either. n/t

[Chulanowa]

8. I got that argument from a buddy of mine...

"I'm not going to rat out my co-worker for stealing a stapler" he says, "So I can see where the cops are coming from"

I asked him since when the other guys in customer service have sworn an oath to uphold the law and protect citizens, and since when stealing a stapler was on the same level as shooting an unarmed man in the back.

He reassessed his position, which is the difference between my lefty friends and my righty acquaintances.

[okiru109]

14. i'm sure they weren't expecting that either

as well as all the passengers who calmly shooting the crime.

if anyone on that train thought that crazy person was gonna actually shoot someone i'm sure they would have been taking cover.

on edit: I thought you meant "Prevent" not acting after the fact... that is certainly strange, and I would add why didn't their superiors ether for days, no excuse for that, too.

:hi:

[CreekDog]

19. Not only didn't they arrest him, they didn't do a damn thing to react either

They just stood there and then apparently helped handcuff the victim. :wtf:

[slackmaster]

2. They have to get a conviction before any discussion of the penalty can begin

I hope they get that. I also hope the jury instructions allow them to convict for manslaughter in case they are unable to agree on a murder conviction.

[Chulanowa]

4. "Your honor, I plea to fuck myself with a shovel"

Well, that IS basically what he's saying here. The piles and piles of evidence weigh heavily towards murder, and there's really no way his not guilty plea will work

[tekisui]

9. NOT GUILTY?!?! ON WHAT GROUNDS?

[sasquatch]

10. On the grounds that he hopes the police union can bully/bribe the judge and prosecutor to-

throw the case.

[slackmaster]

31. He has a right to force the state to prove that he's guilty before he can be punished

No "grounds" required. He doesn't even have to say anything. It's the law.

[2QT2BSTR8]

11. This is such BS! Hello!! Not guilty? Dude, the PLANET saw you shoot this unarmed citizen!

[okiru109]

12. gotta good lawyer

gonna need one to avoid the death penalty (which i am strongly against in principle)

[sasquatch]

15. I am to except in the cases of war criminals, mass murderers and human rights violators

And in my book he's a human rights violator.

[Rebubula]

25. Nah...

...they will end up pleading it down to manslaughter (which is what it should be - No matter what, I cannot believe that this asshole actually and intentionally shot this kid in the back with intent to kill) and he will serve about 12 years - mostly in a protective form of custody.

Some people should not be law enforcement officers. Many, myself included, lack the ability to react coolly in stressful, dangerous situations. That is why I work in IT - heck, I get all stressed when an email server goes down for three hours.

I think he fucked up, but I do not think that he had malice of forethought and killed this kid in cold blood. Unless they can find previous incidents between the officer and victim (if they did...well Murder one back on table and I would admit to being wrong) - this is manslaughter.

[Rottenmac]

13. As someone who doesn't post very often...

I fully expect to get flamed, yelled at, called names... whatever... BUT.

Fact is, this guy took a life, and that is something he will have to deal with for the rest of his life. If you look at some of the videos online, his expression is one of disbelief; as in "Holy Shit. I just shot some guy." My thoughts are he thought he was pulling his stun gun (Yes they do have the same look and feel-in-hand as a handgun) and he thought he had his 'non-lethal' weapon in hand.

But he didn't. And I'm guessing he will not be able to function very well after this incident.

As for 'Not Guilty' ... have you EVER EVER EVER heard of someone going before a judge and pleading 'Guilty' to any charge? Really...?

This guy is screwed no matter what happens, and the family of the deceased has lost someone near and dear to them, but that doesn't excuse people who say the BART cop should be killed and his body dragged thru the streets. He made the worst mistake someone in uniform can make, but I hardly would call it an 'execution'. I'm guessing he didn't set out that night to kill someone. And yes, I do believe he will be haunted by this for the rest of his life.

I do think he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and as a former skater (the joints aren't as resilient as they used to be...) I have had full personal and up-close contact with 'rent-a-cops' who couldn't pass the test to be a real cop, and have made it their mission to punish everyone who they see as a 'criminal'... but let's not lose sight of reality. BART cop killed someone. Ample footage from many bystanders. Possibly a sequestered jury (who hasn't seen or heard of this by now...? I live in Munich; formerly the Mission in SF... so...)

He is guilty of excessive force, no doubt. He is guilty of bad judgement, without question. I just feel 'Execution' is a term that is waaaay too strong for the incident at hand.

—flame on.

[okiru109]

16. it is certainly debatable and hopefully that will come out, too

i find it highly plausible what you state... I haven't seen any clear video of the officer's face let alone expressions but to think he would do such a thing in front of EVERYONE is inexplicable to me right now.

he will have his day in court.

:hi:

edit for grammar

[sasquatch]

17. I'm not going to flame its just some constructive criticism on my part

The man is handcuffed laying on the ground and not moving, why is it necessary for you to taser him? The answer is it is not and in his case was not, so that right their is a violation of human rights by torturing a human being alone let then you have an authority figure killing a human being without any justification: these two factors in my opinion justify a death penalty sentence and the advocation of it. In the very least he still made a series of bad judgements that resulted in an innocent man losing his life. In those cases some are completely accidental w/out malice and treated accordingly as misdameanors. In this case the officer was acting in malice towards his victim and no matter what the intention he's still committing a crime in which the person has lost his life. For example if you become angry at someone and break a bottle over their head and they die as of a result from that blow you've committed a homocide in the very least a reckless one. I use this answer to you as a justification for my position.

[okiru109]

18. true but that still doesn't mean that wasn't his intention

there is PLENTY of video online of cops tasering folks (young and old, healthy, sick or helpless) in what i would consider inappropriate circumstance.

[sasquatch]

20. Maybe this will serve as a deterrent though against officers behaving this way

[okiru109]

24. definitely

that's a big part of this in my mind, too.

:hi:

[noiretextatique]

21. the taser wasn't necessary

from the footage i saw, it seems the cops instigated the contact with the victim when he was sitting against the wall handcuffed. he didn't seem to be doing anything that required their intervention, so why did they throw him on the ground? i think this guy is guilty of murder too. `

[rvablue]

22. I tend to agree with this line of thinking ... what I'm curious to find out

since we have heard next to nothing about this BART cop and his background, is if there is the possiblity that he is an Iraq or Afghanistan war vet.

Right before the shooting, there was so much yelling and such from the crowd at the station, I was thinking this might have triggered some PTSD reaction.

He's only been a BART cop for 2 years so it certainly is plausible, given how many war vets go into law enforcement after service.

I'm sure I'll get flamed, too. But I just can't imagine with 100 witnesses standing right there that this cop intentionally shot the young man.

And while some cops can be harrassers and control freaks, I too lived in the Bay Area for several years and not once saw a BART cop do anything except write a ticket for someone jumping the turnstile or smoking on the platform?????

ed:sp.

[okiru109]

29. that was the first thought that crossed my mind when i heard of this tragedy

i am sure that will eventually come out and i think the odds are good that he may have been over there considering his age and occupation.

[Rottenmac]

32. That is something I had'nt considered. N/T

[HardWorkingDem]

26. No flame here - troubling though so many apparently ignoring due process...

I'm sorry, but it seems quite odd to me that so many around here are screaming about throwing this guy down a rabbit hole without any due process while turning around screaming about due process for people at Gitmo.

Of course now someone will ask what about the due process for the poor man killed, but that is another topic.


Are we a nation of laws or not?!?!?

[Retrograde]

23. The Grant family's lawyer currently being interviewed

on KGO radio's call-in program (they have their shows available for later downloads - see www.kgo.com, select today's 11-12 AM hour. It should be available later today): from what he's saying it doesn't sound like he's convinced it was 1st degree murder on Mehserle's part. Manslaughter, poor training and process on BART's part, possible criminal negligence on the officer's part yes, but under California law 1st degree murder requires specific conditions, including pre-meditation.

I'm glad I'm not going to be in the jury pool for this one.

[HardWorkingDem]

28. Hm, wonder how many people are going to flame this attorney for....

suggesting the same thing I've been asking about.

[emlev]

30. Is the charge 1st degree murder, or 2nd degree?

First degree means planned ahead of time, which I don't think this was.

[iandhr]

27. I am opposed to capital punishment