Frecking Bart Police are at it again. Bart commuters recording a suspect laying face down, handcuffed, and with officer knee on his back. Then suddenly, the officer draws his weapon and shoots the suspect in the back. From viewing the video the officer appears "shocked." It's been several days and still no word from the officer involved. Why? To gather his story and make it stick. Big problem.... commuters recorded the killing!
I don't think the officer pulled the trigger on purpose, looks like their was a lot going on. Watch his reaction. But seriously, the worst thing you can do is make a police officer nervous. The family certainly doesn't deserve 25 million.
[This message has been edited by IEatRice (edited 01-06-2009).]
IP: Logged
12:41 PM
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35467 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
Looks like the "victim" was a real winner too: Grant also had a criminal record; according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Grant served several months in state prison in 2007 and 2008. The Department of Corrections didn't disclose the offenses for which Grant was sentenced.
Records at the main Alameda County Courthouse in Oakland indicate that Grant had 12 separate cases between April 12, 2004, and May 8, 2008. But the records for all of those cases are at the Hayward Hall of Justice and weren't immediately available.
IP: Logged
12:54 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 35921 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by Pyrthian: I dont mind the officer himself being put on trial & being made to pay but, I dont agree with the police department being put on trial
I say 50 million. Where does the buck stop ?
IP: Logged
01:10 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Looks like the "victim" was a real winner too: Grant also had a criminal record; according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Grant served several months in state prison in 2007 and 2008. The Department of Corrections didn't disclose the offenses for which Grant was sentenced.
Records at the main Alameda County Courthouse in Oakland indicate that Grant had 12 separate cases between April 12, 2004, and May 8, 2008. But the records for all of those cases are at the Hayward Hall of Justice and weren't immediately available.
You forgot to pull the records on the police officer.
1. How many years on the force. Was he a transfer? 2. How many filed complaints, and most importantly 3. Why the silence?
I've always found it strange that when a officer is involved in a incident, he/she is placed on leave pending investigation and past conduct is a very slow process. Lets see if the other officers "rat" him out. Or will the blue shield of silence be used?
The biggest victim here is the general pubic. Not only were they victims of the criminal but will now be victims of his family and ultimately paying them off if the judges and juries let the suit go to fruition.
IP: Logged
01:13 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27079 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
I just want to know why that cop pulled his gun. The guy was on the ground, face down, and had his hands behind his back. They said they cuffed the guy after the shot, so I assume they were getting ready to cuff him.
A Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer this morning fatally shot an unarmed 22-year-old man on the platform of the Fruitvale Station in Oakland, but BART officials said the details of how the shooting occurred remain under investigation.
BART police were called to respond to a fight between two groups of men onboard a train traveling from San Francisco to the East Bay, spokesman Jim Allison said this afternoon during a news conference at BART headquarters in Oakland.
Five officers had gathered at the Fruitvale BART Station platform when the train arrived shortly after 2 a.m., Allison said.
Officers worked to separate the men, who were dispersed inside the train and outside on the platform, according to Allison. BART police did not say how many people were involved in the fight or what spurred the confrontation.
At some point during the effort to bring the men under control, a BART police officer's gun fired one bullet, hitting 22-year-old Oscar Grant, according to Allison.
According to Mike Yost, supervising coroner investigator with the Alameda County coroner's bureau, Grant was pronounced dead at 9:13 a.m. at Highland Hospital.
Allison said the preliminary investigation indicates that Grant was one of the men involved in the altercation that brought police to the station, which was closed until 2:45 a.m., when it was reopened to finish extended New Year's Eve service until 3 a.m.
Three or four people on the platform were put in plastic handcuffs, called "flexi-cuffs," during the effort to bring the scuffle under control, Allison said. Grant was not in handcuffs when he was shot, and police said it is unclear if Grant had been cuffed at any point before the shooting occurred.
"A preliminary investigation indicates that Mr. Grant was not restrained when the officer's firearm was discharged," Allison said.
Grant was unarmed and no weapons were recovered at the scene.
"The early investigation shows that he was on the platform, not on the train, and he may have been on the ground," Allison said, explaining he does not know the exact position Grant was in when he was shot.
Two men were taken into custody for questioning following the shooting but were not arrested, Allison said. No arrests have been made since the shooting occurred, and the officer has been placed on administrative leave and tested for both alcohol and drugs as part of standard BART police policy.
The officer involved in the shooting has served nearly two years for BART police, Allison said. His name has not been released.
BART police officers complete the same training as other law enforcement officers. Officers are licensed to make arrests and carry batons and sometimes tasers in addition to firearms, Allison said.
BART police patrol bureau Cmdr. Travis Gibson said it is too early to determine the justification for why the officer took his weapon out of the gun's holster.
Gibson said BART police recovered two firearms, one at the Embarcadero Station and the other at the West Oakland Station, earlier in the night. The night was busy on the BART system with New Year's Eve revelers out in full force, Gibson said.
The last fatal officer-involved shooting at a BART station occurred in April 2001, when an officer at the Hayward Station shot a man who later died, according to Allison.
This morning's shooting remains under investigation, Allison said.
"BART continues to investigate the legal aspects of this incident, it is also investigating the internal protocol and procedures," Allison said. "In addition to that, the District Attorney's Office is conducting a separate, independent investigation."
Anyone with information about this morning's shooting is asked to call (877) 679-7000, extension 7040.
Looks to be clearly an accident. The officer should not have pulled his weapon; though I would have maced the **** out of that perp, or hit him with my baton.
25 million!?? no ****ing way.
IP: Logged
01:48 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
I don't think the officer pulled the trigger on purpose, looks like their was a lot going on. Watch his reaction. But seriously, the worst thing you can do is make a police officer nervous. The family certainly doesn't deserve 25 million.
The reaction is too late. The plain and simple, cut and dry rule of weapons is, you do NOT brandish unless you intend to fire. If it was an accident, the policeman is still in the wrong. Period. And I bet they get their $25M. People sue McDonald's for hot coffee... And you don't think these people will get $25M? And to top it all off, it's our taxes that will pay for it. I'm not saying they deserve it, just saying I'm pretty sure they'll get it, unless it can be fully proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the the policeman was right in what he did.
Policemen carry up to four different weapons on them: 1) A baton, 2) Pepper spray, 3) Taser & 4) A firearm. A taser would have worked flawlessly here, assuming he had one. If the suspect had been standing there with his hands in his pockets, or even holding something like a cell phone and refusing to drop it/show his hands, the cop would have been fully justified in brandishing his firearm and firing if he felt unsafe.As it was, the suspect was face down on the ground, with three officers in the immediate vicinity, in the process of putting handcuffs on him.
The only way I can see his shooting being justified is if perhaps one of the suspect's hands got loose and he reached underneath himself to fetch his own weapon, but if he was going to do that, then why not do it before he put up his hands and dropped to his knees? Brandishing a weapon to a policeman is a death sentence anyway, why not get it over with early,l instead of cooperating, then trying to grab the gun once he's down? Doesn't make sense, but unfortunately, the only people that know for sure if that happened are the dead suspect, the policeman that fired, and possibly the two other policeman that were in close vicinity, because none of the videos I've seen are clear enough to make a determination.
Curly, to answer one of your questions, one of the videos I watched had a news reporter that claimed the firing officer was a "two year veteran" of the force.
Originally posted by fieroboom: The reaction is too late. The plain and simple, cut and dry rule of weapons is, you do NOT brandish unless you intend to fire. If it was an accident, the policeman is still in the wrong. Period. And I bet they get their $25M. People sue McDonald's for hot coffee... And you don't think these people will get $25M? And to top it all off, it's our taxes that will pay for it. I'm not saying they deserve it, just saying I'm pretty sure they'll get it, unless it can be fully proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the the policeman was right in what he did.
I'll give you that. But we don't know yet what the reason his weapon was pulled. Accident is the wrong word to use. Police responded to two groups of several men fighting in public, who ran from the police, had two firearms, and resisted arrest - but people are pissed at the cop. That's not an accident.
quote
Originally posted by fieroboom: Policemen carry up to four different weapons on them: 1) A baton, 2) Pepper spray, 3) Taser & 4) A firearm. A taser would have worked flawlessly here, assuming he had one. If the suspect had been standing there with his hands in his pockets, or even holding something like a cell phone and refusing to drop it/show his hands, the cop would have been fully justified in brandishing his firearm and firing if he felt unsafe.As it was, the suspect was face down on the ground, with three officers in the immediate vicinity, in the process of putting handcuffs on him.
Regardless of what the police officer used, it would have made national news. Not only that, but the media constantly warps stories of cops because people have such a knee jerk rage reaction to stories about officers. How many news stations played the entire Rodney King beating? None. They just showed him being beaten on the ground not moving. They don't show King getting up to approach an officer. In this case, it's probably better that the guy was shot. At least then he wont be on the stand lying his ass off just to score some cash.
quote
Originally posted by fieroboom: The only way I can see his shooting being justified is if perhaps one of the suspect's hands got loose and he reached underneath himself to fetch his own weapon, but if he was going to do that, then why not do it before he put up his hands and dropped to his knees? Brandishing a weapon to a policeman is a death sentence anyway, why not get it over with early,l instead of cooperating, then trying to grab the gun once he's down? Doesn't make sense, but unfortunately, the only people that know for sure if that happened are the dead suspect, the policeman that fired, and possibly the two other policeman that were in close vicinity, because none of the videos I've seen are clear enough to make a determination.
It just looks like adrenaline got the best of a rookie cop, which does happen from time to time. No, resisting arrest or even being anything less than on your best behavior for a cop is a death sentence.
IP: Logged
02:40 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Originally posted by IEatRice: Let the biased cop hating continue
In Video #4 @ 11-minutes into the story, she states that the female officer knocked on the Bart train's door and demanded that she (person taking the video) hand it over.
Why on earth would an officer demand from others to hand over the video tape? Are they affraid of exposing wrongful conduct? According to what one of the lawyers stated, " during an investigation the officer is required to give explanation of the incident within 48-72 hours or ASAP if ordered by higher ups. The shooting according on Jan 1st and it's now Jan 6th.
Why the delay? Is to docture the story? I must agree that the guy wasn't handcuffed, but he was in the process of being cuffed while the other officer had his knee on the dude.
Curl, because the media gets ahold of tapes and sways common sense on the public. And even from your own link: Johnson called for people who have additional videos to give them to BART instead of the news media, saying that videos shown on television have the potential to "taint" witnesses to the incident.
Lets recap and ask a good question.
You mean if I start a fight in public with a group of men (two of which had firearms), run from the police, resist arrest, I COULD GET SHOT BY THE POLICE?!
But I don't expect to get through to you, you're always posting anti-police news and its obvious you have it in for them.
IP: Logged
03:04 PM
vinny Member
Posts: 1690 From: starkville MISSISSIPPI Registered: Mar 2003
Remember officers of the law are only people just like you and me. I'm not stupid. I can see with my own eyes he did not shoot the man in cold blood. To be smart the people in the situation should have stood down and cooperated. It is foolish to fight against them in a minor situation as a fight. Its called common sence.
I say fire the officer and give and give nothing
My mistake I was thinking of another video. Goes to show you shouln't try to type and work an the same time!
[This message has been edited by vinny (edited 01-06-2009).]
IP: Logged
03:05 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
I saw the R.K. video completely and he clearly provoked the officers. 99% of the time you only see the part of the video that showed the beating. Remember officers of the law are only people just like you and me. I'm not stupid. I can see with my own eyes he did not shoot the man in cold blood. To be smart the people in the situation should have stood down and cooperated. It is foolish to fight against them in a minor situation as a fight. Its called common sence.
I say fire the officer and give and give nothing
It would be great if you could post a link to this video, because out of the 11 videos I've watched so far, I saw no provoking. Here's a pretty good raw video (ie, not a news story)
Do NOT listen to the media, and even when you do, take it with a grain of salt. That's why I answered Curly's question the way I did.. "She claims..." The media is full of it, and will say anything to get their story on & better than the other news stations.
IP: Logged
03:17 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Curl, because the media gets ahold of tapes and sways common sense on the public. And even from your own link: Johnson called for people who have additional videos to give them to BART instead of the news media, saying that videos shown on television have the potential to "taint" witnesses to the incident.
Lets recap and ask a good question.
You mean if I start a fight in public with a group of men (two of which had firearms), run from the police, resist arrest, I COULD GET SHOT BY THE POLICE?!
But I don't expect to get through to you, you're always posting anti-police news and its obvious you have it in for them.
It's a double edge sword. Law enforcement have no problems "tainting" the jury pool when it's a cop shooting or killing do they? They're on the air condeming the killers and putting 100% trying to capture the thug. Once captured, the general public is now bias towards the case... unless something comes out if that sheds a different light; at that point law enforcement clams-up.
quote
Originally posted by IEatRice: But I don't expect to get through to you, you're always posting anti-police news and its obvious you have it in for them.
Actually, I post numerouse silly criminal threads and actions of law enforcement whom abuse the position they're sworn to upheld. I'm guilty of being "anti-police?" Only if you're caught.
Did the victim deserve to be shot to death with his hands behind his back? No.
The video woman also stated that the guy co-opertated with the police. The dude did everything, but put the handcuffs on by himself.
[This message has been edited by madcurl (edited 01-06-2009).]
IP: Logged
03:35 PM
PFF
System Bot
Doug85GT Member
Posts: 9472 From: Sacramento CA USA Registered: May 2003
This was being discussed on the radio this morning and was all over the news last night. There is a theory that the police officer thought that he had pulled his tazer gun but instead pulled his service pistol. Ooooopppppsssssss.
If he made an "honest" mistake, then he was improperly trained therefore the police department is at fault. If he did it because he is a bad cop, the police department is still at fault. The family should sue them and I hope they get the $25 million. Even if it was accidental, you can't just kill a man and no have any reprecussions for it.
edit: I wonder what would have happened if this was not recorded? Would it have even made the news? Would the police department just bury it?
[This message has been edited by Doug85GT (edited 01-06-2009).]
/\ THAT--is not a mistake. It is negligence and manslaughter, no matter how you spin it. $25 million? Sounds about right, because it has become apparent--even to this old conservative--that munincipalities are not afraid of being condemned by their citizens. They are not concerned with right or wrong when it come to themselves or the actions of their employees. If you can't teach a city's govt a lesson in ethics and integrity--teach them one in economics.
IP: Logged
03:55 PM
vinny Member
Posts: 1690 From: starkville MISSISSIPPI Registered: Mar 2003
Negligence is not caring. If they didn't care they would have continued with what ever they were doing like eating donuts after the call was made. Look at the cops face. He made a mistake. How can you teach economics to a individuals who work for the government that has a failing economy. You probably can't. This will haunt him for life.
IP: Logged
04:05 PM
fieroboom Member
Posts: 2132 From: Hayden, AL (BFE) Registered: Oct 2008
/\ THAT--is not a mistake. It is negligence and manslaughter, no matter how you spin it. $25 million? Sounds about right, because it has become apparent--even to this old conservative--that munincipalities are not afraid of being condemned by their citizens. They are not concerned with right or wrong when it come to themselves or the actions of their employees. If you can't teach a city's govt a lesson in ethics and integrity--teach them one in economics.
The only problem is that it's a vicious cycle... Taxes & speeding fines pay cop dept, cop dept gets sued, taxes pay the lawsuit... Kinda like the "pass the debt around" thread. So the lesson can't be taught in economics... What do they care? Raise the traffic infraction "taxes" by a quarter, and there's your lawsuit money.
IP: Logged
04:06 PM
vinny Member
Posts: 1690 From: starkville MISSISSIPPI Registered: Mar 2003
It's really a sad situation but at least there is pretty good video of it that can't be denied. Watch it and study it closely before you hang anyone out to dry and start throwing out sue sue sue.
The whole episode is very sad. But my gut instinct says...the Courts are going to make multi-millionaires out of the family of a multiply-convicted criminal? NO WAY: That is too hard to swallow. Pay his dependents 40 times his past year's salary ( I doubt he had a legitimate one ), spread out over the next 40 years, allowing for inflation every year. I regret sincerely that ANY human being should die in an accident, but it seems the 'accident' was waiting to happen, from his previous reported conduct.Sadly it was at the hands of a Police Officer, who made a tragic...mistake, maybe? We might never know. Nick
IP: Logged
05:58 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
Originally posted by vinny: Look at the cops face. He made a mistake.
IMO that's my guess too. The officer looked suprised like, "what the heck" and so-too the other officer with his back to the camera. Still no reason to shot the unarmed guy... regardless.
"Gibson said BART police recovered two firearms, one at the Embarcadero Station and the other at the West Oakland Station, earlier in the night. The night was busy on the BART system with New Year's Eve revelers out in full force, Gibson said."
No one at this incident had a gun. The two firearms were recovered elsewhere earlier in the night. Why does everyone keep saying two of the guys had guns??? I don't see where it says that at all.
He should never be allowed to touch a gun again, manslaughter yes I agree with that and he should be punished for it. Murder no I don't think he intentionally drew his gun to kill the guy I think he is just a dumb ass that doesn't know how to hold a gun. **** him let the family sue him.
In this case being a dumb ass should be a crime
I will be the first one to stand up for a police officer but this one doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground and should be sent to prison so bubba can show him.
[This message has been edited by Jake_Dragon (edited 01-06-2009).]
IP: Logged
06:49 PM
carnut122 Member
Posts: 9122 From: Waleska, GA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
It was totally needless to shoot that guy-no doubt about it. So much for "to protect and serve." On the other hand, I can see where it might have been an over-adrenalinized accident. Either way, it was a gross misjudgment. I found it interesting the family's attorney was complaining that the lack of a quick statement was allowing the fabrication of justification- not that criminals are allowed such luxuries.
IP: Logged
08:27 PM
Jan 7th, 2009
Wichita Member
Posts: 20658 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
This is going to sound bad, but that officer probably did our society a favor and probably DRT a life time harden criminal.
Other than that, we are a Nation ruled by law and the officer must be accountable for any violations under the law.
Where are you getting this from? Did who a favor, you because you don't like him? I don't think killing people who were in prison is doing anyone any favors.
[This message has been edited by InTheLead (edited 01-07-2009).]
This is going to sound bad, but that officer probably did our society a favor and probably DRT a life time harden criminal.
Other than that, we are a Nation ruled by law and the officer must be accountable for any violations under the law.
What if it was just someone that got swept up in the mess. Ever get involved in something just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time? Ever had a cop point a gun at you after he just jumped a fence? This is a bad cop and should be fired and held accountable.
IP: Logged
04:21 AM
AusFiero Member
Posts: 11513 From: Dapto NSW Australia Registered: Feb 2001
He might have been on his stomach but he certainly wasn't making it easy to be cuffed. The officer probably pulled his gun because of this, to warn the guy to behave. There is nothing there indicating he shot him on purpose. Tragic accident yes. But a criminal with a track record like his does not deserve $25,000,000. He played with fire, and his lifestyle got him in the end. Would he have been in that situation if he was a good person? No.
He might have been on his stomach but he certainly wasn't making it easy to be cuffed.
And the penalty for making it difficult to be cuffed, as we all know, is death--without appeal or chance of parole.
Instantly accused, tried, setenced and that sentence carried out by the officer on scene. Just a one man complete total judicial system, this cop is. Wyatt Earp, Clint Eastwood, and Judge Roy Bean all rolled in to one. What a guy.
He might have been on his stomach but he certainly wasn't making it easy to be cuffed. The officer probably pulled his gun because of this, to warn the guy to behave. There is nothing there indicating he shot him on purpose. Tragic accident yes. But a criminal with a track record like his does not deserve $25,000,000. He played with fire, and his lifestyle got him in the end. Would he have been in that situation if he was a good person? No.
If he was doing what he was trained to do he wouldn't have had his finger on the trigger to begin with.
I had 4 deputies jump my back fence chasing a fleeing felon. They all had weapons drawn as soon as their feet hit the ground, the one that pointed his gun at me didn't have his finger on the trigger. I didn't notice it at first but it was the only thing I could focus on until they let me go back inside my house. I was in my own back yard and was armed at the time, they did their job and secured my yard and I didn't get shot. They apprehended one of the felons, I had her in my house and took them to her. The other got apprehended down the street, I could hear them cuffing him. They put their guns away as soon as the cuffs were on.
IP: Logged
05:55 AM
AusFiero Member
Posts: 11513 From: Dapto NSW Australia Registered: Feb 2001
Sheeze, talk about trying to twist what I posted. Yes it was an accident. No it shouldn't have happened. Would it have happened if the guy wasn't already resiting arrest? No, I doubt it. Blame to be had from all parties in this one. The point of it all is, he is not worth $25,000,000. That is just ludicrous. Let the law run its course on the officer and yes pay some sort of compensation. But not some ludicrous figure. Lawsuits like that one are a big part of what is destroying the USA. The family are realy quick to talk figures. They don't seem to give a rats ass about him if money is all that matters.
), spread out over the next 40 years, allowing for inflation every year. I regret sincerely that ANY human being should die in an accident, but it seems the 'accident' was waiting to happen, from his previous reported conduct.Sadly it was at the hands of a Police Officer, who made a tragic...mistake, maybe? We might never know.
