Betty Shelby trial
- Thread starter anon_xl72qcu5isp39
- Start date
I haven't stayed current on the case. The helicopter angle was the only one I've seen and didn't give a clear picture of what happened at the time of the shooting. I can't say I fault her for shooting him if he did reach inside the vehicle. I know something happened that caused the other officer to simultaneously discharge his tazer.
What are your thoughts?
What are your thoughts?
I haven't' seen much more than you -- wondered if some tulsa people knew something. My gut feeling was that she panicked.
My broad demographic analysis is that a white Tulsa jury isn't convicting, but the old deputy that shot the guy on the ground was found guilty (I think?) so you just never know. I had a run-in with a tulsa cop once and he was a crazed moron. Enough of those experiences and a jury can do anything. I'll still say acquittal based on conventional thinking that conservative white juries aren't gonna send a female cop to prison for shooting a non-compliant, drugged, black guy.
I think she panicked. Don't know of that means she should be found guilty. I do think it greatly helps her case that the defense was able to bring up the four other times Crutcher was non-compliant with officers in past 6 years.
It shouldn't be about race. Anyone who thinks race played even a remote factor in this sad story is just race-baiting.
It shouldn't be about race. Anyone who thinks race played even a remote factor in this sad story is just race-baiting.
She over reacted, bigtime.
They should of tasered him if he wasn't complying and acting strange.
The thing about this case is I think they went for manslaughter instead of murder. In most of these police shootings they over charge because of public pressure and they end up getting acquitted because the prosecution can't come close to the burden needed to convict of murder.
They should of tasered him if he wasn't complying and acting strange.
The thing about this case is I think they went for manslaughter instead of murder. In most of these police shootings they over charge because of public pressure and they end up getting acquitted because the prosecution can't come close to the burden needed to convict of murder.
The tazer would have been a good choice had she had another officer on scene initially. When you're by yourself, you go gun in that scenario. You're also not going to holster your lethal force once drawn for less lethal. Once he appeared to reach into the vehicle (not sure he actually did), attempting to deploy a tazer is not an option when you have a pistol in your hand.
That said, I think she was quick on the trigger. She already had her gun drawn. I don't know what she saw from her angle, but the benefit of hindsight and the not very good helicopter footage leads me to think he didn't present as an immediate threat. Had he reached into the vehicle and then turned toward the officers, fire away. Whatever they saw, they both fired their respective drawn weapons. What they saw is what I obviously don't have.
That said, I think she was quick on the trigger. She already had her gun drawn. I don't know what she saw from her angle, but the benefit of hindsight and the not very good helicopter footage leads me to think he didn't present as an immediate threat. Had he reached into the vehicle and then turned toward the officers, fire away. Whatever they saw, they both fired their respective drawn weapons. What they saw is what I obviously don't have.
Verdict is in. I say guilty. It's just a four year sentence. Show the rest of the world what redneck justice is.
Damn. Saw this news on the day it happened. Had completely lost track of it. Trending in news. Guess itll be out in the next 30 minutes.
DA filed charges (1st degree manslaughter) prior to the completion of the investigation. If they would have waited (which is normal) they would have seen the enhanced video of the incident showing victim reaching into his car which initiated the shooting. Ironic because the DA asked the Judge to add the option of 2nd degree manslaughter (the proper charge imo) right before closing arguments. The judge of course refused.
Is the refusal to consider the lesser sentence a form of protection, and if so, why would that be discretionary?
I'm not a criminal guy but the problem I see with it is that you're now wanting to add a charge with different elements of proof. A charge and elements which the defense has not had an opportunity to address during the trial. Seldom a good sign for the DA when he is wanting the jury to consider lesser charges at the end of the trial.
I'm all for holding officers accountable. Unfortunately, what I'm not hearing from any of these protesters is that people need to be respectful and follow directions when stopped by the police. This alone would eliminate almost all of these incidents. Yet...I haven't heard this as a lesson once tonight. This was a tragedy and whatever one might think of the victim our hearts should go out to his family. They lost a loved one.
Lawpoke hit it on the head.
DA had the opportunity to provide for lesser included offenses at the beginning. The fact that he didn't wou,d affect how defense pleads their case at trial. For instance, prosecution charges and prosecutes for Murder. If there is no lesser included offenses a viable defense would be "this isn't murder. There was no intent. At worst this is negligence"....but he can't be convicted of negligence because of no lesser included offenses....so he walks free if the jury believes a crime was committed, just not the only one he prosecuted for.
Couldn't have happened to a "nicer" guy. Kunzweiler deserves every bit of fallout from this debacle. Hopefully it rains down on him like an avalanche. Sorry to those that saw him at midnight mass one time or like him because his wife is a veterinarian (non OSU)....blah..blah..blah. This train has been roaring down the tracks for a long time.
I just heard on the radio that last night as soon as the cameras left-the protesters left. National news could learn something from this.
I can't say I agree with you (agency politics)....just know that I could easily say I disagree with you....if I did.
A white jury wouldn't have sent a cop to prison for shooting a non-compliant, drugged out white person that was reaching into his vehicle either.
There were three African Americans' on that jury. To characterize it as a white jury is inaccurate. The verdict was unanimous btw.
Can they go back and retry a lesser crime, or does double jeopardy mean you can't be tried twice for one incident even if the charges are different?
Double jeopardy attaches and she can't be tried for a lesser included at this point.
So....the latter.
This true if the prosecution can come up with even 1 additional piece of information, or would they need to reach a high bar that the new information would impact the case under the ORIGINAL charge?
Is there a hard and fast rule on this type of thing? Some Scenarios (Not related to Shelby):
Found not guilty for murdering a homeowner, retried for breaking and entering?
Not guilty for murder, retried for crimes committed while evading the police?
Not guilty for murder, retried for littering fleeing the scene?
What does double jeopardy cover?
Tulsa World published some interesting data of police involved shooting that caused a death in Oklahoma over the last 10 years.
The data shows the media narrative of a war on blacks is NOT happening.
The deaths by race from being shot by a police officer in Oklahoma:
Whites: 65%
Blacks: 19%
Hispanic: 9%
Native American and other: 7%
The data shows the media narrative of a war on blacks is NOT happening.
The deaths by race from being shot by a police officer in Oklahoma:
Whites: 65%
Blacks: 19%
Hispanic: 9%
Native American and other: 7%
The hard and fast rule of double jeopardy is that all offenses arising out of the same event must be concurrently charged and tried in the same trial and that once jeopardy attaches for the event, that is the prosecutions one shot. Then there are specific rules about at what point double jeopardy attaches. Those are complicated and convoluted.
In all your examples, all the crimes would have to have been charged and tried together. If they weren't, the prosecution doesn't get to go back and take another bite.
It's universally true. If the prosecution charges (and doesn't include a lesser included offenses allegation), jeopardy attaches for that charge, there is no allowance for changing the charges (unless the defense agrees).
Know I'm gonna blow your guys' minds. Double jeopardy speaks to a second trial by the same sovereign. If a single act constitutes both federal and state crimes, both the Feds and the DA can separately prosecute over the same set of facts. You don't see it too often, but it happens. Examples are big drug cases, child pornography, and simple fraud at the state level with federal mail/wire fraud or money laundering Being prosecuted at the federal level. The laws on that are also pretty complicated and convoluted.
According to the 2013 United States census, the racial and ethnic composition of Oklahoma was the following:[3][13][14]
It looks like the Hispanics and Latinos and Others are getting off easy.
- White: 65%
- Black or African American: 10%
- Native American: 6%
- Asian: 2% (0.4% Vietnamese, 0.3% Indian, 0.2% Chinese, 0.2% Korean, 0.2% Filipino, 0.1% Hmong, 0.1% Japanese)
- Pacific Islander: 0.1%
- Two or more races: 5%
It looks like the Hispanics and Latinos and Others are getting off easy.
There is an extensive body of law about all the ins and outs of it happening.
It does seem unjust and unfair, but as my favorite Law School Professor, Crazy Mike Berch, said "the law ain't about justice or fairness or right and wrong or any of the 1L horseshit....it's about power, and authority, and winning within a specific set of rules that can be changed as you go along by a bunch of morons at the state and national capitols.
<furiously shutting down mail fraud scheme>
Hmm. I guess you can't fight City Hall.
The most well known example that comes to my mind was when the cops involved in the Rodney King arrest/excessive use of force case were retried in federal court after skating on state charges. Sometimes the result is gratifying, but the "getting there" is alarming. Or at least is is to me.
Similar threads
