06-26-2020, 05:24 PM
(06-26-2020, 03:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am assuming the video will clearly show the taser being fired twice.
That's only half of the argument, though. The other half is proving the officer knew it had been discharged twice.
(06-26-2020, 03:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I agree this is a false statement. You can use deadly force on a violent criminal who is a threat to others safety.
But unlike SSF I don't let my personal opiinion of the DA effect my opinion on the case. Instead I base my opinions on what I see of the facts and the law. In this case I don't think the officers were justified in using deadly force.
My opinion of what I think will happen to these officers is not just based on the law. It is based on my experience with juries. juries really don't care that much about the technical nuances of the law. Instead they want to do what they think is right. Even if a lawyer was able to convince a few jurors that the officers were justified or maybe just the victims of a "poor decision made in a split second under great pressure" they will most likely get convicted when the jurors see the video of the officer kicking Booker's body on the ground and standing on him refusing to render aid as he bled out.
And this is why the defendant will likely request a bench trial.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
