Deputy charged with murder

[buzz_knox]

After undergoing a lot of training, they are very eager to put their training in practice.

And if they don't implement the training, they will be questioned next time around about why it's still necessary to fund training for operations they don't use. As with any organization, if some task is not being performed, it will not be funded in the future.

 

[up_onus]

I can only say this....
If he is not charged with manslaughter, this could possibly be the beginning of SWAT being able to use miscellaneous ideas to kill people.

In this case he THOUGHT he heard gunfire (although no other officer heard it), and the officer gets off.... ok?? I thought I heard the rack of a gun...Backfire on a Vehicle? Slamming of a door? WHERE DOES IT END.

Everyone is talking facts....
Facts are - UNARMED TEEN GETS SHOT TO DEATH.
If the SWAT was worried about guns, why did they approach the situation as they did where they believed that the suspect was armed and dangerous?
I see this happen, they pull up and the suspect is in the house ARMED and all the police cars pull up and attempt to talk him out...

This is a travesty. I am very dissapointed if this is TRUELY the reality of the situation.

One person before commented that a criminal gets what he deserves. I agree to SOME point - death for assualt? Do we live in the same country???

 

[GRB]

As usual those on this site who all too readily condemn the police in their actions or inactions did it again in this thread. Funny how the Grand Jury did not indict him. Maybe they heard the whole story before deciding if a crime had been committed or not.

 

[carebear]

I'm condemning the foolish choice of tactics, not necessarily the officer's actions. Though those, as described anyway, are sketchy as well.

To be fair, how many known bad guys have walked unindicted?

Can you still honestly say you view grand juries decisions as ultimately and universally exculpatory, or could it be they occasionally make a bad decision?

If so, this decision could fall under "bad".

 

[Tim Burke]

The Grand Jury did not indict for 2nd degree murder. The DA is considering his options. The one thought most likely is to try for an indictment on a lesser charge- probably voluntary manslaughter.

 

[Manedwolf]

The Grand Jury did not indict for 2nd degree murder. The DA is considering his options. The one thought most likely is to try for an indictment on a lesser charge- probably voluntary manslaughter.

Will end with about a month of paid administrative leave, then back on the beat doing the same job. I'd bet on it.

 

[JohnBT]

I doubt if they'll let him continue working if he ends up getting a felony conviction.

"This is a travesty. I am very dissapointed if this is TRUELY the reality of the situation."

Don't blame the police or the prosecution or anybody down at city hall, it was a grand jury of ordinary people who heard the evidence and voted.

Jonh

 

[up_onus]

Glen - I am not talking down on LEO's. Everyone makes mistakes, I am commenting on how if it were me who "mistakingly thought I saw a person pull a gun" and SHOT them....well, I can say it wouldnt be EASY or EVEN POSSIBLE to not get charged with some type of murder.

DA Not Accepting Grand Jury's Decision

Dec 14, 2006 01:34 PM PST

http://www.wect.com/Global/story.asp?S=5814863&nav=2gQc

 

[carebear]

Did he charge for 2nd and all lesser includeds or just 2nd? if it was only the biggie, the GJ might well have been willing to go for Man or Crim. Neg.

For the Defense and FOP to say the GJ found "no probable cause for any criminal charge" is more than just inaccurate if that is the case.

I also like how the defense says he should have been "allowed" to testify. IIRC from my crim. pro. even if a defendant is "allowed" to, most defense attorney's won't risk it.

Makes a handy line to hang a whine on though. The DA should give him a put up or shut up opportunity if he re-files.

edited to add - this post is aimed not at the guilt or innocence of the officer but my dislike of doubletalk and outright lying by sides in a court case

 

[Tim Burke]

I doubt if they'll let him continue working if he ends up getting a felony conviction.

He was fired even before the 1st Grand Jury concluded its deliberations.

Did he charge for 2nd and all lesser includeds or just 2nd?

I believe he charged just for Murder 2. I'm not surprised the jury no-billed that.

 

[carebear]

-cynical side on-

Could be political...

You "do something" that you know probably won't go through and then monitor public opinion to see which way the wind is blowing.

If PO says "drop it" you can point to "doing something" to deflect the critics.

If PO gets up in arms, you can then "do something" that's actually liable to go through.

 

[Tim Burke]

That thought crossed my mind.

 

[hammer4nc]

case possibly up for reconsideration...

New grand jury selected in teen shooting case

Jan 3, 2007 09:25 AM

WILMINGTON -- A new 18-member grand jury convened today in New Hanover County.

There had been some thought that the new jurors would review a high-profile, officer involved shooting right away.

District Attorney Ben David told NewsChannel 3 earlier today that the new grand jurors chosen today would not be given such a hard hitting case right away.

David says eventually the jury will be presented with a case to indict former New Hanover County Sheriff's deputy Christopher Long for shooting 18-year-old Peyton Strickland last month.

Strickland was shot and killed December 1 after authorities attempted to issue warrants at his Wilmington home.

Cpl. Christopher Long shot Strickland after he says he thought he heard gunfire.

DA David later presented a case to the grand jury to indict Long for second-degree murder. That grand jury chose not to indict Long, but a clerical error in paperwork made it seem as if they did.

Attorney Thom Goolsby said, "In the first case apparently the foreman of the grand jury, who is responsible for marking the grand jury sheet, marked the wrong box. The court came in the next day and corrected it, as they should have, and then of course it means that there is no indictment. So, anything that may have happened before was improper and had to be thrown out."

The DA could have dropped the case after it was thrown out the first time, but after consulting with the Attorney General's office, David said he would continue to pursue the case and ultimately present it again to another grand jury.

According to Goolsby the DA can present the Strickland case before a grand jury as many times as he deems necessary, as there are no statutes of limitations in North Carolina for felony cases.

Goolsby says it's also unlikely a new grand jury will be presented with this case right away.

http://www.wwaytv3.com/Global/story.asp?S=5881600