Tulsa female race soldier faces trial for killing unarmed black man Terence Crutcher…

13»

Comments

  • blakfyahking
    blakfyahking Members Posts: 15,785 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Copper wrote: »
    ? was done once the report said he had ? in his system

    ? shouldn't protest over this one.......we gotta just hold that L

    Being on drugs is not an offense punishable by death.

    Esp. If the person isnt breaking any laws

    ok....but when did I say all that?

    Kwan Dai wrote: »
    ghostdog56 wrote: »
    ? was done once the report said he had ? in his system

    ? shouldn't protest over this one.......we gotta just hold that L

    What does him having ? in his system have to do with whether or not the shooting was justified or not? I can see using that if he was trying to attack her but he wasn't

    my ? u really gon waste ur time protesting a situation where they can prove a ? wasn't on point before he got shot? and then u think white folks gon prosecute a white female cop at that?


    there are too many better cases to put ur efforts than to fight for a dude that they can prove was gon off of prob some dippers.........? ain't no regular drug bruh

    it's hard to make progress against police brutality when mofos want to protest for everybody, instead of the cases where it's obvious it's an innocent person who was killed


    it's not a coincidence that the media pushes the controversial cases over the obvious open and shut ones....the controversial cases give these ? up cops an excuse

    So, you believe the police should just shoot and ? on the premise they "feared for their lives"? Are you serious?

    When the police arrived on the scene and killed that man they didn't know he had ? in his system. The police are to follow protocol. If, the protocol is to shoot first and ask questions later then something is amiss. More importantly if, this is the protocol more civilians whether they have drugs in their system or not will be killed.

    Protest are going to continue and they should because police are in fact brutalizing civilians who aren't on drugs, don't have weapons and in many cases doing absolutely nothing at all. i.e. James Blake and Kathryn Johnston.

    What's making it hard to get these killer cops off of the streets or at the very least to do their jobs, are clowns with opinions like yours. It's not civilians that are provoking officers into killing them. It's poor training, lack of education (most cops were trash students) and police departments constant hiring of racist, and mentally unfit people for one of the most volatile occupations in the country.

    u in ur feelings and arguing against me and I'm not even disagreeing with u

    I never said the broad was justified, or that she is right for getting off, or even that somebody shouldn't even the score and bump her off the same way

    all I said is that protesting is fruitless whenever they can prove some type of culpability on the victim

    ? is not a casual drug ? just take at their leisure.......so if they can prove he had that ? in court no jury is going to refuse to give the cop the benefit of the doubt, especially a white chick acting like she scared of a black man

    it doesn't make sense to focus ur energy protesting for victims with issues when there are plenty of innocent victims with no negative info that can be brought against them at all.........then these crackas have no excuse to try to divert ? from the truth

    every ? is not qualified for rescue bruh...........the example u gave like James Blake are the cases that will eventually force the system to change

  • blakfyahking
    blakfyahking Members Posts: 15,785 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Copper wrote: »
    ? was done once the report said he had ? in his system

    ? shouldn't protest over this one.......we gotta just hold that L

    Being on drugs is not an offense punishable by death.

    Esp. If the person isnt breaking any laws

    We know this of course...but we know they also think having weed in your system makes you violent so anything harder than that nulls a victims credibility to them....

    but to just accept this outcome and not support or rally behind victims who may not be angels with perfect resumes reaffirms or rather suggests not everyone deserves equal protections under the law

    maybe not ? , but trayvon, sandra bland, mike brown, etc all had weed in their system. they had troubled past. but we evoke their names. should we not, regardless of if the evidence shows the police misbehaved

    I dunno, to me it defeats the whole purpose of the blm or anti police brutality movement when we begin to pick and choose who we rally behind based on factors other than evidence of racial discrimination and police misconduct

    I understand the sentiment at the bolded

    but in 2017 if we know the system is ? up to where cops can literally ? our kids and get away with it

    why are grown adults out in public and high on drugs getting into confrontations with police when they know ? is rigged?


    passive aggressive protests ain't been getting us anywhere

    and trayvon is not relevant to police brutality.....mixing cases like his is what waters down the movement against crooked police


  • Swiffness!
    Swiffness! Members Posts: 10,128 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ? was done once the report said he had ? in his system

    ? shouldn't protest over this one.......we gotta just hold that L

    i really get what you're saying, but the bit about ppl "shouldn't protest" and basically letting it go is a bridge too far....
  • stringer bell
    stringer bell Members Posts: 26,212 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2017
    Trillfate wrote: »

    It amazing how so many dumb people always end up on these type of juries.. Smh...
  • stringer bell
    stringer bell Members Posts: 26,212 ✭✭✭✭✭
    https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/05/18/guilty-verdict-ends-tulsa-police-shooting-case-bitterness-goes
    Not-guilty verdict ends Tulsa police shooting case, but the bitterness goes on and on

    A blunt question and its one-word answer in a Tulsa courtroom this week spoke volumes.

    The tense, seven-word exchange summarized our nation's devastating inability to bridge the angry divide over police shootings of black Americans.

    It came as Tulsa police Officer Betty Jo Shelby testified during her manslaughter trial in the death last September of an unarmed motorist named Terence Crutcher.

    Last fall, Shelby came upon Crutcher's SUV in the middle of a road, its motor still running, Crutcher outside the vehicle. When she ordered him to show his hands and drop to the ground, he raised his hands and walked back toward the car.

    When, according to police officers, Crutcher appeared to reach toward the window of his car, Shelby's partner fired his Taser. Shelby fired her gun, and Crutcher was dead within minutes.

    Grainy video of the shooting — to me at least — was inconclusive. Some viewers insist that the car window was up, proving that Crutcher could not be reaching for something inside. I couldn't tell.

    More unsettling, perhaps, is that Crutcher lay in the street for more than two minutes before anyone approached to offer him aid.

    A search found that Crutcher was unarmed. An autopsy showed ? in his system.

    Prosecutors, Crutcher's family, and by extension, many supporters of the "Black Lives Matter" movement, believe Shelby — like many other police officers involved in similar incidents — clearly overreacted.

    Defense lawyers and (mostly white) Americans inclined to be dubious of anti-police protests believe Shelby acted reasonably and in accordance with her training to counter what could have been a deadly threat.

    It was murder, said Crutcher's family, Tulsa's minority community, and millions of American.

    It was justified, said Shelby, countless law enforcement officers, and millions of other Americans.

    On Wednesday, the jury sided with Shelby — but it clearly wasn't an easy decision.

    The panel, which included three black jurors, deliberated for nine hours, and several of its members were in tears when the verdict was announced. After Shelby's acquittal, protesters gathered in downtown Tulsa, but they were peaceful, their sorrow and perhaps weariness matching their anger.

    It's particularly telling that jurors asked the judge whether they could explain their reasons for the verdict in court. They longed to elaborate, to be understood.

    The law says no, the judge told them. No explanations. Just the verdict: not guilty.

    Despite her attorney's statement that Shelby was "elated," nobody left the courthouse happy, not really.

    That seven-word question-and-answer exchange still lingers in the air. It will be asked and answered in other courtrooms, and during protests, and in opinion columns, and on news shows.

    The question will go on dividing us, maybe even defining us.

    So the Tulsa case is at an end, but it's hardly a resolution. Rank-and-file police officers — not just in Tulsa, but in departments across the country — remain aggrieved that prosecutors brought a case against Shelby in the first place. We can't prosecute cops for doing their jobs, they say.

    The city's mayor, during a gingerly worded news conference Thursday, said racial disparity remains Tulsa's worst problem, and that healing the rift between law enforcement and the minority community will be a top priority. It could have been a thousand mayors, a thousand American cities.

    Because how often have we seen this miserable scenario? Police are trained to suspect every dicey gesture, every failure to comply, every fumbling reach for a pocket or a waistband as a potentially deadly threat. Their top priority is to end the end their shifts alive, to not join the ranks of the fallen in a too-often dangerous profession.

    Many officers and their defenders argue that had Crutcher not used drugs, not disobeyed, not acted erratically — if he had just done what Shelby told him to do, he would be alive.

    Their detractors say with equal passion that disobedience and noncompliance, particularly during the tense and confusing moments of a police encounter, are not capital offenses.

    Civilians, they say, aren't drilled and trained in making split-second decisions, and making them pay for misunderstandings or disobedience with their lives is a disgrace, an injustice.

    Tell me the answer. I want to know the answer.

    Back to those seven words, that signpost at a yawning philosophical canyon with no bridge in sight:

    A prosecutor asked: "Is Terence Crutcher's death his fault?"

    And Betty Jo Shelby answered:

    "Yes."
  • Crude_
    Crude_ Members Posts: 19,964 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2017
    They actually seek out those type of jurors it's an art to selecting a jury.

    Generally the more ill informed and easily led the better.

    It's sad but it's how it works.
  • semi-auto-mato
    semi-auto-mato Members Posts: 2,833 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Trillfate wrote: »


    if u thought the prosecution could have done better to convince the juror to convict then u are suppose to holdout and let the judge call a mistrial. after the mistrial u do ur interview and let the prosecution know they need to tighten they ? up. u don't give that ? a free pass. they cant do a retrial now. every black person on that juror is a ? coward. they should all be ashamed of themselves
  • stringer bell
    stringer bell Members Posts: 26,212 ✭✭✭✭✭
    http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/bettyshelby/jury-could-never-get-comfortable-with-the-concept-of-betty/article_743d79dc-4317-5963-a69b-fe3b0ba6c732.html
    The jurors in Betty Shelby's trial believed she acted according to her training when she fatally shot Terence Crutcher, but several believed she didn't do all she could to mitigate the situation, which left the group unable to get "comfortable with the concept of Betty Shelby being blameless."

    A letter written by the jury's foreman, which District Judge Doug Drummond said will be entered into the court record, states the jury concluded any officer in Shelby's situation at the exact moment she pulled the trigger would have used force against Crutcher based on police training. Shelby testified on Monday that she shot Crutcher once because she saw him reach into the halfway-open driver's side window of his SUV with his left hand, while Tyler Turnbough, her backing officer, told the jury May 10 he deployed his Taser at the same time.

    The jury deliberated for just more than nine hours Wednesday before reaching its decision that night. Several jurors were in tears as Drummond read the not-guilty verdicts for the two theories of manslaughter — heat of passion and resisting criminal attempt — for which Shelby was charged.

    "By all evidence presented, that instant required action, which two officers took simultaneously," the jury's letter states. "That moment, according to the evidence presented, was unfortunate and tragic, but justifiable due to the actions of the suspect."

    The letter, titled by the jury as a media release, emphasized the jury's desire to remain anonymous and requested privacy but said it was "keenly aware" of the impact of the verdict on the community.

    The document is an apparent rejection of claims from prosecutors that Shelby, 43, became too emotional and used unreasonable force despite her belief Crutcher, 40, was committing misdemeanor offenses of public intoxication and obstruction. Shelby's defense team asserted she simply followed her training, which dictates not to wait for a suspect of a crime to obtain a weapon before deciding to use force.

    The jury also said Crutcher's legal history, a focus of the defense's case, was not considered in any way as a means to justify Shelby's actions. Although the jury believed she became increasingly fearful as the incident escalated, the conclusion reached was that the state couldn't prove her fear dominated her choice to shoot Crutcher at least in part because Turnbough also decided to use force in the moment.

    "What is unclear based on the testimony and the evidence presented in that courtroom was whether her judgment at that time was in accordance to her training as a police officer in the line of duty or whether her training allowed her to holster her service weapon and draw her Taser instead," the letter reads. "There was no evidence presented that she was acting outside of her training, or even if her training allowed her flexibility of a decision at that point. All discussion of what her training requires in that instant, as presented in the trial, favored the defense's case.

    "The jury, without knowledge of the guidelines learned through law enforcement training, believes that a Taser attempt to subdue Mr. Crutcher before he reached his vehicle could have saved his life and that potential scenario was seemingly an option available to her; however, there was no evidence presented that her extensive training allowed such an option."

    The letter went on to say this issue was "critical" to the not-guilty verdict because the jury, even with those questions, couldn't conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Shelby acted outside of her duties and training.

    "Because of this perceived option that she may have had, many on the jury could never get comfortable with the concept of Betty Shelby being blameless for Mr. Crutcher's death, but due to the lack of direct or even circumstantial evidence that she was acting outside of her training in the 30 feet prior to Mr. Crutcher reaching the window of that SUV, the jury was forced by the rule of law to render a not guilty verdict."
  • stringer bell
    stringer bell Members Posts: 26,212 ✭✭✭✭✭
    http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/bettyshelby/officer-betty-shelby-won-t-patrol-but-returns-to-tulsa/article_dbd76608-fc17-5191-8cb5-6596976ec838.html
    Officer Betty Shelby won't patrol but returns to Tulsa Police active duty, chief says

    The job status of Officer Betty Shelby after her manslaughter acquittal has been resolved, Tulsa Police Chief Chuck Jordan said Friday.

    In an emailed statement, Jordan said Shelby will return to active duty but "will not be assigned in a patrol capacity."


    Tulsa’s chapter of Black Lives Matter had called for Shelby’s termination. According to a juror's statement to online Tulsa publication The Frontier, the jury asked Jordan that Shelby not be allowed to patrol.

    Jordan and Mayor G.T. Bynum hosted a news conference Thursday morning at City Hall to address the not-guilty verdict rendered Wednesday night in Shelby’s first-degree manslaughter trial in the death of Terence Crutcher.

    According to Jordan, Shelby's employment was being evaluated by the city and police legal and HR departments.

    “We know we’ve had failings,” Jordan said, re-emphasizing his department’s resolve to implement community policing. “We understand that, and we’re committed absolutely to making a better relationship where we ensure trust and ensure cooperation in our community.”

    The police chief reiterated his stance on protecting the rights of demonstrators and said officers did so Wednesday night. He complimented both protesters and police officers.

    “I think if you watched any of the streaming videos, you saw a prime example of de-escalation when protesters were blocking Denver (Avenue),” Jordan said. “As I said before also, we are prepared for anything, but we’re expecting exactly what we got last night — peaceful protests.”

    Bynum laid out specifics on what the city is doing to bridge Tulsa’s racial disparity since his inauguration in December:

    • Body-worn cameras will be “fully deployed” on police officers by the end of this year.

    • Citizen advisory boards will be established in each police patrol division this summer.

    • The latest city budget will fund the largest single influx of officers in Tulsa’s history to implement community policing initiatives.

    • The Commission on Community Policing offered 77 recommendations to improve the Police Department.

    • The city has partnered with Rockefeller Foundation to install the Resilient Cities program to bring resources here to address racial disparity through access to economic opportunities, transportation and health care.

    • A Tulsa African-American Affairs Commission has been created.

    Only in Amerikkka..

    07buc0xiodj3.jpg
  • Kwan Dai
    Kwan Dai Members Posts: 6,929 ✭✭✭✭✭
    They are cowards all of them. With that said I will not overlook the fact that jurors particularly the Black ones don't want to end up on the end of a cops gun for sending one to prison. They are dealing with gang members and they have to go back to regular life once a trial is over. They don't want those problems.
  • stringer bell
    stringer bell Members Posts: 26,212 ✭✭✭✭✭
    http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/bettyshelby/family-of-terence-crutcher-calls-for-firing-of-lead-homicide/article_33d958d6-c26a-5e43-892d-37c6de04713a.html
    Crutcher told reporters that social media harassment has only added insult to the injury her family feels from Shelby’s acquittal.

    “It’s been a long and sleepless night. I’ve been harassed all night long by the citizens of Tulsa,” she said. “Some have stated that Terence Crutcher deserved to die, stating that Terence Crutcher was a thug so he deserved to die, stating that Terence Crutcher was an addict so he deserved to die. So for the city of Tulsa to state we’re all one and we’ll all come together, I beg to differ.”

    But All Lives Matter right.. Smh...
  • 5th Letter
    5th Letter Members, Moderators, Writer Posts: 37,068 Regulator
    That letter ? is nothing more than a tool to pacify black people.
  • Madame_CJSkywalker
    Madame_CJSkywalker Members Posts: 940 ✭✭✭✭
    Copper wrote: »
    ? was done once the report said he had ? in his system

    ? shouldn't protest over this one.......we gotta just hold that L

    Being on drugs is not an offense punishable by death.

    Esp. If the person isnt breaking any laws

    We know this of course...but we know they also think having weed in your system makes you violent so anything harder than that nulls a victims credibility to them....

    but to just accept this outcome and not support or rally behind victims who may not be angels with perfect resumes reaffirms or rather suggests not everyone deserves equal protections under the law

    maybe not ? , but trayvon, sandra bland, mike brown, etc all had weed in their system. they had troubled past. but we evoke their names. should we not, regardless of if the evidence shows the police misbehaved

    I dunno, to me it defeats the whole purpose of the blm or anti police brutality movement when we begin to pick and choose who we rally behind based on factors other than evidence of racial discrimination and police misconduct

    I understand the sentiment at the bolded

    but in 2017 if we know the system is ? up to where cops can literally ? our kids and get away with it

    why are grown adults out in public and high on drugs getting into confrontations with police when they know ? is rigged?


    passive aggressive protests ain't been getting us anywhere

    and trayvon is not relevant to police brutality.....mixing cases like his is what waters down the movement against crooked police


    with trayvon I feel he is lumped in with the others because the acquittal of zimmerman was partly the result of a bias justice system

    wouldn't go as far as to say as a community we shouldn't evoke and or shouldn't have made an effort to get justice for the families of brown or bland though

    but I get what u saying
  • Olorun22
    Olorun22 Members Posts: 5,696 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Kwan Dai wrote: »
    They are cowards all of them. With that said I will not overlook the fact that jurors particularly the Black ones don't want to end up on the end of a cops gun for sending one to prison. They are dealing with gang members and they have to go back to regular life once a trial is over. They don't want those problems.

    This is what I think really goes on.. they don't play fair
  • MR.CJ
    MR.CJ Members Posts: 64,689 ✭✭✭✭✭