Sharpton vows to 'close this city' after officer acquittals

[Matt Molnar]

The Associated Press:

Sharpton vows to 'close this city' after officer acquittals

Apr 26, 4:42 PM (ET)

By VERENA DOBNIK

NEW YORK (AP) - Hundreds of angry people marched through Harlem on Saturday after the Rev. Al Sharpton promised to "close this city down" to protest the acquittals of three police detectives in the 50-shot barrage that killed a groom on his wedding day and wounded two friends.

"We strategically know how to stop the city so people stand still and realize that you do not have the right to shoot down unarmed, innocent civilians," Sharpton told an overflow crowd of several hundred people at his National Action Network office in the historically black Manhattan neighborhood. "This city is going to deal with the blood of Sean Bell." [Full Article]

[PhilDernerJr]

*yawn*

Not that I agree that these police should go unpunished, but relax, Al.

[T-Bird76]

Who is Sharpton protesting against and why punish the ppl of NYC? While we can disagree or agree with the verdict the one thing we can all agree upon is that Officers was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. This is the how the justice system works and the decisions of court must be respected.

[PhilDernerJr]

Actually, it wasn't by jury. The judge decided this case.

[T-Bird76]

Actually, it wasn't by jury. The judge decided this case.

Why was that? Can I guess the defendants choose to forgo a jury trial? I wasn't aware of that. Even still the judges decision falls within the limits of the law and should be respected as such. I bet if this was jury trial they would have been found guilty. Be one for the law schools to study for the future.

[moose135]

Why was that? Can I guess the defendants choose to forgo a jury trial? I wasn't aware of that. Even still the judges decision falls within the limits of the law and should be respected as such. I bet if this was jury trial they would have been found guilty. Be one for the law schools to study for the future.

Yes, the defendants can choose to waive a jury and have a judge hear the case, which is what happened here. I don't know if a jury would have found them guilty, but when I heard they chose to go this route, I suspected their chances of acquittal went up.

[bonanzabucks]

And if Sharpton really wants to get his message across, encouraging disrupting behavior is the worst way to do it. He wants people to have sympathy for his cause, well, he's going to get a lot of people even more pissed off if he "closes this city". Fewer people are going to have sympathy for the black community and he's going to set his aims and goals back by years. Remember the Rodney King riots. Did that really do anything to help the civil rights cause? Not really. Maybe Sharpton can take a lesson from that, but being the fat gasbag that he is, I doubt it.

[Matt Molnar]

[quote=T-Bird76]

Actually, it wasn't by jury. The judge decided this case.

Why was that? Can I guess the defendants choose to forgo a jury trial?[/quote:df5fa]
Correct.

Al likes to stage grand marches across the Brooklyn Bridge, at best he might gather enough people to jam that up for a little while. No way he'll be able to cause any significant disruption. This isn't as disturbing a case as the Amadou Diallo shooting or the Abner Louima assault. People have more important things to worry about like paying their bills. The DA was under pressure to indict and he did without really having a strong case to do so. The judge cited the weakness of the prosecution witnesses in his decision.

[wunaladreamin]

Look, race aside, if you try to run a cop over with your car...twice...you're probably going to get shot. Bottom line. A cop's number one priority is to ensure he/she goes home safe at end of tour. I can almost guarantee that if the perps (yes they are perps, they have rap sheets 3 pages long and the surviving perps have both been collared twice since the shooting for assault, narcotics, and criminal possession of firearms) were white, the outcome would have been the same without the Sharpton rabblerousing. Yes, it was tragic but, keep in mind too the only cop the media likes is a dead one. Also keep in mind the Commissioner Ray Kelly is a ball-less empty suit using his position to further his political career. God Damn I miss Bratton. That whole "take 3 shots and assess the situation" jargon is a load of bull****. Those words were never sopken in any academy I've ever attended. Remember who we're dealing with here folks before you draw your conclusions. These three cops only won a battle. They're still looking at federal and departmental action, as well as a civil suit from the Bell family. But for now, give them their retro pay and a desk. Friday justice was served.

[bonanzabucks]

Look, race aside, if you try to run a cop over with your car...twice...you're probably going to get shot. Bottom line. A cop's number one priority is to ensure he/she goes home safe at end of tour. I can almost guarantee that if the perps (yes they are perps, they have rap sheets 3 pages long and the surviving perps have both been collared twice since the shooting for assault, narcotics, and criminal possession of firearms) were white, the outcome would have been the same without the Sharpton rabblerousing. Yes, it was tragic but, keep in mind too the only cop the media likes is a dead one. Also keep in mind the Commissioner Ray Kelly is a ball-less empty suit using his position to further his political career. God Damn I miss Bratton. That whole "take 3 shots and assess the situation" jargon is a load of bull****. Those words were never sopken in any academy I've ever attended. Remember who we're dealing with here folks before you draw your conclusions. These three cops only won a battle. They're still looking at federal and departmental action, as well as a civil suit from the Bell family. But for now, give them their retro pay and a desk. Friday justice was served.

Don't forget that some of the cops who shot were black too. Sharpton doesn't bring this up.

[PhilDernerJr]

My only problem is the one officer that fired 31 times. Everything I've read about what happened and the timeline does not give ANY real excuse for this guy to have emptied, reloaded and emptied again. It makes no sense and was completely careless. I do feel that this officer (Oliver) should have received jail time. But him being paired up with two other officers in the trail, who happened to be black, having the judge decide the case, it was clear nothing would happen to him.

[wunaladreamin]

Don't forget that some of the cops who shot were black too. Sharpton doesn't bring this up.

Sharpton doesn't hate you if you're black or white (though I am positive he cares for neither), he only hates you if you're blue. I can't wait till he expires.

[wunaladreamin]

My only problem is the one officer that fired 31 times. Everything I've read about what happened and the timeline does not give ANY real excuse for this guy to have emptied, reloaded and emptied again. It makes no sense and was completely careless. I do feel that this officer (Oliver) should have received jail time. But him being paired up with two other officers in the trail, who happened to be black, having the judge decide the case, it was clear nothing would happen to him.

Phil, doing anything less than emptying your clip does not show the absolute need to preserve your own life. They tell you that in any firearms class. That said, what would you do? You're in an alley with subjects you suspect are carrying, who have already attempted to hit your partner with their car, and gunfire rings out. You can't call a time out here. And all of the training you go through cannot prepare you for a real time gunfight especially when nobody turns out from roll call looking to light someone up. I can honestly say I don't know if I would have done what he did any differently. Neither can you. We've never been in that situation and I hope that situation never finds me. But if it does and it comes down to my life or his...it's going to be his.

[PhilDernerJr]

I would have fired. I think the officers WERE justified in firing.

However, in terms of timeline, there's no way that I can play it out in my head in a way that would imply that all the "action" was over, even by the time Oliver reloaded. Sure you can unload fast, but the action happens quickly and is over just as fast. How was he firing for that long? It doesn't make sense to me at all.

The car races, guns start firing, the officers who fired a few shots, or even up to 11.....the action is over within 5 seconds, 8 tops. Car is stopped, maybe rolling in an nonthreatening manner, the officers....guns drawn would be still aiming and assessing. Yet with Oliver, he's still firing. The act of emptying a gun, reloading, and emptying again (and wasn't he in a seated position no less?) would take at least 15 seconds in the high-adrenaline state. The car was not coming at him personally, so he did not face any initial threat. What could have been going on for that long that justified his shooting? It sounds to me like he lost his mind, which is understandable, but he should still be held accountable.

[wunaladreamin]

What I'm trying to get at is you're not going to take a second to see who is firing. You're going to keep pulling that trigger until you hear other shots stop. If you let up for a second to see what's going on, it could be you that takes a hit. Even in a seated position it takes only a split second to reload a clip. You release the spent cart with one hand whilst grabbing a full cart mounted to your belt at your abdomen with the other. Tactics. Was it excessive? Possibly, but in that situation what would any of us do? Was it justified and legal? Absolutely. Firing 3 shots and killing a perp is not self preservation. It's murder. It shows your life was not in imminent danger AND you had time to aim. As bad as it sounds, the more shots you fire in a situation like that, the cleaner the shoot really winds up being solely because of the haste displayed.