Unarmed Man Is Charged With Wounding Bystanders Shot by Police Near Times Square

[Are_grits_groceries]

An unarmed, emotionally disturbed man shot at by the police as he was lurching around traffic near Times Square in September has been charged with assault, on the theory that he was responsible for bullet wounds suffered by two bystanders, according to an indictment unsealed in State Supreme Court in Manhattan on Wednesday.

The man, Glenn Broadnax, 35, of Brooklyn, created a disturbance on Sept. 14, wading into traffic at 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue and throwing himself into the path of oncoming cars.

A curious crowd grew. Police officers arrived and tried to corral Mr. Broadnax, a 250-pound man. When he reached into his pants pocket, two officers, who, the police said, thought he was pulling a gun, opened fire, missing Mr. Broadnax, but hitting two nearby women. Finally, a police sergeant knocked Mr. Broadnax down with a Taser.

The shootings once again raised questions about the police use of firearms in crowded areas and drew comparisons to a shooting a year ago, when officers struck nine bystanders in front of the Empire State Building when they killed an armed murder suspect.

Initially Mr. Broadnax was arrested on misdemeanor charges of menacing, drug possession and resisting arrest. But the Manhattan district attorney’s office persuaded a grand jury to charge Mr. Broadnax with assault, a felony carrying a maximum sentence of 25 years. Specifically, the nine-count indictment unsealed on Wednesday said Mr. Broadnax “recklessly engaged in conduct which created a grave risk of death.”

“The defendant is the one that created the situation that injured innocent bystanders,” said an assistant district attorney, Shannon Lucey.
<snip>
More:http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/nyregion/unarmed-man-is-charged-with-wounding-bystanders-shot-by-police-near-times-square.html

They have lost their minds.
Charge the cops with reckless endangerment.

[bemildred]

1. And these fucking morons want absolute authority to do as they please. nt

Could we have a better sign of how the Grand Jury system is used these days and what it is used for?

[Downwinder]

2. Charge whomever called the Police.

[geek tragedy]

3. Cops are making a case to bust their own damn union. And people get one guess

as to Mr. Broadnax's skin pigmentation.

[yuiyoshida]

4. wtf?

They pulled the damn trigger, can they not be responsible for anything they do????

[davidpdx]

10. Unfortuantely no

It is getting beyond absurd what the police are doing to people. Maybe they should have tried the taser FIRST before shooting their guns. If they had missed, those people would be alive. That's what they get for their "shoot first, take responsibility never" attitude.

It will be interesting to see how the trial plays out.

[Boreal]

5. OMG, who is going to come to this poor man's aid?

These damned prosecutors need to be jailed right along with the criminal cops they work hand in glove with. Just think about this: basically a life sentence for disrupting TRAFFIC and shifting the blame from out of control cops. This man needs serious legal help.

[malaise]

6. Now that is the definition of

an inversion of reality. WTF?????

[Kalidurga]

7. An unarmed, emotionally disturbed man

The police really need to be trained in how to deal with people who are emotionally disturbed. I can give them, but one clue. Guns don't really help the situation in these cases unless one thinks that being mentally ill or emotionally disturbed should be a death sentence.

[drynberg]

8. TIME TO CUT THE BULL AND CALL BALLS AND STRIKES ACURATELY, NO MORE LIES

[HereSince1628]

9. Wouldn't such thinking also make perpetrators responsible for cops 'heroic acts'?

To be consistent with that thinking, if the guiding principle is that the person creating the situation is responsible for all that follows, don't you have to apply that to all the events, both good and bad that occur during the crime???

The DAs legal theory seems to rely heavily on some uncommunicated principle of forensic Manichaeism in which criminal perpetrators are inherently all bad and law enforcement is inherently all good, thus making proper assignment of good and bad outcomes possible.

I suppose I just don't understand the intersection of common sense and The Law.

I once heard a law school dean speaking to pre-law students. He told them understanding and practicing The Law required adopting a new way of thinking.

So it seems.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. I once witnessed the police shoot to death a drunk woman with a pen knife that did not need to be

shot at all, they also hit two bystanders, one right next to me. LAPD. The treatment given to the wounded and innocent bystander was appalling. She was sitting on the curb and as a cop passed she said 'Officer, I think I've been shot.' and he barked 'Shut up and wait your turn someone will come to you!' That cop probably was the one who shot the bystander. 'Shut up'.

[MindPilot]

12. "If you are here looking for logic in the law, you're in the wrong room."

The very first thing my very first law prof said on the very first day of class.

This idea was nuts when it was applied to police chases; any damage or injury casued during a chase is the suspect's fault. And with the rapper being charged in gang shootings that happened after he wrote a song about gang shootings, it would not come as much of a shock if they start charging the innocent bystanders with theft of police propery for taking a bullet or eight. The absurd level it has now devolved into is nothing more than standard bully's response to your face getting in the way of his hand, "now look what you've made me do!"

But we don't live in a police state so stop saying that!

[_Blue_]

15. If someone flees from police they SHOULD be responsible

For any damage or injury that results from the subsequent pursuit. That's a completely different scenario from charging a guy with assault when the police needlessly crack off a couple rounds in a crowded space.

[branford]

19. You're an attorney, and don't believe a fleeing suspect should be held responsible

for the reasonably anticipated damages and injuries resulting from a lawful chase?

I, too, am an attorney, and that proposition has never been the least bit controversial among any of my peers in law school or practice, including my friends and colleagues practicing criminal defense.

Are you also among the small minority who oppose felony murder and accomplice liability?

[MindPilot]

22. I'm not an attorney--never claimed to be--I had a few semesters of general law.

Program required coursework incidental to my degree which in education.

My opinion is born of the fact that I feel the vast majority of police motor vehicles chases are unnecessary, and as irresponsible as shooting a suspect on a crowed street when less-lethal methods may be available.

[branford]

23. I and other attorneys certainly have our reservations concerning many police chases and policies.

However, that is an entirely separate issue of whether a fleeing suspect should be liable for the criminal results of the chase he started. A suspected criminal does not have a right to flee a lawful arrest.

A police officer could very well have improperly chosen to engage in a chase, and even be disciplined, but that will not excuse the individual(s) who necessitated the chase from the criminal legal repercussions that were the proximate result of the chase they caused.

[MindPilot]

24. I think we probably agree on more than not

I certainly don't think a criminal suspect has the right to flee--that's just silly. But I do think the proximate result is expanding from assigning appropriate liability to the criminal, to absolving the police of any and all responsibility. I think vehicle chases are a part of that slippery slope.

But they do look super-cool on TV.

[branford]

27. They do look cool and TV. I also love the trick shots

when super cops shoot guns out of criminals' hands and everyone lives happily ever after, at least until the sequel.

Have you seen the new Autotrader commercial ]with the Dukes of Hazzard chase?

In many chases, particularly with more recent rules concerning public safety and fleeing suspects, it's quite possible for a chasing officer to face severe discipline, even criminal charges for his own negligent actions. Except in the most odd and extreme circumstances, the fleeing criminal, however, will still not avoid the criminal results of the chase. In fact, it's possible for both an officer and a fleeing suspect to be jointly charged with the murder of a innocent bystander, although such a trial would be admittedly unlikely.

Think of the chase responsibility like the better know felony murder rule. If a group sets out to commit a crime, and someone, including a conspirator, ends up dead, all the participants could be found guilty of murder, even those who were not at the scene like a lookout or getaway driver.

[annabanana]

13. RIDICULOUS!

Just how stupid does it have to get before something is done?

[annabanana]

14. And the people who GOT shot were probably charged

with theft of ammo...

[panader0]

16. I don't agree with the charge, but I believe that is common.

Two young guys tried to rob a Sonic Burger here in town. The cops shot one to death and charged the other with his murder.

[branford]

20. Standard felony murder charge. nt

[MindPilot]

25. One of the big reasons I never went any further in law.

Never could make my brain bend that way. And trust me not for lack of trying...not a day goes by that I don't see something shitty and think "I wish I was a lawyer".

[branford]

29. Trust me, practicing law looks far better from the outside!

What is your area in the education field?

Both my parents were public elementary school teachers in NYC, my father in special education, and my mother taught third grade.

They did not want me to go into education. They believed I had many career choices, I could be any type of doctor or lawyer that I wanted.

[MindPilot]

30. Adult learning psychology and curriculum development...I never did much classroom time.

But I found there is much more money and much less BS in IT. And, I never have to wear a suit.

Grass is always greener, huh?

[branford]

32. Always greener . . . nt

[rock]

17. See, guns don't kill people

Unarmed men do. At least they cause them to get shot up (not necessarily killed)!

[tk2kewl]

18. He made me do it!

[Ex Lurker]

21. Interesting how this DA could lead the Grand Jury around by the nose

and the Ferguson DA couldn't. Or maybe he did.

[Shrike47]

31. Oh, he surely did.

[valerief]

26. Holy fuckin' shit. The killing cops are now GOD. nt

[Ramses]

28. i wouldnt be suprised if the cops bill his family

For the bullets they shot at the bystanders either.

And im not kidding

[ohheckyeah]

33. Prisons are the new

mental hospitals - they had to find some reason to put him there.

[Jamastiene]

34. What next?

Cops start beating people until they damage their batons, then charge the person they were beating with vandalism? This sets a dangerous precedent....for non-cops.

[ecstatic]

35. We have to keep saying: This is NOT OK

Stuff like this should not be allowed to stand. Whether it's shooting in public areas or racing their damn squad cars on the streets, we need to continue to say NO!

[Rex]

36. Clearly he has some mutant powers to make cops miss him and hit innocent people!

Here we see a rendering of the criminal in action to be presented as evidence to the court.

[Comrade Grumpy]

37. The Patrick Lynch mob strikes again.