Cleveland cop acquittal a fair verdict?

[NaturalHigh]

(CNN)—Protests broke out in Cleveland after the acquittal of Michael Brelo, a police officer who had been charged with voluntary manslaughter and felonious assault in the 2012 shooting deaths of two unarmed people.

We have seen a lot of alleged cases of excessive and deadly force by law enforcement, and in the last year, protests have followed decisions or events absolving law enforcement of responsibility. This has been understandable in some of these cases.

This is not one of them.

If you are among those who heard little about this case until the verdict, your takeaway may have been that a police officer jumped onto the hood of an unarmed suspect's car and fired 15 times into the windshield.


http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/26/opinions/cevallos-cleveland-acquittal/index.html

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. No, I'd say it was BS.

Was Brelo saved by the presence of other shooters? It's an interesting discussion: When a member of a drive-by shooting crew is prosecuted, conspiracy theory allows members to be convicted of murder even if a defendant only drove the car and never fired a shot. Here, because there is only a single defendant and no conspirators, the contributed pool of bullets by his fellow officers actually caused the reasonable doubt.

Just another technicality to let cops murder two people and get away with it. If they didn't want a single cop to 'take the fall', then they all should have been charged as taking part in the murders.

[NaturalHigh]

6. "Just another technicality"...

Those "technicalities" are also called laws.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

9. The law was only the last part in the chain.

It's like the rotating villains kabuki in Congress. You just have to find out how to charge them so as to wind up with acquittals.

[Comrade Grumpy]

2. No way. That cop was out of control.

He was only acquitted because the judge couldn't determine if his shots killed them. Among all the shots in their bodies.

[NaturalHigh]

13. Actually the judge repeated the phrase "perceived threat" quite a few times...

and made mention, I believe, of the preceding 22-mile car chase.

[HassleCat]

3. Individual vs. System

The protesters want someone to be held responsible. This is understandable, but does not address the real problem. This was another one of those "contagious fire" incidents where police start shooting, and all join in together, firing hundreds of rounds. When the media report "...suspects died in a hail of gunfire..." that is no exaggeration. The police need better training so they don't get in too close, too fast, then have to shoot their way out. They need better community relations so they don't perceive every citizen as a threat. Putting an individual officer on trial for an incident like this is just scapegoating, blaming one guy for the failure of the whole system.

[brush]

11. They did it that way because they knew how to charge him only and get him off . . .

therefore, nobody gets charged for the two dead bodies with hundred of bullets in them.

Par for the course. They were only Black people .

[safeinOhio]

4. I always find it hard to disagree

with any of Judge John P. O'Donnell's rulings.

In civil court "causation" will be very clear.

[NaturalHigh]

5. Are you familiar with him personally?

[safeinOhio]

12. Yes

[MoonRiver]

7. No

[LanternWaste]

8. I'm afraid that should I state disagreement with the verdict...

I'm afraid that should I state disagreement with the verdict, some sub-literate, dogmatic dullard would read that as a desire for anarchy and hatred for law enforcement.

[cheyanne]

10. Here is a lawyer's take on the charges and the aquittal at http://blog.simplejustice.us/

excerpts:

"That the judge refused to convict Brelo because, despite the possibility, maybe even probability, that he fired a kill shot, it was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, is what the law demands. This is no “technicality,” but a fundamental demand before a person is convicted.

But the failure of evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the kill shot came from Brelo’s gun does little to resolve the conundrum, and even less to instill confidence in the verdict. It’s smells of a scam, legal trickery, since it suggests that if more than one cop shoots, we can never be sure beyond a reasonable doubt this cop fired the kill shot, and they all walk. Not like a non-cop, who would certainly go down for the attempted murder if not the murder itself."

On the judge's reasoning:
"Update: I’m informed by a close friend and Ohio lawyer that Judge O’Donnell’s “but for” analysis is non-existent under state law, and shocking. If any other judge applies it in a case involving a non-cop, it would be a huge boon for the defense bar, as it’s that extraordinary a requirement for voluntary manslaughter."