Another Cop acquitted and another riot in the US.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/16/us/jason-stockley-st-louis-officer-shooting-protests/index.html

Remember no Cop is ever guilty... Ever!

inb4 bootlicking apologists

The judge seemed to play a critical role in his aquittal.

Indeed the guy apparently waived his right to a jury trial.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
inb4 bootlicking apologists

What do you prefer to lick when you apologize Bashy?

This is a very long read

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/politics/state/ferguson-police-shooting/

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/16/us/jason-stockley-st-louis-officer-shooting-protests/index.html

Remember no Cop is ever guilty... Ever!

#triggered

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]#triggered [/B]

Just go with it, I mean surely even if you spent like 10 whole minutes searching you couldn't ever find an example of a cop being found guilty of murder.

Originally posted by Surtur
Just go with it, I mean surely even if you spent like 10 whole minutes searching you couldn't ever find an example of a cop being found guilty of murder.

Not if you have aa narrow a world view as Little Stevie you probably wouldn't.

I wonder what cops ever did to Little Stevie to make him hate them so much....

So the only DNA found on the gun was the policemans and he was recorded as saying he was going to kill the guy.

Nothing to see here, unless of course the gun would have had the victims DNA then it would have been irrfetable.

Originally posted by snowdragon
So the only DNA found on the gun was the policemans and he was recorded as saying he was going to kill the guy.

Nothing to see here, unless of course the gun would have had the victims DNA then it would have been irrfetable.

You bring up some good points and I'd wonder how the defense explained away the fact no DNA but the cops was on the gun. Do you know?

Yeah but that goes against the threads ALL Cops are Bad and Always Guilty Opinion!?

Originally posted by Surtur
You bring up some good points and I'd wonder how the defense explained away the fact no DNA but the cops was on the gun. Do you know?

Nope, just have to read steves and shivs articles.

I didn't mean to sound like I was doubting you or anything, I'm genuinely curious as to how they explained these things.

If the evidence was sound and the judge still found him not guilty the judge needs to be removed.

Well it was done by Lawyers so....I am sure it reads as clears as Glass!

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
inb4 bootlicking apologists

YouTube video

Originally posted by cdtm
YouTube video

YouTube video

Originally posted by shiv
This is a very long read

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/politics/state/ferguson-police-shooting/

Longer then the Diplomacy article by far.

It doesn't really blame the police either. If anything, a lot of the questions and scenerios it poses proves police officers are held to an impossibly high, if even unfair, standard.

Originally posted by cdtm
Longer then the Diplomacy article by far.

It doesn't really blame the police either. If anything, a lot of the questions and scenerios it poses proves police officers are held to an impossibly high, if even unfair, standard.

Just because they are supposed to be master negotiators, able to diagnose mental illness at a single glance, keepers of the peace, and superb hand to hand fighters that can disarm anyone does NOT mean they are being held to an unfair standard. Because they trained extensively in every single thing I just mentioned before they got a badge.

Plus on top of that they do not need to worry about death threats and being labeled as a racist if they shoot a gang banging thug who just happens to be a member of a minority. Ohh and the cops lucky enough to *be* minorities are treated more or less as heroes by their communities. 😉

An article about why he was acquitted, makes sense:

http://nypost.com/2017/09/16/why-judge-acquitted-st-louis-cop-of-first-degree-murder/

About the "planted" gun;

"A full-sized revolver was too large for the officer to hide in his pants pockets and he was not wearing a jacket, the judge said. If the gun had been tucked into his belt, it would have been visible on a bystander’s video that showed Stockley walking between the police car and Smith’s car, he found."

About the lack of DNA:

"Wilson also noted none of the officers standing next to the vehicle were called to testify that Stockley planted a gun. And he recounted witness testimony that the absence of a person’s DNA on a gun does not mean that person did not touch the gun."

Does someone want to refute the stuff from this article and make a case for why the judge was wrong?