Another Cop acquitted and another riot in the US.

Stockley testified that after the shooting he found the gun tucked down between the seat and the center console, and he rendered the gun safe by unloading cartridges from the cylinder and then left the gun and cartridges on the passenger seat.

This is one of the things that sounds fishy to me. No DNA on the handgun and it was tucked away when he was killed.

We also seem to have a system where DNA found on the gun is enough to prosecute but in this case a lack of DNA isn't enough to show "innocence."

Originally posted by snowdragon
[B]Stockley testified that after the shooting he found the gun tucked down between the seat and the center console, and he rendered the gun safe by unloading cartridges from the cylinder and then left the gun and cartridges on the passenger seat.

This is one of the things that sounds fishy to me. No DNA on the handgun and it was tucked away when he was killed.

We also seem to have a system where DNA found on the gun is enough to prosecute but in this case a lack of DNA isn't enough to show "innocence." [/B]

But according to witnesses you can touch a gun without leaving dna on it. I have to assume "witnesses" means experts on dna and shit right? Cuz it's not like a dude that was there could just eyeball a gun and decide "you can touch it without DNA being left on it".

This is quite an important detail. If it's possible the guy touched the gun and yet didn't leave DNA on it...well, then how do we know if he did or did not try to touch the gun? This is why I assume the judge ruled the way he did.

Also the article talks about the guys partner yelling "gun!". So see this is what bugs me about these cases. Whenever a cop is found innocent people just scream racism must be the reason, that systemic racism protected the cops. But often when you actually look at the specific details of the case it is never as cut and dry as those who think racism is why the cop got off say.

You do not hear these details usually mentioned, I certainly didn't. So until I looked more into it all I knew is "No dna on gun, dude must have planted it".

[Q]But the defense countered that Stockley heard his partner yell “gun” and saw the driver’s hand on a gun as the car sped by him. [/Q]

The guy had just held the gun according to the officers, that means sweat, salt etc.

Also is it common practice for officers to unload guns found at a crime scene without proper methods used for collecting evidence?

[Q]“Ultimately when people argue about this case, they are going to be arguing whether the judge drew the right conclusion from the evidence and probably less about the law,” said Ben Trachtenberg, an associate professor of law at the University of Missouri.[/Q]

This is what it boils down to BUT imo it sounds like this policeman got a "freeride" when you look at how he handled the crime scene.

And yet "witnesses" testified you could hold a gun without leaving DNA on it. That is key to me. Either its possible or its not. If it is possible...how could the judge for sure declare the guy didn't go for it then?

Originally posted by Surtur
And yet "witnesses" testified you could hold a gun without leaving DNA on it. That is key to me. Either its possible or its not. If it is possible...how could the judge for sure declare the guy didn't go for it then?

All the witnesses were doing was providing reasonable doubt. Yet we still have the officer handling the gun after the guy was killed without gloves and leaving dna on it.

Why did the officer tamper with evidence in this case the gun, the idea he was unloading it for safety reasons is garbage.

In the case of the judge he was stated as saying drug dealers carry guns, evidence or not that was his position.

If the gun was held

And the gun was tucked away

This tells us:

The gun brushed against a surface / a surface which may or may not have been a soft microfiber compressing surface

The gun was tucked away for some length of time (unspecified)

If that was a microfiber surface, synthetic or natural fiber or a surface with a fine animal hair finish any salt / sweat would be efficiently wiped and wicked away

The judge would have access to information about upholstery / interior of the vehicle / contents of the vehicle, The gun may have been tucked away in a discarded item of clothing. The gun may have been tucked away in a microfiber mitt (the kind you use to wipe your windshield / wash your car / buff your car / etc.

Most people drive around with things on the passenger seat, things in the car door, the glove compartment under the seat on the back seat, etc.

The driver of the vehicle wasn't driving real slow either, so if the gun was moving around it could absolutely have been shedding dna.

The article on page 1 is a very long read, but Its one of those where I don't think you can be exactly the same person before and after you make it to the end

And now some people wanna burn down the city over it.

Recent white kid on a college campus was shot and killed for walking towards a cop with a knife. I bet we won't see folk burning shit down, smashing windows, or throwing bricks at cops over it.

To be fair, there's a world of difference between that, and a lot of these other cases where it's ambigious what actually happened.

Originally posted by cdtm
To be fair, there's a world of difference between that, and a lot of these other cases where it's ambigious what actually happened.

But that gets negated by the instances where it's not ambiguous and they still burnt stuff down. Like Milwaukee.

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!

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
inb4 bootlicking apologists

Par for the course

"feed me that nightstick, daddy"

Originally posted by snowdragon
All the witnesses were doing was providing reasonable doubt. Yet we still have the officer handling the gun after the guy was killed without gloves and leaving dna on it.

Why did the officer tamper with evidence in this case the gun, the idea he was unloading it for safety reasons is garbage.

In the case of the judge he was stated as saying drug dealers carry guns, evidence or not that was his position.

To bad you weren't on that jury then.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]To bad you weren't on that jury then. [/B]

There wasn't a Jury 😛