85 Comments

1. Scott:

There is no “order” in Oakland, and hasn’t been for years.

What we are seeing now is two things: one is Black Grievance Theater, which plays the same show any time the “black community” feels wronged. The other is the Anarchist Show, with the usual collection of punks, vandals, savages, and just plain criminals using “anarchism” as an excuse to trash anything they can.

What we saw in Oakland in the riot was a combination of the two. The staff of Revolution Books in Berkeley has been in full incite-to-riot mode, egging on “protesters” during the riot. Add to this the ANSWER goons of the Workers World Party, and another RCP group, World Can’t Wait, and you have the potential for lots of destruction.

Another protest was held Monday night in San Francisco. Cars were walked on, hoods stomped, news boxes set on fire, etc, by the “anarchists”.

Another protest is scheduled in Oakland for 4 p.m. today. We shall see whan ensues.

I’m carrying my pepper spray and an iron bar in my backpack on BART when I go home.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:26 am 2. Cris:

Good to see you on PJM, Jack.
This should be a difficult case for a lot of reasons. One does indeed wonder about the charge of murder, here. As you say, it requires malice aforethought. That would lead to a rather extensive inquiry into Mehserle’s general state of mind and attitude towards his job and the people he came in contact with. Unless they find the equivalent of a hood and sheets in his locker, Mehserle might be found not guilty, so Oakland better get ready for another go-round on the streets.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:29 am 3. Joe:

I thought it was my Tazer. Oooops.
Hardly an excuse for taking a man’s life.
Sorry about the grim picture painted on the Crimespotting website but there is a difference between rival gangs roughing it up, and uniformed police killing handcuffed subjects. It’s called training, and I guess Oakland PD needs some.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:31 am 4. RJGatorEsq.:

I like Jack Dunphy. He is always a good read. I generally am very pro-police, and so is he, so it is easy to like him: we agree on just about everything.

But he errs.

He says, “it’s infinitely more plausible than the one alleging that in shooting Grant Mehserle committed ‘murder,’ which under California law requires ‘malice aforethought.’”

How long does it take to form “malice aforethought?”

About as long as it takes to pull a pistol. It isn’t something you have to brood about or plan for days. One second is enough.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:39 am 5. Three Piece Suit:

He is clearly guilty of manslaughter since his defense is “I was negligent.” That’s what civilians guilty of negligence get.

In some states, it could be second degree murder (what negligent hunters are often charged with).

Do tasers really “feel” just like real guns? Aren’t they about 1/2 the weight?

The guy was handcuffed. If he wanted to squirm about on the floor, why not let him? Or is Mehserle a control freak (as sooooo many cops are)?

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:40 am 6. Almost Ali:

I suppose the I-reached-for-my-taser is as good excuse as any. Kinda like Janet Reno reaching for her tank instead of her tank.

No wonder Michelle has an ax to grind. After all, it could have been Barack driving down the New Jersey Turnpike, ad infinitum.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:47 am 7. artwebster:

My general reflex when it comes to police brutality cases is to support the police. They have a difficult job that most of us shy away from. While never having been a police officer, I spent three years in the Army. I know what it is like to be shot at and I understand the adrenaline rush that comes in any confrontation. Having said that, I do not know how this incident can be excused. Rodney King got exactly what he was asking for, but even he didn’t got shot. This guy was on the ground with at least three officers on him. I haven’t seen the tazer the officer was carrying, but I have never seen a tazer that looks or handles like a gun. Having said all that, he is entitled to the presumption of innocence, but I will follow the trial with some anticipation.

I do not know the law of California, but in Maryland, this officer is certainly looking at second degree murder. In Maryland the law only requires a split second of forethought and assaulting someone with a weapon, certainly would comply with the requirement that one intends to kill.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:47 am 8. Mark Buehner:

It shows you how far down the road we’ve gotten when tasering a man you are sitting on who is face down on the pavement is considered reasonable use of force, and hence an excuse for putting a bullet in a man’s back. What ever happened to the ancient art of the cuff and stuff?

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:50 am 9. Charlie (Colorado):

Jack, I have to say that the video in this case is pretty unequivocal. I might buy the notion that it wasn’t first degree murder but negligent homicide — shot his service weapon instead of his Taser — but it’s real difficult to buy the notion that he could have been properly protecting himself or others.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:51 am 10. Xanthippe:

Looks to me like the cop is either incredibly stupid, and murdered a man in cold blood, which I find implausible, or the cop made a huge mistake – a career-killing move, for sure. He ought to find another line of work.

But how many people are murdered every year in Oakland with nary a peep of outrage?

Yet this one killing which is likely not a murder at all merits an overblown response from the barbarians in Oakland.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:52 am 11. Kurt:

I think Scott describes the situation around here pretty well. It’s anarchy time. There’s a lot of incitement going on and the local media, among others, are doing their job to drum-up business. It’s tragic what happened, but it will be even more tragic if this young cop is railroaded for political reasons.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:52 am 12. Atl Esq.:

Go to the videotape link and watch the third (bottom) one. There appears to be a struggle going on closer to the train at the exact time of the shooting. That video also has good audio, which gives a better idea of what was going on. Does any of that excuse or justify the shooting? No – but it makes it appear like a much more threatening situation than the other video, which does not show the crowd or the surrounding situation.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:52 am 13. Ellis Amdur:

1. Police have “fired” a flashlight, clicking the on-off switch in the heat of the moment, thinking it is their gun (this is a training issue – insufficient training leads to this kind of mistake. There are protocols to avoid mistaking the Taser for the gun, even when adrenalized, but if you don’t train, you’ll grab something and fire, just like a panic stricken person puts their foot on the gas, and thinking it’s the break, keeps it down as they crash through a store window.
2. If Mr. Grant was NOT struggling, as some, I believe have claimed, and the officer decided to Tase him just to cause pain – in other words, a malicious act, would that not be “malice aforethought?” If I drive my car in a crowd, as a “joke,” because I want to see people dive out of the way in panic, and “accidentally” kill some one -what is the charge? 2nd degree murder? or Voluntary manslaughter.
3. All this is predicated on the assumption of the Taser “mistake.” It’s also possible that the officer thought he could get away with something – there are reports that the other officers’ response was to try to confiscate the cell phone (cameras) of the witnesses. That action suggests that he had a belief that other officers, with no evidence to the contrary would cover up for him if he claimed the guy had, for example, tried to grab his gun.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:53 am 14. David Thomson:

“Sorry about the grim picture painted on the Crimespotting website but there is a difference between rival gangs roughing it up, and uniformed police killing handcuffed subjects.”

You seem to be overlooking Jack Dunphy’s central point: where is the outrage regarding black on black crime? I suspect that for every questionable shooting of a black youth by a police officer—there are over a thousand incidents of one black youth shooting another black youth.

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:58 am 15. R. Hurst:

Couple of points:

1. I’m white, and I live in east bay area (Walnut Creek). And I have to say I’m very concerned about being killed by a cop in a similar situation as anyone else. I think it’s plausible, under the circustances, that a cop could have used a gun against me. He might have been angry at what the guy was saying for instance. He could have been unstable. Was he going through a divorce? Was he in financial ruin? We don’t know that yet. You assume that a perfectly reasonable officer would fire a gun in someone’s back. I think you’re reasoning backwards. I don’t know any good, reasonable, responsible cop able to do that kind of mistake. The question is: What kind of a reckless, unstable person could do that? That’s the inquiry many are doing right now.

2. Why the crime situation has anything to do with what’s at stake here? Maybe only if you’re trying to understand the riots, which are deplorable indeed. But that maybe could have been made more clear in your text, I don’t know. I know is that I use the Bart every day. And I now fear what the next cop we’ll going to do with me, or my kids, if we somehow do not behave properly on a party day like New Year’s Eve.

3. What if the cop has a history of racism? I don’t know that, do you? We can’t ruled that out before hand, can we? It should be investigated. You should have at least mentioned that possibility. Otherwise, the reaction from the black community is going to look they’re all nuts! That might be true of most of their leaders, I don’t know. But don’t assume things.

4. I don’t think it can be proved that the cop was planning on killing grant, with malice and afterthought. I believe he was completely out of his mind. But if the criteria is what you’re saying, a cop will never be charged with murder. I think it has been used another criteria: recklessly act with extreme disregard for human life. That should warrant murder charges too, but I don’t know.

5. To mistake a gun for a taser? Are they even comparable? I mean, weight, trigger action, etc? It’s just a question, I don’t know, but I’d suspect that it’s very unlikely for a trained official to be subject to that kind of mistakes.

6. Why would BART police need guns anyway? Isn’t it just a train operator? What’s next, bus police? Really, I don’t see the point. Just give them two tasers next time!

Jan 14, 2009 - 8:59 am 16. Bill:

The man was in fact not handcuffed, not that it matters a great deal.

I don’t see any way this was other than a horrendous error. There is no conceivable way he wanted to shoot that man. Look at the reaction.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:01 am 17. Sunflower:

But that raises a disturbing question: What is the definition of “order” in the city of Oakland? Judging from some of the rhetoric heard since the Grant shooting, a stranger might judge that the greatest threat to a young black man in that city is being gunned down by some racist white cop. Again, this is not to suggest that the anger over Grant’s death is unjustified, but one wonders whether some of that outrage might be summoned when, as happens with horrifying frequency, one young black man in Oakland kills another one.

I am so glad someone raised this. The people of Oakland tolerate the murders of theirs sons, brothers, uncles etc from the hands of their sons, brothers, uncles on a minute by minute basis without one teaspoon of outrage as this. I’d be more sympathetic if I saw Oakland stop their violent ways and understand why no cop wants to work there.

It’s time for society to start demanding decent behavior from citizens not tolerating fighting and gun fights and theft and rape and murder.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:04 am 18. FFN:

How many times do episodes like this occur without their being video evidence to document the situation for the benefit of the victim? In my town, the police were caught first on eye witness video, which they argued did not show the full situation, but then secretly withheld their own surveillance video which recorded the voices of two officers discussing how to incite a riot. If there had never been a citizen video, we would never have learned about the police cover up. In our new Orwellian surveillance society, I suspect we will all need to be carrying video cameras and conducting our own 24 x 7 surveillance to protect ourselves from criminals of all types, but also to protect us from the cover ups that invariably follow when the government is a party to the crime.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:07 am 19. junyo:

Yep, unarmed, handcuffed, and physically restrained citizen shot, and somehow it’s all a plot of the “the mighty Bay Area grievance industry”. Talk about spin. Maybe, just maybe, someone other than grievance industry reps should be protesting a young man having his existence ended by an agent of the state under highly suspect circumstances. But it’s imperative that we point out that most of the protesters share a skin color with the victim, and point out that other people kill blacks too. Because that makes this guy less dead. Or makes it less likely that the police will need to kill a handcuffed suspect. Or something.

But give them time, I’m sure some drugs or some such will appear that will justify it, and we can all get on with our lives.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:11 am 20. Ohio Granny:

I’ve seen this video from several different sources. What struck me from on of the best of the lot is that this office comes out of nowhere and approaches this person, drags him away from the wall, wrestling ensures of a questionable intensity, then the cop jumps up, pulls his weapon, and fires.
Since I’m a newbie to hand guns myself, I will tell you that a gun is a gun is a gun. It is not a taser. It is shockingly GUN like. Pulling it out, pointing it, and firing into a human who is face down and maybe even handcuffed is WRONG.
I hope all the facts come out but something here stinks.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:12 am 21. DensityDuck:

My personal belief is that he knew he was drawing his gun, but he never intended to fire it. The officer planned to use the gun as a threat–”stop fighting or I’ll shoot!” Except that he accidentally pulled the trigger instead of merely presenting the gun. I think that a manslaughter charge is exactly correct.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:14 am 22. Ohio Granny:

I’ve seen this video from several different sources. What struck me from one of the best of the lot is that this officer comes out of nowhere and approaches this person, drags him away from the wall, wrestling ensures of a questionable intensity, then the cop jumps up, pulls his weapon, and fires.
Since I’m a newbie to hand guns myself, I will tell you that a gun is a gun is a gun. It is not a taser. It is shockingly GUN like. Pulling it out, pointing it, and firing into a human who is face down and maybe even handcuffed is WRONG.
I hope all the facts come out but something here stinks.

ps. to R. Hurst Bravo!

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:14 am 23. Lee:

Isn’t Manslaughter also known as 3rd degree murder?

I don;t know the answer.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:27 am 24. John:

>>> “one wonders whether some of that outrage might be summoned when…one young black man in Oakland kills another one.”

What is that, a joke? The difference is that police officers have the authority of the state and are trained and paid to protect life. Street toughs are not.

That’s why people riot when an officer of the law shoots an unarmed guy in the back and not when one gang-banger bumps off another.

That train of thought is so preposterous that its hard to believe they printed it.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:32 am 25. Almost Ali:

This case is different from others in that the shooter – the cop – instantly resigned. Hardly the act of an innocent man.

Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume his cohorts – the cops – were convinced this murder would be impossible to cover up.

My feeling is that the shooter – the cop – was forced out for conduct unbecoming; straddling and shooting an unarmed civilian virtually in broad daylight. Gunning down a downed man in an Oakland alley is one thing, but performing such a community service in a crowded subway station is quite another.

Which proves that even cops have rules.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:33 am 26. John:

>>>” 1. Police have “fired” a flashlight, clicking the on-off switch in the heat of the moment, thinking it is their gun (this is a training issue – insufficient training leads to this kind of mistake.”

Oh yeah, here we go. Shooting an unarmed suspect in the back will be turned into an excuse for cops to get another week of vacation called “training”.

How about this, instead? Any cop that can’t tell the difference between his flashlight and a handgun be fired for incompetence.

It’s an instrument of *death*. If you can’t wield it reliably, you shouldn’t have a badge. Period.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:36 am 27. Mike T:

My personal belief is that he knew he was drawing his gun, but he never intended to fire it. The officer planned to use the gun as a threat–”stop fighting or I’ll shoot!” Except that he accidentally pulled the trigger instead of merely presenting the gun. I think that a manslaughter charge is exactly correct.

If you pulled a gun on someone who you were trying to subdue after catching them breaking into your house, and shot them at such close range, the police wouldn’t even entertain the thought of it being less than 1st degree murder.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:38 am 28. tyree:

Another victim of the “fight the police and hope they make a mistake so you can get headlines” mentality. It is probably best if you don’t fight, yell at, throw things at or spit on an armed representative of the municipal government. It is also a good idea to avoid criminal activity as this tends to attract said armed representatives. Take up your grievance with city council way before it ever escalates. Some people act like they have the right to disobey the law. I am not say that is what happened in this case, but if everyone there had been obeying the law and minding their own business, the shooting wouldn’t have happened.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:39 am 29. jvon:

Let’s hope this ex-cop can get a fair trial in California. If he did pull his service weapon and fire it thinking it was a taser, finding another line of work (which he’s done, apparently) was probably a good idea. If he shot this guy in front of witnesses intentionally, he deserves to go to jail. I agree with the author that it seems unlikely, barring some sort of serious mental defect.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:40 am 30. willem:

How terribly sad this is. Plenty of avarice to sort through in getting to the bigger picture; particularly who the victims actually are and who they are victimized by. No doubt the victims includes the dead boy, and the young shooter in uniform and the citizens of Oakland who will pay dearly for this. There is a real and just question of underlying causes integral to the violence defining this particular event. I wonder at what point corporations like “Revolution Books in Berkeley” (as mentioned by another poster) becomes liable for engaging in a commerce of incitement which leads to disorder and riot. In part, corporations like this are in the business of selling books to an audience interested in insurrection and rioting. To have more customers and to stay in business it seems logical for them to build their brand as inexpensively as possible by exploiting tragedies in a manner that promotes their product and services. Has this not happened? Does not the same question apply to corporations like WWW, ANSWER, WCW? Are these and other networking corporations commercially engaged in promoting opportunistic disorder and community agonism? If so, are they immune to RICO statutes? Just as it took Nixon to go to China, perhaps under Obama we will see the Law brought to bear upon these social justice entrepreneurs and their crypto-capitalism. They are not the cure. In my opinion, they are the disease.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:44 am 31. Fred:

Don’t worry about the cop – he’ll get a good job at Blackwater…

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:47 am 32. jeff:

“gunshot allegedly fired by Johannes Mehserle”

There is no dispute that Mehserle’s duty weapon fired the shot.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:51 am 33. Michael Chaney:

We’ve been over this at other sites. If they hadn’t intended to cover up a non-justified shooting, hit cop buddies wouldn’t have started “confiscating” all the cell phone cameras in the area. If it was justified, the station cameras would have magically started working and we’d be seeing the video.

As an aside, I love how when cops commit crimes, we use a completely different set of words to avoid the obvious. For instance, stealing people’s cell phones is “confiscation”. And we hear that he “should find another line of work”. Really? If I shot someone in cold blood you’d be talking about how long I would spend behind bars.

Now, as for the article, there’s a reason this is far more outrageous than a black man shooting another black man. This isn’t (supposed to be) a gang war or whatever, This is an officer of the law, “Oakland’s finest!” I’m sure. He’s held to a higher standard, and he has the force of government. We see time and again this stuff gets covered up. A reasonable question is why he wasn’t arrested at the scene by the other officers. Why did they go about stealing cameras? Why aren’t they being charged?

No, when an officer commits a crime that is *far* more grievous that when a civilian commits a crime. The penalties should be far higher. And his buddies who tried to cover it up should pay, too.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:56 am 34. useful idiot:

Listen, any cop that still keeps his job in an overwhelmingly black or limousine liberal urban area in the Obamanation should be acquitted of any crime they committ due to serious mental defect. Yes, they have to be crazy to risk their lives and their family’s future to these thugs.

Jan 14, 2009 - 9:59 am 35. John:

6. Why would BART police need guns anyway? Isn’t it just a train operator? What’s next, bus police? Really, I don’t see the point. Just give them two tasers next time!

Check out the info on the New York City Transit Police. It’s a little more serious than Kevin James playing a Mall Cop.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:03 am 36. Mike T:

I am not say that is what happened in this case, but if everyone there had been obeying the law and minding their own business, the shooting wouldn’t have happened.

While that is true, responsibility is not a zero sum game. Thousands of cops subdue people every day without having to taser the detainee. Law enforcement should not tolerate people like this cop because they’re troublemakers and a ticking time bomb.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:31 am 37. paul_unalaska:

R. Hurst posed the question of, ‘Why would BART police need a gun’?

Mr. Hurst, when returning home via BART in the evening, most passengers would have a collective gasp when stopping at the West Oakland stop and there wouldn’t be any people boarding from that stop.

This was 20 years ago, though I’m sure West Oakland hasn’t improved.

Furthermore, I’m sure law breakers at a BART station are not inclined to stay at the BART station, Many, most considering this is Oakland, will flee the area. Would you want to be an officer running from BART into Oakland’s city streets unarmed?

I’m not condoning Mr. Mehserle’s actions, for that is much, much too preemptive. Let the evidence present itself through time. And not be have a knee-jerk response like the few morons in Oakland/ Berkeley. Destroying property, much of it personal, in the hopes of, ‘Justice.’ Man, I don’t miss that loony area.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:34 am 38. Bruno:

The fact that there is no outrage over black on black crime is an apt and relevant illustration of the bizarro world we live in today. Cops, both white and black, point their guns thousands of times per day at minorities across the country and no shots are fired. Deadly force, if you check any of the statistics at NCJRS or BJS, is rarely used by law enforcement considering the millions of contacts made by cops. Is the act criminal by the BART cop? Probably. But until minority neighborhoods in urban areas resort to less violent means to resolve their differences, police will always be on edge in these neighborhoods, where they are often seen as an occupying force rather than public servants.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:40 am 39. jeff:

@rhurst, BART is a regional transit district that covers at least 5 different counties and countless cities. I can’t imagine the chaos that would ensue if BART had to rely on local law enforcement to respond to violent and non-violent crimes. By your logic the same could be said of the California Highway Patrol… “they just write speeding tickets and accident reports on the freeway.” In addition to the Port Authority, Amtrak and the Postal Service have their own police forces.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:45 am 40. Austin:

Looks like a Negligent Discharge (ND) to me – an accidental trigger pulling.

The Officer also did not hold the pistol in Retention – he had his arm extended.

He should not have pulled out his pistol given how close he was and that the suspect was down.

“If you pulled a gun on someone who you were trying to subdue after catching them breaking into your house, and shot them at such close range, the police wouldn’t even entertain the thought of it being less than 1st degree murder.”

In most states, it does not matter. Its called the Castle Doctrine and it presumes that anyone breaking into your home means you grievous bodily harm. Frankly, if its in your home and they did struggle with you, then the law would be even more on your side, because you made an attempt to solve the problem with a less than lethal alternative.

“No, when an officer commits a crime that is *far* more grievous that when a civilian commits a crime. The penalties should be far higher. And his buddies who tried to cover it up should pay, too.”

A crime is a crime and no one should pay any more or less than anyone else. Its called equal protection before the law.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:50 am 41. allison:

Why would BART police need guns anyway? Isn’t it just a train operator? What’s next, bus police? Really, I don’t see the point.

because a sizeable fraction of the riders are armed gang members who commit crimes at stations, parking lots of station or on trains. it’s not safe to be alone or white at the fruitvale station at night.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:55 am 42. 11B40:

Greetings:

Re: The Bay Area grievance industry and “order” in Oakland

TV station KRON reported that of the 100 arrested during the riot, only a handful actually went to jail. The rest were given citations, several dozen for “rioting”, and released.

This is very typical of the collusive relationship between the grievance industry, the politicians and the police department. The three groups seem to have agreed that the public’s not at the table so its rights can be given short shrift. The press does its part by never following up on the results of the citations issued or the repeated behavior of agitators. Meanwhile, property continues to be damaged, traffic and commerce disrupted.

Finally, a bit of a thought experiment. I’m a printer by trade and have owned and run printing plants. If one of my employees was treated by a customer or a fellow employee the way some “young, black males” interact with the police authorities, what do you think would happen to me and mine?

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:55 am 43. Dave:

PJM needs to have reported on the actual shooting when it happened. The videos from the night of the shooting should get much more attention.

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:05 am 44. paul_unalaska:

Austin, comment #40, an incident of the Castle Doctrine (or the, ‘Make My Day Law’) was used recently in Colorado.

As the old adage goes, ‘When seconds matter, the Police are but minutes away.’

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:06 am 45. Abdul Abulbul Amir:

“If they hadn’t intended to cover up a non-justified shooting, hit cop buddies wouldn’t have started “confiscating” all the cell phone cameras in the area.”

Is that so? I thought cops were supposed to gather evidence when a crime occures. Frankly, they would be neglegent not to collect and preserve video evidence.

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:10 am 46. Sugar:

Charging this incompetent BART fake police office with murder WILL NOT not make the residents of Oakland safer.

Oakland cannot recruit new, quality police today…good luck going forward! Have fun being assaulted and murdered

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:16 am 47. Mark Buehner:

Does anyone honestly believe the cop thought he was going to shoot an unarmed suspect IN THE BACK in front of a bunch of witnesses (civilian and law enforcement) and get away with it? Either the guy was derranged or he made a horrible mistake, almost certainly the latter.

That being said, tasering someone who is already on the ground face down can’t possibly be correct practice. Assuming doing so was against department policy, if he accidently pulled his gun he is still guilty of negligent homicide… ie, it wasnt an honest mistake within the confines of duty, just as taking the police car for a joyride and killing a pedestrian isnt the same as accidently hitting someone in a high speed chase. The taser excuse is an explanation, not a get out of jail free card. The guy should have been handcuffed and a knee put on his back, he wasn’t going anywhere. The tasering was malicious, and hence the repurcusions of botching it belong to the officer.

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:55 am 48. mohammed:

Zionists and racists. what do they share? I wonder. Hmmmmmmm.

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:58 am 49. mohammed:

Killing defenseless people. Shooting a man behind his back. Only deluded pajamas media readers can show this level of cynicism.

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:59 am 50. OldRedJoe:

Using an inherently dangerous instrument (handgun) in this situation will supply ‘implied malice’ to support at least a 2nd degree murder charge; as a former cop and present lawyer the ‘oops- thought it was a taser’ is REALLY lame.

Jan 14, 2009 - 12:07 pm 51. Broadsword:

Willem, commenter #30 is the only one so far to say “How sad this all is”. And he is correct. The first thing needing done is not finger pointing or speculation, but prayers both for the BART officer and Mr. Grant. Here’s one for both: ‘May the Divine Assistance remain with always with us, and may the souls of the faithful departed, through the Mercy of God rest in peace.” “IHS”

Jan 14, 2009 - 12:23 pm 52. Scott:

I want the cop to get a fair trial on whatever charges are brought against him. What’s angering me, as a Bay Area resident and a BART commuter, is that the full-time grievance industry here has already convicted the man and is “demanding” that he be essentially lynched.

I have been tracking the San Francisco Independent Media site, which is “protest central” here. Go read the pieces and the comments. Their anger is not about just this cop, but rather anger about “patriarchy”, capitalism, “heterosexism” and all the other nonsense that the Left finds so awful. The protests over this incident have resulted in violence that had NOTHING to do with BART or the cop. Today, on the site, there is a handy list of corporate logos showing which targets are “acceptable” for vandalism. They include banks, Walgreens, and other retail businesses that have no connection to this kid’s death at all. It’s an anarchist free-for-all. These anarchists thrive here, and they are the ones that continually trash our cities at every protest, no matter what it’s about.

I’m tired of this crap. I’m tired of these jerks disrupting everthing, causing millions in property damage that result in no one being charged, no one being jailed, and no one being sued for damages.

It needs to end. Personally, I expect today’s protest to get completely out of hand. And I have to go right through this mess at 5 p.m. on BART.

Jan 14, 2009 - 12:56 pm 53. Michael Chaney:

Really, Abdul? Um, where *is* that “video evidence”?

If they were trying to gather evidence, they would have done it properly. Instead, they simply stole any camera they could find. I don’t think they gave out receipts, as it wasn’t mentioned.

Jan 14, 2009 - 1:00 pm 54. Martge:

I suppose police officers will now have to ask a person committing a crime if it is ok to shoot at them. But then if the person being attacked is black and the crook is black, what cha gonna do. It seems like when ever the police arrest, berate or try to stop a black person from doing something wrong,,,,the first thing the black community yells is RACIST.

Jan 14, 2009 - 1:28 pm 55. furious:

I find myself in the odd position of defending the Oakland populace when it comes to Civil Order, but here goes…

…the ensuing riots were not the result of the “Black Grievance Machine”, but of a well-organized group of anarchists from
out-of-town (Berkeley, SF, etc.) who joined the protests, broke away from the main march, and started the smashing and burning.
The Oakland locals who participated in the protests did so in good faith and didn’t get out of hand.

–furious

Jan 14, 2009 - 1:33 pm 56. junyo:

“It seems like when ever the police arrest, berate or try to stop a black person from doing something wrong,,,,the first thing the black community yells is RACIST.”

And whenever black people speak the first thing libertarians yell is GRIEVANCE. Oh wait, there’s also HE DESERVED IT.

What wrongdoing was the dead guy charged with again?

Jan 14, 2009 - 1:45 pm 57. cedarford:

“No, when an officer commits a crime that is *far* more grievous that when a civilian commits a crime. The penalties should be far higher. And his buddies who tried to cover it up should pay, too.”

Austin – A crime is a crime and no one should pay any more or less than anyone else. Its called equal protection before the law.

Errr, yes and no. We rightly tend to shade the law and penalties in many areas – juvies get less consequence, a male teacher who molests young 7-year old boys gets more heat than a female who sleeps with a 16 year old boy. In some cases, cops and prosecutors get lieniency a member of the public would not for certain actions. In other areas, because they are acting under the color of law and actually have the power to control others lifes via legitimate physical and legal powers, make them obey, and have higher credibility as witnesses and officers of the court – they justly face higher consequences. But even then, the good old boys network intervenes most times and prevents the dirty cops and crooked prosecutors from doing any real jailtime (See Mike Nifong and his 3 stooge cops from the Duke Rape Case).

The BART case is not so clear. This wasn’t an instance of a robber or passerby seeing a man lying on the ground and deciding to shoot ‘em in the back just for the heck of it, which would clearly be murder. This is a cop in the course of his duties, a person who most would agree had no history of criminality, trying to subdue a suspect and in the heat of struggle, either made a humongous mistake or lost control of himself and his anger or acted with criminal negligence.

The legal system, hopefully, will carefully examine this incident and even perhaps reach a just sentence.

Jack Dunphy properly questions why black and Lefty activists have such selective outrage. Meaning they are silent on black thug on black thug butchery, even black thug on innocent black, Asian, white, hispanic people butchery – but when a black thug or black bystander is killed by any but a black thug – howls of shock and political outrage ring through the City.

Going past Dunphy and touching on “The Color of Crime” theme black leaders and Jewish liberal lawyers and Lefty activists want blocked from public discussion at all costs – The ugly truth is young black males, age 13 to 40, 3% of America’s population, commit half the murders, half the rapes, and almost 60% of armed robberies. (They also account for a majority of cop-killings)
And any black or white with a lick of common sense could then screen that 3% population and with about 96% confidence exclude 2 out of 3 young black males as good, productive, “safe” citizens highly unlikely to commit violent felonies..
The great problem is not untrained or poor-performing cops. It is how to stop the young black male thug crime wave..and as a side issue, how to stop cops from overeacting on the thugs and also to prevent harm to non-thug young male blacks mistaken for dangerous, threatening (to society and cop’s personal safety) criminal blacks. All too many incidents are of cops that could screen a young black as a threat or non-threat in a few minutes – not being able to do so in a street situation or traffic stop with any high degree of confidence – who then treat all young blacks as dangerous thugs.
If young red-haired white males, 3% of the white population, did half the major violent crime, we would have a degree of “carrot-top” racism, and accusations against cops of being guilty of standing around or driving while being red-headed.

Jan 14, 2009 - 1:48 pm 58. robotech master:

I tend to believe that in this case its very clear that he was going for his tazer… The main reason for this is its very clear from the video that,

1. These cops didn’t consider this suspects any threat at all to them(which I’ll go into detail later)
2. The fact its very clear that these are corrupt cops getting their rocks off pushing ppl around.

Its a very clear cut case of cops trying to push ppl around/get more charges/get their rocks off gone bad.

If you watch the video the cops clearly don’t consider these ppl any threat. You can tell this by the fact that,

1. They didn’t space them out to arrest them.
2. Didn’t give them verbal commands to follow expect to meet the need to use force(ie they were given no time to do the actions they were told to to).
3. Their are numinous times when the shooter has his back turned to uncuffed suspect/s and in some cases nearly hits these uncuffed suspects in the face with his holstered pistol. His pistol is inches from at least 2 uncuffed suspects at many times and could easily have been taken from him if they had even the slightest want to do so.
4. All the cops turn their backs on all the uncuffed suspects at many points and had any chosen to fight they could have easily attacked them from behind and/also goto their weapons.

Their are many other factors that clearly show beyond doubt that these cops had no fear of these ppl.

You can also clearly see that the cops didn’t give the suspect a chance to follow any commands most of all by the fact they are repeatably threatening and yelling and giving different commands. The shooter jumps the person from behind in order to cause the most pain possible and the bald cop jumps on his head… at which point its very clear from the movement of the suspect that he isn’t resisting any more then the fact HE IN FING PAIN… IF YOUR IN PAIN YOU CAN”T JUST LAY STILL… its not possible. Their is no way even a very controlled person will not move when this type of action is being taken because ITS ONCE AGAIN INSANELY FING PAINFUL. Being that I used that knew to the head and had it used against me a number of times I can tell you its insanely painful if the person wants it to be…

This is where I believe its important to understand the thought process of a corrupt cop. They want to inflict as much pain to you as they possible can and they also want to figure out how to apply more charge to use when you are through involuntary relax reacting to that pain.

This means that when they were inflicting the max amount of pay for the most involuntary reaction it is the prefect time to tazer the suspect. This goes along with everything in a corrupt cops mind set. It inflicts more pain, It provide more “evidence” of resisting arrest, It provides great enjoyment for the corrupt cop(even more fun when the suspect is handcuffed and completely defenseless/in complete control of the cop).

Its very clear that this guy should goto jail for a long time… the question is will the bald cops who was right along with him jerking off on inflicting unneeded pain will be fired. I highly doubt he will but clearly he should be.

Their is little doubt that the racists and extortionist are out in force over this… which is sad. In many respect this is as much their fault as it is the corrupt cops fault. They try to paint what is clearly no racism into a racist matter in order to profit from the death of this person. They also make it much harder to prosecute other corrupt cops.

I tend to side with cops on matter(most of all in shooting) however the number of corrupt cops are growing… I’m a criminal justice guy and it very clear that many cops need to be fired yet never are. Their are hundreds of videos of which show cops clearly acting unprofessional and while not often attacking ppl physical clearly trying to escalate the issue into a physical confrontation in which they can jail the person mostly because they either don’t like the person or because the person knows their rights and refuses to do anything more then they are legally required to do.

It is becoming a standard along police that somehow if police can’t be found guilty in a court of law that they shouldn’t be fired. This is completely absurd and in fact in the long run badly hurts the police as a whole. The level of action that a police officer does requires that they have very open and broad laws stemming from a legal standpoint when it comes to charging them with criminal conduct. Thats the nature of the risky job they do. However they should have very very narrow level of action in which they can be fired. They are entrusted public servants in many states granted rights and privileges well about the “common ppl”. They need to be held to a very very high standard in other to keep those rights and privileges… which currently they are not. Police are suppose to be on roughly equal footing in also every respect to every other person… yet police are often granted huge rights and privileges well about the “common ppl”.

Police in many major cities in many respects act more like British nobles did before the US revolted. They have huge rights and privileges with little oversight and little action taken against them unless the masses through word of mouth(or in current history the internet/videos) could be made to atone for crimes or be forced from their positions.

Jan 14, 2009 - 3:04 pm 59. jill:

Footage of Chicago police officer Alvin Weems shooting an unarmed man. Narration by Chicago Reader staff writer John Conroy.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=259_1199605337

Jan 14, 2009 - 3:44 pm 60. Joe the Plumber:

The media should be abolished from reporting on the activities of law enforcement personnel.

P.S. Hey, Simon, send me more money (American dollars). And more scripts. I can’t think of anything else to say. You owe me, Simon.

Jan 14, 2009 - 4:59 pm 61. fmfnavydoc:

I’ve seen a few different angles of this incident…one thing struck me in all of the videos – the crowd around the officers just before the shooting seemed very agitated, almost to the point of threatening the officers on the scene. Also, the suspect on the left (officer’s right side) looked like he may have been trying to go for the gun while the officer was trying to restrain Grant..

Bad situation for all concerned…who knows how it will all play out in the courts….

Jan 14, 2009 - 5:15 pm 62. Bob:

i wonder if those who participate in these “rallies” are starting to take some cues from Muslim protests. The implicit threat of violence from Muslims — “stop before we go out of control” — seems to win concessions for them all across Europe.

If so, this is a dangerous lowering of the bar for mob behavior.

Jan 14, 2009 - 5:39 pm 63. Randall:

furious said: “the ensuing riots were not the result of the “Black Grievance Machine”, but of a well-organized group of anarchists from out-of-town”

This is exactly right, and Revolutionary Books isn’t a bookstore but a branch of the idiotic Bob Avakian Revolutionary Communists who often provoke violence in otherwise peaceful demonstrations. I’ve seen them do this for thirty years in the bay area, and years ago many leftists used to wonder if they weren’t intentional FBI provocateurs. Oakland is a beautiful city with a cross-racial, cross-ethnic spirit of cooperation and friendliness that’s almost unique in this country. Considering how strongly everyone in Oakland feels about this tragedy (and I’m an old white guy who owns a business right downtown) it’s amazing only a few windows were broken. It’s a shame this has been reported as a black/white issue; the reality is that it’s a drunk-young-guys plus untrained-armed-officers issue. A couple of posters have mentioned the OPD; this was NOT the OPD, but Bart police, a very different group with much less training or esprit.

Jan 14, 2009 - 5:51 pm 64. Joe the Plumber:

Damn straight, Bob. We should expect a much higher standard of behavior from mobs.

Where’s my money, Simon? I’ll turn on you just like I turned on McCain. I own the G.O.P., Simon. You don’t know who you’re f**king with!

Jan 14, 2009 - 6:03 pm 65. Mike:

Mr. Hurst, when returning home via BART in the evening, most passengers would have a collective gasp when stopping at the West Oakland stop and there wouldn’t be any people boarding from that stop.

Nonsense. Quite often I drive to West Oakland after work from my office in downtown Oakland, take BART to SF to see a Giants game, and afterward take BART back to pick up my car, arriving at 10:30 or 11:00 PM. I’ve never had a problem of any kind.

Jan 14, 2009 - 6:46 pm 66. ThomasD:

Criminally negligent homicide.

A murder charge is being pursued in order to allow the jury an ‘out.’

The officer made a terrible, horrible mistake. Yes, i’ve watched all the video, while it isn’t readily apparent what led him to undetake the fatal act, it is entirely clear from the aftermath that it was a surprise (and therefore highly unlikely to be justified) to everyone present.

My bigger problem? The actions of his fellow officers after the event. Had that been a plain jane civilian who fired the fatal shot he would have been immediately disarmed, arrested, Mirandized, and interrogated. AFAIK nothing of the sort happened.

I am very pro law and order and I am very pro law enforcement. I respect the officer because he -like all professionals- is expected to labor under a higher standard. Giving him a pass for something that would surely put you or I in jail, is not a higher standard, it is a license. A license no one in a free society is entitled to wield.

Jan 14, 2009 - 7:37 pm 67. paul_unalaska:

‘Nonsense. Quite often I drive to West Oakland after work from my office in downtown Oakland, take BART to SF to see a Giants game, and afterward take BART back to pick up my car, arriving at 10:30 or 11:00 PM. I’ve never had a problem of any kind.’

Wow Mike, I hope with that good fortune you’re buying a lotto ticket next time you’re in West Oakland. Here’s some info from Wikipedia to chew on.. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland,_California)

-120 murders recorded in 2007 made Oakland’s murder rate third highest in California, behind Richmond and Compton; however, Oakland suffered rape and robbery rates per capita that were almost twice those of Richmond and Compton, making Oakland’s violent crime rate the highest overall.

-Most violent crime occurs in West Oakland and the flatlands of East Oakland between I-580 and I-880.

-In 2007, Oakland had by far the highest robbery and motor vehicle theft rates of all significant cities in California, with one robbery per 114 residents and one car theft per 40 residents, three to four times the state average.

-The five-year average for homicide victims in Oakland breaks down as follows: 77% Black, 15.4% Hispanic, 3.2% White, 2.8% Asian and 1.6% Unknown.

-November, 2008 Congressional Quarterly Press publication, the city of Oakland has the dubious distinction of ranking fifth worst in a nationwide ranking of violent crime. The ranking takes into account six crime categories: murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary and motor vehicle theft.

Yeah, Oakland.. great city. I don’t understand the ’supposed high crime.’

Jan 14, 2009 - 11:57 pm 68. Randall:

Mike says: “Nonsense. Quite often I drive to West Oakland after work from my office in downtown Oakland, take BART to SF to see a Giants game, and afterward take BART back to pick up my car, arriving at 10:30 or 11:00 PM. I’ve never had a problem of any kind.”

I do exactly the same thing and so do hundreds of people. What on earth is this view of Oakland that people have, as a failed city like Detroit or Newark? The West Oakland BART station is next to $500,000 condos and a dance/performance theatre. It’s not a city for everyone, I understand; it’s more like Brooklyn (a place I know well) than anywhere else I can think of, and not everyone wants to live in Brooklyn. But to say, like Alison: “a sizeable fraction of the riders are armed gang members who commit crimes at stations, parking lots of station or on trains. it’s not safe to be alone or white at the fruitvale station at night.” is to spout complete nonsense. It’s not like that at all. I’m sure the only person ever shot at the Fruitvale station was shot in the back by a police officer.

Jan 15, 2009 - 12:02 am 69. rosignol:

If you pulled a gun on someone who you were trying to subdue after catching them breaking into your house, and shot them at such close range, the police wouldn’t even entertain the thought of it being less than 1st degree murder.

Depends on the jurisdiction. Around here, so long as the burglar is inside your house when they get shot, the cops will write up the report as ’self defense’ and send the body to the morgue.

Jan 15, 2009 - 1:48 am 70. Dan:

Jack, good piece as usual. Fact is the only stories folks get fired up about these days are when an animal is hurt, or a person of color is hurt (under any circumstance) by a police officer.

The young officer made a horrific and deadly mistake and will be paying for it forever one way or another.

Almost none of the people posting here (or in newspapers across the country) know what it’s like to be involved in the pursuit or arrest of people believed to be armed; never been in a dogpile with an armed suspect and heard a gun go off, never been shot at or had to shoot back…few have even engaged in a physical conflict since grade school.

I would suggest folks read Lt. Col. David Grossman’s excellent book, “On Combat” and read about the psychological and physiological stressors that occur during interpersonal violence. Then judge police and military.

If you don’t have the time to do that, just Google the colonel’s monograph “On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs.”

Jan 15, 2009 - 8:36 am 71. LawhawkSF:

Good article. As a retired lawyer who cut his teeth on a case of a “police riot,” I learned the difference between reasonable force, intentional homicide, negligent homicide, and just plain brutality (“The Lemon Drive Incident,” Simi Valley, Ventura County, California 1976. I was a new kid in a firm that represented a paraplegic in a wheelchair who was beaten senseless by out-of-control cops on the pretense of his having “resisted arrest.” That said, I have discovered over the years that this was a rare, rare incident. Most cops do not intentionally harm suspects, even apparently dangerous ones. Part of the reason this story is getting so much press is that contrary to lefty doctrine, it’s a rarity. In the huge majority of cases, the shooting is justified. Clearly, this one is not. As a firm believer in the importance of hard evidence, I tend to agree with Jack Dunphy that this was not a murder. But I find the “taser” argument just plain ludicrous. With some hard work, the evidence will eventually prove a case. I’m guessing that will be a badly-trained cop, using a weapon that he was no good with, in a tough situation pulled that weapon and discharged it negligently. Even if it turns out that the BART cop is a racist and hates black people, it is highly unlikely that he would intentionally fire a shot into a restrained arrestee’s back in full view of scores of witnesses and fellow officers. The evidence may prove me wrong, but from what I’ve seen so far, malice aforethought, even under the loosest of law school standards, doesn’t exist in this case. Ergo, no murder. Manslaughter of some sort? Likely.

Jan 15, 2009 - 10:30 am 72. Blackwell:

Everybody needs to calm down and wait before doing a re-do of John de Lorean and Rodney King.

King had video too, taken in the last few seconds but unfortunately the first 20 seconds were rarely played. King’s behavior, his shaking off four officers that tried to swarm him, the care of the LAPD sergeant that ordered everyone to holster guns to avoid shooting King–none of that was shown by TV, which prefered to show only the end where they whacked him with billy clubs to make him stay down.

The officers were acquitted at a lengthy trial (the first one)that regrettably was not televised. The trial transcript is a stunner for anyone that thinks King’s rights were violated. Even the American Lawyer, hardly a right wing piece, concluded that the aquittal was probably right.

The FBI had video on Deloren too, but the jury went the other way when they determined that the FBI had entrapped Delorean.

The video here looks pretty bad for the officer, and trotting out claims that he might have been “stressed,” is a bit much. I am weary of claims that police officers have the right to go crazy on a cuffed suspect when stressed and have seen enough Rambo officers to know they do exist and they aren’t helpful”. This wasn’t an open gunfight, an armed struggle or a pursuit where I give the officer a pass. The man was down and seemingly cuffed.

Nor does it seem he had any basis to be “reaching for a TASER” when the suspect was down and cuffed.

But rather than smearing the dead man, pre judging the officer, or assuming that a few hundred crazies represent the majority of Oakland, lets wait. Police officers aren’t entitled to shoot handcuffed suspects, no matter how vile they are, even if its John Lindh trying to get back to the Taliban. But they are entitled to explain.

Jan 15, 2009 - 10:35 am 73. Gilligan:

Were I a cop, I would be tempted to think that if Officer Mehserle had been eating donuts or sleeping in his cop car in some inconspicuous place his life would be a whole lot happier right now.

Jan 15, 2009 - 9:49 pm 74. Rex:

Gee if the reason for confiscation of video evidence is to collect evidence and not to hide evidence then what happened to the video from the at least 86 video cameras that were around the area of the Pentagon. All the footage was taken immediately from the owners and has disappeared never to surface again.

Where are the videos? Why did they only show us 5 frames from one camera which shows nothing at all? No plane?

911 was an inside job!

Jan 16, 2009 - 12:18 am 75. Kel:

Try not to pre-judge Officer Mehserle or Oscar Grant. Wait for the facts, but know that race will be a factor. If we are honest with each other and ourselves we will admit that had Rodney King been white we would not have aquitted the offenders. To our eyes we unconsciously view blacks as aggressive, making these types of incidents more palatable. If Oscar was a white man….?

Jan 16, 2009 - 8:14 am 76. paul_unalaska:

‘Wait for the facts, but know that race will be a factor.’

Kel, why begin your sentence with logic and end it illogically?

I take it the overwhelming majority of black youths incarcerated, affiliated with gangs, produce high percentages of children out of wedlock, 50% of black teenage women have an STD et al.. are other people’s/ races doing?

Jan 16, 2009 - 11:06 pm 77. Gilligan:

One point that probably deserves consideration is the pistol that Mehserle was carrying. Over the years I have read dozens of tales about police officers shooting themselves in the leg with their Glock pistol. Presumably, that was usually not done on purpose.

Was Oscar Grant shot with a Glock? If so, I think that the possibility of an accidental discharge should be considered.

As to why Mehserle would draw his pistol once he had Grant handcuffed on the ground, I have no idea. Maybe there were other things going on that had little to do with Grant that prompted Mehserle to draw his pistol. Was there some other person who threatened Mehserle or some other police officer?

Jan 17, 2009 - 10:19 am 78. Juice:

If the glove don’t fit, you must acquit.

Jan 17, 2009 - 5:26 pm 79. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Jack Dunphy, et al.
RE: I Am….

….SICK AND TIRED of cops who can’t tell the difference—by feel—of a taser and a service pistol.

This is either an indication that these police officer are too stupid to be on patrol or an outright lie.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[There is nothing peaceable about a peace officer.]

Jan 18, 2009 - 2:04 am 80. michelle bledsaw:

um, when you have worn your belt for two years, don’t you know what side your taser is on and what side your gun is on? and why didn’t the other officers who were RIGHT THERE stop him. i think it was the case of the white boy hating the black man, so i will shoot him, i’ll get off, i always do. i am not a hater of white people, i despise the ignorant white men who call me a nigger bitch and look at my daughter’s ass when when we go over to THERE side of town to the nice stores.

Jan 18, 2009 - 2:17 pm 81. paul_unalaska:

Your allowing anger to overtake your thoughts when ‘the ignorant white men’ eyeball your daughter is overtaking your common sense and logic. Proven by ‘the white boy hating ‘the’ black man’ garbage.

THERE.. I believe you meant ‘THEIR.’ It’s in BOLD to prove your point and it stood out.

You may not be a ‘hater’ of white people, but your deplorable ‘use’ of the English language by no means furthers your cause, point either..

Jan 18, 2009 - 7:54 pm 82. paul_unalaska:

Yeah, Michelle, black people just can’t get a fair shake. Black-only colleges, black only scholarships, Equal Employment Opportunity hiring programs in place, sensitivity training in most workplace settings throughout the country, B E T channel, NAACP, ACLU, the Black Caucus, lowered A.C.T. and SAT standards for black high school age children. Yeah, I feel your pain.

Wait, no I don’t. Suppose we had a whites-only college, white entertainment channel, whites only tabloid trash magazine, Special Interest groups for the ‘Advancement of Caucasian People.’ Oh yeah, America did have a similar type of program in the early-mid 20th Century. It was the KKK and other white supremacist groups. Disappointed to see the American people haven’t learned a thing from that sad chapter, time in our history. The only thing that’s changed is the races involved today. i.e. the aforementioned special interest groups, as well as La Raza, et al.

A junior Chicago politician with the thinnest of resumes, though a large, unanswered shady history, business dealings, won the seat to the most powerful Government seat in the world. That same man, as you put it, ‘Got off’ in answering to his past and recent actions (100’s of millions of dollars raised from overseas donors, 2nd biggest receiver of Fannie, Freddie donations, giving his wife Michelle a 240% raise at her hospital gig when becoming Senator, on and on). Ignorance is indeed bliss..

Jan 18, 2009 - 8:39 pm 83. J Thompson:

What do you expect to happen to thugs. One down 23 million to go and all the towels with them. While America is a pacifist nation as a whole, we can kill,maim,and destroy with the best of them. Keep pushing us.

Jan 19, 2009 - 11:02 am 84. Shelby:

Why did it take 14 days to arrest him? They had plenty of evidence, witnesses & video. If I had shot Grant, with eye witnesses + video, the cops would’ve arrested my ass at the next stop. Allegedly? Is that a joke? I swear if Mehserle gets off on a technicality or isn’t found guilty all hell is going to break loose during this time of economic hardship, people are broke, frustrated & aren’t putting up with shit anymore.

Jan 22, 2009 - 9:10 pm 85. michelle bledsaw:

actually paul I do know how to spell.
“THERE” refers to a place and “THEIR” is possesive.
You look it up, I am in the right.It’s ok for us to have help with college, t.v. stations. I mean, I don’t have anything in common with the show”friends”.

Apr 10, 2009 - 11:14 am