Texas Police Office guilty of manslaughter

[nolesincebirth]

This was the right decision. I give cops a LOT of leeway in these circumstances but the victim was minding her own business in her own home and exercised her right to bear arms when she heard/saw something.

I don’t think murder was appropriate as I think the officer just really, really effed up. So manslaughter seems appropriate.

But, now what? We’re going to send an otherwise law abiding citizen to prison for up to 20 years because he was a really shitty cop? Does anyone really think he’s a danger to society? Wouldn’t society be better off by removing his right to ever possess a weapon, house arrest, community service, restitution, etc? This guy isn’t a threat to anyone. Why do we send him to prison? We can punish in other ways.

Texas officer convicted in killing of Atatiana Jefferson

A former Texas police officer was convicted of manslaughter Thursday for fatally shooting Atatiana Jefferson through a rear window of her home in 2019, a rare conviction of an officer for killing someone who was also armed with a gun. Jurors also considered a murder charge against Aaron Dean...

news.yahoo.com

 

[BubsFinn]

He needs to go to prison so the next guy thinks twice about shooting an innocent person. He needs to go to prison so the next guy follows procedure and doesn't put himself in the same situation.

 

[nolesincebirth]

He needs to go to prison so the next guy thinks twice about shooting an innocent person. He needs to go to prison so the next guy follows procedure and doesn't put himself in the same situation.

You think he intended to shoot an innocent person? On purpose?

Or maybe he stupidly and mistakenly shot someone he wrongly perceived as a threat?

And there won’t be a next time for this guy. He’ll never legally own a gun again.

 

[Hawkeye Swarm]

He needs to go to prison so the next guy thinks twice about shooting an innocent person. He needs to go to prison so the next guy follows procedure and doesn't put himself in the same situation.

Next guy? The "next guy" is getting increasingly hard to find in that profession. Up to 20 year sentences resulting from high stress encounters. That doesn't sound appealing.


Jefferson’s 8-year-old nephew, Zion Carr, was in the room with his aunt when she was shot. Zion testified that Jefferson took out her gun believing there was an intruder in the backyard, but he offered contradictory accounts of whether she pointed the pistol out the window.

On the trial’s opening day, the now-11-year-old Zion testified that Jefferson always had the gun pointed down, but in an interview that was recorded soon after the shooting and played in court, he said she had pointed the weapon at the window.

 

[BubsFinn]

You think he intended to shoot an innocent person? On purpose?

Or maybe he stupidly and mistakenly shot someone he wrongly perceived as a threat?

And there won’t be a next time for this guy. He’ll never legally own a gun again.

None of that matters. His gun didn't go off by itself, so he did intend to shoot the person in question. He put himself in a situation that put an innocent person in jeopardy. Just like a drunk driver that hits a pedestrian, his intent is irrelevant.
And I'm not worried about there being a next time for him. I'm worried about the next time for the rest of the police. Maybe next time an officer will announce police presence before skulking through someone's backyard with their weapon drawn. Maybe they go to the front door and see why it is open rather than assume there has been a break-in. And maybe next time a grandson doesn't have to see his grandmother bleeding out on the floor.

And as for her grandson giving contradictory testimony. He was 8. Fully grown adults are terrible eye witnesses. An 8 year old really can't be expected to be completely credible. And it doesn't matter if the grandmother pointed the gun at the window or not. The cop shouldn't have been in that position in the first place.

 

[nolesincebirth]

None of that matters. His gun didn't go off by itself, so he did intend to shoot the person in question. He put himself in a situation that put an innocent person in jeopardy. Just like a drunk driver that hits a pedestrian, his intent is irrelevant.
And I'm not worried about there being a next time for him. I'm worried about the next time for the rest of the police. Maybe next time an officer will announce police presence before skulking through someone's backyard with their weapon drawn. Maybe they go to the front door and see why it is open rather than assume there has been a break-in. And maybe next time a grandson doesn't have to see his grandmother bleeding out on the floor.

And as for her grandson giving contradictory testimony. He was 8. Fully grown adults are terrible eye witnesses. An 8 year old really can't be expected to be completely credible. And it doesn't matter if the grandmother pointed the gun at the window or not. The cop shouldn't have been in that position in the first place.

You and I will never agree on his intent, motives, etc. So moving on.

In your view, should prison be to punish offenders, rehabilitate, and/or protect society from dangerous individuals?

I believe there are alternative and more effective methods for punishing offenders that could actually benefit the victim and society. And I feel that prison should only be reserved for those individuals who pose a threat to others.

 

[NDallasRuss]

Does anyone really think he’s a danger to society?

Other than the part where he killed an innocent person?

That seems pretty dangerous to me.

 

[NDallasRuss]

Just like a drunk driver that hits a pedestrian, his intent is irrelevant.

I agree with this. You can be a danger to society through your negligence and/or incompetence. You don't have to intend to do harm, to do significant harm.

 

[nolesincebirth]

I agree with this. You can be a danger to society through your negligence and/or incompetence. You don't have to intend to do harm, to do significant harm.

Well sure; but this guy will never be allowed to touch a weapon again. So how is he a continuing threat?

 

[SoProudNole]

Well sure; but this guy will never be allowed to touch a weapon again. So how is he a continuing threat?

Umm, there are 1,000s of people who aren't allowed to touch a weapon who are arrested with weapons.

 

[SolarHawk]

Well sure; but this guy will never be allowed to touch a weapon again. So how is he a continuing threat?

Your logic is seriously flawed dude.

 

[NDallasRuss]

Well sure; but this guy will never be allowed to touch a weapon again. So how is he a continuing threat?

If this worked as intended, gun control would be a lot, lot easier.

And, it's possible that with his demonstrated capacity for negligence/incompetence, he'd still find new and interesting ways to kill innocent people.

 

[Hawkeye Swarm]

Umm, there are 1,000s of people who aren't allowed to touch a weapon who are arrested with weapons.

Sure there are, but the system evaluates each case individually based upon the facts of the case and background of the defendant.

A felon gang banger from Chicago with numerous other felonies and violent crimes vs. a person with no prior convictions who is found guilty of manslaughter. In other words, It's not a one size fits all.

I think we all know that this guy is not a threat to the public but that's hard for some to acknowledge because they likely have an anti-police bias and they want that pound of flesh.

 

[NDallasRuss]

I think we all know that this guy is not a threat to the public...

Well, all of us but the person he killed...

 

[nolesincebirth]

This country will never have criminal justice reform because too many people just want vengeance. Which, is fine if that’s what we want, but I hoped that we were shifting away from the idea of “just punish” and more towards an idea of reform.

This ex-cop is in no way whatsoever a threat to anyone going forward. Locking this guy up for 20 years doesn’t make society any safer.

 

[NDallasRuss]

This ex-cop is in no way whatsoever a threat to anyone going forward.

I just don't know what you're basing this on.

The fact that he'd never killed anyone, before he did?

Every serial killer throughout history had never killed anyone, until they did.

“Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results”

 

[Finance85]

Well sure; but this guy will never be allowed to touch a weapon again. So how is he a continuing threat?

How do you know he will never touch a weapon again? Because there's a law against it? That's laughable.

 

[Finance85]

This country will never have criminal justice reform because too many people just want vengeance. Which, is fine if that’s what we want, but I hoped that we were shifting away from the idea of “just punish” and more towards an idea of reform.

This ex-cop is in no way whatsoever a threat to anyone going forward. Locking this guy up for 20 years doesn’t make society any safer.

People need to be punished. The problem with this country is too many children are raised with no understanding of having to take responsibility.

There's no way you can be 100% certain that this ex-cop isn't a threat going forward, especially with options being more limited by having a felony conviction.

 

[Nole Lou]

I don't know that 20 years is appropriate, but neither is "whoopsie, I'll probably never do it again."

 

[NDallasRuss]

I don't know that 20 years is appropriate, but neither is "whoopsie, I'll probably never do it again."

Since the woman he killed was 28yo and likely had a long time left to live, I'm good with him being in jail for as long as possible (since we're not going to use the death penalty for him killing someone). He should have taken away from him, what he took away from her.

 

[CarolinaHawkeye]

I think we all know that this guy is not a threat to the public but that's hard for some to acknowledge because they likely have an anti-police bias and they want that pound of flesh.

Evidently he was a threat that one time.

 

[torbee]

Sure there are, but the system evaluates each case individually based upon the facts of the case and background of the defendant.

A felon gang banger from Chicago with numerous other felonies and violent crimes vs. a person with no prior convictions who is found guilty of manslaughter. In other words, It's not a one size fits all.

I think we all know that this guy is not a threat to the public but that's hard for some to acknowledge because they likely have an anti-police bias and they want that pound of flesh.

Prison terms are also handed down so the victims get closure and a sense of justice.

That family will never, ever see their mother/grandmother/sister again.

Why should the criminal get to go about his regular family life happily and free? Dude needs some time in the slammer to pay for his crime. That is justice.

 

[Hawkeye Swarm]

Prison terms are also handed down so the victims get closure and a sense of justice.

That family will never, ever see their mother/grandmother/sister again.

Why should the criminal get to go about his regular family life happily and free? Dude needs some time in the slammer to pay for his crime. That is justice.

It's fine to disagree on what we consider to be justice.

My hope is that the judge is reasonable in the sentencing and that justice is served for everyone, not the public mob.