(December 5, 2014 at 5:38 pm)popeyespappy Wrote: As far as all police shooting going to trial that's just silly. Yes police officers should be held to higher not lower standard. Yes there should be an independent investigation by an unrelated agency. But you are saying the cop that just shot somebody while they were in middle of murdering a bus load of kids should be charged with a crime and tried.
What's the problem with that, Pops? Day One of the trial, charges are laid, even before the prosecutor gets to make an opening statement, the defense can ask for dismissal of charges -- "Your Honor, there was a busload of kids [or fill in your open-shut case here], we're asking the charges be dismissed based on the principle of clear and present danger." The judge can dismiss prima facie based on the principle of necessity, right? "Yeah, that busload of kids was in danger, let the cop off."
But -- whenever a representative of the government kills a citizen, there should be some sort of accountability, and that officer should have to prove the need to kill a citizen, don't you agree? He should have legal representation. He should have the right to bring up his side. But the citizenry should be given a clear, evidenced justification, shouldn't they?
The grand jury process is flawed in that it allows the local prosecutor to sculpt the presented evidence, as you yourself have noted. Clearly, there should be a more objective means for handling deaths caused by government agents.
The government certainly has the resources, to do this, and it is certainly in the interest of society at large, right?
I mean, it's cheaper than riots.
