Playstations Mania, Strong Arm Robbery, and SWAT

Discussion in 'Off-topic' started by Malum Prohibitum, Dec 5, 2006.

  1. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    This playstation mania is getting out of hand! :D

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061204/ap_ ... tion_theft

     
  2. Macktee

    Macktee New Member

    6,172
    0
    0
    Of course, there's not enough information to form an opinion, but I'm gonna do it anyway...

    But, based on what info is available, I think the kid contributed significantly to his own demise. All because of a game......sad.
     

  3. Purge

    Purge New Member

    251
    0
    0
    I like how the cops wanted to make sure this was done right and used "members of a specially trained team" to kill the innocent until proven guilty suspect.

    I wonder what an ordinary cop would have done.
     
  4. mzmtg

    mzmtg Active Member

    3,119
    0
    36
    Don't forget:

    They always shoot the dog.
     
  5. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    Well, no doubt any strong arm robber contributes to his own demise, but there is some new news coming out . . .



    :shock:


    and:
    Does this match the story the police told originally?

    Why was a SWAT team being used for this? Well, remember the Florida case? Ring a bell? No, this guy did not have a firearms license (he would not have qualified for one), but the officers saw a picture of him with a gun. So they used a SWAT team.

    Well, more details are sure to come out, and we will perhaps discover whether the use of the SWAT team and the shooting were justified.

    Link to source story
     
  6. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    More here (including the internet picture) and here.
     
  7. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    The deputy who fired the fatal shot has been charged with murder!

    The others have been cleared of any wrongdoing.


    Link to story
     
  8. mzmtg

    mzmtg Active Member

    3,119
    0
    36
    It turns out the murder charge was a paperwork screw-up.

    The charge has been dismissed.

    http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/12/plays ... index.html

    "Sorry, we didn't mean to hold an irresponsible cop accountable for his actions. No harm, no foul."
     
  9. kkennett

    kkennett New Member

    2,139
    0
    0
    Wow! I just read this thread! Firing through a closed door???? Unbelievable. Based on what I've read, this guy has been rightly charged. He has not apparently developed the maturity to be placed in such situations. The situations he will face in prison will likely clear that up.
     
  10. mzmtg

    mzmtg Active Member

    3,119
    0
    36
    He's not going to prison at this rate.
     
  11. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    This story is starting to make me dizzy.

    Well, it looks like the Sheriff recovered from his initial denial and fired the deputy at least.
     
  12. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    Gunowner = no-knock warrant
     
  13. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    jrm, the roommate said that the SWAT team did knock. That is why Strickland was going to the door when the officer inexplicably opened fire through the door. It sounds like Strickland did not have a chance to open it.

    Typically, the wait time is only a few seconds. Adrenaline is high. Time slows down.

    Unless some additional facts come out, I will speculate that the grand jury simply decided this kid was a scummy violent felon spoiled rich kid and that shooting him was not a big enough deal to imprison the officer. I sure hope they would not return a "no bill" if this cop shot me or you or our wives or children through the door whilst we were in the midst of answering a knock at the door.
     
  14. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    If the grand jury came to the scummy violent felon conclusion, it's because the prosecutor wanted them to.

    You know the old saying that a prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted? It's more or less true. Put yourself in the prosecutor's position on this one. You call one witness, the roommate. Roommate testifies there was a knock at the door. Victim goes to the door, starts returning, shots come through door, victim's dead. You call second witness, one of the cops. Cop testifies that indictee fired shots through door. You instruct grand jury on elements of 2nd degree murder. There is no testimony regarding victim (why should there be?).

    How can you not get an indictment? Remember, there's no cross examination. You control the entire proceeding.

    Answer: you sabotage your own chances of getting an indictment by introducing evidence about the victim. You call the indictee as a witness (instead of the other cop). You let him testify that he heard shots, and thought he was under attack. You instruct the grand jury on self defense.

    No true bill.
     
  15. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    New grand jury selected in teen shooting case

    Jan 3, 2007 09:25 AM

    WILMINGTON -- A new 18-member grand jury convened today in New Hanover County.

    There had been some thought that the new jurors would review a high-profile, officer involved shooting right away.

    District Attorney Ben David told NewsChannel 3 earlier today that the new grand jurors chosen today would not be given such a hard hitting case right away.

    David says eventually the jury will be presented with a case to indict former New Hanover County Sheriff's deputy Christopher Long for shooting 18-year-old Peyton Strickland last month.

    Strickland was shot and killed December 1 after authorities attempted to issue warrants at his Wilmington home.

    Cpl. Christopher Long shot Strickland after he says he thought he heard gunfire.

    DA David later presented a case to the grand jury to indict Long for second-degree murder. That grand jury chose not to indict Long, but a clerical error in paperwork made it seem as if they did.

    Attorney Thom Goolsby said, "In the first case apparently the foreman of the grand jury, who is responsible for marking the grand jury sheet, marked the wrong box. The court came in the next day and corrected it, as they should have, and then of course it means that there is no indictment. So, anything that may have happened before was improper and had to be thrown out."

    The DA could have dropped the case after it was thrown out the first time, but after consulting with the Attorney General's office, David said he would continue to pursue the case and ultimately present it again to another grand jury.

    According to Goolsby the DA can present the Strickland case before a grand jury as many times as he deems necessary, as there are no statutes of limitations in North Carolina for felony cases.

    Goolsby says it's also unlikely a new grand jury will be presented with this case right away.

    http://www.wwaytv3.com/Global/story.asp?S=5881600