DPD Trial - Mistrial declared in manslaughter trial of Detroit cop

[Meddle]

Looks like FAUX 2 got their butt spanked by the Judge already:

DETROIT — Twice during the opening day of testimony in the case against Detroit Police Officer Joseph Weekley, who is charged with the manslaughter of 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones in May of 2010 during a raid, Judge Cynthia Gray Hathaway received a note from her clerk.

It said the court received a call that one of the news stations was broadcasting a live feed that showed members of the jury.

At the end of Monday's testimony, Hathaway said Fox 2 News cameras were no longer allowed in her courtroom for the duration of the trial.

"I took great care, both before and during the jury selection process and today to ask the electronic media to please not film and publish the jurors," she said. "I got a message earlier, we already made a record of it, that jurors faces were being shown... at least on the Internet.

"You said you checked your cameras and it was not taking place."

Hathaway said the media order specifically states jurors' faces may not be shown.

Then "I got a call from the prosecutor's office indicating they were seeing the jurors' faces... and I asked my staff to look on the Internet... to see if they saw anything, and lo and behold they did; they saw one of the juror's half body and another juror's full face," Hathaway said.

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/in...oit_camer.html

[softailrider]

To me, it sounds like a good decision from that judge.

[Lowell]

A mistrial has been declared in the little Aiyana murder trial.

A judge has declared a mistrial after jurors failed to reach a verdict in the trial of Joseph Weekley, a Detroit police officer, who fatally shot 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones during a 2010 police raid.

Wayne County Judge Cynthia Gray Hathaway dismissed jurors about an hour after urging them to keep working Tuesday. The jury sent three notes, the last one indicating it still couldn't reach a unanimous verdict on the third day of deliberations.

I am hearing that the prosecution is coming under fire for blowing it.

[Meddle]

I was just coming to look for this.

I can't figure out what the Jury was thinking unless there was a union obstructionist/sympathizer on board. His intent doesn't matter. The charge was Involuntary Manslaughter. That doesn't require intent of any kind. He had the weapon. It fired [[for whatever reason). She died. End of story. Guilty in three minutes of deliberations or less.

[softailrider]

I was just coming to look for this.

I can't figure out what the Jury was thinking unless there was a union obstructionist/sympathizer on board. His intent doesn't matter. The charge was Involuntary Manslaughter. That doesn't require intent of any kind. He had the weapon. It fired [[for whatever reason). She died. End of story. Guilty in three minutes of deliberations or less.

Some of the jurors must have bought the cops story that the grandmother grabbed his H&K. That's the only explanation I can think of.

[Johnnny5]

I was just coming to look for this.

I can't figure out what the Jury was thinking unless there was a union obstructionist/sympathizer on board. His intent doesn't matter. The charge was Involuntary Manslaughter. That doesn't require intent of any kind. He had the weapon. It fired [[for whatever reason). She died. End of story. Guilty in three minutes of deliberations or less.

I may be wrong, but I think involuntary manslaughter still requires "gross negligence". Otherwise the charge could apply to many accidents where there was no intent to kill. If you're driving down the road at excessive speeds and a pedestrian misjudges the distance and is hit and killed then that could be involuntary manslaughter. If you're driving the posted speed limit and someone steps in front of your car but you still can't stop in time that would just be considered an accident. Apparently after seeing all the evidence at least one or more people on the jury thought that this was truly just a tragic accident.

[Scottathew]

I was just coming to look for this.

I can't figure out what the Jury was thinking unless there was a union obstructionist/sympathizer on board. His intent doesn't matter. The charge was Involuntary Manslaughter. That doesn't require intent of any kind. He had the weapon. It fired [[for whatever reason). She died. End of story. Guilty in three minutes of deliberations or less.

I've been thinking pretty much the same way. I'm passing judgement at 40,000 feet, but often we have to make our own judgement based on limited information.

I just can't imagine someone taking my girl away from me. I would be ruined.

[Honky Tonk]

I've been thinking pretty much the same way. I'm passing judgement at 40,000 feet, but often we have to make our own judgement based on limited information.

I just can't imagine someone taking my girl away from me. I would be ruined.

A good lesson then would be not to harbor a known criminal in the same house that your daughter's in, especially if they've just been involved in a murder.

[Bobl]

I watched Officer Weekley grow up, and knew his parents. They chose to raise him in a stable home. They did not harbor fugitives. No stolen property could be found in their yard. This case is a tragedy, and a young child is dead. Terrible.
And, it all could have been avoided if the family of this child had done the same.
The post from Honky Tonk is correct: "A good lesson then would be not to harbor a known criminal in the same house that your daughter's in, especially if they've just been involved in a murder."

[jt1]

I watched Officer Weekley grow up, and knew his parents. They chose to raise him in a stable home. They did not harbor fugitives. No stolen property could be found in their yard. This case is a tragedy, and a young child is dead. Terrible.
And, it all could have been avoided if the family of this child had done the same.
The post from Honky Tonk is correct: "A good lesson then would be not to harbor a known criminal in the same house that your daughter's in, especially if they've just been involved in a murder."

So the killing of a 7 year old girl is justifiable based upon the actions of her parents? Hell, if you really believe that we should just bomb any house with a known or suspected felon and consider the loss of anyone else's life the fault of everyone else.

I doubt it was intentional but the refrain that the girl being killed is almost justifiable due to the actions of her parents and grandmother is just sickening.

I don't care if her father was Osama bin Laden and in the house with her, dismissing her death since there was a fugitive in the house is complete and utter bullshit.

I'm also curious why DPD has to serve warrants or go after criminals that way. They could have caught him before he went into the house or after he left since they knew he was there. I guess the others in the house simply don't count.

[Meddle]

I watched Officer Weekley grow up, ....

And an elderly woman watched him kill a 7 year old.

So, what was your point again?

[Kevgoblue]

But didn't he [[DPD) recant that version of the story a day or so after the incident happened?
I thought that was why she was released from custody 8 hrs later and no charges were ever filed

[Meddle]

^ With a firearm, there's no such thing as an accident in the sense you're referring to. Especially in the hands of a trained police officer who is required to maintain control of the weapon at all times. There is only negligence.

[compn]

its called jury nullification.
one person on the jury votes not guilty. bam. defendant walks.
guess someone thought that cop should walk.

happened in kwame cases, will happen again.
the real question is will the prosecutor go for it again with a new jury ?

[Meddle]

Has a jury count been published? Was there more than one in disagreement with the others?

[downtownguy]

^^ Well put, jt1

[rb336]

Frankly, I have an easier time believing the grandmother grabbed the gun than a highly-trained officer accidentally firing

[jt1]

Frankly, I have an easier time believing the grandmother grabbed the gun than a highly-trained officer accidentally firing

Agreed. My issues don't lie with the officer on trial, it lies with DPD brass that seems to think this is the only way to apprehend suspects. I still have issues with the past statements from DPD that an officer saw the suspect on the street but couldn't pick him up because he was undercover. Clearly DPD doesn't know about those fancy things called radios or cell phones.

With close to a national low in close rates with violent crime I would assume that they do everything in their power to apprehend a criminal the second he is seen, not wait to go all swat.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised is the scumbag killed someone between the first sighting and the SRT team's apprehension.

[Meddle]

Frankly, I have an easier time believing the grandmother grabbed the gun than a highly-trained officer accidentally firing

You haven't been watching much news lately, have you?

Maybe you missed the 'training accident' in Baltimore when PO were 'fooling around' with live weapons and one shot another?

Him being a 'highly trained officer' is exactly why he should be convicted. They should not be making such mistakes, even if she did grab it, which another officer testified she did not.

[Johnnny5]

Him being a 'highly trained officer' is exactly why he should be convicted. They should not be making such mistakes, even if she did grab it, which another officer testified she did not.

^ With a firearm, there's no such thing as an accident in the sense you're referring to. Especially in the hands of a trained police officer who is required to maintain control of the weapon at all times. There is only negligence.

Meddle, I'm not sure where you got the idea that training somehow makes someone superhuman and impervious to mistakes or accidents. Officers need to be held to a high standard, but considering the difficult work they do to expect that nothing will ever go wrong is not a reasonable expectation.

[firstandten]

I saw officer Weekley on the reality show Detroit SWAT and on screen he seems like a decent person. While shows like that and 48 Hours gives people some insight into the personalities of these officers the need to show the raids is a bit much. Raids are inherently dangerous many things can go wrong. Why didn't they just surround the house and waited the guy out ?

[48009]

I saw officer Weekley on the reality show Detroit SWAT and on screen he seems like a decent person. While shows like that and 48 Hours gives people some insight into the personalities of these officers the need to show the raids is a bit much. Raids are inherently dangerous many things can go wrong. Why didn't they just surround the house and waited the guy out ?

I believe surprising the murderer while he is asleep is better than any other alternative.

[jt1]

I believe surprising the murderer while he is asleep is better than any other alternative.

I would argue that an alternative that doesn't result in a dead 7 year old is the better alternative

[TKshreve]

I would argue that an alternative that doesn't result in a dead 7 year old is the better alternative

With all due respect to the young girl..... may she rest in peace.

That said: This does fall directly on the shoulders of the little girls parents/grandparents. If they knew there is a fugitive hiding out inside/upstairs/next door...... they should have gotten her and themselves out of harms way. Or gotten the fugitive away from those they want to protect. That is parental instincts. THAT was the alternative.

To act anyway but this is where the negligence should properly fall.

[Meddle]

That said: This does fall directly on the shoulders of the little girls parents/grandparents.

No, it falls on the shoulders of the person that fired the shot.