Posted by tecwrg on 12/4/2014 12:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2014 12:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2014 11:55:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 12/4/2014 11:08:00 AM (view original):
I looked up these yesterday. Based on the definitions of these crimes, I don't understand how it at least doesn't go to trial.
S 125.10 Criminally negligent homicide. A person is guilty of criminally negligent homicide when, with criminal negligence, he causes the death of another person. Criminally negligent homicide is a class E felony. S 125.15 Manslaughter in the second degree. A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when: 1. He recklessly causes the death of another person; or 2. He commits upon a female an abortional act which causes her death, unless such abortional act is justifiable pursuant to subdivision three of section 125.05 or 3. He intentionally causes or aids another person to commit suicide. Manslaughter in the second degree is a class C felony.
I'm guessing the laws work a little differently for cops. He was detaining a suspect. You or I would just be choking some random dude out. I drive past a guy walking in the middle of the road and tell him to get his *** out of the road. A struggle ensues. I'm looked at as the aggressor. Not so much with a cop.
Cops should be held to a higher standard in their use of force since they're the ones with the power and the weapons.
Cops are also the ones on the front lines dealing with the often violent scum of society.
Random citizen A putting random citizen B in a choke hold is quite different from police officer C putting criminal suspect D in a choke hold.
I guess I'll post it again -
Yes, laws are somewhat different when it comes to cops, because of the nature of their job. If this was anyone else, they'd be going to trial for murder or 1st degree manslaughter, because you can't just put someone in a chokehold and bring them to the ground for no reason. Because it's a cop, criminally negligent homicide makes the most sense, in my opinion. Generally when someone tells you that they're having trouble with a normal life function, like breathing, that you shouldn't continue to do what you're doing. Or when it appears that they're dying after you didn't stop suffocating this person, to try to bring them back to life sooner than 7 minutes later. It sounds like there's a great chance he was negligent. Not going to trial seems insane.