" How does one fight negative publicity when one is a day late and a dollar short? "

" You only get one chance to make a first impression. It's too late for Mehserle to sincerely say I made a mistake, I'm sorry. "

" It's too late to say "I made a mistake" ?

Are you supposed to say it BEFORE you made the mistake ?

Don't think I'm saying this whole thing is anything but tragic, but it certainly has made people say illogical things. "

" Is it logical or illogical to not know the feel, balance and weight of a taser versus a handgun with a trigger? "

" The damage to Mehserle has already been done in the press, so lifting a gag order now would be meaningless. I agree that things still need to play out, but doesn't it seem like a trial is going to be superfluous? "

" This is way more that just OOPS! As a "trained" officer of the law...... unfortunately, I'm sorry isn't going to cut it. No one is going to hear it. Tragic, but true. Lifting the gag order wouldn't have made a difference.
The only way this boy is going to get a fair trial is to get a change of venue.....and hope that no one on the jury watches the news.....or reads a paper.....or socializes with anyone outside of their homes...... "

" If he had said, "Oops, I'm sorry," would that have made it all better now...??? "

" reason-ator... please focus on the word sincerely:

It's too late for Mehserle to sincerely say I made a mistake, I'm sorry. "

******************

from www.dictionary.com

SINCERE
1. free of deceit, hypocrisy, or falseness; earnest: a sincere apology.
2. genuine; real: a sincere effort to improve; a sincere friend. "

" I think that Judge Jacobson was not fair in his ruling !!! Johannes Mehserle was advised by his prior attorney not to speak and since the legal system is like a foreign language he went along with it. People are forgetting the fact that the reason that Johannes Mehserle and the other BART officers were called out was because Oscar Grant and the others were fighting on BART. Let's not lose sight of the facts. I like that it was a cheap shot for the DA to charger Mehserle with murder. It is obvious that he thought that he was tasering Oscar Grant. I think that this is a travesty of justice for Johannes Mehserle. Police officers put their lives on the line every day to protect us from the criminals !!! "

" supernapawoman, what would you have charged him with...??? "

" Well Dwayne, it was an accident !! The constitution guarantees that if a police officer feels like their life is threatened they are not charged with a crime !!! It was obvious that he thought he was using his taser instead of his gun. "

" Good ruling by the judge. And it appears that the order was extended to include all attorneys (probably including those involved with the civil claim as well). So at least that evens things out.

I'm not so sure if a change of venue would be of much use at this point (see, e.g. Scott Peterson). But at least the gag order will allow the matter to proceed without extra-judicial commentary. This should hopefully increase the amount of unbiased jurors out there...

By the way, I'm not comparing Peterson to Mehserle. Two very different sets of facts and circumstances. I am only making the comparison with reference to media coverage tainting the jury pool of ALL CA counties... "

" I really have to respond to supernapawoman here.

Could you let me know where "[t]he constitution guarantees that if a police officer feels like their life is threatened they are not charged with a crime"?

I was not familiar with that provision. Is this under the state constitution or the federal constitution? Please let us know. "

" I would also like to know where that particular provision is. Perhaps it was written in very small print at the bottom of the Constitution? "

" US Court rulings determine if the use of deadly force is a crime.
****
Here is an excerpt from the Opening Statement of Louis J. Freeh, Director FBI at the October 19, 1995, Ruby Ridge Hearing

http://www.skepticfiles.org/fbi/rubystat.htm

“Ruby Ridge has become synonymous with tragedy, given the deaths there of a decorated Deputy United States Marshal, a young boy, and the boy's mother. It has also become synonymous with the exaggerated application of federal law enforcement. Both conclusions seem justified…

We know today that law enforcement overreacted at Ruby Ridge. FBI officials promulgated rules of engagement that were reasonably subject to interpretation that would permit a violation of FBI policy and the Constitution -- rules that could have caused even worse consequences than actually occurred. Rules of engagement that I will never allow the FBI to use again.”
****
But here is a critical finding by Freeh:
“I too determined that the twelve FBI employees did not commit any crimes or intentional misconduct. Nevertheless, I concluded that those employees had demonstrated inadequate performance, improper judgment, neglect of duty, and failure to exert proper managerial oversight.”
****
And here are the penalties he imposed :
“Accordingly, I imposed or proposed discipline ranging from an oral reprimand or written censure to written censure with suspension from duty. At that time, I believed the discipline imposed or proposed was commensurate with the factual basis for the imposition of that discipline.”
*******************
I recall that Ed Meese had a role in crafting Judicial Deadly Force Policy.

http://www.ojp.gov/ovc/assist/nvaa/98facult.htm

Edwin Meese III, Attorney General of the U.S from 1985 to 1988... During the 1970s, Mr. Meese was Director of the Center for Criminal Justice Policy and Management... He earlier... was an Alameda County prosecutor... "

" lookwhat: good information.

But I - and at least on other commentor - am still looking for the constitutional guarantees that supernapawoman referred to.

Any of your online digging come up with anything in that regard? "

" Mr. Feasor, interpretation of the constitution is up to the court. The links provide detail. Another post follows.

*************************
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cjs04.htm

Federal constitutional standards permit law enforcement officers to use deadly force to apprehend criminal suspects when there is "probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm...to the officer or to others..." and if deadly force "is necessary" to effect the apprehension.1 This formulation of the constitutional rule by the Supreme Court suggests two factors - dangerousness and necessity - as relevant to the question whether deadly force is constitutionally permissible.

*******************************

http://www.virginiacops.org/Articles/Force/useof.htm

There are three provisions in the U.S. Constitution that are relevant to the use of force by government officials: the Fourth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment, and the Due Process Clause. By its explicit terms, the Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Accordingly, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that within the context of arrests or other seizures of persons, the use of deadly force by police officers must be "objectively reasonable, in light of the facts and circumstances confronting [the officers] . . . judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene . . . rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight." The Eighth Amendment explicitly prohibits "cruel and unusual punishments." Because of this explicit text, the Supreme Court has held that the Eighth Amendment governs the use of force appropriate for maintaining control of convicted prisoners and has framed the issue as "whether force was applied in a good faith effort to maintain or restore discipline or maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm." But while the texts of the Fourth and Eighth Amendments have assisted the courts in deciding the scope... "

" lookwhat: thank you again.

So that verifies there is no explicit constitutional guarantee "that if a police officer feels like their life is threatened they are not charged with a crime." Right?

It's up to the court. Police are not protected from criminal charges if they end up killing someone without (objectively-determined) justification.

Your research is appreciated; I think that closes the case on supernapawoman's mistaken interpretation of our constitution. "

" Mr. Feasor,
While there is no explicit constitutional guarantee "that if a police officer feels like their life is threatened they are not charged with a crime", the reality is closer to supernapawoman’s observation that “if a police officer feels like their life is threatened they are not charged with a crime”.

Confused? It’s not the constitution, it’s something else that provides protection from any criminal charge or civil suit. I’ll let you read these articles and read between the lines.

******************

Bart Shooting
15November 1992
Jerrold Cornelius Hall
Officer Fred Crabtree

Lethal force
The BART Police Department operates without oversight or accountability - but with plenty of attack dogs and 12-gauge shotguns

BY TIM REDMOND
Monday January 5, 2009
Editors note: This story ran Dec. 12, 1992

http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=7799&catid=&volume_id=398&issue_id=417&volume_num=43&issue_num=19

******************

“no-knock search warrant”
29July2008
Trinity Tomsic and Cheye Calvo
Prince George's County Police Dept. & the county Sheriff's Office

Deadly Force
What a SWAT team did to Cheye Calvo's family may seem extreme. But decades into America's war on drugs, it's business as usual.

By April Witt
Sunday, February 1, 2009

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/23/AR2009012302935.html?sid=ST2009013002471&s_pos=

*********************


A Snitch Seeks His Money
Curtain closes on throw-down gun scandal
By Carl Jones
Published on November 08, 2006
Miami New Times News

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2006-11-09/news/a-snitch-seeks-his-money/

****

Ex-Florida Officer Faces Trials after Speaking Out
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Miami Herald, The (KRT)
via NewsEdge Corporation


http://www.officer.com/web/online/Top-News-Stories/Ex-Florida-Officer-Faces-Trials-after-Speaking-Out-/1$41971

*****
Ex-Miami Officer Testifies In Police Corruption Case
By DANA CANEDY
Published: January 29, 2003
New York Times

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE0D61039F93AA15752C0A9659C8B63 "