" I've lost a lot of respect for that judge, who completely failed to appreciate the situation Mehserle found himself in. I don't think what he did was right, but was it murder? Really?? Oh, wait, judges are elected?? You mean this judge has a reason to make the voting public of his county happy despite the interests of justice? Say it ain't so... "

" Baraki-

There is plenty of evidence to support this going to trial. I'm not sure there is many judges that would have came to a different conclusion at least in terms of moving this to a trial.

When you have officers statements from the time of the incident not matching their statements now as well as their statement now not matching the video evidence it causes problems. When you combine that with the tazer and firearm being on different sides with different look feel and weight it's worthy of a full trial so that all evidence can be presented and a jury of his peers can judge him. "

" Pathetic... "

" YaY! ONE step in the right direction. This is some good news in the midst of this saga. "

" Murder?Yes,murder,maybe not premeditated but murder all the same,he pulled his gun (not his tazer)and shot the guy in the BACK! Im not defending the actions of these men leading up to the "incident" but to shoot an unarmed man is inexcusable. "

" napagirlnomore: one of the elements of the crime of murder is malice aforethought. Intent aka pre meditation without it its manslaughter. "

" Guesswhoiam-


That's not entirely true. You don't need pre-meditation to get a murder rap. "

" Mesherle will be found not guilty and
oakland will burn. "

" Mehserle will be found not guilty and Oakland will burn. "

" justice to all, cops are not above the law, they are our servants if anything, we pay for them through taxes "

" Unbelievable !! Rather than doing the right thing and ending all the insanity of this situation this judge has continued the circus atmosphere. I agree with you badheadache that he will be found NOT GUILTY ! But I am sorry that he will have to go through this entire trial when the criminal in the case was Oscar Grant. It is sad that a situation like this is being controled by public pressure rather than the real facts ! "

" Hear Ye every definition of murder I can find says you do.

The judge hid. He did not want to take the heat (and I believe his life would have been at risk) if he had concluded that there wasn't enough proof for murder charges.

There is a slim chance Mehserle will be found guilty of murder, but a greater chance of him being found guilty of manslaughter. I doubt he will get off with any less. "

" supernapawoman: So are you saying that Grant deserved what he got? "

" thzn: does this mean that all people on welfare are our sevants as well?.... we pay for them through taxes too.

police officers are always talked down upon until you need them, then all of a sudden they're your hero. imagine that. "

" Mr. Grant should have been at home with his wife and young child. Not out starting fights. If Mr. Grant had never put himself into that situation of needing police intervention, well, I guess we all make choices. "

" Don't kid yourselves. This thing was going to trial no matter what. "

" The comments here are highly revealing, some more so than others:
"Unbelievable !! Rather than doing the right thing and ending all the insanity of this situation this judge has continued the circus atmosphere. I agree with you badheadache that he will be found NOT GUILTY ! But I am sorry that he will have to go through this entire trial when the criminal in the case was Oscar Grant. It is sad that a situation like this is being controled by public pressure rather than the real facts ! "

Think about the mentality of this statement. "

" LOL @ thzn, next time your house gets burglarized or your car gets broken into or better yet you get in a traffic accident and your insurance company wont pay without a police report, tell the officer that shows up he's your servant see how far you get.

Brilliant!!! "

" 187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.

thats the entire section I specifically see malice aforethought

perhaps you can point out a cal app or case that defines it more clear than the PC "

" The judge should have gag ordered himself. His comments of "there is no doubt in my mind....it was a deliberate...intentional act" are damaging to the Defense for future hearings. Way to ruin the jury pool. Not allowing witnesses? I hope that went for both sides. Seems the judge was scared of the criminal element and not to interested in justice. "

" From Answers.com

"Many states use the California definition of implied malice to describe an unintentional killing that is charged as murder because the defendant intended to do serious bodily injury or acted with extreme recklessness. For example, if an aggressor punches a victim in the nose, intending only to injure the victim's face, the aggressor may be charged with murder if the victim dies from the blow. The infliction of serious bodily injury becomes the equivalent of an intent to kill when the victim dies. Although the aggressor did not have the express desire to kill the victim, the aggressor in such a case would not be charged with assault, but murder. To understand why, it is helpful to consider the alternative. When a person dies at the hands of an aggressor, it does not sit well with the public conscience to preclude a murder charge simply because the aggressor intended only to do serious bodily injury.

A person who unintentionally causes the death of another person also may be charged with murder under the depraved-heart theory. Depraved-heart murder refers to a killing that results from gross negligence. For example, assume that a man is practicing shooting his firearm in his backyard, located in a suburban area. If the man accidentally shoots and kills someone, he can be charged with murder under the depraved-heart theory." "

" I find it hard to believe that a tazer was even necessary in that situation. I mean Grant had his hands behind his back and 400+ pounds of police officer on top of him. With that said Mehserle is not guilty of murder no matter how many people think he is. I highly doubt Mehserle clocked into work thinking "hey i'm gonna kill somebody today". He should be charged with manslaughter because he is guilty of that. To bad the folks in Oakland don't know the law very well because a murder conviction is not going to happen. I am thankful however that there is video of the incident because if there wasn't he would probably get away with it. "

" have someone over 200 lbs kneeled your neck down the ground...see if you can breath without trying to move to get some air. this is the way officers are trained to do so they use their tasers. "

" like father like son? http://sfist.com/2009/01/12/todd_mehserles_angry_internet_histo.php "

" The judge did a wonderful job of tainting the jury pool...and to WhatWhat, point well taken...as you say, the retribution that would have been visited upon him and his family from the "criminal element" must have been uppermost in his mind when he made those unfortunate remarks. This promises to be a very nasty trial.
So thankful we don't live in Oakland... "

" asahigo and guesswhoiam-

See response from dipper. Gross recklessness and implied malice aforethought is all it takes for murder charges. I think he could very well be convicted of 2nd degree murder. "

" The judge's comments were out of line. He went beyond just saying there was enough to go to trial. He stated that the defendant meant to shoot the victim with a gun. That is really inappropriate.

second degree murder n. a non-premeditated killing, resulting from an assault in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility. Second degree murder is different from First Degree Murder which is a premeditated, intentional killing, or results from a vicious crime such as arson, rape, or armed robbery. Exact distinctions on degree vary by state.

California has retained the malice aforethought definition of murder (Cal. Penal Code § 187 [West 1996]). It also maintains a statute that defines the term malice. Under section 188 of the California Penal Code, malice is divided into two types: express and implied. Express malice exists "when there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a fellow creature." Malice may be implied by a judge or jury "when no considerable provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart."

A jury will decide. A change of venue is certainly very important in this case as the emotional climate in Oakland is not conducive to the selection of a fair and impartial jury. Who would want to be identified as a juror there? Imagine the pressure. This judge should certainly be recused. He's obviously decided already and could mislead a jury. "

" He's innocent until proven guilty. The look on his face after he fired his weapon tells all. It was accidential. I say good luck to you Johannes Mehserle! I am wondering if it's possible to change the location in this case? Will he get a fair trial in a city gripped by fear and run by criminals? "

" Oh brother.

The judge determined that a JURY TRIAL is necessary to resolve innocence or guilt. So why are so many people complaining? If you don't like the judge's decisions, SHOULDN'T it go to a JURY???

FYI (guesswhoiam & others), malice aforethought does have a statutory definition - under Penal Code section 188 (the code section after PC 187) - specifically:

"Such MALICE may be express or implied. It is express when there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a fellow creature. It is implied, when no considerable provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing show an ABANDONED and MALIGNANT HEART.
When it is shown that the killing resulted from the INTENTIONAL doing of an act with express OR implied malice as defined above, NO OTHER MENTAL STATE need be shown TO ESTABLISH the mental state of MALICE AFORETHOUGHT. Neither an awareness of the obligation to act within the general body of laws regulating society nor acting despite such awareness is included within the definition of malice." (Pen. Code 188, emphasis added).

So basically, it does not need to be premeditated. If you intentionally pull the trigger of a lethal weapon aimed at someone's back, you'll likely face a trial (and not have it dismissed by way of preliminary law and motion practice...)

That's all. "

" This trial needs to take place elsewhere. Far from Oakland. Where the judge and they jury will not be strongly influenced by everyone who claims this was murder. "