The Prosecution Rests

Thursday, April 03, 2008

Eugene O'Donnell, professor of law and police science at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, Errol Louis, columnist for the Daily News, and civil rights attorney Norman Siegel talk about the latest in the trial of the officers charged in the Sean Bell shooting.


Errol Louis, Eugene O'Donnell and Norman Siegel

Comments [12]

WAT? from Get grip

Why is it that in a lot of these cases, where police officers use excessive violence and firepower against civilians - who mostly happen to be minorities, there is NEVER an assessment or concrete steps taken regarding policing procedures, training and management?


Ummmmmmmmmm who is shooting up neighborhoods? Who continues to follows their own distorted version of the laws? Dumb question.
There is also plenty of police training and its always going on. There are also always assessments done. What we have on this blog is a group of people, who are quick to march because of their ignorance. Thank you for showing your selves up. You just made the point, how and why so many are easily bought into Sharpton and the sceaming lawyers mind set for the money shake downs.

Apr. 27 2008 02:50 PM
WAT? from Get grip

How can someone sitting in a car have a gun? R U for real! Please put the pipe down or get a a reality ck.

Did you see all the drug dealing gang members who were from the same cartel on the border, yeah Mexico and the US that drove down a main street killing each other within the past three days? 1,500 spent shell casings, 21 veh's. and what, a nice big double digit number dead. They were sitting in their cars. So explain to me how being in a car makes it an inability to have or fire a weapon? Better yet dont waste my time, there is no conversation to be had on this blog with someone as dense as U!

Apr. 27 2008 02:38 PM

Every Policemen is an agent of repression in your eyes, every Officer. You have a personal agenda in this and its not Bell or the others to which your con artist Sharpton and others twist the reality of the facts.

Bell not having gun is what you use as a drumming cry but none of you involved in these demonstrations aimed at civil unrest deal with true facts. Why did Bell and his drinking buddies act out that night because they like you feel they have a right to clown around the police. Fear is not a part of it, and they knew the individuals involved were Police.

It was not excessive fire power it happened in seconds. Police dont count rounds when their safety is at stake they stop the threat immediately. Stop distoring reality they do not love taking lives. This us against them is an agenda for the law breakers.

Im fed up with so many of you, who feel you can do whatever you want when you want and screw the law of land and police order. Your the reason society is all screwed up, all because of your lawless life preference. Its always the mans fault no personal responsibilty what so ever, none at all. We have laws for a reason but you in support of breaking the laws would love to see the law destroyed so your free to commit your crime spree. Were not buying your real game/gang banging plan.

Apr. 27 2008 02:29 PM
REALITY from Big City

Your lying about police being intoxicated.

Apr. 27 2008 02:03 PM
GETREAL from Big City

Its amazing Sharpton marches and radical marches making demands always manage to a produce a number of people, who apparently are not at work or even in school. Plenty of time on their hands to idle away on the street.

If a vehicle is being used as a weapon you can shoot. Sorry if you think police simply refuse to stand in for your vehicle run down. Guess some of you would rather see an Officer diving face first to the ground or simply be run over. Heaven forbid, you should try following the law as a responsible citizen and cease acting out.

Its also amazing that your marchers always consist of the Revolutionary Communist Party, The New Black Panther Radical Gang Group ala- remix and every other odd ball available on the streets who feels this country should provide them with every conceivable federal program paid for by those who actually are to busy either at work or at home caring for their families.

Also amazing, you always have to have a loud mouth confused fleecer calling them-selves a Minister distorting facts of crime.

Sharpton is an opportunist with no job, other than to find a pool of misfits who are easily excited and very familiar with acting out like a bunch of un-educated fools.

You also try to use these marching tactics as a form of intimidation. Sorry again, its also not working. You bore us, now go get a job be there for your children and try sending your kids to school clean and fed for a change. FACT!

Apr. 27 2008 01:56 PM
David from NYC

#5--Thank you! I've been saying the same thing for weeks now.

Apr. 03 2008 10:52 AM
James from New York

As someone who has served on many juries, I have always thought that it was never a very useful thing for the media to discuss "controversial" trials while they were in progress. Unless one is in the courtroom during ALL of the proceedings, one is simply unable to have an accurate sense of the relative merits of all of the testimony & evidence presented. Media attempts to 'summarize' are inevitably distorted by the particular media presenters' bias, however unintentional. For citizens who are interested in 'justice', it's best to avoid paying much attention to these 'media' circuses, and instead present themselves to serve on juries when called.

Apr. 03 2008 10:42 AM
HK from new york

maybe i've miossed something, but how could bell or his friend go for his gun if they were sitting in the car? doesnt that seem odd? if a guy was standing outside of the car(which he wasnt according to what i understand) then that motion takes a while and would not warrant a rapid firing reaction. and if a cop cannot shoot at a car, even if it is used as a weapon coming toward him, then i don;t understand what is being debated or why the prosecution could not have had a slam-dunk on this one.

and the fact that the cops were probably inebriated but for some reason cops do not get questioned or tested immediately or even very soon after they commit an act for which they may be charged with a crime.

i would like someone to explain this. seriously. what am i missing?

Apr. 03 2008 10:38 AM
Leonardo from Queens

Is there a particular reason why the trials of police officers are ALWAYS defined as the victim's trial? - I.e., 'THe Shawn Bell Trial', 'The Amedeo Diallo Trial', 'The Rodney King Trial'. These imply that the VICTIM is on trial. They should be properly named. - I..e, 'THe Trial of the Police officers who killed Shawn Bell'

Apr. 03 2008 10:30 AM
DP from Brooklyn

Does the fact that the cops may have been drinking (but did not take brethalizer tests) impact the cops credibility?

Apr. 03 2008 10:27 AM
Brian from Forest Hills

Yes, there should have been a special prosecutor. DA Brown is in a no-win situation because he has to deal with the police and the community every day and they are in conflict in this case.

This is a bench trial and because of that each side does not have to put on a show (there is no need for drama)--they can simply present everything and sort it out during closing argument and let the judge find the facts.

Apr. 03 2008 10:18 AM
Leo L from Queens

Why is it that in a lot of these cases, where police officers use excessive violence and firepower against civilians - who mostly happen to be minorities, there is NEVER an assessment or concrete steps taken regarding policing procedures, training and management?

These incidents not only destroy the civilians and their families, but destroy the families of the officers and continue to create anger, frustration and resentment in many communities.
Why isn't the police hierarchy, the commissioner and mayor held accountable for their mismanagement?

Apr. 03 2008 09:25 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.