Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
The thing about the union is that it is pretty much obligated to have your back.
The fact that that explanation was the best excuse the union could come up with only demonstrates how egregious this cop's failures are. Given the argument being made - and thanks to the publicity it is getting - hopefully a grand jury eventually comes down with charges of attempted murder (of the person he claims he was trying to shoot) and aggravated assault (of the person he did shoot), rather than just a charge of attempted murder for the person he shot.
|
They wont do that..sadly.
The trick they use is they over-charge cops when something like this happens. Charging them with the most serious crime that will be the most difficult to prove. Ive lost track of how many times I've seen that. Rather than laying the most logical charges with the highest chance of the cop getting convicted they purposefully go for the most difficult charge to convict the cop.
Nothing new.
However when the typical criminal goes and shoots someone - there will be a ton of deliberation about what is the most logical charge that has the highest chance of sticking - while still carrying a high punishment. They dont do the same for cops for some reason.
This case is a bit unique in that the situation looks calm on tape, the officer shot and hit a man with his hands up and then officially claimed to be shooting at a autistic child with a toy in his hands. There is a chance that the statement made trying to cover up his actions could actually get him in deep trouble because it means he shot at a child with a toy in his hands after being told the situation by the caregiver he eventually shot who was on the ground and posing no threat.
Maybe he can actually get into more trouble for attempting to shoot the child than he can for actually hitting the adult.