NYPD cops aquitted after shooting unarmed bridegroom 50 times

[footstepsfrom#27]

This is so deeply disturbing I really can't even get my head around it. How does something like this happen?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080425/...olice_shooting

3 NYPD detectives acquitted in 50-shot killing

By TOM HAYS, Associated Press Writer
44 minutes ago

NEW YORK - Three detectives were acquitted of all charges Friday in the 50-shot killing of an unarmed groom-to-be on his wedding day, a case that put the NYPD at the center of another dispute involving allegations of excessive firepower.

Justice Arthur Cooperman delivered the verdict in a Queens courtroom packed with spectators, including victim Sean Bell's fiancee and parents, and at least 200 people gathered outside the building.

The verdict provoked an outpouring of emotions: Bell's fiancee immediately walked out of the room. His mother cried.

Outside the courthouse, which was surrounded by scores of police officers, many in the crowd began weeping as news of the verdict said. Others were enraged, swearing and screaming "Murderers! Murderers!" or "KKK!"

Bell, a 23-year-old black man, was killed in a hail of gunfire outside a seedy strip club in Queens on Nov. 25, 2006 — his wedding day — as he was leaving his bachelor party with two friends.

Officers Michael Oliver, 36, and Gescard Isnora, 29, stood trial for manslaughter while Officer Marc Cooper, 40, was charged only with reckless endangerment. Two other shooters weren't charged. Oliver squeezed off 31 shots; Isnora fired 11 rounds; and Cooper shot four times.

The officers, complaining that pretrial publicity had unfairly painted them as cold-blooded killers, opted to have the judge decide the case rather than a jury.

The judge indicated that the police officers' version of events was more credible than the victims' version. "The people have not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that each defendant was not justified" in firing, he said.

A conviction on manslaughter could have brought up to 25 years in prison; the penalty for reckless endangerment, a misdemeanor, is a year behind bars.

The case brought back painful memories of other NYPD shootings, such as the 1999 shooting of Amadou Diallo — an African immigrant who was gunned down in a hail of 41 bullets by police officers who mistook his wallet for a gun. The acquittal of the officers in that case created a storm of protest, with hundreds arrested after taking to the streets in demonstration.

The mood surrounding this case has been muted by comparison, although Bell's fiancee, parents and their supporters, including the Rev. Al Sharpton, have held rallies demanding that the officers — two of whom are black — be held accountable.

Still, a phalanx of police officers, some uniformed and some in the department's community affairs polo shirts, was stationed outside the courthouse Friday. The building was ringed by metal barricades. Some in the crowd wore buttons with Bell's picture or held signs saying "Justice for Sean Bell." After the verdict was read, some in the crowd approached officers but were held back; the jostling quickly died down.

After the verdict, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly acknowledged that some people were disappointed with the acquittals.

"We don't anticipate violence, but we are prepared for any contingency," he said.

The nearly two-month trial was marked by deeply divergent accounts of the night.

The defense painted the victims as drunken thugs who the officers believed were armed and dangerous. Prosecutors sought to convince the judge that the victims had been minding their own business, and that the officers were inept, trigger-happy aggressors.

None of the officers took the witness stand in his own defense. Instead, Cooperman heard transcripts of the officers testifying before a grand jury, saying they believed they had good reason to use deadly force. The judge also heard testimony from Bell's two injured companions, who insisted the maelstrom erupted without warning.

Both sides were consistent on one point: The utter chaos surrounding the last moments of Bell's life.

"It happened so quick," Isnora said in his grand jury testimony. "It was like the last thing I ever wanted to do."

Bell's companions — Trent Benefield and Joseph Guzman — also offered dramatic testimony about the episode. Benefield and Guzman were both wounded; Guzman still has four bullets lodged in his body.

Referring to Isnora, Guzman said, "This dude is shooting like he's crazy, like he's out of his mind."

The victims and shooters were set on a fateful collision course by a pair of innocuous decisions: Bell's to have a last-minute bachelor party at Kalua Cabaret, and the undercover detectives' to investigate reports of prostitution at the club.

As the club closed around 4 a.m., Sanchez and Isnora claimed they overheard Bell and his friends first flirt with women, then taunt a stranger who responded by putting his right hand in his pocket as if he had a gun. Guzman, they testified, said, "Yo, go get my gun" — something Bell's friends denied.

Isnora said he decided to arm himself, call for backup — "It's getting hot," he told his supervisor — and tail Bell, Guzman and Benefield as they went around the corner and got into Bell's car. He claimed that after warning the men to halt, Bell pulled away, bumped him and rammed an unmarked police van that converged on the scene with Oliver at the wheel.

The detective also alleged that Guzman made a sudden move as if he were reaching for a gun.

"I yelled 'Gun!' and fired," he said. "In my mind, I knew (Guzman) had a gun."

Benefield and Guzman testified that there were no orders. Instead, Guzman said, Isnora "appeared out of nowhere" with a gun drawn and shot him in the shoulder — the first of 16 shots to enter his body.

"That's all there was — gunfire," he said. "There wasn't nothing else."

With tires screeching, glass breaking and bullets flying, the officers claimed that they believed they were the ones under fire. Oliver responded by emptying his semiautomatic pistol, reloading, and emptying it again, as the supervisor sought cover.

The truth emerged when the smoke cleared: There was no weapon inside Bell's blood-splattered car.

[jhat01]

The one guy shot 31 times?? unbelievable...
What a sad story.

[Florida_Bronco]

Can't help feel sorry for a guy getting shot and killed before his wedding, but I'm gonna side with the cops on this one. Anytime you ram police vehicle with your car, you give the officers the right to use lethal force.

It also appears that those in the car were giving alot of contradictory testimony, which pretty much put the nail in the coffin.

[Los Broncos]

Dam, sad indeed, but you cant mess with the law.

[gunns]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Can't help feel sorry for a guy getting shot and killed before his wedding, but I'm gonna side with the cops on this one. Anytime you ram police vehicle with your car, you give the officers the right to use lethal force.

It also appears that those in the car were giving alot of contradictory testimony, which pretty much put the nail in the coffin.

Well color me surprised that you sided with the cops.

You wait long enough, memories fade, testimonies become changed. The only thing that doesn't is the 31 times. How was that explained?

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Can't help feel sorry for a guy getting shot and killed before his wedding, but I'm gonna side with the cops on this one. Anytime you ram police vehicle with your car, you give the officers the right to use lethal force.

It also appears that those in the car were giving alot of contradictory testimony, which pretty much put the nail in the coffin.

I'm guessing that if I'm sitting in a car with 50 bullets flying at me from all directions that I might tend to see things a tad different than the next guy also...ya think? Whose sitting there taking notes when their being pumped full of bullets?

As for the ramming of the cop car...that's only the police version of this story. I'd like to know why it was necessary to import backup officers at 4:00 am for a couple dudes talking to strippers in the parking lot of a club in the first place. This was done under the supposed umbrella of a prostitution sting. If it was truly a prostitution sting wouldn't you already have your assets in place? And even if tricks were being turned out of there, why would that merit cops hanging out in the parkig lot at closing time? They could easily go undercover inside the club. Lots of things don't make sense and the NYPD has been down this road before hasn't it?

How is it possible that somebody winds up getting shot over this...much less 31 times? I find their story pretty hard to fathom.

[Spider]

Rambo works for the NYPD

[Florida_Bronco]

Originally Posted by gunns

Well color me surprised that you sided with the cops.

You wait long enough, memories fade, testimonies become changed. The only thing that doesn't is the 31 times. How was that explained?

Regardless, it doesn't appear that anyone challenged the fact that the "victims" hit a police officer with their vehicle and then rammed a police vehicle. That's going to get you shot almost every time.

The officer who fired 31 times used 2 magazines. While it's far from good marksmanship, its not that hard to believe that it would happen under such a tense moment, especially if the car was still moving after he used his first mag.

[Florida_Bronco]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

I'm guessing that if I'm sitting in a car with 50 bullets flying at me from all directions that I might tend to see things a tad different than the next guy also...ya think? Whose sitting there taking notes when their being pumped full of bullets?

It appears the cops all gave the same story though, and they were in the same situation.

As for the ramming of the cop car...that's only the police version of this story.

In the article you posted and the news story that was on TV, I heard nothing of the car's occupants denying this. If you have a link showing they denied it, please post it up.

I'd like to know why it was necessary to import backup officers at 4:00 am for a couple dudes talking to strippers in the parking lot of a club in the first place. This was done under the supposed umbrella of a prostitution sting. If it was truly a prostitution sting wouldn't you already have your assets in place? And even if tricks were being turned out of there, why would that merit cops hanging out in the parkig lot at closing time? They could easily go undercover inside the club. Lots of things don't make sense and the NYPD has been down this road before hasn't it?

All irrelevant.

How is it possible that somebody winds up getting shot over this...much less 31 times? I find their story pretty hard to fathom.

Easy, they hit a cop with their car and then rammed a police vehicle.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Regardless, it doesn't appear that anyone challenged the fact that the "victims" hit a police officer with their vehicle and then rammed a police vehicle.

Nowhere in this story does it say this. One guy said the cops "appeared out of nowhere" before shooting him.

That's going to get you shot almost every time.

Yeah? 51 times? Why is it always in NYC that cops fire off like they're in a fire fight in Iraq? Ever hear of a cop in Toledo blowing somebody away with the equivilent of a firing squad?

The officer who fired 31 times used 2 magazines. While it's far from good marksmanship, its not that hard to believe that it would happen under such a tense moment, especially if the car was still moving after he used his first mag.

Yeah...it's almost impossible for any clear thinking individual to believe that. First of all...it wasn't bad marksmanship as you claim...he had 31 bullets in him so I think they found the target. At what point did the cops decide enough was enough then...cause I'm guessing the dude was no longer a threat...if he ever was...LONG before they got to 31 shots that found the mark.

This stinks to high heaven...as I said...not the first time for the NYPD is it?

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

It appears the cops all gave the same story though, and they were in the same situation.

No kidding...the cops all gave the same story? That's truly incredible. No they were not "in the same situation". It's a bit different...they weren't the ones being slaughtered by a firing squad. I know you're smarter than this.

In the article you posted and the news story that was on TV, I heard nothing of the car's occupants denying this. If you have a link showing they denied it, please post it up.

And it also says nothing about them admitting to that either. You're drawing that conclusion out of thin air. The two stories are described as radically different but we were not told every aspect of how they differed I'm sure.

All irrelevant.

Murder by police is not irrelevant.

Easy, they hit a cop with their car and then rammed a police vehicle.

As I said...you don't know that. But I can see why you want to believe it.

Not the first time for the NYPD on this is it?

[Florida_Bronco]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

Nowhere in this story does it say this. One guy said the cops "appeared out of nowhere" before shooting him.

Read the story YOU posted. It's right there towards the end.

Yeah? 51 times? Why is it always in NYC that cops fire off like they're in a fire fight in Iraq? Ever hear of a cop in Toledo blowing somebody away with the equivilent of a firing squad?

How many cops fired? Other than the one who fired 31 times, the number of bullets fired by the other officers was plenty reasonable.

Yeah...it's almost impossible for any clear thinking individual to believe that. First of all...it wasn't bad marksmanship as you claim...he had 31 bullets in him so I think they found the target. At what point did the cops decide enough was enough then...cause I'm guessing the dude was no longer a threat...if he ever was...LONG before they got to 31 shots that found the mark.

If the car is still moving after the first magazine, most cops will assume the target is still alive and a threat and continue firing.

I stand by my assertion that it was a combination of bad markmanship and the intensity of the moment.

[alkemical]

http://gothamist.com/2008/04/24/new_...s.php#comments

Starting today, teams of six NYPD officers will be patrolling the subway system in 12 hour shifts to thwart would-be terrorists. You’ll be able to easily identify the squads – called “Torch Teams” – by their rifles, MP5 submachine guns, handguns, body armor and bomb-sniffing dogs.

The program is being paid for with $151 million from taxpayers nationwide, allocated through D.C. The Torch Teams will function like the similarly equipped NYPD “Hercules Teams” (pictured) above ground.

WCBS says this “a fist [sic] for mass transit in the United States.” The NYPD’s spokesperson calls them “Hercules teams with MetroCards.”

[Florida_Bronco]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

No kidding...the cops all gave the same story? That's truly incredible. No they were not "in the same situation". It's a bit different...they weren't the ones being slaughtered by a firing squad. I know you're smarter than this.

Well in the judges own words, the inconsistency in the testimony of the witnesses had a major impact on his ruling. And I think we can all agree it'd have to be major inconsistencies to warrant that, as I imagine the judge would understand minor differences are to be expected.

And it also says nothing about them admitting to that either. You're drawing that conclusion out of thin air. The two stories are described as radically different but we were not told every aspect of how they differed I'm sure.

Oh for Christ's sake footsteps, pull your head out of your ass. Are you SERIOUSLY gonna sit there and tell me that if there was any doubt over if they rammed the vehicle that the prosecution would have not used that or that it wouldn't have come out by now?

Murder by police is not irrelevant.

All that crap you posted has nothing to do with the shooting, nor is it really all that educated on police procedure.

As I said...you don't know that. But I can see why you want to believe it.

I'll say it again. If there was ANY doubt over the fact that the police vehicle was rammed, we'd know about it by now.

[Spider]

Shot 51 times = mere flesh wound

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Read the story YOU posted. It's right there towards the end.

I did read it...twice. It says nothing about the victims admitting that they tried to ram the police car.

How many cops fired? Other than the one who fired 31 times, the number of bullets fired by the other officers was plenty reasonable.

Yeah...another 20 shots? It takes four guys firing for what...about 30 seconds straight with single shot revolvers to fire off that many shots? They stood there and pumped this guy full of bullets for half a minute before stopping. He was probably cut in half by that time.

If the car is still moving after the first magazine, most cops will assume the target is still alive and a threat and continue firing.

Sure...lots of people can drive with a 20 or more bullets in them. Again...nothing but the cops word on this. Is there some reason you're taking it at face value? Tell me this...do you think any police officer anywhere in this country has ever shot somebody he didn't need to and lied? Do you think that's ever happened in NYC? Or do you automatically assume the cops are telling the truth?

I stand by my assertion that it was a combination of bad markmanship and the intensity of the moment.

Bad markmanship? Why? You think they should have hit him in the head maybe insted of the chest? He was hit 31 times...my 12 year old daughter could hit somebody firing a gun 31 times. If a police officer couldn't hit his target with that many shots he ought not be running around carrying a loaded gun at all.

Tell me how often you've seen cops kill people in gun fights that they needed 50 shots to get the job done. Usually it's one shot. These guys were the worst "marksmen' in the history of law enforcement if what you say is true.
Of courses it isn't though. They hit him 31 times.

[Spider]

cant believe I stopped watching porn to read this .......

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Well in the judges own words, the inconsistency in the testimony of the witnesses had a major impact on his ruling. And I think we can all agree it'd have to be major inconsistencies to warrant that, as I imagine the judge would understand minor differences are to be expected.

Right..."in the judges own words"...if in fact the judge actually considered that the victims of what was basically a fireing squad had to offer factually consistent accounts of this event, then I suggest he's unfit to be a judge. This sounds like some good 'ol boy justice NYC style. As I said...not the first time for the NYPD ont his is it? This has happened before now...several times.

Oh for Christ's sake footsteps, pull your head out of your ass. Are you SERIOUSLY gonna sit there and tell me that if there was any doubt over if they rammed the vehicle that the prosecution would have not used that or that it wouldn't have come out by now?

The story only says the accounts are completely different and unless you've read the court transcripts you don't know what the victims testified. Are you saying you do know what they said?

All that crap you posted has nothing to do with the shooting, nor is it really all that educated on police procedure.

Bull****. I don't need to be "educated on police procedure" to understand that when cops shoot someone 51 times there's something fishy going on. What are you saying...that happens all the time?

I'll say it again. If there was ANY doubt over the fact that the police vehicle was rammed, we'd know about it by now.

EVEN if the vehicle as rammed...there's absolutely NOTHING you cansay that accounts for why they filled this guy with 31 bullets. You must think I'm an absolute numbskull to buy this **** you're shoveling.

You really back the blue no matte what huh? Suppose he'd had 400 bullets in him...would that be consistent with "police procedure" too?

[Florida_Bronco]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

I did read it...twice. It says nothing about the victims admitting that they tried to ram the police car.

It doesn't say they deny it either. This reminds me why no one pays attention to your postings on the main board anymore.

Yeah...another 20 shots? It takes four guys firing for what...about 30 seconds straight with single shot revolvers to fire off that many shots? They stood there and pumped this guy full of bullets for half a minute before stopping. He was probably cut in half by that time.

NYPD does not use revolvers. They use Glock, Sig Sauer and Smith and Wesson semi-autos.

Sure...lots of people can drive with a 20 or more bullets in them. Again...nothing but the cops word on this. Is there some reason you're taking it at face value? Tell me this...do you think any police officer anywhere in this country has ever shot somebody he didn't need to and lied? Do you think that's ever happened in NYC? Or do you automatically assume the cops are telling the truth?

You're not taking all things into consideration here. It's likely the cars windows were tinted, and even when shot the driver could easily stay on the accelerator leading the officers to believe he was still a threat.

Bad markmanship? Why? You think they should have hit him in the head maybe insted of the chest? He was hit 31 times...my 12 year old daughter could hit somebody firing a gun 31 times. If a police officer couldn't hit his target with that many shots he ought not be running around carrying a loaded gun at all.

Like I said, it's definetly not a shining example of great work, but knowing people who have been in those situations I tend to be a little more understanding of it, and it appears the judge was too.

Tell me how often you've seen cops kill people in gun fights that they needed 50 shots to get the job done. Usually it's one shot. These guys were the worst "marksmen' in the history of law enforcement if what you say is true.
Of courses it isn't though. They hit him 31 times.

Again, you're forgetting that there were a number of cops who fired. Only the one actually fired 31 times.

[Florida_Bronco]

Footsteps, debating with you is like talking to a brick wall, you know that? I'm not going to keep going round and round with you on this. I've stated what I needed to, so as far as you and me are concerned this debate is over.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Footsteps, debating with you is like talking to a brick wall, you know that? I'm not going to keep going round and round with you on this.

you can quit arguing with him , but dont ask to watch porn with me .......

[Florida_Bronco]

Originally Posted by Spider

you can quit arguing with him , but dont ask to watch porn with me .......

You said you loved me though.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

You said you loved me though.

ok you caught me , I am not watching porn , watching the Disney channel ... but if I was and you watched with me , you would have ot wear falsies and dress so I wouldnt feel like a queer

[Florida_Bronco]

Originally Posted by Spider

ok you caught me , I am not watching porn , watching the Disney channel ... but if I was and you watched with me , you would have ot wear falsies and dress so I wouldnt feel like a queer

Anything for you Spider.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

Anything for you Spider.

soon people will be Pming you links to therapist . happens to me all the time