Judge : This is murder, not manslaughter. Sorry, not guilty.

Rekia Boyd shooting: protests after Chicago police officer found not guilty

Disbelief as judge says Dante Servin must be acquitted because gunshot that killed woman was ‘intentional’ but not ‘reckless’





A judge’s surprise acquittal of an off-duty Chicago police officer in the shooting death of an unarmed woman called into question prosecutors’ decision not to charge the man with murder and fuelled protests on Tuesday.

That the officer shot Rekia Boyd, 22, was never in dispute. But the judge said he was bound to find detective Dante Servin not guilty of involuntary manslaughter — because manslaughter requires evidence of “recklessness”, while the judge described the act of shooting as “intentional”.

“It is intentional and the crime, if any there be, is first-degree murder,” Judge Dennis Porter said in his seven-page ruling.

Several dozen demonstrators gathered in downtown Chicago’s Daley Plaza on Tuesday, some holding signs with a picture of Boyd, to voice disdain for the decision by Porter and for Cook county state’s attorney Anita Alvarez.

“Anita has to go,” activist William Calloway said. “We have to band together and make a conscious decision to whom we have to pick to not only represent the police officers, but for African Americans and minorities across this city.”

Boyd had been walking to a store with three friends in March 2012 when Servin, upset over noise, asked them to quiet down. Servin says he fired because he believed another person in the group was moving towards him with a gun, though police found only a phone.

Prosecutors said Servin fired five shots over his shoulder from inside his car at the group, who all had their backs to him in an alley. Boyd was struck in the head and one other person was grazed by a bullet.

The city settled a wrongful death lawsuit with Boyd’s family for $4.5m in 2013. A few months later the Cook county state’s attorney’s office charged Servin with involuntary manslaughter.

But after a four-day bench trial Porter ruled that prosecutors failed to prove Servin acted recklessly, in the precise legal sense of the word. He said Illinois courts had consistently held that the act of pointing a gun and firing was an intentional act, not a reckless one.

Alvarez disagreed and said in a statement that she was “extremely disappointed”.

“The state’s attorney’s office brought charges in this case in good faith and only after a very careful legal analysis of the evidence as well as the specific circumstances of this crime,” Alvarez said.

Servin told reporters he had no regrets, though he said his “heart goes out to the family”.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...eath-of-unarmed-woman-prompts-protest-anger-0


So, what have we got here ? A prosecutor who thought it would be tought to have a cop found guilty of murder so he decided to go for Mauslaughter, which he probably thought it would be easier. But then the judge said the prosecutor should have charged him of murder and that since the prosecutor didn't charged him for the right crime, he had not other choice not to found him guilty of manslaughter.
And, because of the double jeopardy rule, Servin will, most probably, get away with murder...
 

Will E Worm

Conspiracy...
That the officer shot Rekia Boyd, 22, was never in dispute. But the judge said he was bound to find detective Dante Servin not guilty of involuntary manslaughter — because manslaughter requires evidence of “recklessness”, while the judge described the act of shooting as “intentional”.


Intentional is fine?

The thug is guilty. :hammer:


 
Worry about your own fucked up country.

He seems to actually know more about this country than you. You should find that saddening. I find an outside perspective can often be more objective as they can take a step back and see things from a less personal point of view without inherent baggage from it.

In any case Johan also both speaks and organizes this thoughts much better than you...which truth be told isn't exactly a difficult feat to pull off.
 
Anyone obsessed enough about something will gather some information. Johan searches the internet for stories to put America in a negative light far too often with way too much consistency. Sean Hannity searches for information to make the Democrats look bad. Would he be an arbiter of truth about the Democrats? A person's intent is important and Johan also severely lacks balance or even strives toward any. A person would have to be naive to think he doesn't resent America. Also somewhat naive to believe he is genuinely concerned about the victims as opposed to blackening a target of his fancy.
 
Johan wants to stir up racial disbutes and he will be disappointed if whites and blacks are friends.

He definitely has his fixations. I will say when there is a racial problem it's predictable which side he'll take. I really don't see how these issues concern him but he does seem to enjoy posting them. He cannot muster a ball-hair of contradiction to these types of claims.
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
He seems to actually know more about this country than you. You should find that saddening. I find an outside perspective can often be more objective as they can take a step back and see things from a less personal point of view without inherent baggage from it.

In any case Johan also both speaks and organizes this thoughts much better than you...which truth be told isn't exactly a difficult feat to pull off.

I will disagree with you. He has always been a centrist as he defines himself but he voted for Hollande which is a socialist, he also approved and endorsed Obama's failed presidency. No, he is clearly from the left wing. What I also note is that he always blames the Whites and conservatives for the minorities's misery. That is too easy. Perhaps he should see who was and is looting, rioting and is getting arrested for crimes or aggravated assault. Not everyone is naive nor stupid to be blinded or even brainwashed by the medias or by another person's opinion to see that America is facing important problems.
 

SabrinaDeep

Official Checked Star Member
Anyone obsessed enough about something will gather some information. Johan searches the internet for stories to put America in a negative light far too often with way too much consistency. Sean Hannity searches for information to make the Democrats look bad. Would he be an arbiter of truth about the Democrats? A person's intent is important and Johan also severely lacks balance or even strives toward any. A person would have to be naive to think he doesn't resent America. Also somewhat naive to believe he is genuinely concerned about the victims as opposed to blackening a target of his fancy.

I must spread some reputation.
 
hey georges can you cite some examples of Obama's failed presidency please?

when he took office we were losing 780k jobs a month. now we have gained private sector jobs for 40 straight months.
The market was at 6k when he took office now it breaks its own record weekly and is at 18k.
our gdp has increased by nearly 3% for the first time in 3 decades.
he has ended 2 wars stopping the deaths of more american soldiers for bullshit
gas prices are $2 gallon less than they were when he took office.
more americans have health care than any time in our history and 87% are paying for it georges before you claim they are all getting it free.

So now its your turn. what has failed please? what is worse than what we had prior to him taking office georges?
 
No. He's entitled to an opinion and I also think I've assessed him fairly as well as accurately. So accurate it seems he also agrees because he doesn't show up to disagree. I don't think he's a bad human being but he enjoys being a snide twat a little too much.

Twat = kusipää :jester:
 
The war in Afghanistan was not waged for bullshit. It was a warranted reaction to 9/11. The Iraq war was total BS however. There are some wars worth fighting you know.

As for the OP. I have not researched this case to even comment on it. But if Johan says it was murder, you might need to take a closer look at the details of the case.
 
hey georges can you cite some examples of Obama's failed presidency please?

when he took office we were losing 780k jobs a month. now we have gained private sector jobs for 40 straight months.
The market was at 6k when he took office now it breaks its own record weekly and is at 18k.
our gdp has increased by nearly 3% for the first time in 3 decades.
he has ended 2 wars stopping the deaths of more american soldiers for bullshit
gas prices are $2 gallon less than they were when he took office.
more americans have health care than any time in our history and 87% are paying for it georges before you claim they are all getting it free.

So now its your turn. what has failed please? what is worse than what we had prior to him taking office georges?

Well said with one exception. In economic chaos people buy less, travel less which causes a surplus of gas. When Obama took office fuel prices had already tanked, down as low as $1.20 in San Diego, and California has the highest per gallon tax in the US.
 

SabrinaDeep

Official Checked Star Member
Well guys, if you don't see the arab spring and the Ukraine crisis as a failure maybe you should travel more overseas and south/east of Versailles. The problem of some Americans and of European communists has always been that they like to be gay with someone else's ass. I wish you guys contributed to Obama and Sarkozy foreign policy hosting a few of the thousands of illegal immigrants mixed with terrorists that every day enter Europe via the coasts of Italy at the cost of poor local people money and safety or experiencing a few russian nukes and troops in Cuba once again, like we do with the Ukraine crisis. If ultra nationalist parties are rising all over Europe is thank to the peace Nobel prize and his disgraceful, arrogant, nonsense foreign policy. If on the map below the territory surrounded by red and orange marks was the USA i'm not so sure that your view over Obama foreign policy would be so sparky.

Image1.jpg
 
Top