ListNook

ishitfrommymouth 3 days ago +200

Mistrial on the more serious charge, convicted in the lesser which is 5 years max. Probably won’t actually see the inside of a cell.

200

QueasyLegKC 3 days ago +105

F****** pathetic. (Our justice system)

105

Thanatosst 3 days ago +38

Legal* System. Justice is not the goal of what happens in a court room; trying to follow a set of rules is. If what happens is considered justice, that's basically just a happy coincidence.

38

QueasyLegKC 3 days ago -8

K thanks

-8

987YouBloodyTulip789 2 days ago +9

Argh, the entire system is designed to protect the Epstein class and their enforcers Mix cops union having massive budgets for the best lawyers, being best buddies with the judge and prosecutors, having the police cartel threatening action against the state if they don't get their way, and die hard police supporters who practically believe they're prophets, and it becomes virtually impossible to prosecute a cop for serious charges.

9

FlashCardManiac 3 days ago +30

Where was the gun when other Leo's arrived on scene? I need a better breakdown than apnews provided. Any good links?

30

ObviouslyRealPerson 3 days ago +119

>no cameras recorded the shooting No cameras and they still got a guilty verdict against a cop? Wow. That's refreshing

119

[deleted] 3 days ago -32

[deleted]

-32

Kurtotall 3 days ago +48

I have always suspected that the deputy never saw a gun however he ran the car plates and saw that the owner had a CCW. There is no proof of this, just my suspicion.

48

AnthonyBarrHeHe 3 days ago +12

Im assuming his sentencing wont involve actual prison time right? Absolutely insane. I know he could get a max sentence, but I highly doubt they will even do that. Shit is ridiculous. Guarantee if it was a judges son that was killed by police, or something then justice may be served, but even then i still have major doubts.

12

Buddhas_Warrior 3 days ago +63

So as a home owner, if someone breaks into my house, causing my family to get threatened and I shoot them while they are fleeing and hit them in the back, I'll get more time then this cop will? C'mon

63

SHUT_DOWN_EVERYTHING 3 days ago +34

The cop claimed the guy was turning around with "the gun" in his hand. There was no camera or witness to confirm this. He shot him five times in the back and once in the side. Somehow they convinced the jury that the shot in the side is because he was turning around. Everyone knows what happened but unfortunatley cops have plot armor.

34

optom 3 days ago +22

Uh important fact. He never had a f****** gun in his hand. Cell phone, keys, sandwich.

22

L_Cranston_Shadow 3 days ago +8

My physics is a bit rusty, but am I correct in assuming that it was a mix of reflexive muscle movement and force from being hit with bullets moving 1100-1200fps (assuming 9mm), probably off-center to his center of gravity, inducing a rotation or tilt before/as he fell?

8

WhatsInAName0420 2 days ago +4

Unless they have a timeline of shots, he could have also shot him as he was turning around so the first shot entered his side and subsequent shots entered his back.

4

L_Cranston_Shadow 1 day ago +1

Quick, someone get CSI on the case so we can get an animated 3d diagram with the precise order, trajectory, and wound track of each round. /S

1

v3ritas1989 2 days ago -1

Unless you are blue blooded, you know there is no reason shooting them in the back other than revenge or feelong good. As running away is not really threatening your family. A simple shot into the air is more then enough to get the point accross. Thinking otherwise is just counter to parts of your arguments regarding the cops behaviour.

-1

Buddhas_Warrior 2 days ago +3

Yeah.... You might want to read more into what I'm trying to convey, you and a lot of others missed the point completely.

3

pimparo0 3 days ago -34

If they are running away they arent a threat any more, you don't shoot someone in the back.

-34

Buddhas_Warrior 3 days ago +45

Missed the point, as well I see! This cop shot this person in the back 5 times. Where was the threat?? He'll get less than 5 years. A homeowner doing that has gotten a lot more time.

45

L_Cranston_Shadow 3 days ago +1

There is one exception to that, which is if the person is an imminent threat, such as if they are running away but shooting wildly at someone fleeing ahead of them.**That doesn't apply here**, but it does come up on rare occasions.

1

[deleted] 3 days ago

[deleted]

0

Buddhas_Warrior 3 days ago +3

You need to read into what I'm saying cause you're missing the point.

3

VaguelyArtistic 3 days ago -40

Why are you shooting someone who is running away from you?

-40

Buddhas_Warrior 3 days ago +28

Missed the point, huh?

28

Radiant_Mind33 3 days ago +7

Don't blame the justice system. Jurors, much like yourselves see nothing but the 1% of dashcam videos that make the job look dangerous. It's not dangerous, the courts give cops 100% leeway to sit on their asses to AVOID the danger. Then we pump money into combat training theater that they pretty much aren't even in physical shape to utilize. Overgeared, overfunded, underpaid and undertrained SOMEHOW. lmao.

7

StraightDig4728 3 days ago +28

Place a . At the end of .com to get around pay wall.

28

Suspicious_Bicycle 3 days ago +7

Reload after modifying the URL and hit X to cancel updates and ads as soon as the text loads. This works for Politico and Reuters as well as some other news sites.

7

SleepingToDreaming 3 days ago +10

"We investigated ourselves and found a bit of wrongdoing. Ok, a few years work? Maybe one? Ok, sold, none."

10

JohnBrownSurvivor 1 day ago +1

He'll have a job in another state in less than a year. Mark my words.

1

A former Ohio deputy has been found guilty of reckless homicide in the shooting of Casey Goodson Jr.

💬 Send a Message

30 Comments