Steal a PS3, and SWAT will kill you. And your dog, too.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Flubber


ooops indeed

You're the lawyer. Do they have to get a new grand jury (possibly screen the idiots out) or can they just go with what this one meant to do?

[Flubber]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
You're the lawyer. Do they have to get a new grand jury (possibly screen the idiots out) or can they just go with what this one meant to do?

NO frickin clue since we don't have grand juries in Canada. I don't even know if they technically HAVE to go before a grand jury every time.


But even if they do, I would think that they could just re-present. I can't imagine that double-jeapordy applies to the grand jury process.

Lets say a grand jury had intentionally rejected charges due to lack of evidence in a case. I can't imagine that if the police gathered more evidence, they would be precluded from bringing the matter forth again. BUt as I say, I am a Canadian and we have no grand juries.


So its possible that the mistake will not matter but it did seem a rather huge mistake in a very high profile case-- and since the standard as I understand it for these grand juries is very low, I am shocked someone didn't go "huh" when they read a dismissal/ As I understand the process you only get the prosecution evidence with no defence at all

[SlowwHand]

That's not true.

[Arrian]

Having read the articles in the OP:

Excessive by the police, definitely. They shot the dog? WTF?

"I think anytime that someone beats a person severely and commits an armed robbery, I certainly would consider him a risk and a danger," the sheriff said.

But yeah, he was such a sweet boy.

That does NOT, however, excuse SWAT's actions.

-Arrian

[Flubber]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
That's not true.

Which part ?? Since we don't have it, I could get every bit of it wrong

[Asher]

The incompetence of US law enforcement is truly staggering.

[Asher]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/14/playstation.theft.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

D.A. in PlayStation shooting still investigating deputy

RALEIGH, North Carolina (AP) -- The investigation into the fatal police shooting of a college student suspected of stealing video game consoles is continuing, even though a grand jury declined to indict a former sheriff's deputy, a prosecutor said Thursday.

Another grand jury could hear evidence against fired Cpl. Christopher Long, who prosecutors say shot Peyton Strickland at the 18-year-old's home December 1 after Long mistook the sound of a battering ram for gunshots coming from inside the house.

New Hanover County District Attorney Ben David wouldn't say what charges he would pursue.

A grand jury voted against indicting Long on a charge of second-degree murder Monday. Initially it appeared that the panel had issued an indictment, but the foreman told a judge Tuesday that he had simply checked the wrong box on the indictment form.

Long's attorney Michael McGuinness said David should have dropped the case in light of the grand jury's decision, but Ron Wright, a criminal procedure professor at Wake Forest University's law school, said there's nothing to stop the prosecutor from presenting a case a second time. The grand jury that met this week will not sit again, but a new panel will consider cases starting next month.

"There's no constitutional bar to them going back again," Wright said. "If you're talking about double jeopardy, it doesn't actually attach to the case until a trial jury is seated."

Strickland was suspected of beating a University of North Carolina at Wilmington student and robbing him of two PlayStation 3s worth more than $600 each. Two of Strickland's friends, Braden Riley and Ryan Mills, are charged in the attack.

Long was part of a special unit of the sheriff's department called to help UNC Wilmington police serve a warrant at Strickland's house. He was fired after the shooting.