• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Everett Officer Acquitted

Beretta92FSLady

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
imported post

It is nice to see justice handed down. The officer protected law-abiding citizens from a drunk lunatic behind the wheel of a high performance machine.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011709224_copshooting27m.html

"EVERETT — Everett police Officer Troy Meade was found not guilty Monday of second-degree murder and first-degree manslaughter in the fatal shooting of a drunken man in a car last summer."
 
gsx1138

gsx1138

Regular Member
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
882
Location
Bremerton, Washington, United States
imported post

Gotta say I have little sympathy for drunk drivers but I'm sure the jury heard more about what happened than we ever will from the media. If they went with not guilty then so be it.

By the way, 7 out of 8 shots connecting is amazingly good for a LEO.
 
Beretta92FSLady

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
imported post

gsx1138 wrote:
Gotta say I have little sympathy for drunk drivers but I'm sure the jury heard more about what happened than we ever will from the media. If they went with not guilty then so be it.

By the way, 7 out of 8 shots connecting is amazingly good for a LEO.
Click to expand...

7 out of 8 is good, even if it was nearly point blank range..for an LEO.

The jury obviously did hear things that we definately did not hear. You blow a .26 you kinda get what is coming to you when trying to drive.
 
N

Norman

Regular Member
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
172
Location
Olympia, Washington, USA
imported post

I'm not entirely sure that the cop is a stand-up kind of guy, but the drunk sounded like a real waste of human skin. The jury handed down a verdict, so I accept what they did. I can't say I feel sorry for the driver though.
 
C

ChuckUFarley

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
256
Location
Renton, Washington, USA
imported post

Was there ever any doubt, this states LEAhave shown time and again to becorrupt.I am not saying all cops are corrupt, so for those of you who want to jump on the "No LEO bashing" bandwagon you can stop right there. From all the verdicts coming out from other LEOs who were charged and got off Scott free, or who weren’t charged at all when they should have been, this verdict shouldn’t surprise anyone.

I hope the family fairs better in their lawsuit.
 
gsx1138

gsx1138

Regular Member
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
882
Location
Bremerton, Washington, United States
imported post

ChuckUFarley wrote:
Was there ever any doubt, this states LEA are so damn corrupt.I hope the family fairs better in their lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you have insight that we don't. Care to share it? Because it wasn't any LEA that found this man not guilty, it was a jury. And from the recording I heard of the trial the Prosecuter went after that guy pretty hard.

Not that I really care, because as far as I'm concerned anyone driving that drunk is at least an attempted murderer.
 
SpyderTattoo

SpyderTattoo

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
1,015
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

I have a funny feeling that if it was any one of usthat fired those shots, the verdict would have been different.

This is only the beginning for this officer. Now he'll face civil charges.
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

SpyderTattoo wrote:
I have a funny feeling that if it was any one of us that fired those shots, the verdict would have been different.

This is only the beginning for this officer.  Now he'll face civil charges.
Click to expand...
Not if the jury returns with a self-defense answer.
 
X

XD45PlusP

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
250
Location
, ,
imported post

joeroket wrote:
okkid wrote:
I just new they would let him go for murder because hes a cop. BS
Click to expand...

That is an ignorant statement. How is it that you knew this?
Click to expand...
Why would it be ignorant if that's how he feels? He's entitled to his opinion. He's not stating it as fact. Just cause you don't like it....
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

XD45PlusP wrote:
joeroket wrote:
okkid wrote:
I just new they would let him go for murder because hes a cop. BS
Click to expand...

That is an ignorant statement. How is it that you knew this?
Click to expand...
Why would it be ignorant if that's how he feels? He's entitled to his opinion. He's not stating it as fact. Just cause you don't like it....
Click to expand...
Still ignorant nonetheless.
 
N

Norman

Regular Member
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
172
Location
Olympia, Washington, USA
imported post

Opinions can be ignorant. The jury was given their information, and made a decision. To say that the jury made the decision because he was a cop, and not very a million other possible reasons, without knowing for sure (ie being on the jury) then you have made an ignorant comment. okkid has no idea what the jury was going through back there. Only the jury knows that.
 
M

Matt85

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
176
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

i do my best not to bash police officers onlineand i dont think we are provided with enough info to say he was right or wrong.

however i will say this, as far as i know bothLEOs and civiliansare not aloud to use deadly force unless lives are in immediate danger (correct me if im wrong). as far as i know both LEOs and civilians have the same rights when it comes to lethal force.

If he was not a police officer, would the trial have gone differently?

-matt
 
O

okkid

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
172
Location
Hoquiam, , USA
imported post

Because evertime they go to court they always walk away no matter what thats why I said it and I mean it and if that is not ok with you well thats not my problem.

Im just sick of all the bs with cops getting away with being thugs with a badge.
 
O

okkid

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
172
Location
Hoquiam, , USA
imported post

Matt85 wrote:
i do my best not to bash police officers onlineand i dont think we are provided with enough info to say he was right or wrong.

however i will say this, as far as i know bothLEOs and civiliansare not aloud to use deadly force unless lives are in immediate danger (correct me if im wrong). as far as i know both LEOs and civilians have the same rights when it comes to lethal force.

If he was not a police officer, would the trial have gone differently?

-matt
Click to expand...
Yes
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

Matt85 wrote:
i do my best not to bash police officers onlineand i dont think we are provided with enough info to say he was right or wrong.

however i will say this, as far as i know bothLEOs and civiliansare not aloud to use deadly force unless lives are in immediate danger (correct me if im wrong). as far as i know both LEOs and civilians have the same rights when it comes to lethal force.

If he was not a police officer, would the trial have gone differently?

-matt
Click to expand...

Slight correction, life and limb is not the only time lawful use of deadly force is allowed. Again for those who can'tcomprehend this, I am not endorsing this, just stating whats allowed by law.

Also non LEO are allowed more leeway in this reguard according to the law....

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040



Notes:Legislative recognition: "The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens' permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers." [1986 c 209 § 3.]
 
K

kschmadeka

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
174
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
imported post

I saw this coming. Same thing happened in the Elio Carrion case. All the prosecutor had to do was help the defense attorney stack the jury inthe defendant'sfavor. Thus he gets thebest of both worlds,the appearance of going after the murdering cop, while still protecting the man in blue like he's expected by them to do.

The family will win something in the civil suit, but that's all the justice they'll get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top