Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: The price citizens pay when a Police Officer shoots and kills someone

  1. #1
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    The price citizens pay when a Police Officer shoots and kills someone

    The Troy Meade case in Everett is still going on. At least that part that regards his employment status with the City of Everett Police Department. For those new to this Forum and perhaps the area, this officer shot and killed a drunk that he claimed was trying to run over him. A Court found that "he didn't break the law" but also found that the killing was NOT done in Self Defense.

    It appears that he City has paid his attorney fees and continues to incur legal expenses while this officer continues to draw a paycheck. No internal investigation has been conducted to determine if he broke any department regulations/rules and it appears that none will be conducted until the Civil Case is disposed of in Court. Evidently they don't want to admit, if the officer is found to have violated dept policy, that anything was done wrong and give the plaintiff more ammunition. This will be sometime next spring. So far the Legal Fees have been around a Quarter of a Million dollars and the officer has drawn over $90,000 in wages. The costs will continue to rise and a civil judgement will add to them 10 fold (if not more). This appears to be the case that will never end and the taxpayers of Everett just keep getting the bills.

    http://www.heraldnet.com/article/201...101109812/1122
    Last edited by amlevin; 11-08-2010 at 05:47 PM.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  2. #2
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Maybe we do have the police we deserve.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...deserve/66235/

    Everett Cop Who Shot Drunk Man Seven Times in the Back, Found Not Guilty
    Caleb Hannan, Mon., Apr. 26 2010 @ 3:16PM Seattle Weekly Blogs
    Categories: Crime & Punishment

    ​The trial of Troy Meade, the Everett cop who shot a drunk man sitting in his car seven times in the back, hinged on two different interpretations of one moment. And today, a Snohomish County jury, by acquitting him of a second-degree murder charge, gave weight to Meade's version of events.

    Meade claimed 51-year-old Niles Meservey presented him with no choice. Meservey had apparently shrugged off a tasing and was ready to back out of a parking spot in his white Corvette, said Meade. The 12-year-old veteran claimed he was just trying to protect himself and prevent being run over, a scenario he'd seen play out with another Everett police officer months earlier.

    Steven Klocker, the other officer on the scene, disagreed. In testimony, Klocker claimed that he and Meade had many other, non-lethal alternatives at their disposal. He also said that he overheard Meade say, "Time to end this; enough is enough."

    Meade, a 12-year-veteran, was also acquitted of the lesser charge of first-degree manslaughter. He remains on paid administrative leave and the jury will now decide if he deserves restitution.
    ******

    How do we treat this one when he asks for ID?
    Last edited by Fuller Malarkey; 11-08-2010 at 05:56 PM.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  3. #3
    Guest
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    808

    My responses are and will be ...

    A. "Am I being detained?"

    B. "Officer, I have every intent on cooperating with you, but I have nothing further to say and will answer no questions without my lawyer present."

    C. "You do not have consent to take my firearm."

    D. "I do not consent to a search."

    The above would be my only responses, and will be in the future to ANY LEO. After Tom Brewster's incident and LEO behavior as a whole in this country ... I will quote here ...

    "Time to end this, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH."

  4. #4
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuller Malarkey View Post

    How do we treat this one when he asks for ID?
    Probably a moot point. I'd wager that he'll never be back on the street, much less carrying a badge once the civil trial is resolved.

    The only questions he may be asking in the future might be "would you like fries with that"?
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  5. #5
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217
    Officer Troy Meade seems to be a trigger-happy kinda guy . . .

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    We need to get rid of unions for public servants a lot of this will go away. Without a union this man would have simply been fired.

    We also need to start enforcing and educating potential jurors that cops have less leeway when it comes to lethal force not more.

    Jeez even his fellow cops thought he was over the line.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Goose View Post
    A. "Am I being detained?"

    B. "Officer, I have every intent on cooperating with you, but I have nothing further to say and will answer no questions without my lawyer present."

    C. "You do not have consent to take my firearm."

    D. "I do not consent to a search."

    The above would be my only responses, and will be in the future to ANY LEO. After Tom Brewster's incident and LEO behavior as a whole in this country ... I will quote here ...

    "Time to end this, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH."
    I have said this before (not LEO-bashing, just stating a fact), you feel your life is in danger by an overzealous LEO and end up defending yourself, successfully, you are going to prison for life as a cop-killer.

    The reality is, an LEO can take your life at a whim if they wanted, and you have two choices, defend yourself (for sure prison time) or meet your maker. There will be no recourse for their actions, but there will be recourse for yours. Welcome to Police States Of America. I think that most LEO's are good public servants that deserve our respect; it is those few that are dangerous and can end your life without any recourse...at least, if there is recourse, it is small compared to you losing your life and your family losing you.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  8. #8
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I have said this before (not LEO-bashing, just stating a fact), you feel your life is in danger by an overzealous LEO and end up defending yourself, successfully, you are going to prison for life as a cop-killer.

    The reality is, an LEO can take your life at a whim if they wanted, and you have two choices, defend yourself (for sure prison time) or meet your maker. There will be no recourse for their actions, but there will be recourse for yours. Welcome to Police States Of America. I think that most LEO's are good public servants that deserve our respect; it is those few that are dangerous and can end your life without any recourse...at least, if there is recourse, it is small compared to you losing your life and your family losing you.
    "These are the cops that we deserve. In that sense, I am not so disturbed that Oscar Grant's killer will do little, if any, jail time. I am disturbed that this will happen again. I am disturbed that we are so fragile a people, that we know this, and that all we can do is look away."
    Ta-Nehisi Coates, senior editor for The Atlantic
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    332
    Niles Meservey was a drunk behind the wheel. My sympathy is limited.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by 3/325 View Post
    Niles Meservey was a drunk behind the wheel. My sympathy is limited.
    I have no sympathy for drunk drivers. Was the officer's response excessive, maybe not. Was the officer's round count excessive, possibly. The argument was that the perp (drunk driver) was cornered and could go nowhere...he was behind the wheel of a high performance machine that had the horsepower and torque to push squad cars out of the way and go about his drunken rampage.

    In my response I was referencing a sober law-abiding citizen being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  11. #11
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bedford, Texas, USA
    Posts
    834
    when did we decide that being a drunk idiot was deserving of being shot to death?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    South of Disorder in Rouge Canyon, , USA
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Goose View Post
    A. "Am I being detained?"

    B. "Officer, I have every intent on cooperating with you, but I have nothing further to say and will answer no questions without my lawyer present."

    C. "You do not have consent to take my firearm."

    D. "I do not consent to a search."

    The above would be my only responses, and will be in the future to ANY LEO. After Tom Brewster's incident and LEO behavior as a whole in this country ... I will quote here ...

    "Time to end this, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH."
    "Time to end this, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH" is what Meade said ..... get this Jackwagon off the payroll !!!

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    South of Disorder in Rouge Canyon, , USA
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by HankT View Post
    Officer Troy Meade seems to be a trigger-happy kinda guy . . .
    Really .... Ya think !!

  14. #14
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by DKSuddeth View Post
    when did we decide that being a drunk idiot was deserving of being shot to death?
    It wasn't the part where he got drunk, it was the follow-up where he got into his car and attempted to drive away, at least that is what was alleged...I didn't read the court findings with regard to the validity of that. No drunk should be shot for being drunk.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  15. #15
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Bersa.380 View Post
    "Time to end this, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH" is what Meade said ..... get this Jackwagon off the payroll !!!
    I see, he should have instead asked, "excuse me kind sir, if you could please shut your car off and step out, pretty please?"

    Meade should be fired, but it wasn't because of the statement he made or his decision to shoot the drunk. This is just my opinion, but I think that shooting someone that many times, in the back, is a bit much; but then again, I wasn't there, maybe it did take eight shots to stop him, and maybe Meade just found himself behind the guy.

    We wouldn't even be talking about this if Meade let the guy continue doing what he was doing, the guy somehow got out of a tight spot with his car and ran over pedestrians or hit a car with a family in it...then we would want to know why Meade didn't use more force to stop him.

    I would like to know what type of excessive force his partners there though he engaged in...was it the shooting part, the round count, what?!
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  16. #16
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post

    We wouldn't even be talking about this if Meade let the guy continue doing what he was doing, the guy somehow got out of a tight spot with his car and ran over pedestrians or hit a car with a family in it...then we would want to know why Meade didn't use more force to stop him.
    Too bad you aren't familiar with the scene where this all took place. Niles Meservy (victims have names) couldnt have left the parking area of the restaurant if he wanted to. He was blocked by a chain link fence to the front, high-centered in a curb, and blocked by a police car at the rear. This shooting DID NOT HAVE TO OCCUR no matter what excuse one wants to put forth. The jury only found that the officer did not break the law. Again, remember that after they saw all the facts that they found he was not acting in self defense. This is not a case of "What If", but a case of "What Happened".
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    And the fact his fellow police didn't agree with what happened.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    South of Disorder in Rouge Canyon, , USA
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I see, he should have instead asked, "excuse me kind sir, if you could please shut your car off and step out, pretty please?"

    Meade should be fired, but it wasn't because of the statement he made or his decision to shoot the drunk. This is just my opinion, but I think that shooting someone that many times, in the back, is a bit much; but then again, I wasn't there, maybe it did take eight shots to stop him, and maybe Meade just found himself behind the guy.

    We wouldn't even be talking about this if Meade let the guy continue doing what he was doing, the guy somehow got out of a tight spot with his car and ran over pedestrians or hit a car with a family in it...then we would want to know why Meade didn't use more force to stop him.

    I would like to know what type of excessive force his partners there though he engaged in...was it the shooting part, the round count, what?!
    Oh Boy .... this was a hot topic for a while when it all happened .... I kept up with the whole story.

    Bottom line if you would have read all the stories and what witnesses had to say this guy should be serving time for murder.

  19. #19
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Bersa.380 View Post
    Bottom line if you would have read all the stories and what witnesses had to say this guy should be serving time for murder.
    And yet the Jury probably heard more about this, in detail, and found he broke no law(s).
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    South of Disorder in Rouge Canyon, , USA
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    And yet the Jury probably heard more about this, in detail, and found he broke no law(s).
    I read the juries verdict in the news papers .. .. .. NOT GUILTY to murder and they found it was NOT an act of self-defence.

    Got me fooled !

  21. #21
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Bersa.380 View Post
    I read the juries verdict in the news papers .. .. .. NOT GUILTY to murder and they found it was NOT an act of self-defence.

    Got me fooled !
    Let me guess certain evidence was probably restricted and not allowed to be entered and the jury was given strict guidelines by the judge on what to rule on and how.

  22. #22
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Let me guess certain evidence was probably restricted and not allowed to be entered and the jury was given strict guidelines by the judge on what to rule on and how.
    And perhaps all that was being passed around in public was not "Evidence" but merely conjecture.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  23. #23
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    And perhaps all that was being passed around in public was not "Evidence" but merely conjecture.
    Impossible!
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran ak56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Carnation, Washington, USA
    Posts
    748
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    And perhaps all that was being passed around in public was not "Evidence" but merely conjecture.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Impossible!
    It must be true! I read it on the internet!

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    And perhaps all that was being passed around in public was not "Evidence" but merely conjecture.
    Oh yea cuz that never happens, oh wait it just happened in Kirkland!!!!! They tried to suppress the evidence of innocence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •