Hope this guy gets the max.....

[Shoobee]

Well to all who think things should be equal... don't forget had this guy been a serviceman he could be convicted twice both under state law and the UCMJ. If LEOs want to play GI Joe let them be held to a dual standard just like the military, let them be judged under the UCMJ. Birk would be behinds bars.

You are incorrect. Anyone subject to the UCMJ (Army, Navy, USMC, USCG, USAF) is NOT subject to any of the states.

 

[Shoobee]

You raelly need to rethink you attitude...you (me and everyone here) do not really be held responsible for what someone else does with a weapon you own, that you did not authorize the use of it....think carefully, without emotion....

What is the difference between your young child taking you firearm without your authoriztion, and a local thug doing the same thing...????

So you want legal precident that if your weapon is stolen, and then used illegally, the owner of the firearm should be held responsible???? Really???> I don't. If someone, anyone, does something illegal with property I own...they should be held responsible. They were the person that conducted the illegal activity.

I know a lot of people do not see what I see here, but for many reasons I pray this officer is aquitted, not just for his good...but for our good. Where do you thing San Fran came up with the argument that if a pistol was not phyiscally on your person, it needed to be locked up???? (that question is being argued in court right now)

You are responsible for your firearm around kids.

 

[JoeSparky]

Well to all who think things should be equal... don't forget had this guy been a serviceman he could be convicted twice both under state law and the UCMJ. If LEOs want to play GI Joe let them be held to a dual standard just like the military, let them be judged under the UCMJ. Birk would be behinds bars.

And if we should allow or encourage the rights of any ONE individual to be violated then ALL of us are at risk to have OUR rights violated.

 

[jsanchez]

Hmm... tricky position to be in. What will sending him to jail really accomplish? There are 2 young kids who have lost their sister, who will now wonder where there daddy is. You are turning a family, into a single mother household. I guarantee you that Derek has gotten the message, he has no lessons to be learned by going to jail.

I lost a child last year, though no fault of my own, it's a devestating ordeal. If it had been my fault, I can only imagine the pain involved.

I'm not saying that he shouldn't face reprecussions for what he did. He should lose the badge, do some community service, or something else. Sending him to jail will just further hurt the innocent victims in this tradgedy.

Scott

He was stupid. If I did that I would go to jail. He needs to go. Maybe his wife will divorce him and marry a smarter man, a man who values her children and will keep them safe. Greener pastures baby(the wife), I hope you find greener pastures.

 

[jsanchez]

You raelly need to rethink you attitude...you (me and everyone here) do not really be held responsible for what someone else does with a weapon you own, that you did not authorize the use of it....think carefully, without emotion....

What is the difference between your young child taking you firearm without your authoriztion, and a local thug doing the same thing...????

So you want legal precident that if your weapon is stolen, and then used illegally, the owner of the firearm should be held responsible???? Really???> I don't. If someone, anyone, does something illegal with property I own...they should be held responsible. They were the person that conducted the illegal activity.

I know a lot of people do not see what I see here, but for many reasons I pray this officer is aquitted, not just for his good...but for our good. Where do you thing San Fran came up with the argument that if a pistol was not phyiscally on your person, it needed to be locked up???? (that question is being argued in court right now)

I'm sorry but that dog just don't hunt. We are talking about a grown man leaving his kids in a car with an unsecured gun. Its kind of like dumping gasoline on his little girl, and then giving his son a bic lighter, and saying I'll be right back.

 

[amzbrady]

Part of my job as a parent is to keep my children safe. Some things are not preventable, this was. As an officer he should know that he needs to lock the firearm up when left unattended around children. He failed his kids.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Such harsh judgments, be careful in wishing for strong judgments someday you may face the other side of the coin.

 

[amlevin]

Hmm... tricky position to be in. What will sending him to jail really accomplish? There are 2 young kids who have lost their sister, who will now wonder where there daddy is. You are turning a family, into a single mother household. I guarantee you that Derek has gotten the message, he has no lessons to be learned by going to jail.

I lost a child last year, though no fault of my own, it's a devestating ordeal. If it had been my fault, I can only imagine the pain involved.

I'm not saying that he shouldn't face reprecussions for what he did. He should lose the badge, do some community service, or something else. Sending him to jail will just further hurt the innocent victims in this tradgedy.

Scott

So you wold advocate just punishing those that don't suffer a personal loss due to their actions. Only punish those that harm others?

Somehow I don't think having dual standards works in a fair legal system.

If this Officer doesn't deserve jail time, what about the driver who drives while $-Faced and kills a family member?

The problem with our Justice System today is that there is less and less certainty of punishment and thus more and more who figure "so what, I'll never be punished!"

Same law for this individual as for every one of us. He was negligent and that negligence caused a death. If the Jury convicts him than he should pay the penalty called for under the law. Maybe the next person will put the gun in their holster rather than leave it in a coffee cup holder for their child to play with.

So far the Prosecutor has pointed out that their were other viable storage options that could have been locked, like a glove box or console.

 

[amlevin]

Such harsh judgments, be careful in wishing for strong judgments someday you may face the other side of the coin.

Yes. And to make sure I didn't, or won't, I never left/leave my firearms lying around my young children because it was an inconvenience to keep it on my person in a holster.

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

The problem with our Justice System today is that there is less and less certainty of punishment and thus more and more who figure "so what, I'll never be punished!"

The real problem with our justice system is there are two many laws and everything is a crime.
Anyone, at anytime, can be imprisoned if the all-seeing eye happens to linger on you.

Negligence is so vague it can be charged to just about anyone.

How many times have we all done something accidentally that could have turned tragic but for luck?

 

[skeith5]

The real problem with our justice system is there are two many laws and everything is a crime.
Anyone, at anytime, can be imprisoned if the all-seeing eye happens to linger on you.

Negligence is so vague it can be charged to just about anyone.

How many times have we all done something accidentally that could have turned tragic but for luck?

Amen to that one...

I'll say it again, Prison won't be a greater punishment then what he is going through already. Take his badge and put him on probation. He'll face more punishment waking up to his wife and kids everyday then waking up in a jail cell.

Scott

 

[skeith5]

If this Officer doesn't deserve jail time, what about the driver who drives while $-Faced and kills a family member?

Apples and oranges my friend.

What if someone stole your car, was drunk and killed someone? Would you want to be held liable?

What if you knew your kids was depressed, you left some rope laying around and he hung himself with it, are you liable?

 

[Trigger Dr]

Is it appropriate for this officer to be charged with a crime? Yes, I think so, if he meets the criteria as established by the required elements of the crime. Now, should we all cry out for the maximum punishment based upon the information in the "NEWSPAPER"? I think not. Rather let the jury decide after they have reviewed all of the information and evidence. Then and only then should we decide if it was a justified punishment.
What happened to the idea that we should take a higher path and not make a ecisin until ALL the circumstances are known and THEN decide upon punishment if indeed it is justified?

 

[Freedom1Man]

No. Laws should treat people equal.

Should being the operative word.

Then there should be no more police exemptions or special powers.

 

[Vitaeus]

So the fellow in this thread

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?107670-Left-handgun-in-backpack-at-restaurant

would have deserved being charged with 2nd degree manslaughter, if someone had found his backpack and gun and used it to commit a murder?

If the precedent is set that merely not exercising effective control of a dangerous instrument is enough to get convicted for manslaughter, you are opening a door best left shut. This is the same as if he had gone outside on a cold morning and started his car, then a child comes along and ends up dead. The civil "attractice nuisance" is not the same as "criminal negligence" forget he is a policeman, I don't think that what he did meets the standards to prove the criminal charge.

 

[TheGunMan]

WOW People

If this had been anyone but a cop, the antigun people and media would have been on it hard.
This guy screwed up and got someone killed. It is his fualt. Someone said it would hurt the family if he goes to jail.
He already hurt the family by not being responcable. What would be the next thing he does to them.
I could go on but I think I havemade my point.

 

[TheGunMan]

I Agree

Should being the operative word.

Then there should be no more police exemptions or special powers.

Truer words could not have been said.

 

[rapgood]

I just don't see Man2

Too many red-herring arguments have been made in this thread about "what if he stole your car (horse, motorcycle, chainsaw, etc.) and you would/could/might/will be made responsible." These arguments are inapposite to the situation with Carlile.

The crux of the charge against the guy is that he did something that he knew was wrong (leaving a loaded firearm within reach of a 3-year-old who has a known fascination with guns) and he nevertheless disregarded the risk involved in leaving the child in harm's way of that firearm.

After some review and thought, the way I see the facts (although not being involved in his case, I/we can't know them all), I think that Manslaughter 2 is overcharging. I think his acts, while horribly tragic in their result, nevertheless rise only to the level of Reckless Endangerment since I cannot reach the conclusion that his negligence was criminal.

(1) A person is guilty of reckless endangerment when he or she recklessly engages in conduct not amounting to drive-by shooting but that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person.
(2) Reckless endangerment is a gross misdemeanor.

(c) RECKLESSNESS. A person is reckless or acts recklessly when he or she knows of and disregards a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur and his or her disregard of such substantial risk is a gross deviation from conduct that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation.

He had knowledge that his 3yo had a fascination with all things guns and consciously chose to disregard the risk and danger inherent in that fascination and the potential consequences of disregarding that substantial risk.

The documents indicate the parents admitted the 3-year-old often tried to get into the home safe that holds Carlile’s guns, that he has his own air soft gun and a toy revolver and that Carlile has shot a BB gun with the boy. During a court ordered interview with police, the 5-year-old allegedly said the 3-year-old always wanted his mother to “get him guns” and that when he played his toy guns, the 3-year-old “Pretends to shoot us.”
Carlile allegedly told officers during an interview, “He’s very fascinated with guns and that’s why I’m beatin’ myself up because I left my damn gun, for forty seconds, in the center…"

As a LEO and being trained in the proper use, handling and storage of firearms, he has inarguable knowledge that improper use, handling and storage can (and here, did) create a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur (read: death of a toddler who has access to that risk) and that leaving such a lethal weapon accessible to a toddler is a gross deviation from conduct that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation (do you think that it would be "reasonable" to hand a loaded gun to a child? I see no difference in this situation).

Perhaps the prosecutor will see room for mercy to the family and allow Carlile to plea to the lesser charge of reckless endangerment.

 

[jsanchez]

Part of my job as a parent is to keep my children safe. Some things are not preventable, this was. As an officer he should know that he needs to lock the firearm up when left unattended around children. He failed his kids.

+1

 

[Freedom1Man]

Equal protection under the law?!

[video=youtube;ApLxezzD2Ys]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApLxezzD2Ys&feature=share&list=PL1D88A12770F7E1A5[/video]