The fact that Mehserle used a gun and killed Grant was simply an accident, Rains argued, and does not merit a conviction of murder, either first degree, second degree or a conviction of manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter.
"So, the relevant question in this case turns out to be very simple: Can the state supply proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Mehserle formed an intent to use the gun as opposed to his Taser," Rains wrote. "(Mehserle's) defense will rather be that he believed Grant might be armed, that Grant continued to resist, and that (Mehserle) properly concluded the appropriate response was to use his Taser."
In fighting that defense, Stein will have to convince the jury that Mehserle believed officers were losing control of the situation on the BART platform and therefore pulled out his gun.
If the jury believes the evidence shows Mehserle knew he was pulling out his gun, then it must decide if Mehserle purposely pulled the trigger or if the gun was fired by accident.
A decision by the jury that Mehserle purposely pulled the trigger would likely result in a second-degree murder conviction and at least 15 years in prison. A decision by the jury that the gun was fired by accident could result in an involuntary manslaughter finding and, at a minimum, a two-year stay in prison for Mehserle.
In addition to the videos and testimony from both BART officers who responded to the scene and passengers on the Dublin-Pleasanton-bound train, both attorneys will present the jury with detailed evidence about police officer training and responses to crowd control, court documents show.
Both attorneys will use the evidence about police training to show what Mehserle thought as he reached to his hip and pulled out his gun.
While presenting that evidence, Rains will have to walk a fine line of showing that the situation on the BART platform was chaotic enough for the officers to justify the use of a Taser while not completely out of control to warrant the use of a gun.
"To be sure, defense expert witnesses will explain that under the circumstances, and in light of Mehserle's training, BART policies, law and common sense, Mehserle was justified in his intention to use his Taser," Rains wrote.
Meanwhile, Stein will have to prove to the jury that Mehserle misread the situation on the platform as dangerous and in need of him pulling out a gun to gain control.
"The People contend that in order for the jurors to properly consider these questions, they must be informed about what the defendant knew about firearms and how he was trained," Stein wrote in a court pleading. "(Mehserle's) training in the academy as well as his training after becoming a sworn BART police officer is relevant to show not only his knowledge of firearms but such training is also circumstantial evidence of his state of mind at the time he fired the gun that killed Oscar Grant."
Mehserle: What was he thinking?
Posted: 05/30/2010 12:01:00 AM PDT
Updated: 05/30/2010 09:01:10 AM PDT
OAKLAND — The central question in the murder case against former BART police Officer Johannes Mehserle will probably never be directly answered.
What was Mehserle thinking in the four seconds it took him to grab his handgun, point it at the back of an unarmed and prone Oscar Grant III, and pull the trigger?While Mehserle, 28, is not expected to answer that question during the murder trial against him that begins this week, a jury's interpretation of his thoughts in the early morning hours of Jan. 1, 2009, will determine if Mehserle — who served as a police officer for 22 months — is sent to state prison.
A prosecutor and defense attorney will spend at least the next four weeks trying to convince a jury of a dozen Los Angeles residents that they know what Mehserle thought when he killed Grant, 22, of Hayward.
For deputy district attorney David Stein, the answer lies in six videotapes of the shooting and the events that led to it. It can also be found in the actions of BART officers who, some argue, used excessive force in an attempt to detain Grant and four friends for fighting on a train, and in the training Mehserle received before and while he was an officer.
For defense attorney Michael Rains, Mehserle's thoughts can be found in the actions of Grant, a parolee who resisted arrest during what some described as a near riot on the BART platform, and from Mehserle's unfamiliarity in using a Taser. Rains said in court documents filed last month he will not argue that Mehserle acted in self-defense. Rains said while Mehserle might have believed Grant possessed a gun, he did not believe Grant had opportunity to use it. Instead, Rains wrote, he will provide evidence that Mehserle was permitted, under the circumstances, to use a Taser to subdue Grant.will focus on those aspects of the case as he presents evidence and makes arguments to the jury that the death, while tragic, was nothing more than an accident sparked by Mehserle believing he had a Taser in his hand when he pulled the trigger.The fact that Mehserle used a gun and killed Grant was simply an accident, Rains argued, and does not merit a conviction of murder, either first degree, second degree or a conviction of manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter. "So, the relevant question in this case turns out to be very simple: Can the state supply proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Mehserle formed an intent to use the gun as opposed to his Taser," Rains wrote. "(Mehserle's) defense will rather be that he believed Grant might be armed, that Grant continued to resist, and that (Mehserle) properly concluded the appropriate response was to use his Taser."
In fighting that defense, Stein will have to convince the jury that Mehserle believed officers were losing control of the situation on the BART platform and therefore pulled out his gun.
If the jury believes the evidence shows Mehserle knew he was pulling out his gun, then it must decide if Mehserle purposely pulled the trigger or if the gun was fired by accident.
A decision by the jury that Mehserle purposely pulled the trigger would likely result in a second-degree murder conviction and at least 15 years in prison. A decision by the jury that the gun was fired by accident could result in an involuntary manslaughter finding and, at a minimum, a two-year stay in prison for Mehserle.
In addition to the videos and testimony from both BART officers who responded to the scene and passengers on the Dublin-Pleasanton-bound train, both attorneys will present the jury with detailed evidence about police officer training and responses to crowd control, court documents show.
Both attorneys will use the evidence about police training to show what Mehserle thought as he reached to his hip and pulled out his gun.
While presenting that evidence, Rains will have to walk a fine line of showing that the situation on the BART platform was chaotic enough for the officers to justify the use of a Taser while not completely out of control to warrant the use of a gun.
"To be sure, defense expert witnesses will explain that under the circumstances, and in light of Mehserle's training, BART policies, law and common sense, Mehserle was justified in his intention to use his Taser," Rains wrote.
Meanwhile, Stein will have to prove to the jury that Mehserle misread the situation on the platform as dangerous and in need of him pulling out a gun to gain control.
"The People contend that in order for the jurors to properly consider these questions, they must be informed about what the defendant knew about firearms and how he was trained," Stein wrote in a court pleading. "(Mehserle's) training in the academy as well as his training after becoming a sworn BART police officer is relevant to show not only his knowledge of firearms but such training is also circumstantial evidence of his state of mind at the time he fired the gun that killed Oscar Grant."
Former BART officer convicted of involuntary manslaughter
Prosecutors accused Johannes Mehserle of intentionally firing his handgun as he tried to handcuff Oscar J. Grant III on New Year's Day 2009. Mehserle testified that he thought he was pulling out his electric Taser weapon and not a firearm.
By Jack Leonard
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
4:11 PM PDT, July 8, 2010
| Advertisement |
Prosecutors accused the ex-officer of intentionally firing his handgun as he tried to handcuff Oscar J. Grant III on New Year's Day 2009. Johannes Mehserle, 28, tearfully testified that the shooting was a tragic accident caused when he mistakenly grabbed his firearm instead of an electric Taser weapon during a struggle with Grant.
The shooting was captured on video by several witnesses. Mehserle, who is white, fired a single round into the back of Grant, who was black and was lying face-down on the station platform. Mehserle resigned a week after the shooting.
The killing provoked protests and violence in Oakland. The case, which has drawn comparisons to the videotaped beating of Rodney G. King that ultimately triggered riots in Los Angeles in 1992, was moved to Los Angeles for trial amid concern about the extensive media coverage of the slaying in the Bay Area.
Many civil rights activists considered the case a test of how the justice system treats police officers accused of abusing minorities. The trial also captured the attention of law enforcement officers who feared that a guilty verdict could raise the stakes for cops who make mistakes.
The shooting occurred soon after police responded to reports of a fight on a train stopped at the Fruitvale Station. Grant and four friends were detained by a different police officer who prosecutors said used excessive force against the men. Mehserle arrived on the platform after the men had been detained.
Alameda County Deputy Dist. Atty. David R. Stein rejected the idea that the shooting was a mistake, telling jurors that Mehserle's holster was specially designed to prevent easy release of his firearm. The prosecutor contrasted the light, bright yellow Taser gun with the heavier black Sig Sauer handgun that Mehserle fired.
"He let his aggression dictate his conduct," Stein told jurors.
The prosecutor urged jurors to find Mehserle guilty of second-degree murder, pointing out that the officer never told his colleagues that night that the shooting was an accident.
Prosecutors in Los Angeles have not won a murder conviction in a police shooting case since 1983.
Mehserle testified that he intended to use his Taser because he believed Grant, 22, might be reaching for a gun in his pants pocket. While the officer's firearm was on his right side, the Taser was in a holster on the left side of his belt but angled so that it could be pulled out with his right hand.
Two people, including a friend of Grant's, testified that they heard the officer say he intended to use his Taser shortly before the shooting. In at least six other instances, officers have said they made the same mistake of firing a handgun when they intended to use a Taser.
Numerous witnesses said Mehserle looked shocked after the gunshot. Defense attorney Michael L. Rains said video footage shows his client holding his head in his hands in despair.
"He's sick to his stomach," Rains told jurors, "because he has shot a man who did not deserve to be shot."
jack.leonard@latimes.com
Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times
OAKLAND CA (IFS) - A former BART officer was found guilty of manslaughter in the slaying of Oscar Grant on January 1, 2009.
Prosecutors said that officer Johannes Mehserle, 28, deliberately shot his gun into Oscar J. Grant III’s back as he attempted to handcuff him on New Year's Day 2009. Mehserle testified in court that he thought he was unleashing his taser, not a gun.
The killing was video taped by several witnesses in Oakland. Mehserle, a White man, shot a round into the back of Grant, a Black man, who was face down on a train station platform. Police were working 12-hour shifts in preparation for riots and crowd control.
Mehserle resigned from the transit force a week after the shooting.
Alameda County Deputy Dist. Atty. David R. told jurors that Mehserle's holster was designed to avert discharge of the handgun, reports the L.A. Times. "He let his aggression dictate his conduct," Stein told jurors. Lawyers for Mehserle charged the gun and the taser had similar weight.
A friend of Oscar Grant testified that he heard Mehserle proclaim that he was going to use the taser to in the infraction that occurred with 22-year-old Grant and three other men. Grant was unarmed.
Others testified that Mehserle expressed immediate grief and despair after the killing of Grant.
Detractors of the police system and the case continue to express discontent with the verdict, considering it too light for Mehserle.
"He's sick to his stomach, because he has shot a man who did not deserve to be shot,” a defense attorney told the jury. A group of protesters expressed a unified discord after the verdict was announced.
Several members of Oscar Grant's family and friends have filed multimillion-dollar lawsuits against the BART transit agency.
Johannes Mehserle faces two to four years in jail for involuntary manslaughter.
No comments:
Post a Comment