Breaking: Jury convicts 5 police officers in post-Katrina shootings

Just scrolled across the home page.

No details yet, but will update.

Hope everyone stays frosty now that the decision has been made.

reply to post by Hessling


Nobody evens remembers this case anymore except those that have been following it.

And why do people need to stay frosty?

reply to post by kro32


I'm Australian and I have been following this case for years.

reply to post by Hessling


More info ASAP, it's about bloody time!

reply to post by Hessling


So I read an article and I cant find exactly what they were convicted of.

Was it only conspiracy charges?

No murder?

Not even manslaughter?

These guys will probably just lose their jobs. Maybe a little bit of jail time in some minimum security resort prison.

I hope I am wrong

It's a bit more horrific than that.

They were using people for target practice basically.

Prison justice Claire?

Updates trickling in...

A federal jury convicted five current or former police officers Friday of civil rights violations in the deadly shootings on a New Orleans bridge after Hurricane Katrina, but decided they were not guilty of murder.

All five officers were convicted Friday of charges stemming from the cover-up of the shootings. The four who had been charged with civil rights violations in the shootings were convicted on all counts.

However, the jury decided that neither fatal shooting was a murder.

Jury convicts 5 officers in Katrina shootings

Here's what snippet that has me confused:

Defense attorneys said the officers were shot at before they returned fire and acted reasonably in the face of a deadly threat.

However, from the Prosecuting attorney:

Assistant U.S. Attorney Theodore Carter said in closing arguments Tuesday that police had no justification for shooting unarmed, defenseless people trying to cross the bridge in search of food and help mere days after Katrina struck.

If they were unarmed, how did they fire on police requiring them to shoot back?

I'll keep updating as info comes in.

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by Hessling

 

Nobody evens remembers this case anymore except those that have been following it.

And why do people need to stay frosty?

I'm thinking of those who live in New Orleans. These are the kind of decisions that can create an explosive situation, even if they were convicted.

I'm just hoping things don't erupt down there. They've been through enough.

They were gonna be convicted whether innocent or not, can't have a riot now can we? We don't know what happened or whether either side lied, they are both prone to. In the end, the state will do what's best for it and be done with it, a really sad statement.

Originally posted by Hessling

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by Hessling

 

Nobody evens remembers this case anymore except those that have been following it.

And why do people need to stay frosty?

I'm thinking of those who live in New Orleans. These are the kind of decisions that can create an explosive situation, even if they were convicted.

I'm just hoping things don't erupt down there. They've been through enough.

Why in the world would they riot over a conviction? Plus like I said, this story is old news and I believe this conviction was just on the conspiracy part, the rest of the case has been over for a long time.

reply to post by kro32


I wonder about bitterness over the fact they were not found innocent of murder.

Convicted, yes. But the charges will seem far too light to some.

That's what I'm guessing. Hope I'm wrong.

Faulcon, the only defendant to testify, said he was "paralyzed with fear" when he shot and killed a 40-year-old mentally disabled man, Ronald Madison, as he chased him and his brother, Lance Madison. Faulcon didn't dispute that he shot an unarmed man in the back

I don't know of a single paraplegic who can draw, aim, and fire a gun, let alone do it while running after a moving target...

Well lets hope One of these officers gets the maximum sentence. Maybe now the Police in the USA will be reminded that they are not above the Jurisdiction of the Courts either.

Kaufman claimed to have found a gun - which he had actually taken from his own home - on the bridge the day after the shooting. He also invented fictional witnesses and witness statements to justify the officer's actions. He faces a maximum sentence of 120 years in prison

BBC NEWS

The officers will be sentenced in mid-December. Some face potential multiple life sentences

Although If I was on that Jury I would have voted for Murder. I do wonder if any of them on that Jury, might have been influenced.