Tags
BART, brutality, cop, Forward, Grant, guilty, gun, human, Johannes, Karthik, m.t., manslaughter, Mehserle, Moving, mtk, Oscar, police, rights, shooting, Taser, verdict, violation, zine
18 Sunday Nov 2012
Posted artists books, North Oakland
in11 Saturday Jun 2011
Tags
BART, Fruitvale, Johannes, killing, Mehserle, New Year's Eve, oakland, Oscar Grant, police, release, shooting
Former BART police officer Johannes Mehserle, convicted of involuntary manslaughter for shooting unarmed Oakland resident Oscar Grant to death, will be released from prison on Monday having served less than a year in prison.
Organizers have established that protests will take place at 3:00 at the Fruitvale BART where Grant was killed and at 5:30 at 14th and Broadway in downtown Oakland. BART has warned police agencies and passengers that service interruptions are possible tomorrow.
Oscar Grant has a small child and Johannes Mehserle’s first child was born the day after the crime. Many families have been rent by what happened New Year’s morning of 2009. But in the larger picture we must address the issues that create an atmosphere where this kind of thing could easily happen again.
It isn’t about Mehserle or Grant as much as a flawed environment. The race issues are left out of the conversation in public, but they are a huge part of the word on the street. The issues here are systemic.
10 Things to Consider
1. BART, the State and Officer Mehserle immediately agreed that the officer terminated his service literally the morning of the crime, speaking to no one – negating culpability for higher-ups and ultimately resulting in a lack of culpability for BART itself. In this case Mehserle ran to Nevada across state lines before his arrest to kill time in those first days of 2009.
This negotiation between Mehserle’s defense and the state in his absence prevented the state or BART from having to respond for the murder. It took place between the private attorney of Mehserle and the State. Did Mehserle’s representation ask: “What are you going to do to protect my client, your employee, if he does this for you? if he quits voluntarily?”
Is it the case that once his attorney agreed Mehserle would resign, the institutions at large then agreed to protect the officer as much as possible? How exactly? Mehserle’s defense is being paid for by a statewide fund for police officers. The BART police union pays into the fund. From when was the Union involved?
2. Moving the trial out of the neighborhood.
In what must be considered a pattern now [Rodney King the case was moved out of South Central, Amadou Diallo the case went from the Bronx to Albany] the state moved the trial to a supposedly neutral location that is in fact far better for the officer in question. Again what keeps coming up is that the officers in all these cases do not live where they are policing. They come from suburbs to cities to police.
3. The state introduced excuses and the mental state of the Officer to the public far more than that of the victim and did this through the channels of the state’s collusion with the media.
The local cops and the local tv stations and newspapers collude morally, ethically and racially to create the illusion of a balanced coverage, but which subtly turns the public opinion toward an acquittal. It’s all designed to create the atmosphere that we, the people, want the state to be so empowered and that we believe, ‘well, a few eggs have to be cracked to make a safety omelette for the rest of us.’
4. the state’s process creates a jury that favors the cop to the victim. Our jury selection process is suspect and should be revisited.
5. the state allows, and even encourages, immaterial historical evidence from the VICTIM’s past into the case, but resists the same in the case of the cop.
Again, a pattern here – Patrick Dorismond in NYC 2000. The idea is to paint the victim as a criminal and the cop as an unfortunate agent for good caught in an impossibly difficult to understand spot. So ANYthing in the victim’s past no matter how irrelevant is dredged up – sometimes illegally as Giuliani did in the case of Dorismond.
6. during the trials of these cops, the same colluding press created an atmosphere of INSECURITY concerning any outcome that doesn’t condemn the cop. Riots are inevitable. This emphasizes the need for good security and basically demands acquittal in the public mind.
10. perhaps most shockingly, the judge unilaterally threw out the handgun charge of which Mehserle was convicted.
It is important to note in this case that a jury of 12 found Mehserle guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter AND uniquely, the handgun charge. The handgun charge was a serious element here which could have led to policy changes such as the removal of lethal weapons like guns from BART cops. (they have Tasers and nightsticks and so on). Instead it was thrown out unilaterally by the judge – which seems illegal to many. This was a profoundly wrong judgement. It’s too expensive for the family to pursue that on appeal, but it certainly ought to be the civic sector’s responsibility to make such a charge stick and to pursue such weird decision-making.
I, for one, believe we should disarm BART police. Let local PDs be called when a gun is necessary, make it a felony to carry a gun on BART and put excessive cameras in the system. We need to de-escalate the violence and the weaponry on our streets.
UPDATE: Indybay has done some interesting reporting on the actions of the police at protests concerning this issue. check it out here.
11 Saturday Jun 2011
Tags
BART, Fruitvale, Johannes, killing, Mehserle, New Year's Eve, oakland, Oscar Grant, police, release, shooting
Former BART police officer Johannes Mehserle, convicted of involuntary manslaughter for shooting unarmed Oakland resident Oscar Grant to death, will be released from prison on Monday having served less than a year in prison.
Organizers have established that protests will take place at 3:00 at the Fruitvale BART where Grant was killed and at 5:30 at 14th and Broadway in downtown Oakland. BART has warned police agencies and passengers that service interruptions are possible tomorrow.
Oscar Grant has a small child and Johannes Mehserle’s first child was born the day after the crime. Many families have been rent by what happened New Year’s morning of 2009. But in the larger picture we must address the issues that create an atmosphere where this kind of thing could easily happen again.
It isn’t about Mehserle or Grant as much as a flawed environment. The race issues are left out of the conversation in public, but they are a huge part of the word on the street. The issues here are systemic.
10 Things to Consider
1. BART, the State and Officer Mehserle immediately agreed that the officer terminated his service literally the morning of the crime, speaking to no one – negating culpability for higher-ups and ultimately resulting in a lack of culpability for BART itself. In this case Mehserle ran to Nevada across state lines before his arrest to kill time in those first days of 2009.
This negotiation between Mehserle’s defense and the state in his absence prevented the state or BART from having to respond for the murder. It took place between the private attorney of Mehserle and the State. Did Mehserle’s representation ask: “What are you going to do to protect my client, your employee, if he does this for you? if he quits voluntarily?”
Is it the case that once his attorney agreed Mehserle would resign, the institutions at large then agreed to protect the officer as much as possible? How exactly? Mehserle’s defense is being paid for by a statewide fund for police officers. The BART police union pays into the fund. From when was the Union involved?
2. Moving the trial out of the neighborhood.
In what must be considered a pattern now [Rodney King the case was moved out of South Central, Amadou Diallo the case went from the Bronx to Albany] the state moved the trial to a supposedly neutral location that is in fact far better for the officer in question. Again what keeps coming up is that the officers in all these cases do not live where they are policing. They come from suburbs to cities to police.
3. The state introduced excuses and the mental state of the Officer to the public far more than that of the victim and did this through the channels of the state’s collusion with the media.
The local cops and the local tv stations and newspapers collude morally, ethically and racially to create the illusion of a balanced coverage, but which subtly turns the public opinion toward an acquittal. It’s all designed to create the atmosphere that we, the people, want the state to be so empowered and that we believe, ‘well, a few eggs have to be cracked to make a safety omelette for the rest of us.’
4. the state’s process creates a jury that favors the cop to the victim. Our jury selection process is suspect and should be revisited.
5. the state allows, and even encourages, immaterial historical evidence from the VICTIM’s past into the case, but resists the same in the case of the cop.
Again, a pattern here – Patrick Dorismond in NYC 2000. The idea is to paint the victim as a criminal and the cop as an unfortunate agent for good caught in an impossibly difficult to understand spot. So ANYthing in the victim’s past no matter how irrelevant is dredged up – sometimes illegally as Giuliani did in the case of Dorismond.
6. during the trials of these cops, the same colluding press created an atmosphere of INSECURITY concerning any outcome that doesn’t condemn the cop. Riots are inevitable. This emphasizes the need for good security and basically demands acquittal in the public mind.
10. perhaps most shockingly, the judge unilaterally threw out the handgun charge of which Mehserle was convicted.
It is important to note in this case that a jury of 12 found Mehserle guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter AND uniquely, the handgun charge. The handgun charge was a serious element here which could have led to policy changes such as the removal of lethal weapons like guns from BART cops. (they have Tasers and nightsticks and so on). Instead it was thrown out unilaterally by the judge – which seems illegal to many. This was a profoundly wrong judgement. It’s too expensive for the family to pursue that on appeal, but it certainly ought to be the civic sector’s responsibility to make such a charge stick and to pursue such weird decision-making.
I, for one, believe we should disarm BART police. Let local PDs be called when a gun is necessary, make it a felony to carry a gun on BART and put excessive cameras in the system. We need to de-escalate the violence and the weaponry on our streets.
UPDATE: Indybay has done some interesting reporting on the actions of the police at protests concerning this issue. check it out here.
12 Thursday May 2011
Posted politics
inTags
2009, BART, death, Johannes, Mehserle, New Year's Day, oakland, Oscar Grant, police, release, shooting
This piece is good. and the comments reflect the intensity of the debate. I challenge Bay Area Citizens to take this issue on … seriously.
My comments on the matter are at the end of the piece in SF Appeal and I’m reproducing them here so they may be considered a plank of my platform:
re: BART Cop Jailed for Shooting Oscar Grant to Death Expected to Get Out of Jail Next Month
This piece is well written and significant because many in the mainstream press are either avoiding the topic or not addressing the emotions it brings up. I have been reading your blog a lot more recently as I campaign for Mayor and want to congratulate you on the editorial decision-making, the reporting and, as in this example, the flexible corrections, as necessary.
This is a space somewhere between the printed press and the wild world of blogging that The Bay Citizen so eagerly (and expensively) seeks. I would say you are succeeding at some level. keep up the good work.
“Shooting to Death Oscar Grant” states it clearly, correctly and brings up some very necessary dialogue.
It is important to note in this case that a jury of 12 found Mehserle guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter AND uniquely, the handgun charge. The handgun charge was a serious element here which could have led to policy changes such as the removal of lethal weapons like guns from BART cops. (they have Tasers and nightsticks and so on).
Instead it was thrown out unilaterally by the judge – which seems illegal to many. That’s what the riots ought to have been about. This was a profoundly wrong judgement. It’s too expensive for the family to pursue that on appeal, but it certainly ought to be the civic sector’s responsibility to make such a charge stick and to pursue such weird decision-making.
I, for one, believe we should disarm BART police. Let local PDs be called when a gun is necessary, make it a felony to carry a gun on BART and put excessive cameras in the system. We need to de-escalate the violence and the weaponry on our streets.
Karthik Rajan
12 Thursday May 2011
Posted politics
inTags
2009, BART, death, Johannes, Mehserle, New Year's Day, oakland, Oscar Grant, police, release, shooting
This piece is good. and the comments reflect the intensity of the debate. I challenge Bay Area Citizens to take this issue on … seriously.
My comments on the matter are at the end of the piece in SF Appeal and I’m reproducing them here so they may be considered a plank of my platform:
re: BART Cop Jailed for Shooting Oscar Grant to Death Expected to Get Out of Jail Next Month
This piece is well written and significant because many in the mainstream press are either avoiding the topic or not addressing the emotions it brings up. I have been reading your blog a lot more recently as I campaign for Mayor and want to congratulate you on the editorial decision-making, the reporting and, as in this example, the flexible corrections, as necessary.
This is a space somewhere between the printed press and the wild world of blogging that The Bay Citizen so eagerly (and expensively) seeks. I would say you are succeeding at some level. keep up the good work.
“Shooting to Death Oscar Grant” states it clearly, correctly and brings up some very necessary dialogue.
It is important to note in this case that a jury of 12 found Mehserle guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter AND uniquely, the handgun charge. The handgun charge was a serious element here which could have led to policy changes such as the removal of lethal weapons like guns from BART cops. (they have Tasers and nightsticks and so on).
Instead it was thrown out unilaterally by the judge – which seems illegal to many. That’s what the riots ought to have been about. This was a profoundly wrong judgement. It’s too expensive for the family to pursue that on appeal, but it certainly ought to be the civic sector’s responsibility to make such a charge stick and to pursue such weird decision-making.
I, for one, believe we should disarm BART police. Let local PDs be called when a gun is necessary, make it a felony to carry a gun on BART and put excessive cameras in the system. We need to de-escalate the violence and the weaponry on our streets.
Karthik Rajan
27 Wednesday Apr 2011
Posted politics
inEarlier this year, the City held a special hearing on the matter of dance clubs and I attended with hundreds of others to hear testimony of citizens concerned with the matter. I stepped out of the overcrowded hearing room to walk about the ante chamber where the metal detectors and the officers who monitor entrants to City Hall are stationed. It was a dark, rainy night, before the time change, and, as everyone was inside at the hearing, the lobby was empty.
I took their spare time to tell several of the officers at City Hall that I hoped to be their next boss; that I was running for Mayor of San Francisco. I asked for their thoughts on the needs of the City and the Department when Officer Gregory Suhr arrived and joined the discussion. We chatted for a time about my policies and ideas and I asked for the officers’ support.
It was then that Officer Suhr said he was considering running for Sheriff!
We both knew that Former Supervisor Ross Mirakarimi is running for Sheriff and, after a beat, Suhr said, “Can I count on your support?” and we laughed together about it.
I remembered Fajitagate, but didn’t bring it up. I told Officer Suhr I would look into his record, but nodded, sure – anybody with as much experience as he has in Community Policing is a good candidate for top policing jobs.
As we chatted together we watched Board President David Chiu stalk the steps of City Hall under the eaves to stay out of the rain, talking on his cell-phone for a few moments before taking off to some important campaign stop. An officer said, “There’s your competition.” I said, “He’s not my competition. I have no problem with him. I’m the best man for the job.” To their credit, they didn’t laugh.
Today, Officer Gregory Suhr ascends to the position of Police Chief in San Francisco and I offer my congratulations to the City for making the right choice. The City needs smart, local police who know the streets and the force to help manage what is going to be a period of severe cuts and changes in policy.
It would be easy to say that Former Supervisor Mirakarimi shares my values and so I would want him to be a Sheriff to help reform what I think are issues with policing, but it’s a wholly other thing to get officers to follow such leadership.
Officer Suhr has some critics (a loud one is the commenter in the link I’ve posted below) but the reality is being a community police officer in SF is difficult and problems and conflicts are inevitable. I am thankful for the experiences he has and upon meeting him, feel confident he has learned from them.
Gregory Suhr is likely to make for a good Police Chief because he knows his history means he will be scrutinized closely. I hope he will implement what he has learned – from the mistakes and the successes – to aid and educate the men and women working under him.
Here’s a good link to a piece in support of Police Chief Suhr by Francisco Da Costa of Environmental Justice Advocacy.
Congratulations Police Chief Suhr and best of luck.
[oh, and taking a page from our City Attorney, “this in no way equals an endorsement in the Sheriff’s race!”]