Grant's Killer Arrested in Nevada

[Updated at 12:48 pm 1/14/09]

The San Francisco Chronicle reports:

Mehserle was arrested in the New Year’s Day shooting of Oscar Grant, a 22-year-old supermarket worker from Hayward who was lying facedown after being pulled off a BART train by police investigating a fight. An Alameda County judge signed an arrest warrant alleging murder, and Mehserle surrendered without incident, authorities said.

The shooting, which was recorded by passengers in videos widely circulated on the Internet and television, prompted public outrage, and some viewers said that the shooting appeared to be an execution.

Reminder, protest later today.

This entry was posted in In the news. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Grant's Killer Arrested in Nevada

  1. Christine says:

    Off topic comment, first comment.

    I love this blog, I really do. But over the past couple of weeks, I’ve become concerned with the number of posts that are limiting comments to specific groups of people — even when the blogger states that other people could comment on a cross post. Which has not always happened.

    Shutting down discussion, or allowing only certain groups to discuss certain subjects, seems to me to be the antithesis of progressive thought. (And elitist.) This is precisely what many conservatives want to do – halt the discussion of ideas, refuse to be open to other viewpoints.

    I understand, certainly, wanting to create a focused discussion from feminist thinkers. But when this is extended into “only people who think a specific way about the Israel/Palestine situation can comment” this becomes troubling. It’s very offputting, and makes even me, a feminist who agrees with 99% of the content on this blog, feel unwelcome — even though I fit into the categories listed. This might be the feeling the blog is going for, but I’m not sure it’s productive.

  2. Mandolin says:

    Hi Christine,

    Another mod (who knows how to do so) may move this to an open thread.

    I think I’ve only seen four categories defined here: 1) feminist-only (which you say you’re okay with), 2) anti-racist only, 3) “only people who believe in the inherent dignity and worth of all people” which I believe is Myca’s way of attempting to combine the first two categories, as well as being inclusive of other civil rights struggles, and 4) the Israel/Palestine category that you mentioned.

    For clarity: Do you have a problem with designations one through three, or only with number four?

  3. Sailorman says:

    AWESOME!

    For anyone else who instantly wondered ‘What is the California murder statute like?” here is a link to the code:
    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=94572123325+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

    It looks like he’ll probably be charged with first degree murder, as I’m guessing that a pistol is a “destructive device.” Here’s the relevant section, with some relevant things highlighted:

    187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
    fetus, with malice aforethought
    ….

    188. Such malice may be express or implied. It is express when
    there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away
    the life of a fellow creature. It is implied, when no considerable
    provocation appears
    , or when the circumstances attending the killing
    show an abandoned and malignant heart.
    When it is shown that the killing resulted from the intentional
    doing of an act with express or implied malice as defined above, no
    other mental state need be shown to establish the mental state of
    malice aforethought
    . Neither an awareness of the obligation to act
    within the general body of laws regulating society nor acting despite
    such awareness is included within the definition of malice.

    189. All murder which is perpetrated by means of a destructive
    device or explosive
    , a weapon of mass destruction, knowing use of
    ammunition designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, poison,
    lying in wait, torture, or by any other kind of willful, deliberate,
    and premeditated killing, or which is committed in the perpetration
    of, or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, carjacking, robbery,
    burglary, mayhem, kidnapping, train wrecking, or any act punishable
    under Section 206, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, or any murder which is
    perpetrated by means of discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle,
    intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with the
    intent to inflict death, is murder of the first degree. All other
    kinds of murders are of the second degree.
    As used in this section, “destructive device” means any
    destructive device as defined in Section 12301, and “explosive” means
    any explosive as defined in Section 12000 of the Health and Safety
    Code.
    As used in this section, “weapon of mass destruction” means any
    item defined in Section 11417.
    To prove the killing was “deliberate and premeditated,” it shall
    not be necessary to prove the defendant maturely and meaningfully
    reflected upon the gravity of his or her act.

    The nice thing about a murder charge is that it contains within it the ability to downgrade to a variety of lesser charges if things are difficult to prove: manslaughter, or murder 2, etc.

  4. Radfem says:

    That’s fortunate b/c in many cases, the more serious levels of murder are more difficult to get convictions for LE officers. I sat through one trial where evidence strongly was in favor of first degree murder but the jury balked and went with involuntary manslaughter for the DA investigator on trial. It was really interesting how it happened, because the defense abruptly changed its version of events told by the LE officer mid-trial and it worked out for them, because there was no way he was getting acquitted.

    He did draw a seven-year prison term though.

  5. Sailorman says:

    The case for murder will, I suspect, hinge on whether the prosecution can prove “no considerable provocation appears” beyond a reasonable doubt. It will be hard to do when the accused is a cop.

    I wonder if the protests will still happen? And what the message(s) will be?

  6. Radfem says:

    Filing charges usually stops protests in the streets. When officers who are charged get acquitted especially by all-White juries, often as we’ve seen in several cities, they start up again like in L.A. in 1992.

    There might still be activism in terms of pushing for BART to be more accountable, i.e. have a civilian review board process or make policy changes.

  7. Another Rachel says:

    Sailorman, one of the things I’ve heard asked for– something that seems reasonable to me– is the suspension of the other BART officers who were on the platform, who saw their colleague draw a gun and had the opportunity to say, “That’s uncalled for.”

  8. Radfem says:

    What would be interesting is to find out if these officers submitted written reports on the incident to their supervisors and/or investigators before the videos surfaced and to see how their written versions match what’s on the video. This comparison in the past led to charges filed in the Rodney King and Donovan Jackson cases for false reporting charges. But in both cases, the officers were acquitted.

    Of course since it’s a major critical incident, they might have been interviewed by investigators early on. The same would apply but I’m guessing that the versions they provided might not have been helpful to the officer who shot Grant.

  9. Christine says:

    Hi Mandolin —

    I’m not comfortable with any of those categories, to be honest — I said I understood why someone would want to create a focused discussion from feminist speakers, but any attempt to limit discussion to a specified group makes this blog feel more offputting, and less welcoming to me.

    Oh, and if the moderators need to move these comments to another thread, that’s fine — I’ll be heading back to lurking in any case :)

  10. Christine,

    I guess I’m personally unclear what the issue is. You think it was okay for the police officers to fly to Gaza and kills some lesbian of color because she was having an abortion? I don’t mean to sound flip, but what EXACTLY feels so silencing?

    ObTopical,

    I’ve seen two videos and I don’t see how 1st Degree Murder can be the finding. Were I on the jury, and were the two videos the only evidence I’d seen, I’d have no trouble saying “Guilty, 2nd degree murder”. Send the guy to prison, for sure.

    I’ve also seen the Rodney King videos and feel that while the police officers over-reacted and used excessive force, there was also evidence that King wasn’t nearly as passive as Grant.

Comments are closed.