Bell Verdict

Cancel7

Banned
3 Detectives in Bell Shooting Acquitted
By MICHAEL WILSON
Three detectives were found not guilty Friday morning on all charges in the November, 2006, shooting death of Sean Bell, who died in a hail of 50 police bullets outside a club in Jamaica, Queens.
The verdict prompted several supporters of Mr. Bell to storm out of the courtroom, and screams could be heard in the hallway moments later.The verdict comes 17 months to the day since the Nov. 25, 2006, shooting of Mr. Bell, 23, and his friends, Joseph Guzman and Trent Benefield, outside the Club Kalua in Jamaica, Queens, hours before Mr. Bell was to be married.
It was delivered in a pack courtroom and was heard by, among others, the slain man’s parents and his fiancee. About 150 Bell supporters had been gathered outside the Queens Criminal Court building before the verdict, handing out leaflets.
The seven-week trial, which ended April 14, was heard by Justice Arthur J. Cooperman of State Supreme Court in Queens. The defendants waived their right to a jury in January, a strategy some lawyers called risky at the time. But it clearly paid off with Friday’s verdict.The detectives were charged collectively with committing eight crimes amid the 50 gunshots that brought worldwide attention. Detectives Isnora and Oliver faced the most charges: first- and second-degree manslaughter, with a possible sentence of 25 years in prison; felony assault, first and second degree; and a misdemeanor, reckless endangerment, with a possible one-year sentence. Detective Oliver also faces a second count of first-degree assault. Detective Marc Cooper was charged only with two counts of reckless endangerment.
During the 26 days of testimony, the prosecution sought to show, with an array of 50 witnesses, that the shooting was the act of a frightened, even enraged group of disorganized police officers who began their shift that night hoping to arrest a prostitute or two and, in suspecting Mr. Bell and his friends of possessing a gun, quickly got in over their heads.
“We ask police to risk their lives to protect ours,” said an assistant district attorney, Charles A. Testagrossa, in his closing arguments. “Not to risk our lives to protect their own.”
The defense, through weeks of often heated cross-examinations, their own witnesses and the words of the detectives themselves, portrayed the shooting as the tragic end to a nonetheless justified confrontation, with Detective Isnora having what it called solid reasons to believe he was the only thing standing between Mr. Bell’s car and a drive-by shooting around the corner.
Several witnesses testified that they heard talk of guns in an argument between Mr. Bell and a stranger, Fabio Coicou, outside Kalua, an argument, the defense claimed, that was fueled by bravado and Mr. Bell’s intoxicated state. Defense lawyers pointed their fingers at Mr. Guzman, who, they said, in shouting for Mr. Bell to drive away when Detective Isnora approached, may have instigated his death.
Detective Isnora told grand jurors last year that he clipped his badge to his collar and drew his gun, shouting, “Police! Don’t move!” as he approached Mr. Bell’s Nissan Altima.
Other witnesses, mostly friends of Mr. Bell, said they never heard shouts of “Police!” Mr. Guzman and Mr. Benefield testified that they had no idea that Detective Guzman was a police officer when he walked up with his gun drawn.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/nyregion/26BELL.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
 
So cops are allowed to murder us in cold blood.

That judge needs to be flogged and those @$$holes need to be sent to prison. That's ridiculous.
 
I don't know if there are going to be riots, but if there is march planned this weekend, I'm seriously thinking about going. This has me more upset than Hillary at the moment, and that's saying a lot. This is yet another slap in the face to his family.
 
I don't know if there are going to be riots, but if there is march planned this weekend, I'm seriously thinking about going. This has me more upset than Hillary at the moment, and that's saying a lot. This is yet another slap in the face to his family.

If I get any emails about one, I'll send them to you.
 
I didn't follow this case at all; I just remember the initial story.

Does anyone know what kind of case the defense presented that somehow justified their actions, or created enough reasonable doubt?
 
I didn't follow this case at all; I just remember the initial story.

Does anyone know what kind of case the defense presented that somehow justified their actions, or created enough reasonable doubt?

The only thing I know is some vague stuff about how the police officer who fired first believed he was stopping Bell from driving aroudn the corner and shooting someone else in a drive by. Why did he believe that Bell was going to drive around the corner and shoot some random person in a drive-by?

It sounds like a bunch of BS to me.
 
The only thing I know is some vague stuff about how the police officer who fired first believed he was stopping Bell from driving aroudn the corner and shooting someone else in a drive by. Why did he believe that Bell was going to drive around the corner and shoot some random person in a drive-by?

It sounds like a bunch of BS to me.

That's insane.

Beyond that, is it acceptable police protocol that, once one shot is fired, every officer present can start shooting every round they have with reckless abandon?

Shoot first, ask questions later. Just like Bush.
 
I didn't follow this case at all; I just remember the initial story.

Does anyone know what kind of case the defense presented that somehow justified their actions, or created enough reasonable doubt?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_...fense_lawyers_get_sean_bell_friend_to_-3.html

The undercover detectives claim they heard Guzman threaten to grab a "gat" to settle the score with Coicou - and that they fired when Guzman reached for a gun.
There was no gun.

_______________________________________________________________

I haven't anything concrete but rather the typical $hit you'd make up after you murder someone.
 
That's insane.

Beyond that, is it acceptable police protocol that, once one shot is fired, every officer present can start shooting every round they have with reckless abandon?

Shoot first, ask questions later. Just like Bush.

There were no shots fired, no one had a gun. These pigs are just murderers with a badge.

Conclusion: If you are a homocidal maniac and you don't want to go to jail, just join the NYPD we're you can get benefits and protection under the law.
 
That's insane.

Beyond that, is it acceptable police protocol that, once one shot is fired, every officer present can start shooting every round they have with reckless abandon?

Shoot first, ask questions later. Just like Bush.

I don't know, it seems that way, remember Diallo? I thought things had gotten better in this city since Rudy left. This is a huge step backwards.
 
It's 2008 and in the bastions of democracy that are the US and the UK the police can still get away with killing innocent, unarmed civilians with impunity. How far we've come.

Makes you proud doesn't it?
 
It's 2008 and in the bastions of democracy that are the US and the UK the police can still get away with killing innocent, unarmed civilians with impunity. How far we've come.

Makes you proud doesn't it?

That's the kicker. Its bad enough that it happened. I think the bigger slap in the face to all of us is that they don't care.
 
The only thing I know is some vague stuff about how the police officer who fired first believed he was stopping Bell from driving aroudn the corner and shooting someone else in a drive by. Why did he believe that Bell was going to drive around the corner and shoot some random person in a drive-by?

It sounds like a bunch of BS to me.

If that story were even true, the police were still being reckless, and should be in jail anyway.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top