Justine Ruszczyk

[luvdids]

Jury has been selected in the trial against the cop that shot Justine. Going to be interesting to see how this ends up, and if he'll testify. Considering he's so far said nothing. Although, he's of course innocent at the moment and has to be proven guilty. He doesn't have to prove he's innocent

https://www.9news.com.au/national/moham ... bb6be3ee37

[Wokko]

Cops in the USA are very rarely found guilty for this kind of thing.

[David]

A sad and really incomprehensible case. Hopefully the shooter receives a fair punishment; cops shouldn't be above the law.

[luvdids]

I believe they have to prove his 'use of force' was reasonable... an unarmed woman in her pj's is obviously not a threat.

Interesting the story in the OP mentions a 'thud' at the back of their patrol car, and the defence are going to claim he heard the thud and that's why he used deadly force. Now, if she's standing by the window, and a thud is heard from the back... why shoot her??

Decent mix of jurors. Hopefully they've got brains.

[stui magpie]

Cops in the USA are very rarely found guilty for this kind of thing.

Likely because in a society when you have to assume anyone who approaches you is armed, there's a degree of sympathy from the judiciary for the beat cop. No way I'd be a cop in the USA, you'd constantly be on guard which doesn't translate to good decision making.

This one is also quite racially charged. In the country where you have the "Black lives matter" movement based on black people being shot by Police, here we have a white woman shot by a black policeman. Whatever verdict comes down here there will be a segment of the community who view it as unfair and evidence of persecution.

I just hope justice is done, whatever the result.

[K]

"Michelle Goss, from the local group Communities United Against Police Brutality, is concerned that 12 of the 16 jurors in the case are men. They are likely to be more sympathetic to police than female jurors, she says."

https://www.theage.com.au/world/north-a ... 51dg1.html

[Pies4shaw]

Guilty of 3rd degree murder and 2nd degree manslaughter.

Whatever that means.

[luvdids]

Oh, I was hoping you'd know! Doesn't make sense but he's behind bars (at least until an appeal I'm guessing will be imminent).

Good outcome.

https://www.9news.com.au/world/us-news- ... e2291e23a3

[Skids]

Guilty of 3rd degree murder and 2nd degree manslaughter.

Whatever that means.

Minnesota 3rd degree murder.

Minnesota law originally defined third-degree murder solely as depraved-heart murder("without intent to effect the death of any person, caus[ing] the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life").[7][8] In 1987, an additional drug-related provision ("without intent to cause death, proximately caus[ing] the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II") was added to the definition of third-degree murder.[7][9] Up until the early 2000s, prosecutions under that provision were rare, but they began to rise in the 2010s. Some reports linked this increase in prosecutions to the opioid epidemic.[10]

Minnesota law also defines the crime of third-degree murder of an unborn child, with the same elements of depraved mind and lack of intent to kill distinguishing it from first- or second-degree murder of an unborn child.[11][12] Both third-degree murder and third-degree murder of an unborn child are punishable by a maximum of 25 years' imprisonment

And this .....

https://statelaws.findlaw.com/minnesota ... r-law.html

[luvdids]

Guilty of 3rd degree murder and 2nd degree manslaughter.

Whatever that means.

Minnesota 3rd degree murder.

Minnesota law originally defined third-degree murder solely as depraved-heart murder("without intent to effect the death of any person, caus[ing] the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life").[7][8] In 1987, an additional drug-related provision ("without intent to cause death, proximately caus[ing] the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II") was added to the definition of third-degree murder.[7][9] Up until the early 2000s, prosecutions under that provision were rare, but they began to rise in the 2010s. Some reports linked this increase in prosecutions to the opioid epidemic.[10]

Minnesota law also defines the crime of third-degree murder of an unborn child, with the same elements of depraved mind and lack of intent to kill distinguishing it from first- or second-degree murder of an unborn child.[11][12] Both third-degree murder and third-degree murder of an unborn child are punishable by a maximum of 25 years' imprisonment

And this .....

https://statelaws.findlaw.com/minnesota ... r-law.html

Doubt he was querying what 3rd degree murder is, more being guilty of BOTH murder & manslaughter.

[think positive]

Cops in the USA are very rarely found guilty for this kind of thing.

Likely because in a society when you have to assume anyone who approaches you is armed, there's a degree of sympathy from the judiciary for the beat cop. No way I'd be a cop in the USA, you'd constantly be on guard which doesn't translate to good decision making.

This one is also quite racially charged. In the country where you have the "Black lives matter" movement based on black people being shot by Police, here we have a white woman shot by a black policeman. Whatever verdict comes down here there will be a segment of the community who view it as unfair and evidence of persecution.

I just hope justice is done, whatever the result.

what is justice here though?

"Noor testified that a loud bang on his squad car made him fearful, and he fired when he saw a woman appear who was raising her arm. He said he fired to protect his partner’s life.

His partner, Officer Matthew Harrity, had fear in his eyes, yelled "Oh Jesus!" and went for his gun but had difficulty pulling it out of the holster.

Noor believed he had to make a split decision and said he pressed his left arm over Officer Harrity's chest to protect his partner before he fired a single bullet through the open window striking Ms Ruszczyk.

"My intent was to stop the threat and save my partner's life," Noor told the downtown Minneapolis courtroom on Thursday."

did his partner back this up?

take a look at the picture of the Alley, thats a spooky place at night. At the most i see a manslaughter charge, thats doesnt make him above the law, To me murder says he set out to kill someone, planned it, not just reacted. This is a truly horrible situation with no winners, a situation every Police officer in the world must dread. What ever prison term he gets it will be nothing compared to living with the fact he took the life of an unarmed innocent woman. What is justice here?

[David]

[think positive]

[luvdids]

He joined the police force in 2015 and before killing Justine, he'd had 3 complaints filed against him. 2 are still open so don't know what they're about. Maybe power goes to some people's heads? 3 complaints and killing someone in 21 months on the force?? That's a pretty crap record.

http://www.startribune.com/what-we-know ... 435018163/

He killed someone, is 5 years really enough? There was no evidence that she ever touched the car making some kind of noise. I guess he had to come up with some reason he felt the need to kill her. The one he made up didn't exist.

[David]

Certainly if his side of the story is in dispute (i.e. that he believed he was acting in self-defence) and he shot her out of malice, then that would change things. But I do believe in sentences that appropriately weigh up extent of harm, intent and prospects of rehabilitation. Killing someone is a very grave act and ought to be treated so by courts, but five years is a long time to spend behind bars, and I doubt he poses any future danger to the community (particularly now that he is no longer employed in the police force).

Hard to draw any conclusions from the complaints and to be honest I'm not sure how common it is for a police officer to have one or more complaints against them.