Philando Castile case. Officer charged

[yukonjasper]

My belief is that the race connection I'd only a factor in that there was a similarity to an armed robbery suspect.

[ijosef]

I haven't posted in a long while, but I thought I'd add that I know the brother of the Officer who was recently acquitted. I used to work with him (he was a colleague of mine when the shooting actually happened) and a great guy in general. I really felt for his family, as his parents - his PARENTS - were getting death threats. Enough of the threats were serious enough to have a squad car outside their house for a couple of weeks. However one may feel about Officer Yanez and what happened, what does the guy's family have to do with it? That's something that really bothers me.

The Castile family already got the $3m settlement, but they indicate that they plan to sue Yanez. I wonder if he'd be indemnified by the police department or the city or if he'd be on his own.

[Rodentman]

Now it's just about the money. Once the acquittal is reached, that should be the end of it.

Also, IMHO the jury of peers is a crock. We should have a 3 judge panel instead, and thus remove jury nullification. It's no longer about "justice" it's about who can manipulate the feelings of the jury to get a covfefe or an acquittal. I can see Yanez having to move out of this area but I cannot see the man and his family's life destroyed. That isn't justice. Non peaceful demonstrations, of ANY kind, should be shut down at once. No roads blocked, fires set, or damage done.

[Randygmn]

Now it's just about the money. Once the acquittal is reached, that should be the end of it.

Also, IMHO the jury of peers is a crock. We should have a 3 judge panel instead, and thus remove jury nullification. It's no longer about "justice" it's about who can manipulate the feelings of the jury to get a covfefe or an acquittal. I can see Yanez having to move out of this area but I cannot see the man and his family's life destroyed. That isn't justice. Non peaceful demonstrations, of ANY kind, should be shut down at once. No roads blocked, fires set, or damage done.

Congratulations, you've just rewritten the Constitution. You're no different than the filthy anti-gun crowd and worse, the FUDDS, because.......FEELINGS!!!!

[MJY65]

The Castile family already got the $3m settlement, but they indicate that they plan to sue Yanez. I wonder if he'd be indemnified by the police department or the city or if he'd be on his own.

I heard them talk about the suit after the criminal trial, but assumed that the settlement was the end of it. Have they actually talked about an additional civil suit since then?

[Ghost]

The Castile family already got the $3m settlement, but they indicate that they plan to sue Yanez. I wonder if he'd be indemnified by the police department or the city or if he'd be on his own.

I heard them talk about the suit after the criminal trial, but assumed that the settlement was the end of it. Have they actually talked about an additional civil suit since then?

I bet their attorney is a happy camper

[ijosef]

I heard them talk about the suit after the criminal trial, but assumed that the settlement was the end of it. Have they actually talked about an additional civil suit since then?

Both rags in the Twin Cities reported that they intended to sue Yanez personally, although this was before the $3M settlement was announced. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the settlement was already in the works at the time. They may be seeking to at least have some form of what they consider to be justice, even if it's a civil court declaring Yanez liable for Castile's death. It would be similar to what the Goldman family did when they won the civil suit against OJ Simpson.

Of course there's are a lot of misconceptions when it comes to civil judgments (which is understandable since most folks never have to deal with that situation). When you win a judgment, some folks think that the judge writes you a check that comes right out of the defendant's bank account. In reality, a judgment is just a legal declaration that the losing party (debtor) owes the winning party (creditor) a sum of money. The judgement also gives the creditor a variety of legal tools to collect the judgment if the debtor doesn't pay voluntarily, such as garnishments, liens, etc. These tools are not unlimited, as laws carve out certain exemptions for debtors (property that a creditor cannot touch).

Of course you can't get money from someone who doesn't have any, and there are others who do have means to pay a judgment but are savvy enough to avoid collection. OJ Simpson paid relatively little on his $9 million judgment (which has now ballooned to over $30m because of interest) and the NYC subway shooter Bernie Goetz hasn't paid a dime on his either. Judgments also don't last forever - they eventually expire, depending on state law (although they can be renewed in many cases).

Of course if Yanez is found liable and gets saddled with a massive money judgment, he could file for bankruptcy. If he has to defend himself in civil court, I'm guessing that the police union won't pick up the tab for a lawyer. He would likely be broke, and chapter 7 could be an option. Although intentional torts are typically ineligible for discharge in bankruptcy, a wrongful death claim based on negligence might not be. Imagine Reynolds or the Castile family winning a huge judgment, only to have a bankruptcy court wipe it out.

I am not an attorney and none of the above should be construed as legal advice

[Rodentman]

Now it's just about the money. Once the acquittal is reached, that should be the end of it.

Also, IMHO the jury of peers is a crock. We should have a 3 judge panel instead, and thus remove jury nullification. It's no longer about "justice" it's about who can manipulate the feelings of the jury to get a covfefe or an acquittal. I can see Yanez having to move out of this area but I cannot see the man and his family's life destroyed. That isn't justice. Non peaceful demonstrations, of ANY kind, should be shut down at once. No roads blocked, fires set, or damage done.

Congratulations, you've just rewritten the Constitution. You're no different than the filthy anti-gun crowd and worse, the FUDDS, because.......FEELINGS!!!!

I'm entitled to my opinion, and if you don't like it you know what you can do about it.

[Randygmn]

Now it's just about the money. Once the acquittal is reached, that should be the end of it.

Also, IMHO the jury of peers is a crock. We should have a 3 judge panel instead, and thus remove jury nullification. It's no longer about "justice" it's about who can manipulate the feelings of the jury to get a covfefe or an acquittal. I can see Yanez having to move out of this area but I cannot see the man and his family's life destroyed. That isn't justice. Non peaceful demonstrations, of ANY kind, should be shut down at once. No roads blocked, fires set, or damage done.

Congratulations, you've just rewritten the Constitution. You're no different than the filthy anti-gun crowd and worse, the FUDDS, because.......FEELINGS!!!!

I'm entitled to my opinion, and if you don't like it you know what you can do about it.

No one questioned whether or not you're entitled to an opinion. Of course, an opinion expressed in public is always open to the analysis/criticism of others. Wouldn't you agree? I couldn't imagine that after your response, that you'd deny another of their opinion. Or perhaps I'm wrong. After all, you're willing to deny other citizens their constitutional rights of judicial due process, so anything is possible.

It's always possible to identify a FUDD. Most of their pistols have a cylinder. Most of their long guns have walnut. And most of their ideas regarding the constitution are fashioned in such a way as to only protect themselves. Thank God they've almost been entirely purged from within leadership of the NRA and have been exposed for what they really are, within the larger "gun community".

[usnret]

I really don't see how he has rewritten the constitution. It seems like you think that only your opinion matters and everyone else's doesn't.

[Rodentman]

...nevertheless he persisted...

[Sorcerer]

Haven't we bemoaned that judges are legislating or attempting to write law from the bench the last 8 1/2 years. Have we not seen convictions over turned because the judge got something wrong. How many times have we we seen judges at all levels, injecting there own interpretation of the law bases on there own ideals. I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Even at that how many innocent people are in prison, and why didn't a judge fix that. It would be much easyer to bribe, pressure 3 verses 12.

[Randygmn]

I really don't see how he has rewritten the constitution. It seems like you think that only your opinion matters and everyone else's doesn't.

Eliminating a jury of one's peers is constitutionally protected and a significant part of our judicial systems due process. That's not an opinion.

[usnret]

You can chose a trial by just a judge.

[ex-LT]

I really don't see how he has rewritten the constitution. It seems like you think that only your opinion matters and everyone else's doesn't.

Eliminating a jury of one's peers is constitutionally protected and a significant part of our judicial systems due process. That's not an opinion.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Where, exactly, in the Sixth Amendment, does it guarantee a "jury of one's peers"?