Hey, there! Log in / Register
Police officer with bullet still in his leg talks about the jury that acquitted the man charged with shooting him
By adamg on Thu, 06/24/2021 - 9:01am
Live Boston posts Officer Kurt Stokinger's comments on career criminal Grant Headley's acquittal on charges he shot Stokinger.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
I'm not one to give a lot of leeway to the police
Or Live617, but jeez, it's hard to imagine what the defense argued that swayed the jury. Seems like a pretty cut-and-dry case to me. I'd be interested to see a transcript of the trail, maybe there's more than meets the eye; I wasn't on the jury. Still, yikes.
All that said, there might be a bit of the police making their own bed here. A jury of peers in Suffolk County is going to have a bunch of people who have been needlessly harassed by the police and are going to have a hard time giving them much benefit of the doubt. I understand that BPD is not the worst offender, either.
Reasonable doubt
Remember, an acquittal doesn't mean he was found innocent, just that the jury didn't find the prosecutors had proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, maybe the defense argued that he only shot at the police after they started shooting at him first, or that the bullet came from "friendly fire". We don't know what happened at the trial, but that's just one way the defense could say that he didn't meet the legal definitions of the charges.
It just means the prosecution didn't prove their case...
It just means the prosecution didn't prove their case on THAT count. Been there, done that, sat on a jury where we were quite sure that the defendant was dodgy as hell, but it was complicated by the fact that the plaintiff (civil case) did not present a compelling case that the defendant was guilty of those charges.
I'm confused about the assignment of blame here
Seems weird to say that the DA did a perfect job but all blame goes to the jury and judge. Is he really sure the DA couldn't have constructed a better case? And why is it the judge's fault here if the jury voted to acquit?