Virginia law officer acquitted in shooting of woman in car

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Virginia law officer acquitted in shooting of woman in car

Updated 4:17 pm, Friday, October 28, 2016


HENRICO, Va. (AP) — A Virginia police officer has been acquitted of all charges for shooting at a car he said was being driven toward him and struck him.

A passenger, Kimberly McNeil, was hit by four bullets as her boyfriend drove away from Henrico County Officer Joel Greenway in December. She survived and testified at Greenway's trial.

A jury on Friday found Greenway not guilty of malicious wounding, firing into an occupied vehicle and using a firearm in the commission of a felony.

Greenway testified that he approached a car in a gas station parking lot, saw evidence of drug use and asked to see the occupants' hands.



Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Virginia-law-officer-acquitted-in-shooting-of-10420808.php

---

[center]

[Blue_Tires]

1. The next cop we convict of anything in VA will be the first...

[Leontius]

3. Steven Rankin might disagree.

[Blue_Tires]

8. And he got a slap on the wrist of a sentence...

[Leontius]

11. Well I guess if you move the goalposts enough

you can justify almost any comment but the fact remains he was convicted and sentenced by a jury.

[Blue_Tires]

12. Now do you want to talk about the cops that walked?

Do you even fucking live in Virginia? Or are you trying to wind me up?

[atreides1]

2. So???

He was found not guilty of firing into an occupied vehicle, and yet he did!!!

First the jury in Oregon, now this one...are we sure the jurors were actually in the court room???

[branford]

4. If the shooting into the vehicle was legally justified, it wasn't a crime.

I don't know the facts of this particular case, and the article blurb to practically useless.

However, it appears the officer claimed that in response to a lawful request to the driver of the vehicle, the driver put his hand in his waistband, drove forward and actually hit the officer. If this defense is even remotely true, I'm entirely unsurprised by the acquittal.

Do you have any other citations with greater case analysis that strongly contradicts the officers version of events, particularly since the state bears the burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

[pkdu]

5. Ahhh...the wasteband defense , an oldie but a goodie. nt

[branford]

6. It appears that the driver actually hit the officer with his vehicle.

That's a a whole lot more than a "waistband defense."

Do you believe a person has a right to drive into a police officer in response to a lawful inquiry?

Firing at someone trying to run you over would generally be considered justified self-defense, regardless of whether a police officer was involved.

[pkdu]

7. I couldnt find reporting on his hospital visit??? but I did find

that he;

didnt call for backup before approaching (per procedure)
didnt turn his body cam on (per procedure)
did fire 7 (yes seven) shots into the vehicle - 4 of which hit the passenger ( and another hit her headrest)

[branford]

9. All of that may indeed be true.

However, the driver would still not be able to attempt to run over the officer in response to a lawful stop (or much else). Even if the officer failed to follow administrative procedures, that would waive an effective self-defense claim.

As I stated, I know little more about this particular incident than my experience as an attorney, the OP article, and the fact the officer was acquitted. However, based on the little we know, the acquittal is unsurprising.

[snooper2]

10. Why all cameras should always be on...removes most doubt

Like this asshole who should never be behind a wheel again