Ferguson cop says life is ‘ruined’ after pointing AR-15 at journalists and saying, ‘I’m going to f*c

[happyslug]

71. You go with the best defence you can based on the evidence.

The officer pointed a LOADED RIFLE at an UNARMED REPORTER, and that is on FILM, what defense does he have EXCEPT that he showed "restraint"?

Worse, most officers are arrogant, you can NOT get them to admit that what they did was wrong. Thus the defense of "I made a mistake" can NOT be used for the Client refuses to even SAY (let alone admit) that what he did was wrong. My Father use to say "I am not perfect, I have made many mistakes in my life, remember there was only one person who ever lived that NEVER made a mistake, and we nailed him to a Cross". Police can NOT accept that concept, they did not nail that man to a Cross, the Jews (or someone else) did.

Sorry, since it is clear this Officer is refusing to say he did something wrong, his only remaining defense is that his actions were correct and he showed "Restraint".

DUring the Columbine disaster, one officer actually fired some rounds down a hallway (hitting no one) and then remarked that he made a mistake. Yes, he had made a mistake, he should NOT have fired those rounds. On the other hand mistakes occur and the first step to prevent them in the future is to acknowledge the ones you have made. In the Columbine situation the officer admitted his mistake and thus was on his way to preventing that mistake again. In this situation this officer is clearly REFUSING to say he made a mistake, and that restricts what his attorney can do. I have seen attorneys tell their clients NOT to admit fault or say they made a mistake, let those statements be used against the client in any subsequent trial. On the other hand the best defense at trial is to attack what harm, if any, did the victim incur. In this case the officer did NOT pull the trigger, no used the rifle as a club, thus the defense of NO HARM DONE, still exists.

Now I live in Western Pennsylvania and juries in Western Pennsylvania are known NOT to give pain and suffering awards (AND this difference is dramatic, Eastern Pennsylvania Juries give Pain and Suffering awards all the time). Thus, in my area, when an officer says he made a mistake, even if a jury hears that, they will NOT grant a verdict against the officer for the pain of having a rifle pointed at time. Elsewhere in this country, Juries have been known to accept such claims and give verdicts based on the "Pain and Suffering" the victim suffered do to the rifle being pointed at them. Thus many Attorneys advise they clients NOT to admit fault or that they made a mistake, so that such a statement can be be used against the client in any subsequent trial.

Just a comment that this MAY not be the attorney's fault, it may be the Client OR it may be the attorney is worried about what a Jury may hear in the future. There are a lot of reason for the attorney NOT to have his client admit he made a mistake, so it may NOT be that he has a bad lawyer, but the Lawyer has a bad case (or worse a bad client and I lean to the latter).
"