• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Former St. Louis officer Jason Stockley found not guilty in murder case

if the prosecution failed to determine ownership of the weapon found in Smith's vehicle, then there should never have been any mention by the DA of the weapon being a potential 'throw down'

reports in the media over a year ago stated the weapon's ownership was attribute by the DA's office to Stockley but that is not set in stone

I find Judge Wilson's F&V to be lacking, at best, on several counts

No the judge used the law, he spell out his decision very carefully and how he arrived at it..... unlike some who just decided he was guilty because... the newspapers said so!
The old media reports were wrong.
 
First off it's not the judges standard it is the legal standard!! A giant difference. From the prosecutions own expert witness's (2) the lack of DNA evidence does not mean someone did not handle something. Remember these are witness for the prosecution. (page 26 of the judges decision)

All well and good. I already acknowledged it didn't meet the legal standard and that's why he opt d for a judge vs jury trial. That being said...

Forget about the conviction for a second...do you think its likely...even probable that the cop planted the gun?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I forwarded a request to the St. Louis Attorneys Office, Circuit Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner, requesting the investigation files utilized for prosecution; will see what they reply with

I smell a rat .........................
 
Once again - classy "protesters" throwing things at police officers.
 
Why lie? Are you serious?

A homicide was committed, a person is on trial for 1st degree murder, and you really have to ask that?

OK .........................

There isn't any evidence of a planted gun. The gun in the car was too big to NOT be seen in his hand or pocket. The video shows no gun in the officer's hand or pocket. Plus, as the judge pointed out....

Screenshot (45).jpg
 
Protesters have burned a St. Louis Cardinals shirt. How dare they.
 
No the judge used the law, he spell out his decision very carefully and how he arrived at it..... unlike some who just decided he was guilty because... the newspapers said so!
The old media reports were wrong.

wait for it ...

































fake news!
 
There isn't any evidence of a planted gun. The gun in the car was too big to NOT be seen in his hand or pocket. The video shows no gun in the officer's hand or pocket. Plus, as the judge pointed out....

View attachment 67222774

I read all 30 pages of the F&V from Judge Wilson; I read all about his comments on the weapon ..........
 
I read all 30 pages of the F&V from Judge Wilson; I read all about his comments on the weapon ..........

You weren't going to believe anything you read anyway, so I'm not sure why you even bothered.
 
There isn't any evidence of a planted gun. The gun in the car was too big to NOT be seen in his hand or pocket. The video shows no gun in the officer's hand or pocket. Plus, as the judge pointed out....

View attachment 67222774

Why are you pointing out that the judge is making stuff up to fit the situation? There is no evidence that I've seen that the victim was a heroin dealer and given the officer's conduct, he could very well have planted that too.
 
Why are you pointing out that the judge is making stuff up to fit the situation? There is no evidence that I've seen that the victim was a heroin dealer and given the officer's conduct, he could very well have planted that too.

The entire reason the police got involved was because they suspected a drug deal was occurring.. And - lo and behold - a bag of narcotics in the car. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Also -- from the Post Dispatch:

Records say Smith, 24, of the 4800 block of Page Boulevard, was on parole for convictions of illegal gun possession, drug distribution and theft at the time of his death.

So................................... what did the judge make up?

Could the officer have planted the gun and the narcotics? Of course --- but you have to prove that. There's no proof of it. You can't convict someone of murder based on what you feel might have happened.
 
Last edited:
All well and good. I already acknowledged it didn't meet the legal standard and that's why he opt d for a judge vs jury trial. That being said...

Forget about the conviction for a second...do you think its likely...even probable that the cop planted the gun?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It really does not matter what I think about it.... Trials are operated based on the law! Not emotions or it could be this or that. The state did not prove it's case. Read what the judge wrote. He goes step by step how he made his decision.
You watch what happens in St. Louis over the weekend. My bet most have no idea of why the judge ruled the way he did but that won't stop them from ........................... I hope it's peaceful protest but I have my doubts.
 
I actually read it three times ...........

then you had three opportunities to learn that the defendant got into the driver's seat, searched the seat for a gun, found one, and unloaded it placing the gun and ammunition on the seat when he was finished
any idea how his DNA could have gotten on that pistol after handling it in that manner
 
Black Lives Matter and company have shown up in St Louis. Bring your ski mask, hoodie, and crowbar. Tonight is a night for after hours shopping. How much looting, arson, and mayhem will be caused tonight?
 
It really does not matter what I think about it.... Trials are operated based on the law! Not emotions or it could be this or that. The state did not prove it's case. Read what the judge wrote. He goes step by step how he made his decision.
You watch what happens in St. Louis over the weekend. My bet most have no idea of why the judge ruled the way he did but that won't stop them from ........................... I hope it's peaceful protest but I have my doubts.
What you think about it absolutely matters. If you can bring yourself to admit that its likely and perhaps even probable that he planted the gun, though not provable beyond a reasonable doubt, it might go a bit of a way to bridge the distance between those that dont feel heard. It might even go a little way to express empathy. It can certainly go a long way to show honesty.
 
Read this and try to tell me this trial wasn't anything but a sham. The officer waived his right to a jury trial because the judge probably gave him the ole white wink wink.
 
Read this and try to tell me this trial wasn't anything but a sham. The officer waived his right to a jury trial because the judge probably gave him the ole white wink wink.
That's what Bench Trials are for cops. A way to avoid being held accountable to the people and instead to get a wink wink/nudge nudge from the law enforcement mechanism infamous for it's glad-handing and self serving behavior.
 
That's what Bench Trials are for cops. A way to avoid being held accountable to the people and instead to get a wink wink/nudge nudge from the law enforcement mechanism infamous for it's glad-handing and self serving behavior.

share with us what the judge got wrong in his published reasoning for coming to the 'not guilty' determination
 
Stockley stated he would kill Smith, Stockley did indeed murder Smith, Stockley planted a 'throw down' weapon, a weapon that was later revealed to be Stockely's, and yet the judge pronounced a NOT GUILTY verdict.

This is a particularly sad day in our nation, when police can brutally murder citizens utilizing the above tactics that go completely against the ideals of our nation & our freedoms.

One can only hope that Stockley, the judge, and ALL others involved in this injustice will very soon have their own justice & rot in Hell.

Just **** them all ...............

They should have shot him at the scene when he tried to run them over with his car. ((Assault with a deadly weapon). If they would have done that, it would have been over and done.
 
Read this and try to tell me this trial wasn't anything but a sham. The officer waived his right to a jury trial because the judge probably gave him the ole white wink wink.

The "kill shot" wasn't the one 6 inches from his face. That was the gunshot to his shoulder which wouldn't have killed him (the prosecution's expert said). I've had to say this several times tonight for some reason -- in order to get a guilty verdict in a murder trial, the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution's experts, the witness testimonies and the video provided that doubt.

The facts that some articles aren't telling you ---

Smith was a convicted drug dealer and thief.
The officers saw what they suspected was a drug deal so they stopped behind Smith's car to confront him.
He immediately rammed his car into the police car (and another car) after seeing the officers stop behind him. There is video of all of this. He hit one of the officers in the hand with his vehicle as he sped away.
Stockley's partner yelled "GUN!" as he sped away because he saw a gun in the car.
They sped after him. Stockley said "we're killing this mother****er, don't you know". He claims that he doesn't remember saying it because of the highly stressful situation you say lots of things, but we know he (or his partner did) because it's on the video/radio.
They finally cornered Smith whose airbags had deployed from crashing. Stockley yelled at him to keep his hands where he can see them and to open the door. Back-up officers had arrived by then. Stockley told them to watch his hands (which meant that he knew there was a gun in the car).
Stockley said Smith then reached down to his right which Stockley assumed was him reaching for his gun (which his partner said he saw). Stockley shot in quick succession - witnesses say there was no pause in shots.
Stockley goes to his vehicle to get first aid. He takes off his gloves (thick gloves because it was chilly that night) so he can quickly feel around to grab it out of the bag. He realizes that Smith is already dead.
The video shows no evidence of Stockley hiding the .38 on his body in order to plant it in the vehicle. No witnesses or other officers on the scene say they saw Stockley plant the .38 in the car.
They search the vehicle. Stockley finds the .38 and a bag of narcotics. Stockley unloads the cartridges and lays everything on the front seat.
The medical examiner said the close-range shot was to his shoulder and not a kill shot. There was, however, a gunshot to his lower flank which would be impossible unless Smith was leaning over (which corroborates Stockley's testimony that Smith leaned down to his right).
The DNA evidence on the gun was Stockley's. Makes sense since he was touching it to take out the cartridges. The expert witnesses for the prosecution said that lack of DNA evidence isn't proof that the gun wasn't handled by Smith. You can handle an object without leaving DNA evidence.

Looking through the evidence, expert testimonies and witness testimonies -- there WAS doubt. You cannot convict someone of murder if there's any doubt that he/she might not be guilty.
 
Last edited:
Justice was not administered today.
 
Justice was not administered today.

Yes, it was. That's how our justice system works. The prosecution didn't prove "guilty of first degree murder" beyond a shadow of a doubt.
 
Before we had Law Enforcement Officers they were Peace Officers and had NO UNION and were fully accountable for their actions. If a Peace Officer shot an Unarmed Person HE(there were no Women Cops) was Terminated and Prosecuted for Manslaughter, the Standard Sentence was 5 years.
 
Back
Top Bottom