• 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

Common Sense 1

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
18,471
Reaction score
13,396
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
A group of maybe 20 to 30 people has moved into an intersection blocking some traffic. Downtown St. Louis.
You can read the Judge’s decision here.


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

Former St. Louis officer Jason Stockley found not guilty in murder case | FOX2now.com

Stockley fatally shot 24-year-old Anthony Lamar Smith in December 2011 after a three-mile police chase through city streets. The incident started as a police stop following a reported drug sale. Surveillance video showed officers block Smith in, who then backed his vehicle into a police car as the officers approached. Stockley ran after the suspect’s car, firing seven shots with his service pistol.

The prosecution called 17 witnesses during the five-day trial. Stockley testified at his own trial and the defense presented only one other witness.
 
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 ...............
 
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 ...............

Hyperbole...... Read what the Judge said.... the State did not prove it's case. His decision is about 30 pages long.
 
Hyperbole...... Read what the Judge said.... the State did not prove it's case. His decision is about 30 pages long.

Hyperbole?

Nope, I meant every word in that post & every word is true; there is no debate on that.

"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."

That is all true & correct ............


**** Stockley, the judge, and anyone else that covered for the murder of Smith by an agent of the state .............
 
A group of maybe 20 to 30 people has moved into an intersection blocking some traffic. Downtown St. Louis.
You can read the Judge’s decision here.


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

Former St. Louis officer Jason Stockley found not guilty in murder case | FOX2now.com

Stockley fatally shot 24-year-old Anthony Lamar Smith in December 2011 after a three-mile police chase through city streets. The incident started as a police stop following a reported drug sale. Surveillance video showed officers block Smith in, who then backed his vehicle into a police car as the officers approached. Stockley ran after the suspect’s car, firing seven shots with his service pistol.

The prosecution called 17 witnesses during the five-day trial. Stockley testified at his own trial and the defense presented only one other witness.

I personally give the guy enormous credit for testifying on his own behalf. Justice has spoken. That's what we're all about. Right?

If what another poster says is true, that it was proven and acknowledged that he dropped a gun? He should use his job. But. That is not murder. The guy's life is ruined regardless. So he'll definitely pay a price.

**** these people who crash into cop cars and flee police.
 
Last edited:
Hyperbole?

Nope, I meant every word in that post & every word is true; there is no debate on that.

"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."

That is all true & correct ............


**** Stockley, the judge, and anyone else that covered for the murder of Smith by an agent of the state .............


You post is just factually wrong! There is NO evidence that a weapon was planted, the weapon that was found did not belong to Stockley, and the judge found the state did not meet it's burden of proof for any of the charges.
 
On the plus side maybe the hoodlums are learning that being a dick to our agents the Police is a bad idea...
 
You post is just factually wrong! There is NO evidence that a weapon was planted, the weapon that was found did not belong to Stockley, and the judge found the state did not meet it's burden of proof for any of the charges.
There IS plenty of evidence that a weapon was planted. What the judge found was that the alleged planted weapon (like the rhetoric involving his carrying a personally owned AK47) was not relevant to the defense position of self defense. The judge found that a violent offender that committed vehicular assault and then went on a high speed attempt at evasion where he put multiple peoples lives at risk, and who did not comply with demands to surrender was then shot by the cop.

Based solely on what I have read in different papers, I personally would have voted to convict if I was on a jury.
 
Its not an argument the protesters want to hear, but the law enforcement agencies are the reason why this trial even took place. Cops testified against him, his Lieutenant testified against him, IA testified against him, and the police unions stood against him. This was a legal decision. Take away the emotionality of the case, and you have to be glad that the judges decision came down on the side of a citizen.
 
There IS plenty of evidence that a weapon was planted. What the judge found was that the alleged planted weapon (like the rhetoric involving his carrying a personally owned AK47) was not relevant to the defense position of self defense. The judge found that a violent offender that committed vehicular assault and then went on a high speed attempt at evasion where he put multiple peoples lives at risk, and who did not comply with demands to surrender was then shot by the cop.

Based solely on what I have read in different papers, I personally would have voted to convict if I was on a jury.

The judge ruled that the evidence did not support that charge that Stockley planted a weapon. Read the judges decision! (bottom of page 25)
 
I thought I saw someone mention this is going to be a bench trial. That pretty much guarantees that there is going to be a not guilty. As much as the average juror has a hard-on for allowing cops to get away with murder, judges are pretty much committed to ensuring the status quo of cops doing these sorts of things because they have a vested interests in supporting police.

From ignoring evidence...
Judge acquits Chicago police commander of abuse charge despite DNA evidence - Chicago Tribune

To using twisted tortured logic...
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/201...explained-expert-says-judges-decision-unusual

There's pretty much no way a judge in a bench trial is going to allow a cop to be convicted.
Called it.
 
So is he going away on obstruction?
 
The judge ruled that the evidence did not support that charge that Stockley planted a weapon. Read the judges decision! (bottom of page 25)
It may not have met the judges standard, but there is little doubt that he planted the weapon. There was only one persons DNA on the weapon...Stockleys. The DNA was blood DNA...but Stockley had no cuts on the day of the shooting.

There is little doubt that he planted the gun...but there is room for doubt...hence no conviction by a judge which is precisely why he sought a bench trial.

Forget about the conviction for a second...do you think its likely...even probable that the cop planted the gun?
 
the judge made a very valid determination of not guilty
the state failed to prove guilt

minor point. the judge did engage in an instance of hyperbole when writing that he reviewed the videos in evidence innumerable times. much as a misstatement one casually makes when insisting something is "literal" when it is actually figurative. a semantic error i would not expect to see in a judge's ruling

i came into this thread expecting to see evidence of a gun being planted by the defendant. the only indication that the defendant possessed the gun was by the DNA found on it. which DNA is explained by the fact that the defendant entered the victim's vehicle and retrieved the pistol - and then emptied the gun of its ammunition
why would the department have allowed the shooting officer to have the opportunity to do that. leadership should be disciplined for tolerating such a sloppy handling of the evidence. hopefully, rules are now in place to prohibit such touching of the shooting scene by the officer who was the shooter. had that been the practice in 2011, there would be no question today whether the deceased was or was not reaching for a weapon to prompt the defendant's decision to begin firing

for me, the most incriminating evidence was the defendant's hostility heard on the recordings during the police pursuit of the deceased's vehicle that he was going to "kill this mother****er". to which i agree with the judge; the defendant acted in a rational manner when approaching the vehicle/occupant and did not immediately assault the deceased. the defendant withheld fire until he was confronted by a suspect whose actions caused the defendant to have reason for concern for his own safety

the question i still have is why was the defendant's partner not called to testify at this trial proceeding
 
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 ...............




Why lie?

There is no evidence he planted the gun
 
within the 30 page Findings & Verdict there is mention of the DNA testing that was performed on the hand gun located in Smith's vehicle.
Also mentioned briefly starting on page 12 it states a FBI employee test fired the weapon.

Does anyone else in this conversation find it odd that the ownership of the hand gun located in Smith's vehicle was never mentioned within the 30 page document?

Was it Smith's gun?
Was it Stockley's weapon?
Did the gun belong to PeeWee Herman?
 
are you serious?

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

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



Where is the evidence of the planted gun as you claim.


Simple question. Seriously.
 
It may not have met the judges standard, but there is little doubt that he planted the weapon. There was only one persons DNA on the weapon...Stockleys. The DNA was blood DNA...but Stockley had no cuts on the day of the shooting.

There is little doubt that he planted the gun...but there is room for doubt...hence no conviction by a judge which is precisely why he sought a bench trial.

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

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)
 
within the 30 page Findings & Verdict there is mention of the DNA testing that was performed on the hand gun located in Smith's vehicle.
Also mentioned briefly starting on page 12 it states a FBI employee test fired the weapon.

Does anyone else in this conversation find it odd that the ownership of the hand gun located in Smith's vehicle was never mentioned within the 30 page document?

Was it Smith's gun?
Was it Stockley's weapon?
Did the gun belong to PeeWee Herman?

Lets see a weeks long trial and the prosecution does not make one mention or claim that the weapon found in the suspects vehicle belong to Officer Stockley!! Game, Set and match!
Guess what bad guys steal guns and use them.
 
Lets see a weeks long trial and the prosecution does not make one mention or claim that the weapon found in the suspects vehicle belong to Officer Stockley!! Game, Set and match!
Guess what bad guys steal guns and use them.

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
 
Back
Top Bottom