New Jersey police officer could get life sentence after driver gunned down during high-speed chase

Looks to be a very bad shooting? The officer who does the shooting seems to be out of control?
Take a look at the video. What do you think?


New Jersey police officer could get life sentence after driver gunned down during high-speed chase

New Jersey police officer could get life sentence after driver gunned down during high-speed chase | Fox News

A New Jersey police officer could spend the rest of his life behind bars after being charged with shooting and killing a driver and wounding a passenger during a wild chase that was all caught on video.

Jovanny Crespo of the Newark Police Department was indicted by a grand jury Tuesday on six counts related to the late January death of Gregory Griffin, the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office said. The announcement coincided with the release of a dramatic bodycam video of the fatal police pursuit, showing the 26-year-old officer firing off numerous rounds into the car Griffin was driving.

“It is the state’s position that this officer’s conduct that night was criminal,” acting Essex County Prosecutor Theodore Stephens said. “He showed a reckless disregard for human life by shooting into a moving vehicle, a vehicle which had heavily tinted windows. This is the first fatal police-involved shooting to result in an indictment in Essex County in recent memory."


Wild video shows Newark cop fire at vehicle, killing driver

The gentleman in the car should not have fled.

Too many people nowadays are defiant.

I hope that the police officer is able to get a good attorney.

Common Sense 1 said:

“It is the state’s position that this officer’s conduct that night was criminal,” acting Essex County Prosecutor Theodore Stephens said. “He showed a reckless disregard for human life by shooting into a moving vehicle, a vehicle which had heavily tinted windows. This is the first fatal police-involved shooting to result in an indictment in Essex County in recent memory."

Click to expand...

While it's good that this isn't another cover-up and sweep-under, it is worth noting that a citizen who tries that is charged with 1st degree murder.

TheParser said:

The gentleman in the car should not have fled.

Too many people nowadays are defiant.

I hope that the police officer is able to get a good attorney.

Click to expand...

A death sentence without trial is appropriate when someone doesn't obey a lawful order? I wonder how many times you've burned your tongue with praise for American "freedoms."

No meaningful freedoms exist if the police are allowed that degree of power over a citizen's life and death.

Mr Person said:

A death sentence without trial is appropriate when someone doesn't obey a lawful order? .

Click to expand...

Let's say that a cop sees Mr. X kill one of my loved ones.

The cop orders Mr. X to freeze in place.

Mr. X jumps into a car and takes off.

If the cop fires at the car (and happens to mortally wound Mr. X in the process), I would gladly and gratefully accept the cop's action.


People like Mr. X have to learn to obey a cop's orders.


*****


You will be interested to know that there is the distinct possibility that here in California, a new law may be passed that will greatly limit the right of cops to use deadly force.

TheParser said:

Let's say that a cop sees Mr. X kill one of my loved ones.

The cop orders Mr. X to freeze in place.

Mr. X jumps into a car and takes off.

If the cop fires at the car (and happens to mortally wound Mr. X in the process), I would gladly and gratefully accept the cop's action.


People like Mr. X have to learn to obey a cop's orders.


*****

You will be interested to know that there is the distinct possibility that here in California, a new law may be passed that will greatly limit the right of cops to use deadly force.

Click to expand...

Fleeing from the police is not sufficient for a death sentence.

If there actually is a chase in progress and it actually is getting very dangerous for the public, then other things become possible that might involve the suspect dying. Run them off the road, spikes or some sort of thing that might send a car tumbling, etc. Merely fleeing is not an acceptable reason. If it's his car, they have the plates. If it's someone else's, his most likely move is to abandon it. Fingerprints, etc., evidence.

You know.... it is acceptable if some bad guys get away if we're talking about a balance of harms for this policy. Meaning that the harm in allowing police officers to simply say "well, he was fleeing" when they shoot someone dead is actually a bigger harm than a jerk getting away (once, and only for a bit).





This video: they get there. Cop starts yelling "he's gonna hop out" as the cops approach. Suspect car is stopped, not going anywhere. The passenger door is slightly open. That doesn't change. Passenger cop comes out. Says "stop". When the video is on the car, look at the hubcaps. They are not moving. Nonetheless the cop yells "stop the car" and starts firing directly into it. I keep saying "cop", but the proper term is Government Agent, isn't it?

And you want to defend that with "fleeing"? That's ****ing murder.

Common Sense 1 said:

Looks to be a very bad shooting? The officer who does the shooting seems to be out of control?
Take a look at the video. What do you think?


New Jersey police officer could get life sentence after driver gunned down during high-speed chase

New Jersey police officer could get life sentence after driver gunned down during high-speed chase | Fox News

A New Jersey police officer could spend the rest of his life behind bars after being charged with shooting and killing a driver and wounding a passenger during a wild chase that was all caught on video.

Jovanny Crespo of the Newark Police Department was indicted by a grand jury Tuesday on six counts related to the late January death of Gregory Griffin, the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office said. The announcement coincided with the release of a dramatic bodycam video of the fatal police pursuit, showing the 26-year-old officer firing off numerous rounds into the car Griffin was driving.

“It is the state’s position that this officer’s conduct that night was criminal,” acting Essex County Prosecutor Theodore Stephens said. “He showed a reckless disregard for human life by shooting into a moving vehicle, a vehicle which had heavily tinted windows. This is the first fatal police-involved shooting to result in an indictment in Essex County in recent memory."


Wild video shows Newark cop fire at vehicle, killing driver

Click to expand...

Not guilty

Shoot first ask questions later. What makes the cop use lethal force when it isn't necessary? Killing someone for trying to run away from the police is insane. I hope the cop gets a life sentence. Did you notice his breathing when all he was doing was riding in the car? He was almost hyperventilating and the scene once the car was stopped was nothing but utter confusion. Great training.

Mr Person said:

While it's good that this isn't another cover-up and sweep-under, it is worth noting that a citizen who tries that is charged with 1st degree murder.

Click to expand...

He should have never been let on the force in the first place. Way too hyper. I also noticed he kept saying these guys had a gun I saw none in the film. I wonder what they are charging the man with?

Mr Person said:

Fleeing from the police is not sufficient for a death sentence.

If there actually is a chase in progress and it actually is getting very dangerous for the public, then other things become possible that might involve the suspect dying. Run them off the road, spikes or some sort of thing that might send a car tumbling, etc. Merely fleeing is not an acceptable reason. If it's his car, they have the plates. If it's someone else's, his most likely move is to abandon it. Fingerprints, etc., evidence.

You know.... it is acceptable if some bad guys get away if we're talking about a balance of harms for this policy. Meaning that the harm in allowing police officers to simply say "well, he was fleeing" when they shoot someone dead is actually a bigger harm than a jerk getting away (once, and only for a bit).





This video: they get there. Cop starts yelling "he's gonna hop out" as the cops approach. Suspect car is stopped, not going anywhere. The passenger door is slightly open. That doesn't change. Passenger cop comes out. Says "stop". When the video is on the car, look at the hubcaps. They are not moving. Nonetheless the cop yells "stop the car" and starts firing directly into it. I keep saying "cop", but the proper term is Government Agent, isn't it?

And you want to defend that with "fleeing"? That's ****ing murder.

Click to expand...

I don't defend the police normally, they can defend themselves. This guy should never have been put in this situation. He is way too hyper. The police department had to know this. His partner should have never let him out of the vehicle once he fired those first shots.

TheParser said:

Let's say that a cop sees Mr. X kill one of my loved ones.

The cop orders Mr. X to freeze in place.

Mr. X jumps into a car and takes off.

If the cop fires at the car (and happens to mortally wound Mr. X in the process), I would gladly and gratefully accept the cop's action.


People like Mr. X have to learn to obey a cop's orders.


*****


You will be interested to know that there is the distinct possibility that here in California, a new law may be passed that will greatly limit the right of cops to use deadly force.

Click to expand...

Good. The only time lethal force should be used is when lethal force has been used against them or others just like us civilians.

Mr Person said:

While it's good that this isn't another cover-up and sweep-under, it is worth noting that a citizen who tries that is charged with 1st degree murder.

Click to expand...

It is unlikely that a person who shoots another who has pointed a gun at them would be charged with murder.

And the cops wonder why so few in the population actually see them as heroes, as protectors and guardians.

In too many cases they are executioners, nothing more.

Thoreau72 said:

And the cops wonder why so few in the population actually see them as heroes, as protectors and guardians.

In too many cases they are executioners, nothing more.

Click to expand...

If someone points a gun at you, and you shoot at them, can you really be fairly called an "executioner?"

Grizzly Adams said:

If someone points a gun at you, and you shoot at them, can you really be fairly called an "executioner?"

Click to expand...

What about the incidents in which NOBODY pointed a gun at a cop, yet somebody gets executed by one in uniform? Do you acknowledge that such incidents happen?

Thoreau72 said:

What about the incidents in which NOBODY pointed a gun at a cop, yet somebody gets executed by one in uniform? Do you acknowledge that such incidents happen?

Click to expand...

This thread is about, so far as I'm able to divine, a specific incident in which someone did. I'm unable to competently comment on hypothetical scenarios in which you make up critical points on the fly.

TheParser said:

Let's say that a cop sees Mr. X kill one of my loved ones.

The cop orders Mr. X to freeze in place.

Mr. X jumps into a car and takes off.

If the cop fires at the car (and happens to mortally wound Mr. X in the process), I would gladly and gratefully accept the cop's action.


People like Mr. X have to learn to obey a cop's orders.


*****


You will be interested to know that there is the distinct possibility that here in California, a new law may be passed that will greatly limit the right of cops to use deadly force.

Click to expand...

Not such a great analogy since Mr. X (in the OP) was not seen taking a life - Mr. X was simply pulled over for a traffic law violation.

ttwtt78640 said:

Not such a great analogy since Mr. X (in the OP) was not seen taking a life - Mr. X was simply pulled over for a traffic law violation.

Click to expand...

If a cop stops you, you must NOT flee -- regardless of the alleged crime.

If you do, I feel that the cop should be able to use force to stop you.

People must learn NOT to be defiant of authority. If they do, they should accept the consequences.

The 44th president stopped public schools from suspending students for being defiant toward their teachers.

These young gentlemen and ladies grow up to think that they can be defiant toward authority without any penalty.

Here in Los Angeles, some bad people refuse to stop their cars when ordered to do so by cops. They then take off, putting good people (drivers and pedestrians) at risk. I believe the cops should be able to use force to stop those bad people -- even for a traffic violation.



Have a nice day!

This is another tough one, and will be equally tough to defend in court.

In the end Crespo was the only one to fire his weapon, in three separate instances during the chase, and by relevant regulation he may have been in the wrong to do so.

TheParser said:

If a cop stops you, you must NOT flee -- regardless of the alleged crime.

If you do, I feel that the cop should be able to use force to stop you.

People must learn NOT to be defiant of authority. If they do, they should accept the consequences.

The 44th president stopped public schools from suspending students for being defiant toward their teachers.

These young gentlemen and ladies grow up to think that they can be defiant toward authority without any penalty.

Here in Los Angeles, some bad people refuse to stop their cars when ordered to do so by cops. They then take off, putting good people (drivers and pedestrians) at risk. I believe the cops should be able to use force to stop those bad people -- even for a traffic violation.



Have a nice day!

Click to expand...

We must learn not to be defiant of authority?

Why?

Granting blanket authority over life and death to an unelected group of people that successfully sued to be able to discriminate against high iq people in the hiring process, is pretty much opposite of what I believe in as an American.

Much of the authority of the police is authority they've assumed, and you let them get away with.

Most of the time, cops do not have probable cause for detaining anyone, searching anyone, or even approaching anyone. They use public ignorance of individual rights to impose their assumed authority as a given. And punish anyone who questions it to the point it's better to go along with it.

Most cops are not even officers of the law, they are corporate employees of a chartered township enforcing corporate code. Not law.

They should never have the benefit of the doubt, the system was designed to place the burden of proof on them.

What little authority they actually have, only kicks in when they have witnessed a crime or believe a crime to have been committed beyond just a hunch. Until then, anything they say to you is bull****. Including , you have to show me ID.

So no, we should be reminding cops all over the country, they don't have that much authority. And if they can't control their emotions and fire arms better, we will take the fire arms away, and they can go out everyday into an armed nation of 300 million citizens with a stun gun and see how long they last pushing their weight around on just their authority.

ThoughtEx. said:

We must learn not to be defiant of authority?

Why?

Granting blanket authority over life and death to an unelected group of people that successfully sued to be able to discriminate against high iq people in the hiring process, is pretty much opposite of what I believe in as an American.

Much of the authority of the police is authority they've assumed, and you let them get away with.

Most of the time, cops do not have probable cause for detaining anyone, searching anyone, or even approaching anyone. They use public ignorance of individual rights to impose their assumed authority as a given. And punish anyone who questions it to the point it's better to go along with it.

Most cops are not even officers of the law, they are corporate employees of a chartered township enforcing corporate code. Not law.

They should never have the benefit of the doubt, the system was designed to place the burden of proof on them.

What little authority they actually have, only kicks in when they have witnessed a crime or believe a crime to have been committed beyond just a hunch. Until then, anything they say to you is bull****. Including , you have to show me ID.

So no, we should be reminding cops all over the country, they don't have that much authority. And if they can't control their emotions and fire arms better, we will take the fire arms away, and they can go out everyday into an armed nation of 300 million citizens with a stun gun and see how long they last pushing their weight around on just their authority.

Click to expand...

As President Clinton used to say: "I feel your pain."

1. I (and probably most people) agree with you in theory.

2. In everyday life, I (and probably most people) feel that you cannot fight City Hall, so it's better to be obedient. Many parents, for example, teach their children to answer "Yes, sir/ma'am" or "No, sir/ma'am" to a cop. Cops know that the public will usually believe them against an ordinary citizen. So it's just practical to go along to get along. The little guy usually always loses in lawsuits against cops.


3. The reason why there are so many police shootings in this country is that many young "kids" agree with the views in your post. They dare the cops to do anything. And when the cops do something, the results can be unfortunate for everyone. Remember what happened in Missouri? A cop gave a young man an order. He ignored it. And the rest is history.


Have a nice day!

Grizzly Adams said:

This thread is about, so far as I'm able to divine, a specific incident in which someone did. I'm unable to competently comment on hypothetical scenarios in which you make up critical points on the fly.

Click to expand...

Yes it is, but probably you and I both know how threads tend to wander. :mrgreen: My post was inspired by to post to which I replied, a hypothetical itself.

ThoughtEx. said:

Most of the time, cops do not have probable cause for detaining anyone, searching anyone,

Click to expand...

{citation needed}

or even approaching anyone.

Click to expand...

Approaching someone does not require even reasonable suspicion, let alone probable cause. No reason at all is needed to saunter up to someone and start talking to them.

Most cops are not even officers of the law, they are corporate employees of a chartered township enforcing corporate code. Not law.

Click to expand...

Hmm. Do you have anything to say about fringed admiralty flags and the difference between your "real" name and your name in all capital letters?

They should never have the benefit of the doubt, the system was designed to place the burden of proof on them.

Click to expand...

If you desire criminal action be taken against a person, proving guilt is the responsibility of the prosecuting authority.

Including , you have to show me ID.

Click to expand...

Some jurisdictions have codified an identification statute and you are required to identify yourself upon request, with varying levels of suspicion and forms of ID required depending on your location.

they can go out everyday into an armed nation of 300 million citizens with a stun gun

Click to expand...

They won't. You don't pay them enough to do that.

ttwtt78640 said:

Not such a great analogy since Mr. X (in the OP) was not seen taking a life - Mr. X was simply pulled over for a traffic law violation.

Click to expand...

...and then (allegedly) pulled a gun and aimed it at the officer in question.

Let's not leave out incredibly pertinent facts, shall we?

Grizzly Adams said:

{citation needed}


Approaching someone does not require even reasonable suspicion, let alone probable cause. No reason at all is needed to saunter up to someone and start talking to them.


Hmm. Do you have anything to say about fringed admiralty flags and the difference between your "real" name and your name in all capital letters?


If you desire criminal action be taken against a person, proving guilt is the responsibility of the prosecuting authority.


Some jurisdictions have codified an identification statute and you are required to identify yourself upon request, with varying levels of suspicion and forms of ID required depending on your location.


They won't. You don't pay them enough to do that.

Click to expand...

Hmm... You're right, let's just let cops murder us with impunity for nothing more than them having a bad day because, you aren't aware of what actually constitutes probable cause.

A cop can approach you for any reason, talk to you, and look for reasons to detain you while refusing to answer the question am i being detained, while implying it's bad to just walk away. Even though it's your right. That's not having probable cause, that's fishing til they get it. And 90 percent of the time that's what they are doing. But hey, you're right, we should just let them do that, murder anyone that doesn't respond well to their fishing, and treat them like a hero. Especially if the person had a criminal background. Oh he sold weed when he was 19, deserved it...

Just going to ignore this straw man attempt to derail.

OK, you know how prosecutors work. Did you also know anytime the police are investigating you you can remain silent and not incriminate yourself because the burden of proof is on them as well to find the evidence to charge you.

That's kind of the ****ing point, they won't go out and do their job unarmed. So they should do their job better. Or we will give them that death sentence. An obvious sentiment to just about everyone. Hurr ****ing Durr. It implies the only authority they've actually got is the threat of murder with impugnity for something as little as disrespect.

They are not particularly needed, it's been proven since the Kansas study that police patrols have no noticeable impact on crime. They only reason most depts have the budget to hire so many, is the war on drugs. Which they've lost. Badly. Hell, the majority of states will have the polices number one cash grab legalized in the next decade. Without the billions going to fight marijuana, we are going to see a major drop in police forces. And that's good. Most of the time they stopping, or harrassing people it's them playing the numbers game on who has weed.

In short, I don't care about your opinion. I gave up long ago trying to convince libertarians that government agents have to much authority over our daily lives and it's affecting our liberty. Because as long as they are keeping the blacks, and mexicans in jail most libertarians are just fine with limited liberties.

Hypocrites.