December 12, 2006
Surreallaw
Must have been a butterfly indictment (my bold):
A day after authorities announced that a former New Hanover County deputy had been indicted in the shooting death of a Durham teen during a raid on a Wilmington home, members of the grand jury now say the indictment was a mistake.The grand jury never intended to charge Cpl. Christopher Long with second-degree murder, but the foreman checked the wrong box on the indictment, authorities said Tuesday.
Peyton Strickland, 18, a Cape Fear Community College student from Durham, was shot to death Dec. 1 at his Wilmington home by deputies serving arrest and search warrants. Strickland and two friends were charged with assaulting a University of North Carolina at Wilmington student last month and stealing two PlayStation 3 consoles from him.
UNC-W police asked for support from the New Hanover County Sheriff's Office during the arrests of the suspects in the case because of the potential that they were armed and dangerous, authorities said. Strickland had an earlier arrest on a felony assault charge.
Was Theresa LePore the jury foreman by any chance?
These guys sound like jerks, but don't you think it is past time to stop the cops from this type of activity? They are really beginning to become opressive.
Posted by: David Caskey at December 13, 2006 01:32 PMDavid, Stop cops from what type of activity? Protecting themselves while they perform their duties? We had an officer who was shot and killed here in Warren County, NC while serving an arrest warrent. What sort of "opressive" behavior was he demonstrating as he knocked on the door just before a shot came through the door killing him? I don't have any sympathy for Strickland.
Posted by: Jack at December 13, 2006 03:20 PMJack, the police were using a battering ram on the door; that's some knock, eh? According to the defense, it's the very method of forcible entry which caused the noisy confusion which caused the officer to fire shots.
Also stated in one of the news reports was that it was known one of the men present with Strickland had an interest in guns, although neither man was armed at the time. If that's the qualifying characteristic for a SWAT-raid, 80 million of us are in equal danger of the same judgement of presumption of guilt.
The police take the job knowing the risks; it should not be off-loaded onto the presumed innocent at the time of arrest.
I agree with David; these SWAT-style raids need to be drastically curtailed. The concept of Peace-officer needs to be restored and any officer held to account for killing innocent citizens.
Posted by: Cindi at December 13, 2006 04:22 PMCindi, To say one of the men there "had an interest in guns" is an understatement. Photos of him on the internet posing with his guns and a loaded gun in his car seem to imply he may present a problem come arrest time.
Also, Strickland had an earlier arrest on a felony assault charge.
It is ridiculous to imply that they were just a bunch of innocent kids playing video games.
No excuse, Jack. I travel with a loaded gun, although there are no internet pictures of me with them. That the man has guns is not a reason to presume he will shoot at law enforcement, thus a SWAT raid. I'M NOT BUYING IT.
I didn't say they were 'innocent kids playing video games'; I'm saying that until a court of law has decided they're guilty of the charge on the warrant, it is wrong to presume guilt at the time of arrest.
Knock on the gods-pounding door like you're supposed to and if ya run into trouble, then act accordingly. We have a murdered young man here, don't you get it? He had a remote in his hand, not a gun.
Posted by: Cindi at December 14, 2006 12:20 AM
