Friday, September 10, 2010

Ex-Philadelphia Cop Acquitted in Brother's Shooting

Any time I read about a Philly cop getting off, I think it's another cover-up. But after reading some of the facts, I think it was a good call on the part of the judge.

"It was either accidental or self-defense," DeFino-Nastasi said. "It was not an intentional act beyond a reasonable doubt."

What a heartbreaking story.

What's your opinion? Please tell us.


  1. What happened to one strike your out? Doesn't apply to police officers?

  2. I love the way Mikeb, without seeing any evidence, without hearing any witness testimony, without getting any more information than is released in the news, likes to judge the guilt or innocence of the accused, on the basis of his own mystical powers alone.

    Judges and juries? Who needs 'em--we've got MikeB the Omniscient.

  3. Zorro, In this case the judge didn't need a jury either. And to answer FWM's concern, I think this was self defense. I come to that conclusion not lightly, but after examining all the evidence and consulting my common sense and of course my feelings.

  4. My mention of juries was a more general reference to your eagerness to judge guilt or innocence with no more evidence than is available in news accounts (some of which contradict each other--no problem--you just pick the one that fits your "feelings" better).

    Your "feelings" tend to put white men at a distinct disadvantage, don't they? But that's not racism/sexism, right?