Honest question - Why are St. Louis residents protesting the not guilty verdict of former St. Louis Police officer Jason Stockley?

Question

Here are the facts as I understand them.

1. Jason Stockley shot and killed Anthony Lamar Smith on December 20, 2011.

2. Prior to the shooting, Stockley and his partner Brian Bianchi claim to have witnessed a drug deal involving Smith.

3. Dashcam video from the police car showed Smith reversing into the squad car twice, before driving off.

4. A 3-minute high speed chase ensued, during which Stockley told his partner to ram Smith's car.

5. During this chase Stockley was also recorded as saying he was "going to kill this motherf*cker."

6. After the car was stopped, Stockley and Bianchi approached Smith's vehicle. Dashcam footage showed that Stockley yelled at Smith through the driver side window of Smith's vehicle to open the door.

7. Stockley testified that Smith did not comply but rather appeared to be reaching around the interior of his vehicle in search of something which Stockley believed to be a gun.

8. Stockley testified that Smith's demeanor suddenly changed, which Stockley believed indicated that Smith had found the alleged gun. Stockley then opened fire through the window and shot five times, killing Smith.

9. A handgun was later found in the vehicle between the driver's seat and center console.

On one hand there was a drug deal, the suspect rammed the police car twice, a high speed chase ensued, and a gun was recovered in the car. On the other, Stockley's comment that he was going to kill Smith suggests Stockley was not approaching the situation rationally.

Answer 1

they believe that the handgun found was planted by the officer

Answer 2

It's all about race. The liberals don't give a crap about facts when they can have a martyr.

Answer 3

they are confused

Answer 4

Because he's guilty.

Answer 5

Because white policemen should be found guilty after they shool African-Americans regardless of the circumstances.

Answer 6

Because f*ck facts, right?

Answer 7

America the way it was done but a I Hop To The Cop courts

Answer 8

People watch to many Hollywood movies

Answer 9

You forgot this very important fact.



Stockley said that Mr. Smith went for a gun. Yet, the gun they claimed was Mr. Smith's, only had Sotckley's fingerprints on it.



So how do you explain this?

Answer 10

Because cops - instead of judges and juries - keep meting out the death penalty and getting away with it.



Edit: I haven't read enough about this particular case to form an opinion on that.

Answer 11

As you stated, the officers "claimed" they saw a gun. The people protesting do not believe them. It really is as simple as that. The officer stated that he was going to kill the guy was said in the heat of the moment, and I doubt he meant it literally. The fact that his gun was still holstered as he approached the vehicle shows that he was still being a policeman, not an executioner. People believe whatever they want to. The police are not being given the benefit of a doubt by a lot of people, and it`s pretty easy to understand, even though we think may think it`s wrong.

Answer 12

Fgh

Answer 13

Because they felt that the drug dealer guy should have been treated better, so he could live to sell more drugs to the next person?

Answer 14

People watch to many Hollywood movies

Answer 15

They may believe the true account of what happened was not presented in court, or that it was ignored.



Also, they may not care about the true account, believing no White - officer acting legitimately or not, unruly Black suspect or not - ever has the right to kill a Black.



It's impossible to get into any of their heads.

Answer 16

I haven't read enough about this particular case to form an opinion on that

Answer 17

They feel that injustice happened.

Answer 18

Cops are agents of the court.. So a judge can not hear the case. Conflict of interest there. So needed a jury trial. If found guilty the cop could have a mistrial found on that alone. Then double jeporty is illegal so free & clear of murder it would be. Proves there is no law in America the way it was done but a I Hop To The Cop courts.

Answer 19

The evidence is 50:50. The judge did the right thing in finding him not guilty because THERE WAS NO PROOF beyond a reasonable doubt AS IS THE LAW. BLM seems to consider race as 'evidence' and so do white nationalists.

Answer 20

He shot him because his "demeanor changed?" That's lame even for crooked cops. PS: Please tell us which drugs were found in the car (none). Please tell us why the gun "found" only had the cop's DNA?

Answer 21

I have to trust the decision of those finders of fact who saw all permissible evidence. However, IF there'd been a body cam AND a dash cam trained on the scene, we could have FAR BETTER EVIDENCE.



I believe, if Darlie Routier had just had cameras in her home when she and her boys were attacked, we would never have convicted her of murder and sentenced her to death.



Folks, cameras are cheap now. If you want to be safe and know the truth, get you some and keep them going like those dashcams in civilian Russians' cars.



If you want to kill your family with no viable motive, then do NOT get cameras. You'll still fry, given the availability of high-resolution, cheap, easily data-stored cameras.



.

Answer 22

Don't sell dope, don't run from and into the cops, don't rummage through your car after a police chase while being told to show your hands = living to do your time.

Answer 23

There was also the accusation of using a "drop gun" which would be planting evidence.



FACT is, though, that the prosecution has to meet the heavy burden of proof of "beyond a reasonable doubt". It would be very hard to meet that burden of beyond a reasonable doubt for murder or any such related charges, because you would have to show that the police officer had no fear for his own life in making the arrest. This is nearly impossible since the perp was in a high-speed chase and had hit the police vehicle with his own vehicle.



As far as tampering with evidence, that would also require a great deal of proof.



Jason Stockley is not longer a police officer. This is what the rioters don't seem to get. To get a conviction you have a HUGE burden of beyond a reasonable doubt to content with. To get fired or laid-off, however, does not take much at all.



There was sufficient evidence SUGGESTING that Jason handled himself inappropriately, but there was not enough evidence to meet "beyond a reasonable doubt". What happened is exactly what should have happened. He lost his job, but the prosecution couldn't prove its case.



The whiners need to learn the law and stop crying like babies. The looters need to be arrested and charged with a crime. When they are charged with a crime, they will all of a sudden be thankful for "beyond a reasonable doubt" and likely get away with little to no jail time.

Answer 24

There are people willing to believe the worst about the police and there are people willing to feed their fantasies.