home

Cops Acquitted in Sean Bell Shooting

By Jeralyn, Section Misconduct
Posted on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:16:42 AM EST
Tags: Sean Bell (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

On his wedding day in Manhattan, Sean Bell was gunned down by 50 police bullets. Three New York police officers have been on trial for the past 8 weeks for manslaughter. Today, the judge acquitted them of all charges.

[Michael]Oliver, who fired 31 times and reloaded once, and [Gescard]Isnora, who fired 11 times, had been charged with manslaughter, felony assault and reckless endangerment. They faced up to 25 years in prison if convicted on all charges.

[Marc]Cooper, who fired four times, faced up to a year in jail if convicted of reckless endangerment. None of the detectives testified, although their grand jury testimony was read out loud at the trial.

The case was tried before Queens Supreme Court Justice Arthur Cooperman who decided the state didn't prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

Cooperman said justification was used as a defense, he had to consider the "mindset of the defendants, not the victims. What the victims did, was more important to resolve the issues at hand than what was in their minds."

< Why Indiana Is The Test | Is the Media Turning on Obama? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Cops Acquitted in Sean Bell Shooting | 68 comments (68 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Could someone make this go away? (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by LarryInNYC on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:53:50 AM EST
    With some luck, the family and friends of the victim will deal with these cops on a "persnal" level and get the justice they so deserve!

    I'm sure management here doesn't want to be associated with this sentiment, and I strongly suspect the surviving victims in this case would not either.

    I share that sentiment... (none / 0) (#36)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:19:58 AM EST
    if you want justice in America, you gotta go get it yourself.

    Somebody shoots my unarmed brother 30 times I'm getting some justice....and it won't be in a court of law, very little to be found there.

    Parent

    As long as you're willing. . . (none / 0) (#41)
    by LarryInNYC on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:30:24 AM EST
    to take your bullet in turn, I guess your sentiment is logically consistent if morally reprehensible.

    Parent
    Morally reprehensible you say? (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:45:37 AM EST
    Todays acquittal is what is morally reprehensible.

    And yes, I'd fully accept the consequences of my actions...be it a bullet or a cell.

    Parent

    Uh (none / 0) (#39)
    by manys on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:25:58 AM EST
    If you don't like the comment, fine, but just because someone leaves words as a blog comment doesn't mean the site is "associated with this sentiment."

    As to the original poster, maybe the families can win a civil suit against the officers.

    Parent

    Uh. . . (none / 0) (#42)
    by LarryInNYC on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:32:54 AM EST
    over the top comments are routinely removed here, it's SOP.  If the moderators (after seeing the comment) feel this doesn't rise to that level then it does make a statement.

    The Police Department still has the opportunity to ruin these officers' careers administratively but any civil action would likely be against the City rather than the officers directly and I doubt they'd suffer direct harm as a result.

    Parent

    Outrageous (none / 0) (#1)
    by stillife on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:21:20 AM EST
    I bet there will be protests around the city this weekend.

    There should be. (none / 0) (#30)
    by andrys on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:01:59 AM EST
    It's a really ugly travesty of 'justice' ...

    And then people wonder why Wright is able to stir bad feelings as he does.  Too much basis for it.

    Parent

    The crowds (none / 0) (#46)
    by AnninCA on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:59:51 AM EST
    have gathered already. No doubt Sharpten will be arriving soon.

    Parent
    I am new to the crime side of this site (none / 0) (#2)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:23:50 AM EST
    does TL still advocate for defendants in cases where cops are the ones on trial?

    Apparently not. (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:26:20 AM EST
    They are presumed innocent, and justifiable homicide [here manslaughter] requires the trier of fact consider the totality of the circumstances from an objective, not subjective, viewpoint.  

    Parent
    I don't see any statement otherwise. . . (none / 0) (#6)
    by LarryInNYC on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:28:18 AM EST
    in this post, which seems to me to be purely factual.  Jeralyn is not advocating for the officers in this post but nothing in the post indicates she won't after she's read the opinion (nor, of course, that she will).

    Parent
    Whoa, Larry! (none / 0) (#7)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:31:05 AM EST
    Just asking a question--certainly not taking sides on anything as I know absolutely nothing about this case.  I didn't say that there was any advocating going on by TL at all.  Don't taze me, bro!

    Parent
    Larry was replying to my comment. (none / 0) (#12)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:37:27 AM EST
    On further reflection, he is correct.  Jeralyn did not tip her hand.  I was reading between the lines.

    Parent
    Sorry, reply was to oculus. . . (none / 0) (#14)
    by LarryInNYC on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:38:10 AM EST
    who does seem to feel that Jeralyn isn't living up to her pro-defendant position in this post.  And not meant as a tazing, either, just a quick comment -- sorry to you and oculus if it came off sounding snippy.

    Parent
    Oh! (none / 0) (#29)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:57:55 AM EST
    My mistake, then--but please feel free to knock Oculus, as he hasn't been posting here nearly enough.  Stuff isn't getting stirred near like it used to!

    Parent
    Usually more on crime than on (none / 0) (#38)
    by jerry on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:24:39 AM EST
    the politicians (the true criminals?)

    But yeah, I am not sure I can recall a case where JM has not advocated for the defense, even when she risks pissing me off by doing so.

    Parent

    Sad yet predictable..... (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:26:39 AM EST
    You have the right not to be killed
    Murder is a crime!
    Unless it was done by a
    Policeman or aristocrat
    Know your rights

    - The Clash, "Know Your Rights"

    Ain't that the truth.

    Jury waiver by both the (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:26:50 AM EST
    prosecution and defense apparently.  Quite unusual.

    In New York , the law is (none / 0) (#10)
    by scribe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:34:19 AM EST
    that the waiver of a jury trial in a criminal case is the sole right of the defendant.  The prosecution cannot demand and get a jury trial if the defendant wants to avoid one.  This is different from many other states' law.

    When charged criminally, and especially where it is a white cop shooting a black man in a large city, NY cops routinely waive the jury trial.  This, because they know the jury will be predisposed to convict them.  If, for some reason, the cops decide to not waive the jury trial, they will try to get venue changed to a whiter county.

    That's just the way it is.

    Parent

    Thanks for the information. (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:38:11 AM EST


    Parent
    However... (none / 0) (#17)
    by cmugirl on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:38:54 AM EST
     2 of the 3 cops (defendants) in this case were AA's.

    Parent
    When NYC juries see blue uniforms, (none / 0) (#21)
    by scribe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:42:58 AM EST
    they see white faces.

    Parent
    I just see.... (none / 0) (#25)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:47:58 AM EST
    hired goons, not color.

    Parent
    You would prefer a society (none / 0) (#26)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:50:19 AM EST
    without law enforcement?

    Parent
    I'd prefer a society.... (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:14:08 AM EST
    with a lot less law enforcement...you bet.

    I've got no problem with detectives investigating murders and rapes....I've got a big problem with cops hanging out in t*tty bars and patrons of the club winding up dead.  For what?  To bust some stripper selling handjobs?  Anybody making a living doing that is a hired goon.

    Parent

    In defense of your post (none / 0) (#31)
    by lilybart on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:04:08 AM EST
    not all cops are hired goons, but the pay is SO LOW that I am not convinced the best people become cops in NYC.

    Parent
    That, and they leave NY for better pay. (none / 0) (#33)
    by scribe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:12:03 AM EST
    Last week, when the Pope was in NYC and as many cops as could be found were working, literally "scores" of NY cops managed to get off, so they could take Seattle's examination.  Seattle has been advertising.  Not that it took much - according to this article, the starting pay there is about $47k.  In NYC, starting pay is about $25k.

    Seriously.  In NYC, one could make more money working in a McDs than as a rookie cop.

    Parent

    uh (none / 0) (#40)
    by manys on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:30:16 AM EST
    You didn't read the article you linked to. The $25K is only during academy.

    Parent
    Right. They get a munificent raise (none / 0) (#44)
    by scribe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:56:04 AM EST
    to about $30k when they graduate.

    Parent
    In NY.... (none / 0) (#51)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:08:06 PM EST
    the unwritten law is that the law doesn't apply to the police.

    That's just the way it is, always has been, and always will be.

    Parent

    Context (none / 0) (#54)
    by Iphie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:41:41 PM EST
    This in no way excuses what happened in this case (and I don't know what happened -- there are contradictory and changing accounts of that night from both the Police and the victims of the shooting -- and as someone else here has noted, the crime scene was contaminated and evidence mishandled), but the police were responding to public outrage over the rape and murder of Imette St. Guillen with an increased police focus on, and presence in NYC nightlife.

    In a city where crime continues to go down, the public has become increasingly intolerant of any crime, especially one as vicious as the St. Guillen case and was calling for the police to ensure that it didn't happen again. This was the environment that lead the Kelly (Police Commissioner) and Bloomberg (Mayor) in a perhaps misguided attempt to increase policing of bars and nightclubs, especially ones that had been problems before.

    Parent

    Beg to differ.... (none / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:59:37 PM EST
    the sting/undercover operation at this club had absolutely nothing to do with St. Guillen murder.  This was a prostitution sting, nothing more.

    St. Guillen was hanging out in the hipster clubs in Manhattan's old meat packing district...the Sean Bell murder took place at a seedy strip joint in Queens.  Apples and oranges.

    Parent

    Add.... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:05:34 PM EST
    It's good NY'ers won't tolerate violent crime, I just wish we also wouldn't tolerate living in a police state, and police misconduct.

    Too many cheerleaders for tyranny amongst my neighbors for my taste.

    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#60)
    by Iphie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:12:55 PM EST
    The police have acknowledged that their stepped up presence was in response to the St. Guillen murder -- only they did it in a hurried manner and without giving proper consideration of how to do it.

    And St. Guillen was hanging out at a bar on Lafayette St. -- not anywhere near the Meatpacking district, but either way, the NYPD is a citywide organization and their efforts don't change at borough borders -- they say they were targeting bars/nightclubs, etc. where there had been prior complaints of illegal activities.

    The increased presence of undercover officers was meant to decrease illegal activities of all kinds -- prostitution, drugs, underage drinking, etc., focus on one is not to the exclusion of the others.

    Parent

    Of course... (none / 0) (#61)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:24:09 PM EST
    the police have to justify, after the fact, why they have undercovers hanging out at strip clubs at 3 in the morning.  

    I just ain't buying it.  For all I know the cops were really there to shake down the working girls for freebies.

    Parent

    No, do a little reading on the subject. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Iphie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:33:04 PM EST
    I included a couple of links in another response, but it was widely known that the NYPD was actively pursuing a crackdown on illegal nightlife activities. The nightlife unit was so new in fact, that many of the officers placed in the unit were so unfamiliar with their new beat that the officer who called in the Sean Bell shooting couldn't give the location of the incident to the dispatcher. It was one of many components that added to the confusion on that night. That call was played at the trial, and there is audio of it floating around the internet if you're curious to hear it.

    Parent
    No, do a little reading on the subject. (none / 0) (#64)
    by Iphie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:33:29 PM EST
    I included a couple of links in another response, but it was widely known that the NYPD was actively pursuing a crackdown on illegal nightlife activities. The nightlife unit was so new in fact, that many of the officers placed in the unit were so unfamiliar with their new beat that the officer who called in the Sean Bell shooting couldn't give the location of the incident to the dispatcher. It was one of many components that added to the confusion on that night. That call was played at the trial, and there is audio of it floating around the internet if you're curious to hear it.

    Parent
    Ah, here it is. (none / 0) (#62)
    by Iphie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:26:00 PM EST
    I couldn't remember the name of the unit the NYPD created to deal with the these "nightlife" issues. It was the Club Enforcement Initiative.
    The cops knew all about Club Kalua. The vice squad had racked up enough arrests to close it back in 2005, though it reopened just two months later. But this was 2006, the year of the girl killings: Imette St. Guillen, raped and murdered after partying at a bar in Soho, and Jennifer Moore, raped and murdered hours after partying in a nightclub in Chelsea. The police had formed a new Club Enforcement Initiative, transferring detectives from vice and narcotics to crack down on nightspots. New teams of cops had worked undercover in Chelsea for a few months. By the fall of 2006, they were branching out to the outer boroughs.
    From Wikipedia on the subject of NYC nightlife legislation.
    This one was the brutal torture, rape and strangulation murder of Imette St. Guillen, a John Jay College Graduate Student, which killing and lurid details later captured the nation's attention.[1] St. Guillen's murder, related to a bar and a bouncer with a criminal record, would strongly bring the public focus on New York City's nightlife.


    Parent
    Note (none / 0) (#66)
    by Iphie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:45:14 PM EST
    Club Kalua is the name of the bar where Sean Bell was shot.

    Parent
    Huh (none / 0) (#13)
    by Nadai on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:37:35 AM EST
    Can the prosecution insist on a jury trial?  I thought that was entirely up to the defendant(s).

    Parent
    In some states, the law is (none / 0) (#22)
    by scribe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:44:20 AM EST
    that the prosecution and defense must agree to waive a jury trial.

    In NY, the law is that the choice to be tried by a jury or not, is solely up to the defendant.  The prosecution has no say in that choice.

    Parent

    Thanks! (none / 0) (#45)
    by Nadai on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:58:02 AM EST
    Everything I know about law, I learned from TV.  Which puts me into negative knowledge at least half the time.

    Parent
    Very disappointed (none / 0) (#8)
    by stefystef on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:32:10 AM EST
    I am in NYC and I'm shocked by the verdict, but not surprised.
    The Blue Wall of Protection held and the judicial system protected their own.

    This is a shame and it proves that not much has changed in this country.  There will be protests, but I doubt any violence.  I hope calm heads prevail...

    Me too. (none / 0) (#20)
    by madamab on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:41:56 AM EST
    It seemed from the press coverage that the police overreacted in a lethal manner.

    It's so hard to tell what really happened, though...

    Parent

    I'm probably in the minority here. (none / 0) (#28)
    by cmugirl on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:56:25 AM EST
    But I reserve judgment on this verdict - I'm not particularly outraged because I don't know enough about it besides the basic tidbits that have been in the media.

    This was a terrible tragedy. Did the cops overreact?  Possibly, and there's certainly been a history (especially in NY) of cops crossing the line time and again. But that doesn't mean these cops didn't think they were in danger.  They said they believed the one guy was going for a gun (even though none was found).  I think it's a fair argument to say how a cop should react with the benefit of hindsight and distance from the situation, but how many people would be willing to hesitate to act if they thought their lives and those of their partners' depended on it?

    Maybe the judge was in the bag for the NYPD too, but we don't know. If I had a chance to read the court transcripts, I might have a better idea, but that's the way the system works.

    Parent

    I can't recall (none / 0) (#9)
    by Lil on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:32:37 AM EST
    cops ever getting convicted in these types of cases; I though it might be different this time. I wonder why.

    Having judge decide was big mistake (none / 0) (#11)
    by Saul on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:37:05 AM EST
    Why wasn't their a trial by jury?  Can't believe the defense wanted it this way.  Any defense lawyer worth his or her salt would have insisted on trial by PETIT jury.

    That poor family. Few things worse than dirty cops (none / 0) (#16)
    by rockinrocknroll on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:38:19 AM EST
    and judges, IMO.

    "You can get killed just for living in your American Skin..." - Bruce

    All I can think is (none / 0) (#18)
    by Nadai on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:40:32 AM EST
    Steve Gilliard would be so disappointed if he were here to see this.  It makes me miss him all over again.

    I was thinking the same (none / 0) (#47)
    by tamens on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:06:49 AM EST
    thing.  I also believe he would not have been shocked by the verdict.  Righteously angry, but not surprised.

    Parent
    I don't know whether this prosecution should (none / 0) (#19)
    by scribe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:41:55 AM EST
    or, as some suggest, should not have been brought in the first place.

    To be clear, there is little doubt there was significant pressure brought by the Mayor on the Queens DA to prosecute.  

    But, all that having been said, there is little doubt in my mind that this may well have been the most unprofessionally handled prosecution in many years.  For starters, the prosecutors did not prepare witnesses for their cross-examination.  Then, at one point, they put the cops grand jury testimony into the record, precluding the possibilty of the cops taking the stand (b/c they could be perjury-trapped on cross if they did).  

    Q.  What's your theory of the case, Mr. Prosecutor?
    A.  "It is what it is."

    Seriously.

    And the police handling of the crime scene was straight out of the Keystone Kops.  Missing "evidence".  Basic procedures not followed.  Vehicles moved before photos taken.  Improper search and inventory of the crime scene.  No cordon around the crime scene.  You name it, the cops did it wrong.

    I don't want to sell the defense lawyers short, but the prosecution made their job a whole lot easier.

    Prosecution told to lose the case (none / 0) (#49)
    by Cream City on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:28:22 AM EST
    is the way my spouse reported this to me this morn, even before the verdict, and way out here in the middle of the country -- based on local black press reports.  And then the verdict comes in as we head into a weekend?  There may be trouble coming, and not just in NYC; police brutality remains a volatile issue in my city, too, after recent awful cases.

    The only way that a case here finally was won, for the first time, was that after the local prosecution screwed it up again, the feds stepped in to bring it back to trial.  Might this happen in NYC?

    Until then, I will just continue to try to hold hope for those poor children, who will grow up hearing the story of their parents' wedding day.  

    Parent

    This is very (none / 0) (#23)
    by bjorn on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:46:48 AM EST
    discouraging.  I hope their families will be able to move on, but this must be devastating for them.

    I wasn't there (none / 0) (#32)
    by eric on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:09:31 AM EST
    and I am reluctant to second guess the judge here, but it does seem that emptying your clip once, reloading and nearly emptying it again, as Oliver did, is overkill.  Nobody was even firing back.  It does sound like reckless endangerment.  31 shots?  That's excessive.

    The Thin Blue line (none / 0) (#37)
    by jondee on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:21:50 AM EST
    syndrome. Both in the ironic, Errol Morris sense, and, in the perception of alot of people, a very real sense.

    Hence the all-too-often abused, double sttandard.

    Parent

    Here in Rochester (none / 0) (#34)
    by jondee on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:13:57 AM EST
    A cop just got off with "retirement" and life time benefits after beinf busted for trading in kiddie porn. Last year, another one, off duty, killed a motorcyclist, blew twice the legal limit and it was decided in court that the accident had nothing to do with the cop being intoxicated.

    If there's going to continue to be such glaring double standards, maybe it's time we codified them into law in the intersets of attenuating some of the outraged public reaction to these decisions. Or maybe we could more of a sincere, public spirited effort to impress upon EVERYONE the importance of adhereing to standards of civilised behavior -- rather than j*cking off to the "gritty realism" of cop shows and reality t.v.

    It's not as if this hasn't happened before... (none / 0) (#48)
    by Maise7 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:15:53 AM EST
    There is a pattern in NYC. It amazes me how these cops can get away with shooting a man more then 30, 40, 50 times. You find me a case where a white person was shot that many times, otherwise I tend to think it's racially motivated. They see a dark skinned person and off they go with their guns. I'm sorry, but I don't buy the 'they were in danger' story. If you felt you were in danger, fire off a couple rounds, not 30!

    What an injustice. :(

    Gideon Busch (none / 0) (#53)
    by Iphie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:17:36 PM EST
    You find me a case where a white person was shot that many times, otherwise I tend to think it's racially motivated. They see a dark skinned person and off they go with their guns.
    Gideon Busch, a white man, was shot 12 times by the NYPD.

    Parent
    2 of the 3 cops were AA. (none / 0) (#55)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:44:36 PM EST


    Parent
    Fifty bullets (none / 0) (#68)
    by jondee on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 05:10:42 PM EST
    are the second highest power apparently.

    Parent
    There is a connection (none / 0) (#50)
    by mmeo on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:59:33 AM EST
    among a number of disparate elements.

    The militarization of the United States, as a society.  The de-humanization of the poor.  The separation of the rich from the rest of the country, and the rewriting of legislation to reflect that fact.

    I, too, am surprised, and in a bad way, by the outcome of thisw case.  We are not addressing our problems when criminals with badges commit manslaughter and are acquitted.  These problems are only going to get worse and to polague us all the more in the future.

    Militarization of Society..... (none / 0) (#52)
    by kdog on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:11:25 PM EST
    speak of the devil...they've got stormtroopers manning subway stations now with submachine guns.

    Am I the only one who feels less safe because of this?  They shoot ya 30, 40, 50 times with a handgun, imagine what they can do with machine guns.

    Parent

    if the first bullet kills you, (none / 0) (#58)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:09:59 PM EST
    I imagine the other 3,000 don't hurt so bad.

    Parent
    Here a look into the eyes and minds of the nypd (none / 0) (#59)
    by zyklonb on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:11:59 PM EST
    This is from a real NYPD forum...
    This is what they think of the verdict and what they truly feel in there hearts about us as a whole...
    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/3107
    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/3166


    Unfortunate (none / 0) (#65)
    by Steve M on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:42:45 PM EST
    This whole saga is a sad, sad story.  I hope the system reached the correct result.

    Disgusting (none / 0) (#67)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 02:44:13 PM EST
    Those cops should be in jail. This case is sadly typical of the double standard cops benefit from. Another nod and wink for Giuliani Time.

    Here a look into the eyes and minds of the nypd (none / 0) (#69)
    by zyklonb on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:23:21 AM EST
    This is from a real NYPD forum...
    This is what they think of the verdict and what they truly feel in there hearts about us as a whole...
    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/3107

    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/3166

    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/2743

    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/3308

    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/3207

    http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/3238

    Here is a link you can copy and paste to the forum.

    Cops Acquitted in Sean Bell Shooting | 68 comments (68 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment