The law is an ass

I don’t know whether to fault the judge or the prosecutor for the failure to find guilty a cop who stood on the hood of a car and fired fifteen shots through the windshield at two unarmed black people. Was the judge just willful, or did the prosecutor fail to prove that any of those fifteen shots and the other 34 Officer Brelo fired were the ones which killed Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams?

[Judge John P.] O’Donnell said he believed Brelo caused some of the fatal wounds — four shots would have killed Russell and seven would have killed Williams — but that other officers must have as well.

O’Donnell said a voluntary manslaughter conviction would require that Brelo’s shots alone were the causes of death or the final wounds tipped the balance between life and death.

O’Donnell spent nearly an hour explaining his decision, even using mannequins marked with gunshot wounds. Brelo could have been convicted of lesser charges, but O’Donnell determined his actions were justified following the chase, which included reports of shots fired from Russell’s car, because officers perceived a threat.

I don’t know the law well enough to say the judge was mistaken in his assertion that to convict Brelo of voluntary manslaughter the prosecution had to prove his shots alone were the causes of death. I do think if that’s true then the law needs to be modified, because it seems to me when a man is acting as part of a group and uses deadly force as do others within the group he should be liable for his actions with the group.

I really find it hard to believe a judge could conclude that standing on the hood of the car and firing point-blank through the windshield after some 100 shots had already been fired at the vehicle and its occupants was justified. How? Why?

I think this cop was just pumped up with adrenaline. I also think the Cleveland Police Department desperately needs to train its personnel better. Jumping on the hood of a car after chasing it for miles is pure bravado, not sensible policing.