Suspect in Accidental Shooting Arrested Within 24 Hours

From The Contra Costa Times:

"A 33-year-old man was arrested Friday night in connection to the accidental fatal shooting of a 2-year-old boy by a 12-year-old family member at a home in East Palo Alto Thursday evening, according to police."

Please explain to me how this guy is arrested within 24 hours, but Barney Fife remains free. I'm almost certain there were no cell phone cameras documenting the accidental shooting in East Palo Alto, yet somehow authorities there were able to wrap up the investigation in less than two weeks. Sounds as if the rules are different if one is a cop. Then again, maybe Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff is really that stupid and incompetent.

Forums:

why was he arrested if a kid actually shot the kid

This is a case of a person who didn't keep his firearms locked, secure, and out of children's reach, not about him shooting a child. Please don't compare this to the New Year's Eve incident because its totally different. Something similiar would be if a bus driver ran over and killed someone because he mistakenly stepped on the gas pedal instead of the brakes. Would they lynch the bus driver and have him do 10 - 15 years in prison for a mistake?

While i do not know the details on this case, the "flight risk" of the suspect is also taken into account. Also Charges are not pressed till all the details are known, in the case of the child shooting, the details are known.

uhh.. maybe because this guy wasn't an officer in the line of duty? It really can't be that hard to understand the difference. Oh wait, I've seen the protesters -- apparently there are a lot of fools who can't see the difference.

DontWannaGetShot's picture

Of course the rules are different when police are involved. You are right, if this had been a civilian involved killing, with all other facts being the same, someone would have already been arrested. Especially had they made the cowardly move to decline to talk about it. But not this time. The DA wants to make sure they have all their facts properly arranged before they touch Johannes Mehserle. His actions speak for themselves - not giving a statement, resigning his position. Obviously if he thought his actions were justified, he would have done neither.

TreoBART's picture

a person resigning to exercise his fifth amendment right to remain silent does not mean he is guilty. If he had not resigned he would have been forced to discuss the incident without a lawyer to people who could be later subpoenaed in court. Doesn't sound cowardly to me, sounds wise.

I don't think he could have predicted the public outcry that has been a result of his actions.

In any other situation, I'd say no one would think his actions are out of the ordinary. The only reason people aren't respecting the former officer's right to remain silent is because there's so much unrest in the general public and everyone expects an answer NOW, thanks to our media indoctrination.

Another reason he was arrested is because he is a undocumented immigrant whom had previously been deported for a felony.

Also as a convicted felon, he is not allowed to be in possession of a firearm.