Sean Bell Verdict: 3 NYC Police Officers Acquitted Of 50-Shot Killing Of Groom-To-Be

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

AP   |  TOM HAYS   |   April 25, 2008 at 10:10 AM


Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

For breaking updates on the Sean Bell acquittal click here.

NEW YORK -- Three detectives were acquitted of all charges Friday in the 50-shot killing of unarmed groom-to-be Sean Bell on his wedding day, a case that put the NYPD at the center of another dispute involving allegations of excessive firepower.

Justice Arthur Cooperman delivered the verdict in a Queens courtroom packed with spectators, including victim Sean Bell's fiancee and parents, and at least 200 people gathered outside the building.

The verdict provoked an outpouring of emotions: Sean Bell's fiancee immediately walked out of the room. His mother cried.

Outside the courthouse, which was surrounded by scores of police officers, many in the crowd began weeping as news of the verdict said. Others were enraged, swearing and screaming "Murderers! Murderers!" or "KKK!"

Sean Bell
, a 23-year-old black man, was killed in a hail of gunfire outside a seedy strip club in Queens on Nov. 25, 2006 _ his wedding day _ as he was leaving his bachelor party with two friends.

Officers Michael Oliver, 36, and Gescard Isnora, 29, stood trial for manslaughter while Officer Marc Cooper, 40, was charged only with reckless endangerment. Two other shooters weren't charged. Oliver squeezed off 31 shots; Isnora fired 11 rounds; and Cooper shot four times.

The officers, complaining that pretrial publicity had unfairly painted them as cold-blooded killers, opted to have the judge decide the case rather than a jury.

The judge indicated that the police officers' version of events was more credible than the victims' version. "The people have not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that each defendant was not justified" in firing, he said.

A conviction on manslaughter could have brought up to 25 years in prison; the penalty for reckless endangerment, a misdemeanor, is a year behind bars.

The case brought back painful memories of other NYPD shootings, such as the 1999 shooting of Amadou Diallo _ an African immigrant who was gunned down in a hail of 41 bullets by police officers who mistook his wallet for a gun. The acquittal of the officers in that case created a storm of protest, with hundreds arrested after taking to the streets in demonstration.

The mood surrounding this case has been muted by comparison, although Sean Bell's fiancee, parents and their supporters, including the Rev. Al Sharpton, have held rallies demanding that the officers _ two of whom are black _ be held accountable.

Still, a phalanx of police officers, some uniformed and some in the department's community affairs polo shirts, was stationed outside the courthouse Friday. The building was ringed by metal barricades. Some in the crowd wore buttons with Bell's picture or held signs saying "Justice for Sean Bell." After the verdict was read, some in the crowd approached officers but were held back; the jostling quickly died down.

After the verdict, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly acknowledged that some people were disappointed with the acquittals.

"We don't anticipate violence, but we are prepared for any contingency," he said.

The nearly two-month trial was marked by deeply divergent accounts of the night.

The defense painted the victims as drunken thugs who the officers believed were armed and dangerous. Prosecutors sought to convince the judge that the victims had been minding their own business, and that the officers were inept, trigger-happy aggressors.

None of the officers took the witness stand in his own defense. Instead, Cooperman heard transcripts of the officers testifying before a grand jury, saying they believed they had good reason to use deadly force. The judge also heard testimony from Bell's two injured companions, who insisted the maelstrom erupted without warning.

Both sides were consistent on one point: The utter chaos surrounding the last moments of Bell's life.

"It happened so quick," Isnora said in his grand jury testimony. "It was like the last thing I ever wanted to do."

Bell's companions _ Trent Benefield and Joseph Guzman _ also offered dramatic testimony about the episode. Benefield and Guzman were both wounded; Guzman still has four bullets lodged in his body.

Referring to Isnora, Guzman said, "This dude is shooting like he's crazy, like he's out of his mind."

The victims and shooters were set on a fateful collision course by a pair of innocuous decisions: Bell's to have a last-minute bachelor party at Kalua Cabaret, and the undercover detectives' to investigate reports of prostitution at the club.

As the club closed around 4 a.m., Sanchez and Isnora claimed they overheard Bell and his friends first flirt with women, then taunt a stranger who responded by putting his right hand in his pocket as if he had a gun. Guzman, they testified, said, "Yo, go get my gun" _ something Bell's friends denied.

Isnora said he decided to arm himself, call for backup _ "It's getting hot," he told his supervisor _ and tail Bell, Guzman and Benefield as they went around the corner and got into Bell's car. He claimed that after warning the men to halt, Bell pulled away, bumped him and rammed an unmarked police van that converged on the scene with Oliver at the wheel.

The detective also alleged that Guzman made a sudden move as if he were reaching for a gun.

"I yelled 'Gun!' and fired," he said. "In my mind, I knew (Guzman) had a gun."

Benefield and Guzman testified that there were no orders. Instead, Guzman said, Isnora "appeared out of nowhere" with a gun drawn and shot him in the shoulder _ the first of 16 shots to enter his body.

"That's all there was _ gunfire," he said. "There wasn't nothing else."

With tires screeching, glass breaking and bullets flying, the officers claimed that they believed they were the ones under fire. Oliver responded by emptying his semiautomatic pistol, reloading, and emptying it again, as the supervisor sought cover.

The truth emerged when the smoke cleared: There was no weapon inside Bell's blood-splattered car.

 
 

Comments
545
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)

And you will do as you are told,
Until the rights to you are sold.
If we can't find a better excuse,
Target practice will be your use.
We're paramilitary - Boots on the ground,
N.Y., N.Y. It's our kind of town.
Your civil rights are under suspension,
Let's all have another convention.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:10 PM on 04/27/2008

Dr Frances Welsing talked about these situations between the police and those in the black community dating back to the 80's. And over 20 years later, we are still seeing this same nonsense: the Katrina fiasco; Megan Williams West Va torture case; Jena 6; and now, Sean Bell. And we still see the same results: no person who exasperated the situation was made truly responsible nor made accountable for their actions.

I think the time for protest marching in the street is over..."it's hog-boiling time"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 AM on 04/27/2008


I quote:
"The judge indicated that the police officers' version of events was more credible than the victims' version. "The people have not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that each defendant was not justified in firing".

The police officers represented the justice system and acted on a judgment unsupported by fact. As a result of those actions, the victims were unjustly judged, deprived of their legal rights and Bell robbed of his life. No due process was performed and his murder can't be justified by the fact that the officers "made a mistake" based on fears that they themselves had fabricated. That mistake was their own and carries a price. Police officers can't be free to murder anyone that they mistakenly perceive as a threat. The officers actions justify their losing both their jobs and their liberty - anything less demonstrates that justice doesn't exist in the USA.

As long as this kind of injustice continues to occur in America, can anyone rightfully criticize the Reverend Jeremiah Wright for his occasionally pointed and righteously angry comments?

If the justice system continues to protect it's own at the cost of the rights and lives of the victims of "peace officers" criminal misjudgments, some of those sympathizing with the victims of those crimes will seek justice within a less partial framework, and it won't be pretty. (That statement's an observation substantiated by logic and experience and doesn't constitute a recommendation).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:06 PM on 04/27/2008

How do these kinds of police officers get away with this kind of shit? This is an absolute outrage. If there are two witnesses corroborating each others' story about no orders being issued, why is it such a federal case to not believe them over the officers. Police officers can not lie? Maybe they didn't want a jury because to 10 of 12 people it probably would not have turned out in their favor. And, then what, go to jail as a cop and hope for the best? Well, no judge would ever put service men in a position like that. In a normal trial they wouldn't even consider what the judge says, it's up to the jury. These crooks were allowed to get away with cold blooded murder, and then were afraid to face the music for the same thing they take an oath to defend the public against. It is NOT unheard of for police officers to take their position to their head, or to be considered "rouge", so why couldn't that possibility have been brought to light in this trial. If I was Bell's fiance i would request an appeal with a higher court. This judge seems like he was a little bias in his decision.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:09 PM on 04/26/2008

Sadly, horribly, this is 'ordinary rendition'. The Earth is the Universe's Guantanamo Bay.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:50 AM on 04/27/2008

Like I said to MariaHopeful a bit ago, this isn"t about race. It doesn't always happen to black people. It always gets on TV when it happens to black people. This is about a public that doesn"t understand police work " I mean real police work, not that stupid crap on TV. CSI-NYPD-X-FILES - whatever

Closest I ever came to shooting an unarmed guy - he was white. It was 2 am and he ran away from me, down a dark alley, after fighting with one of our local hookers. As I was about to catch up, he suddenly stopped, spun around and squared off on me. He crouched in a fighting stance, jammed his hand deep in his pocket, and grabbed a handful of something bulky. I *saw* a gun through his clothes " swear to it. I was maybe 15-20" away, in a dark, narrow, walkway between a wall and a hedge, so I"m thinking " shit " I"m dead.

(continued¦)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:00 PM on 04/26/2008

...continued from above...)

I drew down on him and start hollering "FREEZE! DROP YOUR WEAPON!" over and over. He thought about it for a loooong few seconds, then slowly took his hands out of his pockets and goes compliant. My partner caught up and we proned him out, etc. etc.. In his pocket was a bunch of keys on one of those big bottle opener key rings (dude was a *professional* drunk). I went from emotionless to *pissed* and started yelling "What the f--- were you thinking!?!? I almost killed you, you dumb motherf----er!!!" He had no answer " he was just drunk and stupid.

I still get the chills thinking about that one. Every physical indication he gave was that he had a gun and was about to use it. The big ring of keys with the opener looked like a gun through the clothing. I had him lined up and all the slack off my trigger. No reason I didn"t shoot " another split second, or if he urned his head, or moved his arm too fast...I"d have killed an unarmed man. And " get this " I would have been IN THE RIGHT. Because if I"m not prepared to shoot a guy like that, then the next time it will be a gun and I"ll be dead.

Not that I would have slept any better about it. Thank God I didn"t shoot him. But what will I do the next time?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:44 PM on 04/26/2008


This is just another case of cowards with badges getting men killed. As long as any officer that fires his weapon at an unarmed civilian is not removed automaticlly from the police force this will continue to happen. As long as we consider it acceptable for the police to ever shoot an innocent they will.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:20 PM on 04/26/2008

How does one know if a suspect is unarmed until after the fact. This is an unfortunate situation but very real. It comes down to the point that a policeman as anyone would has/had fear for his life. A delay may cost him dearly, yes this is a generalization but nontheless true. In this particular trial the Prosecution did a terrrible job of preparing their witnesses. They consistently contradicted each other as to the facts. At the minimum a legitimate cause for "reasonable doubt" was created. To Huffpo particpants who are not New York area residents. It should be noted that this was not a jury trial but decided by the trial judge, who took two weeks or there abouts to study the testimony and then render his decision.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 PM on 04/27/2008

If Bell had listened to the cops and not tried to drive off he would be alive!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:02 PM on 04/26/2008

so very sad...and this is just ONE example.
our nation needs a change.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:10 PM on 04/26/2008

Completely nuts. 50 shots to take down a man without a weapon? And that's okay?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:31 PM on 04/26/2008

Law enforcement is perpetually protected by a "perception of danger" clause with regard to use of force.

Unfortunately for the citizenry, no such defense exists in terms of error or abuse.

Clearly, the victims were in no position to understand that the police were none other than aggressive civilians.

Apparently, our perceptions carry absolutely no weight.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:21 PM on 04/26/2008

I don't understand why every American citizen isn't threatened by this decision. If a New York officer knows that he can kill a black man with immunity he surely knows he can physically abuse or coerce a citizen of any color. If the threat of legal consequences don't protect a black man from murder by police,what is protecting any of us from lesser police aggression? Every policeman sees this verdict and realizes he doesn't need to be very careful in concerns of public safety. A fault in behavior will be overlooked regardless of results. Our police have great authority. They carry guns. Their word is accepted as gospel in courts. Such power should demand tremendous responsibility. None of us are safe when a person carrying a gun, with permission to abuse physically, has no legal accountability for their actions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:53 PM on 04/26/2008

Cops wear a lot of hats.

And for some, donning the summary executioner's mask is the best part of the job.

I don't see how big-city police departments can keep track of all of their officers, with so many assigned the same badge number: 007 (license to kill)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 04/26/2008

I was having a fight with my husband and he called the cops. They put me in handcuffs and forced me into a hospital. My husband had told them I was crazy. The hospital released me a few hours later after checking me out. My husband called the cops to punish me. He knows I was raped by a cop and generally fearful of the police. But they believed him and carted me off in handcuffs. They should have left and said, work it out between the two of you. Seems like cops never miss an opportunity to show how brave they are.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 AM on 04/26/2008

I am sorry that one sworn to uphold the law committed a violent crime upon your person; may they get everything they deserve for such an evil act.

Your husband's act was abusive to say the least; he owes you an apology IMHO, and he needs to seek counseling. You should also avail yourself of counseling if possible due to the trauma you suffered first from the act of violence done to you by an officer of the law, and the act of psychological abuse done by your husband.

The police officers acted inappropriately IMHO, but as I do not know all of the circumstances, I can only judge by your version of events. If true, the police officers at best were fools, at worst abusive, MCPs with dire issues of their own.

State laws differ one from another on domestic disturbance calls; in CA if *any* visible injuries are present on one spouse/partner, then the other is subject to immediate arrest and prosecution, with the arresting officers having little or no say in the matter. If both parties have visible injuries, then *both* are subject to immediate arrest and prosecution. No exceptions (at least in theory).

Given the many psychological variables in an abusive relationship, counseling is the first, best answer, along with compassion for the abused, especially by law enforcement personnel.

We've come a long way in my lifetime in this arena, but we still have quite a long ways to go.

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:55 AM on 04/26/2008

what the hell they had handguns not machinguns

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:40 AM on 04/26/2008

The judge's statement of ruling cited inconsistent prior statements / testimony by the prosecution's witnesses. I dare say the police had more legal advice in synchronizing, crafting (& amending!) theirs than had been afforded the victims, in the aftermath..statements that have been disputed by Benefield's attorney. Semantic triviaities such as intoxicated or drunk, car reversed or not, Hennessy or none & "didn't ask because he doesn't know what he (Isnaro) looks like?"..isn't it enough knowing a gun was pointed at them, by someone they didn't know? I believe Benefield's claim that the police DID NOT identify themselves. If someone approached my car & pointed a gun at me, I would do anything to get away! (YES, even run over them!) Who wouldn't?

Regardless of the circumstances..a hail of 46 bullets? 31 from one cop alone? A comment noted internalization of subtle/not-so subtle cues influencing behavior in how value is assigned, especially in stereotyping. That the police were undercover & made judgments about those frequenting the club, lends credence to their stereotyping these young men accordingly. They not only placed little value on their lives, but on the consequences of their own actions. It seems the judge has done the same, with his opinion that they brought it on themselves. How can he possibly justify the police actions? What about Isnaro's "Gun!" when none existed? That indisputable fact alone should merit the charge/guilt of endangerment or manslaughter. I hope the Feds do investigate..this is a travesty!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:07 AM on 04/26/2008

This is not about the race of the cops. This is about the race of the victims. If the three male victims had been white and not black, there would have been no victims. The cops would have used good judgment from the start and no one would be dead.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 PM on 04/25/2008

No one can win against cops..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:26 PM on 04/25/2008

Sadly, cops in New York have a loooong history of bullying. Not protecting the public which they serve.
Sure there are going to be mishaps. With the population of NY, it is bound to happen sometimes. But I have seen NY cops ( even the minority ones) harrass people needlessly. I am glad I am not minority.
I would probably do something I would later regret.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:06 PM on 04/25/2008

You do know that 2 of the 3 cops that shot this guy were black so I hope you weren't trying to inject race into this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:08 PM on 04/25/2008

The victim is and has always been black so this has RACE all over it! The black cops involved would not have fired were the young men white. They know it is NOT ALLOWED to shoot white people. Had the victims been white those cops would be looking at life imprisonment.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:17 PM on 04/26/2008

I wrote, ( even the minority ones).
I will inject my foot in your ----

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 PM on 04/25/2008

Jeez. If Servicemembers emptied 50 rounds into a targeted person in Iraq (or any war), they'd be convicted. There is virtually no situation under which this intentional act is permissible in the Military, and no "conflicting witnesses" could influence the verdict. The only legal way this could happen I can think of is if you had about 20 or more Soldiers open up on the same single-person target simultaneously. But even that scenario is highly unlikely and would have to occur in just the right way to be legal, or it would be classified as excessive use of force.

3 cops/50 rounds/conflicting witnesses/not guilty?

I'd rather go swimming in the San Diego area right now than hope for justice in the U.S. legal system.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:58 PM on 04/25/2008

If Servicemembers emptied 50 rounds into a targeted person in Iraq (or any war), they'd be convicted. - Catharsis

That's because being scared sh**less is a temporary state for a servicemember but a continuous state for a cop.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 PM on 04/25/2008

BEING SCARED SH....TLESS COMES FROM ONE "THING" BEING UNPREPARED AND THAT COMES FROM BEING UNTRAINED --ANYWAY YOU CUT IT. FROM MOST ACCOUNTS THAT SITUATION WAS NEVER VIEWED THE SAME WAY BY THOSE THREE AND THEY WERE ACTING LIKE THEY HAD NEVER, EVER BEEN TRAINED 'PROPERLY" JUST A CASE OF MONKEY SEE, MONKEY DO, HUH? AHHH HE SAID, SCOOT AND I THOUGHT HE SAID, SHOOT..................

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 AM on 04/26/2008

All you know-it-alls know exactly what happened. You know all the facts and are ready to proclaim guilt. The fact is, you don't know the facts. And the other fact is, it's your loudmouth rants that will sink the Democrats come November. We can't win with you all because America doesn't like your lippiness. It's simple and it's real.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:49 PM on 04/25/2008

I'm replying to cfreedom just because I'm in a generous mood on a Friday night and I'm more than happy to reply to somebody who intentionally posted something to rile people up and get responses. I wish I were as clever as cfreedom.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:11 PM on 04/25/2008

All i'm trying to do is stick up for the cops. You all don't know what it's like to face that chaos at 4 in the morning, not knowing who has a gun or who is intent on perhaps killing you or your partners. It's a tense and angst-filled situation and every one of these guys wished what happened had not. It is a tragedy, but it wasn't intentional and it wasn't malicious and police deserve the benefit of the doubt. If that opinion riles you, i'm sorry, but it's fair.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:29 PM on 04/25/2008

cfreedom, I see your point but explain why this ALWAYS happen to black people. Sixty year old grandmother, fleeing young schoolboys, unarmed young men standing at their own front door, unarmed young men out having a good time? Why does it always happen to black people and the cops are ALWAYS acquitted meanwhile Michael Vicks is in prison, his career destroyed for cruelty, inhumane treatment toward DOGS. How many young black men lives are worth the life of one dog?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 PM on 04/26/2008

The fact is: Sean Bell was unarmed. The fact is: the officers were undercover ( supposedly). How the heck did he know who they were.
The saddest fact is this young man was murdered before his wedding, his life cut short by some eager Keyston Cops who don't know up from down.
This is why cops get their heads blown off and some people rejoice. Not me, but some.
In New York, the cops are more corrupt than the gangsters.
What happened to Sean Bell is unfortunate, the anger is warranted.
Vengence is the Lords

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:03 PM on 04/25/2008

In the officers' opinion, he was armed with a car. That's a deadly weapon, especially when someone is under the influence of alcohol. You don't know anything about the pressure on cops, but you'll scream for them like a baby the minute you need them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 PM on 04/25/2008

No one is making cops be cops. Let's take this out of the real of law enforcement...If you had your child in daycare and went there to pick him up and was told, "Hey, little Bijou was crying uncontrollably and pissing his pants. I couldn't take it anymore. This is a stressful job. So I picked him up and shook him violently and unfortunately his neck snapped. He's dead now. But please understand, this is a stressful job. I didn't mean to do it." Would that be acceptable to you? If you have a short fuse, then FIND ANOTHER JOB. If you're not a people person, then maybe you shouldn't be a hostess. If you have no tolerance for children, then maybe you shouldn't be a teacher or day care provider. If you like to shoot first and ask questions later, then you shouldn't be a cop. Period!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 AM on 04/26/2008