Cam Newton, the Chinese cop, and the code of protection (op-ed)
Last football season Carolina panther quarterback Cam Newton scrambled and threw the ball away to avoid a sack. The defender continued his pursuit and shoved Newton out of bounds after the ball was released.
Newton complained to the referee. He felt the defender roughed the passer but there was no flag. After the game Newton claimed the referee explained on the field that he wasn’t old enough to get that call. (Or he’s not Tom Brady or Peyton Manning)
As a professional Newton is accustomed to breakdowns in pass protection but on that particular play Newton believed the code of protection that comes with the position was arbitrarily absent.
Newton joked about the referee, “Heaven forbid he gets any rookies.”
Recently Chinese-American rookie police officer, Peter Liang, was convicted of manslaughter in New York. Chinese-American organizations held thirty demonstrations across the country protesting the verdict.
In November 2014 Liang fatally shot an unarmed black man in a darkened public housing stairwell. (Liang heard a noise and discharged his weapon. The bullet hit the wall, ricocheted, and struck the victim in the heart.)
The New York Times reported, “The shooting focused scrutiny on everyday tactics used by officers in housing projects, where rooting out entrenched violence has been a departmental priority … [But] basic questions about the death remain unanswered: Had officer Liang, surprised by a figure in the shadows below, reflexively squeezed the trigger, or had he merely lost his grip as he opened the door to the stairs?”
In court Liang’s defense was the gun went off accidentally.
The defense was debunked because the jurors were allowed to pull the trigger on Liang’s gun. They could see for themselves that a quick flinch if surprised would not be sufficient to fire the weapon. A legal expert explained: The important part of the charge of reckless manslaughter is the law doesn’t require intent to harm a person, it requires that a person does conduct with a conscious disregard for a known risk. (Such as fire a gun into a dark hallway when he or she doesn’t know who or what is there.)
Apparently the protesters disagreed. One protester said, “The climate is crying out for the indictment of a police officer.”
Liang supporters believe he’s a scapegoat to appease the black community because white police officers were cleared of murder charges against black males in recent years.
But the legal expert stated Liang’s situation was different, other officers were able to contend they were in imminent danger. “This gave those officers the ability to tell the jury ‘you don’t know what I saw; you cannot second guess my actions.’ Liang saw nothing but darkness.”
The former chairman of the Chinese Cultural Association of Long Island said, “We all know this is a rookie cop who doesn’t know the ropes … We all know it’s a dangerous environment. Why did he [the district attorney] charge a rookie cop with manslaughter, with the obvious intent of throwing him in jail? This is a vicious attack on the family, and this is a vicious attack on the Chinese community.”
But what exactly is being protested?
It’s not innocence.
Do the protesters believe the proper charge was involuntary manslaughter due to Liang’s inexperience but the lesser sentence wouldn’t have satisfied the length of incarceration expected by those the state wished to appease?
Is the protest against reverse racial profiling?
Or did the protesters expect Liang to be overcharged with second degree murder and cleared of all charges because the prosecution wouldn’t be able to prove intent to harm? If that’s the case then they’re actually protesting Liang being outside of the code of protection they assumed came along with the profession when the victim’s black. And the protesters translated the conviction to mean: You haven’t been one of us long enough to get that call rookie. Plus you’re not the police version of Tom Brady or Peyton Manning.
This is a vicious attack but on which family?
First published in New Pittsburgh Courier 3/2/16
Newton complained to the referee. He felt the defender roughed the passer but there was no flag. After the game Newton claimed the referee explained on the field that he wasn’t old enough to get that call. (Or he’s not Tom Brady or Peyton Manning)
As a professional Newton is accustomed to breakdowns in pass protection but on that particular play Newton believed the code of protection that comes with the position was arbitrarily absent.
Newton joked about the referee, “Heaven forbid he gets any rookies.”
Recently Chinese-American rookie police officer, Peter Liang, was convicted of manslaughter in New York. Chinese-American organizations held thirty demonstrations across the country protesting the verdict.
In November 2014 Liang fatally shot an unarmed black man in a darkened public housing stairwell. (Liang heard a noise and discharged his weapon. The bullet hit the wall, ricocheted, and struck the victim in the heart.)
The New York Times reported, “The shooting focused scrutiny on everyday tactics used by officers in housing projects, where rooting out entrenched violence has been a departmental priority … [But] basic questions about the death remain unanswered: Had officer Liang, surprised by a figure in the shadows below, reflexively squeezed the trigger, or had he merely lost his grip as he opened the door to the stairs?”
In court Liang’s defense was the gun went off accidentally.
The defense was debunked because the jurors were allowed to pull the trigger on Liang’s gun. They could see for themselves that a quick flinch if surprised would not be sufficient to fire the weapon. A legal expert explained: The important part of the charge of reckless manslaughter is the law doesn’t require intent to harm a person, it requires that a person does conduct with a conscious disregard for a known risk. (Such as fire a gun into a dark hallway when he or she doesn’t know who or what is there.)
Apparently the protesters disagreed. One protester said, “The climate is crying out for the indictment of a police officer.”
Liang supporters believe he’s a scapegoat to appease the black community because white police officers were cleared of murder charges against black males in recent years.
But the legal expert stated Liang’s situation was different, other officers were able to contend they were in imminent danger. “This gave those officers the ability to tell the jury ‘you don’t know what I saw; you cannot second guess my actions.’ Liang saw nothing but darkness.”
The former chairman of the Chinese Cultural Association of Long Island said, “We all know this is a rookie cop who doesn’t know the ropes … We all know it’s a dangerous environment. Why did he [the district attorney] charge a rookie cop with manslaughter, with the obvious intent of throwing him in jail? This is a vicious attack on the family, and this is a vicious attack on the Chinese community.”
But what exactly is being protested?
It’s not innocence.
Do the protesters believe the proper charge was involuntary manslaughter due to Liang’s inexperience but the lesser sentence wouldn’t have satisfied the length of incarceration expected by those the state wished to appease?
Is the protest against reverse racial profiling?
Or did the protesters expect Liang to be overcharged with second degree murder and cleared of all charges because the prosecution wouldn’t be able to prove intent to harm? If that’s the case then they’re actually protesting Liang being outside of the code of protection they assumed came along with the profession when the victim’s black. And the protesters translated the conviction to mean: You haven’t been one of us long enough to get that call rookie. Plus you’re not the police version of Tom Brady or Peyton Manning.
This is a vicious attack but on which family?
First published in New Pittsburgh Courier 3/2/16
Comments
Post a Comment