And you have people celebrating it on the Tulsa Police Department Facebook page.. pure freaking evil!
2 Tulsa Police Officers Shot
- Thread starter TULSARISING
- Start date
The vast majority of the people I saw on that comment thread were people calling for the death penalty. Lots of "Hang him", "Shoulda put a bullet in his head", "an eye for an eye" type reactions.
The majority of people almost always do and say the right thing. It’s the vocal or visible minority which give groups their bad name. Police for example.
The majority were, yes, but you also had morons saying things such as “ well now they see how we feel” or “ they aren’t so tough now”
Just imagine how smart the average person is.... now realize that 50% are dumber than that. Scary right?
His picture alone is a crime, looks like the biggest loser I have ever seen
lol Union is thug lyfe didn't ya know. Had a fb teammate murder his ex gf a few years back too. It's crazy how people turn out.
I went to school with this guy. I don't think anyone is too surprised
Last edited:
I agree. I fully believe that everyone deserves a defense, as that’s what the law says, but the public defender will have a handful here. I don’t do much in the criminal law world, but I would run from this one. I suppose there’s a chance they appoint someone, but then that becomes a whole other mess.
I had a chance to listen to Rob Nigh speak once. He represented Timothy McVeigh, with others. He was supposed to talk for 10 minutes at a dinner In a room full of mostly law firm type attorneys. He talked for about two hours. Nobody moved. The job is to keep this defendant from getting the death penalty, like it was with McVeigh. In McVeigh’s case, there were some serious legal/ precedential issues with the sentence, at least according to Nigh. He was an amazing attorney, a better person, and passed away too early.
If you believe in the American system of government and our justice system, and you’ve trained properly at a reputable law school that can properly teach you to be dispassionate in your analysis and representation, AND most importantly, you have the requisite experience to properly defend someone in this position, then you have no reservations about what your role is and who you are defending. That’s the stuff that separates real lawyers from people who think because they can debate and advocate effectively for something they agree with they would be a great lawyer and would be just as good as a pro. If you’ve got a bullet in you, a surgeon or a cowboy with a Bowie knife can take it out. You want a surgeon. A real surgeon will take the bullet out of a guy who just shot up a school. When you know to a moral certainty that your function is essential regardless of the moral repugnance of the situation, you act without inquiry into the distasteful nature of what you are doing. If you do, the jury will see it and convict your guy. “Even her lawyer thinks she’s guilty” is a Conclusion a lot of jurors draw just by watching body language and verbal tap dancing.
Cases like a double cop murder are like being a pilot of a burning aircraft. You’ve only got so much time and you aren’t worried about saving all the passengers or yourself. You are simply looking as quick as you can for the nearest airport or open field where you can put the case down and give the client the best chance to survive, walking away would be a miracle or chance, and none of it is truly in your hands.
It doesn’t get easier. I’ve prosecuted every type of crime you can name except murder and manslaughter, but second and third chaired those. I’ve defended at trial or appeal, murderers, rapists, child molesters, child pornographers, all types of unconvicted murderous drug dealers, even human trafficking and a couple of guys accused of slavery (both were found not guilty). Never bothered me.
In each and every case, one of two things were true: they either had the evidence to convict him, so it became my job to make sure the crime charged and the punishment inflicted matched what he actually did, to protect him AND the thousands of defendants that come after him, maybe some one some day you really care about. Or they didn’t have the evidence to convict him so it made no difference to me what people thought he did.
I’ve only had one case where I thought a serious violent felon escaped a jury’s verdict. That case was a black man with 7 white women jurors who was accused of entering a home and violently beating an elderly white woman for her purse, tv, and car. There was little tying him to the crime besides reputation and proximity. He had a juvenile home invasion and a string of violent and non-violent incidents involving females. Nobody saw him and he had been a handy man for her in the house so the DNA evidence had little probity. Someone else’s DNA was found on the victim. The victim said she knew it was my guy but the assailant was masked. She told the jury she recognized him by the color of his hands. He was facing life without parole. We pushed the problematic ID and I guess one of the jurors didn’t want to face Jesus and be wrong. It took awhile, several days, but they came back NG. I always thought he did it and would do it again and he could have been off the streets if the cops interviewed him properly and didn’t just assume he’d be convicted. But I never felt bad about the result.
If cases like that still bother you, then they won’t after you defend someone like the guy I represented who was developmentally disabled but high functioning and got a job at an Appleby’s in a kitchen through a government program. He parked nightly in the same spot on private property to keep his new car from being dented. Something he earned and was proud of. He had permission from the restaurant to park it there and despite the restaurant notifying the towing company orally and in writing not to tow the car, they towed it. He paid the fine and got the car out. The restaurant was livid and told the company to not tow the car again. A month goes by, the same guy that towed the car the first time towed it again. My guy goes to the lot. The gate is open and the guy who towed the car sees him and taunts him. It’s unclear if he knew about my guys disability. My guy walks into the lot and drives away before the gate can close. The tow yard sees this and closed their gate on his car, damaging his car and allegedly doing over $10,000 damage to the motorized gate.
The police arrest my guy and charge him with felony burglary and grant theft auto of his own car. The State persisted despite having all the facts. The restaurant swore out an affidavit for the arrest of the tow truck driver and filed a civil suit against the tow company. The cops and prosecutors did nothing. It went to trial. He would not take the deal offered of defrauding the tow truck company of their towing fee. My guy faced a mandatory minimum of 26 years. It came back not guilty in under 15 minutes. Which if you know how the system works is the minimum amount of time possible to pick a foreman and sort through the paperwork and call the bailiff back. The judge formally admonished the State from the bench. It was the last prosecution for him in front of that judge. It’s cases like that which tell you that your role is vital. Indispensable. So you do your duty regardless of the facts.
Cases like a double cop murder are like being a pilot of a burning aircraft. You’ve only got so much time and you aren’t worried about saving all the passengers or yourself. You are simply looking as quick as you can for the nearest airport or open field where you can put the case down and give the client the best chance to survive, walking away would be a miracle or chance, and none of it is truly in your hands.
It doesn’t get easier. I’ve prosecuted every type of crime you can name except murder and manslaughter, but second and third chaired those. I’ve defended at trial or appeal, murderers, rapists, child molesters, child pornographers, all types of unconvicted murderous drug dealers, even human trafficking and a couple of guys accused of slavery (both were found not guilty). Never bothered me.
In each and every case, one of two things were true: they either had the evidence to convict him, so it became my job to make sure the crime charged and the punishment inflicted matched what he actually did, to protect him AND the thousands of defendants that come after him, maybe some one some day you really care about. Or they didn’t have the evidence to convict him so it made no difference to me what people thought he did.
I’ve only had one case where I thought a serious violent felon escaped a jury’s verdict. That case was a black man with 7 white women jurors who was accused of entering a home and violently beating an elderly white woman for her purse, tv, and car. There was little tying him to the crime besides reputation and proximity. He had a juvenile home invasion and a string of violent and non-violent incidents involving females. Nobody saw him and he had been a handy man for her in the house so the DNA evidence had little probity. Someone else’s DNA was found on the victim. The victim said she knew it was my guy but the assailant was masked. She told the jury she recognized him by the color of his hands. He was facing life without parole. We pushed the problematic ID and I guess one of the jurors didn’t want to face Jesus and be wrong. It took awhile, several days, but they came back NG. I always thought he did it and would do it again and he could have been off the streets if the cops interviewed him properly and didn’t just assume he’d be convicted. But I never felt bad about the result.
If cases like that still bother you, then they won’t after you defend someone like the guy I represented who was developmentally disabled but high functioning and got a job at an Appleby’s in a kitchen through a government program. He parked nightly in the same spot on private property to keep his new car from being dented. Something he earned and was proud of. He had permission from the restaurant to park it there and despite the restaurant notifying the towing company orally and in writing not to tow the car, they towed it. He paid the fine and got the car out. The restaurant was livid and told the company to not tow the car again. A month goes by, the same guy that towed the car the first time towed it again. My guy goes to the lot. The gate is open and the guy who towed the car sees him and taunts him. It’s unclear if he knew about my guys disability. My guy walks into the lot and drives away before the gate can close. The tow yard sees this and closed their gate on his car, damaging his car and allegedly doing over $10,000 damage to the motorized gate.
The police arrest my guy and charge him with felony burglary and grant theft auto of his own car. The State persisted despite having all the facts. The restaurant swore out an affidavit for the arrest of the tow truck driver and filed a civil suit against the tow company. The cops and prosecutors did nothing. It went to trial. He would not take the deal offered of defrauding the tow truck company of their towing fee. My guy faced a mandatory minimum of 26 years. It came back not guilty in under 15 minutes. Which if you know how the system works is the minimum amount of time possible to pick a foreman and sort through the paperwork and call the bailiff back. The judge formally admonished the State from the bench. It was the last prosecution for him in front of that judge. It’s cases like that which tell you that your role is vital. Indispensable. So you do your duty regardless of the facts.
Last edited:
Good for you. You did your job. Someone has to do it.
I'll stick to my comment and not have any reservation with it. I couldn't look the families of the two officers in the eye and defend the shooter.
I wouldn't get picked by the defense team to be a member of the jury either.
Last edited:
Amazing stories. I have little faith in the ability of most law school graduates I’m seeing being able to do that ethically and honorably. There are still some sly old dogs around here, but so many of the folks coming up just aren’t smart. I think all this computer stuff zapped their attention spans.
So much of the best lawyering happen quickly and with meticulous attention to detail. My best ideas have been while letting something simmer and then noticing the ridiculous connection or issue no one thought of.
Exactly. Law schools ruined their reputations through greed and being unwilling to phase out a lot of over paid boomer faculty who werent teaching and in their seventies. UF had over a million dollars in salary tied up in several prof who had not taught or published in several years. And buying costly information tech that quickly became obsolete.
Nobody good wants to be a lawyer anymore and won’t pay it if they could. The only people going are those that don’t want to be rich or own their own business and want the degree for free. That usually does not attract good talent.
There’s just not interest in doing the things it takes to be good. Details matter.
I do think the market is going to turn around at some point. There is going to be too much demand. When I came out, the job market was awful. Now, I read about old attorneys dying everyday. There will be some good opportunities that weren’t there, if people want to work.
Last edited:
Sad news: Sgt. Craig Johnson has passed away from his injuries. https://www.newson6.com/story/5efba...t-dies-from-injuries-suffered-during-shooting
As Clarence Darrow made famous with Leopold and Loeb, there is always a reason for even the most heinous of criminals deserve representation. Fun fact... Loeb died in prison during his life sentence but Leopold served 33 years, was paroled and worked as a medical tech in Puerto Rico and eventually earned a masters degree. He taught and published a book on birds of PR in his later life.
So is anyone besides me suspicious of the timing of this shooting? Sgt. Johnson was the first TPD officer killed in the line of duty since 1996, and it just so happened to occur following the three or four most intense weeks of anti-police sentiment in our country in a long time (maybe ever).
It was a white guy who looked like a meth head that did it... so... no.
The rhetoric has been over the top at times but I would guess there probably have been other times that TPD officers have been shot since 96'. This guy just happened to hit both of them in the head
Maybe. But there was a struggle in the vehicle prior to the shooting. They wanted to impound his car for expired temp tag and he refused to exit. That’s common. What isn’t common is pulling a pistol out after you’ve been tased and shooting two cops three times each. He may have just shot them because they tased him. Not because he felt discriminated against/was mad as hell.
First death in line of duty by gunshot since 1996. Shooting happen once every couple of years. Injuries every week.
Maybe suspicious wasn’t the right word. It just seems super coincidental that Tulsa would have it’s first cop-killing in 24 years during the exact time that anti-police rhetoric is at an all-time high. I’m not saying that this guy had any particular agenda, because I have no idea if he did. What I am wondering is if this is an example of sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind.
He didn’t just “happen to hit both of them in the head”. He shot them both while he was inside the car, which caused them to go down. Then he got out of the car, stood over them, and fired three more times.
http://ktul.com/news/local/2-police-officers-shot-in-east-tulsa
Maybe I could have phrased that better. What I meant was, there have probably been several similar situations with officers being shot. This guy just happened to be able to get himself in position to hit both of them in the head. The others likely intended to kill the officers just the same.
Tulsa County has been increasingly reluctant to give the death penalty. Wouldn’t surprise me if there was a plea deal. Kunzweiler is a strong Catholic. For whatever reason, these cases drag on. Tulsa isn’t seating juries in the foreseeable future, either.
Similar threads
