I wonder what ever happened to the cop?
It's long past time for Paul Schene to man up. The King County Sheriff's Deputy who lost his job after beating 15-year-old Malika Calhoun in a SeaTac holding cell first said he'd attacked the girl because she injured his shin kicking off her shoe. Then, when video was released showing him accidentally kicking the cell's metal toilet, and thus injuring himself, he wisely shut up. Until yesterday.
That's when he testified for the first time about his version of the events that were caught on tape in November of 2008.
As The Seattle Times reports, Schene defended his actions as appropriate because he said Calhoun had made an "angry face" at him, kicked her shoe deliberately at his groin and because he was "afraid of being injured by her." Schene also said he followed police academy protocol when he kicked Calhoun, grabbed her by the hair, threw her to the ground and punched her multiple times while she was cuffed.
It's unknown what effect Schene's testimony had on jurors. But as a representative of everyone in the world with working retinas, I can say the only effect it had on me was to feel pity for the man who lives his life in fear of teenage girls throwing tantrums.
UPDATE: According to KIRO, the judge's decision came after jurors said they were deadlocked.
Despite the strong evidence against Schene, the mistrial shouldn't come as too much of a surprise. Yesterday jurors asked the judge to boot one of their own because she had a 15-year-old daughter, and therefore couldn't be impartial. The judge told them to keep deliberating, but apparently that didn't help matters.
Still trying to figure out who wanted to let Schene go free and why. I'll update when I find out.
UPDATE: According to one of the jurors, Schene got a mistrial because of one person who could not be convinced.
Like a lot of people, I was a little surprised last Friday when Schene's case was declared a mistrial. Maybe I shouldn't have been; our system of justice is, after all, necessarily imperfect, and I was only watching from the outside, not actually in the courtroom charged with making a decision that would drastically affect another human being's future.
So in order to satisfy my curiosity, I decided to call some of the jurors and find out what happened. Thus far, only one has returned my call. And that juror, understandably, does not feel comfortable being identified. But this person (let's call them Juror Number One) was comfortable answering some questions about the case.
Right off the bat, it should be noted that Juror Number One takes the whole idea of serving on a jury very seriously. Logic is important to this person. Ditto for dispassionate reasoning. If it helps you better understand their character, I'd imagine Juror Number One is either a strict vegetarian or has come up will a rational, lengthy explanation for why they eat meat that makes other carnivores feel guilty for not thinking it through.
I don't know if that makes any sense. But what I'm trying to say is that I'd imagine if any of us was ever convicted of a crime, we'd want someone like Juror Number One deciding our fate.
Anyway, as has been reported, Juror Number One confirmed that there was indeed only one holdout who didn't want to convict Schene. This person, who we're also not going to identify, made their position on the case known very quickly.
"Friday morning the individual came in and said I think we should set an order for a hung jury now because I'm not going to change my mind," says Juror Number One. "We said no and tried a few hours more of deliberating, but he just refused. He said 'This is just making me more resolved.'"
According to Juror Number One, the dissenting man couldn't bridge an intellectual gap. He agreed that Schene had used unnecessary force, but thought that by deeming it unlawful, the prosecution was making him and the rest of the jury declare that Schene had intended to harm Calhoun.
"This particular juror felt that we were somehow suggesting that this guy had criminal intent in his head. Like we were getting inside his head," says Juror Number One. "It was so frustrating to explain and explain all day long. And for an individual who was an adult and was seemingly intelligent, either they were acting stupid or they just made a really poor decision. Upon reflection, I feel like the person had to be biased. They stated many times that they were not going to be convinced."
Juror Number One still thinks their time in court was worth it. ("I really enjoyed the experience. It was a good test of character to see if I could remain impartial.") But they say they're worried about the impression the public will get following the Schene mistrial. Especially in light of the case of Christopher Monfort, the alleged Halloween-night cop-killer who apparently was partially motivated by the Schene video.
"I'm afraid for the community because we just had these cop killings and the person used this as part of his motive," says Juror Number One. "It makes me a little sad that the community thinks cops can get away with it. All it takes is one bad juror. I hope people understand that 11 people knew what they were doing."
op is a bully and well out of order, I would like five minutes with the slack jawed ******.
