Jump to content

Interesting Arcticle on a Tragedy...wonder what the outcome will be


SSCatz

Recommended Posts

The grand jury, after listening to 30 witnesses and looking at forensic evidence for weeks, concurred, saying the teen accidentally shot himself. The report said no evidence, including DNA, indicated the deputy who pulled Johnson over had fired the shotgun and that no other people were involved in the shooting.

 

“The grand jury finds … that Deputy Joe Sullivan was in his patrol car at the time of Billey Joe Johnson Jr.’s death,” the ruling said.

 

 

 

Johnson family attorney Jerome Carter said he was glad the grand jury did not rule the teen committed suicide but still had concerns that make his own investigation necessary.

 

The report said Sullivan, who is white, did have gunpowder residue on his hands but that it came from him handling his service revolver the morning of the shooting. Based on the lack of Johnson’s blood on Sullivan’s clothes and on eyewitness reports, the jury concluded the deputy could not have shot the athlete.

 

Johnson’s hands also tested positive for gunpowder residue and there were no other injuries on his body, according to the report by the grand jury, made up of 14 white and two black members. It did not detail how Johnson accidentally discharged the gun, which he had with him because he was going hunting.

 

George County Sheriff Garry Welford said Thursday the investigation found that after Sullivan took the teen’s license and went back to his patrol car to check it, Johnson squatted down to move the shotgun from underneath the seat of his truck. He grabbed the barrel and the gun went off, said Welford, who did not know why the teen was trying to move the gun.

 

 

 

Attorney Carter said he hoped his team will be allowed to soon review the autopsy and other evidence.

 

“I’m very concerned with Detective Sullivan testing having gunshot residue on both of his hands having just logged in being on duty,” Carter said after the ruling in Lucedale.

 

for more ...http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news;_ylt=AqsVsr408Ug_UlS5X0JYqAM5nYcB?slug=ap-footballstarsdeath&prov=ap&type=lgns

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said earlier, is anybody going to issue this officer an apology? Man, those "writers" that wrote the story full of accusations based on absolutely no evidence ought to be fired. What a joke. Those guys are hacks.

 

The article linked to by GBolt seems fair enough to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, Joe Friday, why you supply us with some evidence this kid was murdered? So far, unless you know something the investigators don't, the only ones who have mentioned that possibility, are his family members.

 

Your comment was assinine and reckless and reflects attitudes that create controversy where there is no reason for it.

 

BTW, are you Shaquanda Cotton?

 

 

No I'm not Sherlock, are you Shaquanda Cotton???? I bet if it was a child of yours you would want some answers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I'm not Sherlock, are you Shaquanda Cotton???? I bet if it was a child of yours you would want some answers!

 

 

Are you insinuating the justice system did not provide those answers? The grand jury said it was not murder. They said it was an accident. BTW, every bit of the evidence in this case is available via a FOI inquiry. Do you think the family has sought to go that route, or did they, like yourself, assume the guilt of the officer?

 

Do you have evidence that would contradict those findings? Or are you just assuming since the officer was white and the kid was black, racism is involved? And if you are, your assumption is a pathetic cop-out.

 

You said "...someone was murdered..." So far, you've given us no evidence to that effect. On the contrary, the grand jury has said that DIDN'T happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you insinuating the justice system did not provide those answers? The grand jury said it was not murder. They said it was an accident. BTW, every bit of the evidence in this case is available via a FOI inquiry. Do you think the family has sought to go that route, or did they, like yourself, assume the guilt of the officer?

 

Do you have evidence that would contradict those findings? Or are you just assuming since the officer was white and the kid was black, racism is involved? And if you are, your assumption is a pathetic cop-out.

 

You said "...someone was murdered..." So far, you've given us no evidence to that effect. On the contrary, the grand jury has said that DIDN'T happen.

 

I never said the officer was guilty, I said there are a lot of unanswered questions. I'm not the one that keeps bringing race in this, that's you. I have not made one comment about the race of the officer or kid. So that makes you the pathetic one.

 

Just because the grand jury said it DIDN't happen doesn't mean it didn't. Grand jury's have let innocent people go to jail, and criminals walk the streets.

 

Again I'll say this is a sad story, and the family will continue to be in my prayers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said the officer was guilty, I said there are a lot of unanswered questions. I'm not the one that keeps bringing race in this, that's you. I have not made one comment about the race of the officer or kid. So that makes you the pathetic one.

 

Just because the grand jury said it DIDN't happen doesn't mean it didn't. Grand jury's have let innocent people go to jail, and criminals walk the streets.

 

Again I'll say this is a sad story, and the family will continue to be in my prayers.

 

Were you on the grand jury? If not, what makes you think there were/are unanswered questions?

 

How in the world does a grand jury "let innocent people go to jail, and criminals walk the streets"? The grand jury's job is to determine if there is enough evidence for a trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said the officer was guilty, I said there are a lot of unanswered questions. I'm not the one that keeps bringing race in this, that's you. I have not made one comment about the race of the officer or kid. So that makes you the pathetic one.

 

Just because the grand jury said it DIDN't happen doesn't mean it didn't. Grand jury's have let innocent people go to jail, and criminals walk the streets.

 

Again I'll say this is a sad story, and the family will continue to be in my prayers.

 

 

You said the kid was murdered. You have absolutely no evidence to that effect, yet you have decided the officer is guilty. You have to have a reason to believe that. Actually, I would like to know why you think the officer murdered him.

 

BTW, I didn't call you pathetic, and if you call me pathetic again, you will be reported. I said your comment was pathetic, and it is, more so now since you have again asserted the grand jury didn't act with justice in mind. You have now impuned the integrity of the officer, with no corroborating evidence, AND the integrity of the grand jury.

 

BGW, it is obvious you have no clue of how a grand jury operates. It is not to determine guilt or innocense. Try to keep up.

 

Again, it is people with similar attitudes such as yours that foment hatred and discord within communities.

 

Are you related to Shaquanda Cotton?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said the officer was guilty, I said there are a lot of unanswered questions. I'm not the one that keeps bringing race in this, that's you. I have not made one comment about the race of the officer or kid. So that makes you the pathetic one.

 

Just because the grand jury said it DIDN't happen doesn't mean it didn't. Grand jury's have let innocent people go to jail, and criminals walk the streets.

 

Again I'll say this is a sad story, and the family will continue to be in my prayers.

 

Can you name one question - other than why - that has gone unanswered? Is it unanswered or do you just not like the answer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. I'm not the one that keeps bringing race in this, that's you. I have not made one comment about the race of the officer or kid.

 

 

 

this statement would be very true ... wouldn't go so far as calling you pathetic, not that i really would care if i was reported, but the statement is true... i posted this article and as far as i can see you made your mind up two weeks ago as to what side u were on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this statement would be very true ... wouldn't go so far as calling you pathetic, not that i really would care if i was reported, but the statement is true... i posted this article and as far as i can see you made your mind up two weeks ago as to what side u were on.

 

The only person I've seen in this thread who had his mind already made up is Yuga. He knew it was murder before the grand jury's finding, and now that the grand jury has decided that the kid shot himself accidentally, well they are probably wrong. Even though, you know, they have access to all the evidence and Yuga doesn't, still he knows better. Hell maybe they're even corrupt, although I'll give him points for not outright saying that. Could be they're just stupid, but in any event they are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this is the most interesting part: The kid supposedly shot himself in the head, with the gun inside his mouth with a 12 gauge that, according to the father, who had shot the gun before, kicks like a mule, and no teeth were knocked out. Im not sure how that happens. Things just dont add up. Im pretty sure that this was not suicide and there is almost no way you can shoot yourself with a 12 gauge automatically, so I would not rule out the cop just yet.

 

my $.02

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this is the most interesting part: The kid supposedly shot himself in the head, with the gun inside his mouth with a 12 gauge that, according to the father, who had shot the gun before, kicks like a mule, and no teeth were knocked out. Im not sure how that happens. Things just dont add up. Im pretty sure that this was not suicide and there is almost no way you can shoot yourself with a 12 gauge automatically, so I would not rule out the cop just yet.

 

my $.02

 

It's actually fairly easy for someone to shoot themselves with a 12 ga. I can also see how the recoil could pull the gun out of the mouth while leaving the teeth in place.

 

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said the kid was murdered. You have absolutely no evidence to that effect, yet you have decided the officer is guilty. You have to have a reason to believe that. Actually, I would like to know why you think the officer murdered him.

 

BTW, I didn't call you pathetic, and if you call me pathetic again, you will be reported. I said your comment was pathetic, and it is, more so now since you have again asserted the grand jury didn't act with justice in mind. You have now impuned the integrity of the officer, with no corroborating evidence, AND the integrity of the grand jury.

 

BGW, it is obvious you have no clue of how a grand jury operates. It is not to determine guilt or innocense. Try to keep up.

 

Again, it is people with similar attitudes such as yours that foment hatred and discord within communities.

 

Are you related to Shaquanda Cotton?

 

Please stop putting words in my mouth! I never said "the officer killed the kid". What I did say is that there were alot of unanswered questions that the police department were dancing around, which there are.

 

If you feel the need to report me, then by all means go right ahead - that's even more pathetic.

 

The grand jury does not directly decide on who is innocent or guilty, however they do decide on what goes to trial and what doesn't. Therefore that is the beginning stage of determing innocence or guiltiness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of statement is that??? What does it matter what color the officer is, someone was murdered and there are a bunch of unanswered questions that the police sure are dancing around and trying to cover up! Hopefully this family will find peace.

 

 

That's your quote. You said the kid was murdered.

 

If you're going to argue about what you said (and it's obvious you are) try your best to remember what you said so you don't look like a clownshoe when you misquote yourself.

 

The GJ decides if there is enough evidence to indict. It has nothing to do with guilt or innocence. That's the job of the jury.

 

And the grand jury in this case said the kid was not murdered. It also didn't indicate law enforcement was dancing around anything.

 

So, I'll ask you again, what is your evidence this kid was murdered? Why do you think the officer murdered him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please stop putting words in my mouth! I never said "the officer killed the kid". What I did say is that there were alot of unanswered questions that the police department were dancing around, which there are.

 

If you feel the need to report me, then by all means go right ahead - that's even more pathetic.

 

The grand jury does not directly decide on who is innocent or guilty, however they do decide on what goes to trial and what doesn't. Therefore that is the beginning stage of determing innocence or guiltiness.

 

 

Then what did you mean when you said the kid was murdered? Who do you think murdered him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...