78. Dippin and Dabblin on Oscar Grant

Nope, I'm not back. Still on a blogging vacay.

But I came across a post on the murder trial for the cop who shot Oscar Grant in California and I wanted to comment. Ever since news came that Johan Mehserle would be charged with murder, and not manslaughter, I've been really pessimistic about the outcome.

As I understand it (from watching Law & Order), the difference between murder and manslaughter is that murder is intentional, and manslaughter is not. That is, in either case, someone causes the death of someone else. But a murderer does whatever they did intending to cause a death, whereas someone who commits manslaughter does something stupid or negligent that results in a death.

This is important because Mehserle has always maintained that he meant to pull out his (gun-shaped) taser in the train station, and not his gun. This is supported in some sense by his body language after the shooting. In the video of the incident he immediately raises his hands to his head in full-on "What did I just do?" posture. And if he truly was mistaken, or if even one person out of 12 believes he was, a murder conviction becomes highly improbable. On the other hand, if the charge were manslaughter, it doesn't matter what he meant to do. He committed an erroneous action that resulted in the death of another person. Case closed.

I'm hoping that California is one of the places where "lesser included charges" are part of the process. That would mean that a jury could find a murder defendant "not guilty" of the crime of murder, but still render a "guilty" verdict on the "lesser included charge" of manslaughter. I.e. "You didn't do quite what they say you did, but you did do something." That seems the only realistic road to a conviction at this point.