That all makes sense to us and I understand where that reasoning is coming from. However, the jury needs proof. I'm sure some here have served on an actual case (and I'm sure there are some attorneys here as well). I was on a jury about two years ago for a gun-related offense. It requires a lot to return a guilty verdict, and the judge makes that abundantly clear. You can only decide based on evidence, not based on hearsay or what you think may have been motivating the person. While your reasons make sense, it's not exactly proof that he didn't reach for his gun. Something as simple as that can derail a jury (or juror, for that matter).

The cop says do not pull out the gun as the guy is reaching for it. Clearly the guy panicked, and should not have been a cop. Do people think he was lying when he said that?

The problem is that the cops "motivations" also shouldn't matter then. The defense was literally "I was scared so I shot him 7 times".

The problem is that cops aren't treated as normal people in these trials. They are given benefits of the doubt that are laughable if anyone else was doing it.

So, once again, as long as a cop feels there is a "threat" they can kill anyone they want. That is the major flaw here. The cops "feelings" don't get to justify any action. You don't believe this was a justified killing. There should have been a punishment.

I am nearly 100% certain if he wasn't a cop and if he was just a normal guy who walked up to him that he would be getting a long jail term. What makes that so maddening is they are supposed to be trained on how to spot threats and those who aren't threats more than the average person.

Is the guy fired from the force? Allowed to still carry a gun? Clearly he is wrong, but I think the police are set-up to fail as well. The guy said he had a gun. The cop said do not reach for it. They he started firing. He was wrong, but I don't think he was lying either.

I don't know what the punishment should be, but I don't know what the value of putting him in jail to "teach him a lesson" is either. Be better to put him under some probation, and make him pay a percentage of his wages to the guy's family for so many years.

Hypothetical: You're an average, normal guy driving a Dodge Stratus and pull over behind Castillo to see if he needs help. You walk up to the car to see what's up. If Castillo grabbed his gun, would you consider him to be a threat? Remember, you have a matter of a few seconds to decide.

Is the guy fired from the force? Allowed to still carry a gun? Clearly he is wrong, but I think the police are set-up to fail as well. The guy said he had a gun. The cop said do not reach for it. They he started firing. He was wrong, but I don't think he was lying either.

I don't know what the punishment should be, but I don't know what the value of putting him in jail to "teach him a lesson" is either. Be better to put him under some probation, and make him pay a percentage of his wages to the guy's family for so many years.

Hypothetical: You're an average, normal guy driving a Dodge Stratus and pull over behind Castillo to see if he needs help. You walk up to the car to see what's up. If Castillo grabbed his gun, would you consider him to be a threat? Remember, you have a matter of a few seconds to decide.

You seem to pretty much be against jail sentences. It's bizarre. This guy wrongfully killed a man and his punishment is finding a different job and not being able to carry a gun(which I'm not sure how he would be stopped from doing that anyways)?

Jail time should be his punishment. Hopefully his family gets the legally allowable amount of his future earnings and current assets too.

Because jail is a tremendous public waste, and a morally bankrupt idea. Who comes up with these sentences? Why would it be better that he sit in a cage for 10 years? It's all arbitrary.

If you want to see something really damaging to poor people send them to prison, especially for a non-violent offense, and see what it does to their ability to earn money and their families.

This hypothetical assumes I see his gun and that I don't have a gun pointing directly at him. In other words, it is a poor hypothetical to compare to this situation.

The problem with us analyzing it post-hoc is that we don't have a good feel for what it's like in the moment. I saw a video where they took a reporter who was critical of police shootings and put him through a police training, where he acts as a cop with a paintball gun. After going through a training course, he approaches various situations, such as a pulled over car, or two people arguing. If I remember correctly, he gets shot a few times, because he didn't want to pull his gun on the guy. I think in one scenario he actually shoots the "suspect." The reporter admitted that it's much more difficult than it seems sitting behind a desk. It happens so quickly that you might think you have time to decide whether this person is pulling a gun or just itching is back. But in reality, you must be prepared to act.

I think body cameras will help and maybe you'll see more convictions if body cameras prove the egregiousness. The body cams could also support the cops.

The problem with us analyzing it post-hoc is that we don't have a good feel for what it's like in the moment. I saw a video where they took a reporter who was critical of police shootings and put him through a police training, where he acts as a cop with a paintball gun. After going through a training course, he approaches various situations, such as a pulled over car, or two people arguing. If I remember correctly, he gets shot a few times, because he didn't want to pull his gun on the guy. I think in one scenario he actually shoots the "suspect." The reporter admitted that it's much more difficult than it seems sitting behind a desk. It happens so quickly that you might think you have time to decide whether this person is pulling a gun or just itching is back. But in reality, you must be prepared to act.

I think body cameras will help and maybe you'll see more convictions if body cameras prove the egregiousness. The body cams could also support the cops.

The body cams could also support the cops.

The problem with us analyzing it post-hoc is that we don't have a good feel for what it's like in the moment. I saw a video where they took a reporter who was critical of police shootings and put him through a police training, where he acts as a cop with a paintball gun. After going through a training course, he approaches various situations, such as a pulled over car, or two people arguing. If I remember correctly, he gets shot a few times, because he didn't want to pull his gun on the guy. I think in one scenario he actually shoots the "suspect." The reporter admitted that it's much more difficult than it seems sitting behind a desk. It happens so quickly that you might think you have time to decide whether this person is pulling a gun or just itching is back. But in reality, you must be prepared to act.

i played the Police Trainer arcade game, it's not easy

If that's true why are most cops so reluctant to wear them?

Laws, with varying degrees, are arbitrary too. Where do you stop? After all, this victim was supposedly wrong for "having weed in his system" and "putting his hand by his side in a way that could have been him pulling a gun.
Ok? Unfair prison sentences are bad. I agree. Going to jail is harmful. I agree.

Now, how about this cop sees similar consequences?

Aren't you really anti-weed?

It's clear to me that jail is not a deterrent to many crimes, and that often people are placed there for completely arbitrary reasons/times. This carries over to this situation as well.

The only time that I think jail is necessary is when the person is a clear danger to harm or take advantage of others. Unless I'm wrong this cop has no prior criminal history, and he was able to hold a steady job. If he works he can help to provide for the family of the slain man. If he's "punished" by sitting in the cage they get very little, and the family of the cop are also punished.

I would seek to minimize damage rather than find a "proper" time-out that people have to sit in often for decades on the tax payers' dime.

Aren't you really anti-weed?

It's clear to me that jail is not a deterrent to many crimes, and that often people are placed there for completely arbitrary reasons/times. This carries over to this situation as well.

The only time that I think jail is necessary is when the person is a clear danger to harm or take advantage of others. Unless I'm wrong this cop has no prior criminal history, and he was able to hold a steady job. If he works he can help to provide for the family of the slain man. If he's "punished" by sitting in the cage they get very little, and the family of the cop are also punished.

I would seek to minimize damage rather than find a "proper" time-out that people have to sit in often for decades on the tax payers' dime.

Only on this message board.

I think jail time is a deterrent to many people. I certainly know I would not want to go to jail. If I was considering an illegal activity I certainly would be concerned about jail.

apparently the cop was very anti-weed as well. His thoughtful response during the trial...

Uh but uh as that was happening as he was pulling at, out his hand I thought, I was gonna die and i thought if he’s, if he has the, the guts and the audacity to smoke marijuana in front of the five year old girl and risk her lungs and risk her life by giving her secondhand smoke and the front seat passenger doing the same thing then what, what care does he give about me.

I'd say it's funny that this idiot was allowed to wear a badge, but it's tragic.

I wouldn't want one on me at my work. Those things are used to hang ya.

Cops might be different, though.

I agree. I wouldn't work anywhere where I was monitored that way. But I l also don't have a pension at age 55 that is 80% of my salary. And it seems to me that cops always want the perks of the job but then they complain about the "bad" stuff. It's not a regular job. People might shoot at you. I think society is more than understanding regarding that fact. That's why this guy, who essentially committed murder, got off.