Another police case

[Tuor]

This case goes back to 2008, if i'm not mistaken, and the story goes like this:

A evaded prision inmate, grabed his own son, puted him the his truck bacside, and went for a robbery job. The police reacted quickly, and after the inmate tried to kill a police officer with the truck, the police pulls his gun and accidently kills the 13YO boy that was hidden inside.

The result shamefull not just for me, but to my entire country, after court, the police officer was sentenced to 4 years of prision, with suspended time, and he has to pay 20k€ to the boys father (the one that grabbed the kid) and another 35k€ to the mother, meanwhille, he had an internal procedure in the force, which suspended him from active duty for a period of 9 months with is wage reduced by 2/3.

What ashames me was the fact that the judge didn't even considered the fact that the chieldrens father grabedd him to an ilicit activity, and that the police officer reacted in self defense not even knowing the boy was hidding inside the truck.

So my question his, how would this case be judged in your country, is it normal to punish police officers that whose duty is to protect law and zeal for everyones public integrity, what would happen to this police officer in your country?

You can try googling the police officer name, Hugo Ernano. There is even a suport facebook page in is name, but its in portuguese https://pt-pt.facebook.com/vamosapoiarhugoernano/

[Deleted]

He got 4 years SUSPENDED sentence? What's the issue here?

[Atlim]

He got 4 years SUSPENDED sentence? What's the issue here?

I would imagine the problem is he got a sentence of any kind for accidentally killing someone he didn't know was there while attempting to defend his own life. At least that is what I got from the OP, I haven't looked up any reliable sources on the matter.

[Gemini Soul]

6 years ago probably nothing would of happened to the cop as long as there was no proof that he knew the boy was there. Now...well same answer because it isn't a case for BLM to get involved to make the situation worst than it is. It's sad, but the cop should not have been punished. But if he knew the boy was there than yeah he should have been.

[Renyo]

6 years ago probably nothing would of happened to the cop as long as there was no proof that he knew the boy was there. Now...well same answer because it isn't a case for BLM to get involved to make the situation worst than it is. It's sad, but the cop should not have been punished. But if he knew the boy was there than yeah he should have been.

According to the OP this happened 8 years ago.

Edit: I would say it depends on whether the policeman shot as he or another person was in great danger or the acute situation was already over. If he hit the back of the truck I would guess that the offender was already driving away from him. But I do not know the details of this case.

[Mistame]

- 8 years ago.
- No source.
- Irrelevant.

[Venant]

Why isn't anyone asking the most important question, was the 13 year old shot by the police officer black?

[Kalis]

If this was in the UK, almost certainly nothing would have happened to the police officer.

Even when they are obviously guilty of shooting and killing someone, they tend to get any wrongdoing covered up, but it happens so rarely (maybe once or twice a decade) that hardly anyone gives a shit.

The only case that springs to mind in recent years, where the policemen involved managed not to get prosecuted in spite of blatantly fucking up a shooting, was that of Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005.

[Tuor]

- 8 years ago.

The last apeal from the police officer passed in last april, when his sentence was lowered from the initial 9 years of suspended prision to the current 4. Its a case that starts to come on portuguese media almost all days.

The real reason i posted this was because, here we have a cop, that accomplished his duty, and now is been penalised in the worst possible ways, that includes been denied the legal status of poverty he is in fact living, due to the fact he his out of active service until next December with only 1/3 of his wage of 830€. His wife only has the mimun wage (530€), and they have already been forced their house to the bank, because they couldn't afford the loan.

And all of this because he accomplished his duty.

- No source.

Correction, plenty of sources, but they all in portuguese. All you need is use google translation, quite accurate from portuguese to english.

- Irrelevant.

No it isn't.

[Kalis]

The last apeal from the police officer passed in last april, when his sentence was lowered from the initial 9 years of suspended prision to the current 4. Its a case that starts to come on portuguese media almost all days.

The real reason i posted this was because, here we have a cop, that accomplished his duty, and now is been penalised in the worst possible ways, that includes been denied the legal status of poverty he is in fact living, due to the fact he his out of active service until next December with only 1/3 of his wage of 830€. His wife only has the mimun wage (530€), and they have already been forced their house to the bank, because they couldn't afford the loan.

And all of this because he accomplished his duty.

It seems like there is a fault with Portuguese liability laws.

This is primarily a site for English speakers*, many of whom could not even point out Portugal on a map, interest in this case will be extremely limited here due to the lack of knowledge in the case and the fact that most people would have to translate sources even if they were interested, which is a pain in the arse.



*And Swedes talking about immigration.

[Glnger]

not even from American news, 3rd post in is about Black Lives Matter. man Fox Entertainment spins a good web.

[Kalis]

not even from American news, 3rd post in is about Black Lives Matter. man Fox Entertainment spins a good web.

OP asked...

So my question his, how would this case be judged in your country, is it normal to punish police officers that whose duty is to protect law and zeal for everyones public integrity, what would happen to this police officer in your country?

[Tijuana]

He got 4 years SUSPENDED sentence? What's the issue here?

He was punished unfairly for a crime. Now if ends up in court again, that stands against him as a prior conviction. It probably cost him his badge. It probably holds him back from other job opportunities. Why do you not understand these things?

[ParanoiD84]

If this happened in sweden i dont think the cop would get charged, perhaps a suspention for a while or something but prison? nope.

[Tuor]

He was punished unfairly for a crime. Now if ends up in court again, that stands against him as a prior conviction. It probably cost him his badge. It probably holds him back from other job opportunities. Why do you not understand these things?

It isn't only that, the main point is that he has to pay 20 000€ to father that carried his own underaged son to a crime scene... It's lame, ridiculus, at worst, the responsabilities should have been shared, the cop should have been acused of passive murder, has he was, and the father responsabilised for the presence of his son in a crime scene, which would automaticly remove the right for any indeminization... But that guy taked his son to a crime scene, and he still got 20k with it... Again, its ridiculus.

[Deleted]

Can we an article on how things actually went?

[Tijuana]

It isn't only that, the main point is that he has to pay 20 000€ to father that carried his own underaged son to a crime scene... It's lame, ridiculus, at worst, the responsabilities should have been shared, the cop should have been acused of passive murder, has he was, and the father responsabilised for the presence of his son in a crime scene, which would automaticly remove the right for any indeminization... But that guy taked his son to a crime scene, and he still got 20k with it... Again, its ridiculus.

Sure, I think it's ridiculous too. But to be honest, every time we get to glimpse foreign courts, it just baffles us Americans. It seems like there are no rights for the accused. How anyone thinks it's fair to not have double jeopardy clauses, and such, amazes me. That said, the US practice of closing arguments is messed up too.

- - - Updated - - -

Can we an article on how things actually went?

Yes, I agree. Someone should google and link the article. Thank you for volunteering.

[Tuor]

Can we an article on how things actually went?

This isn't the most recent article (it's from 2013), but it comes from a wekly newspaper that is well credited for its articles.

Googled translated myself.
http://expresso.sapo.pt/blogues/Opin...andido=f839499

Escaped from prison eight years ago (assaulting old ladies), Sandro decides to rob a warehouse. To this end, it takes a white van with the smallest child in the seat hangs. As you know, the bastards are good for carrying things. In the warehouse door already assaulted a GNR, Hugo Ernano, sends stop the van. Sandro is not the settings, press the accelerator, trying to go over the police, flee at high speed. Hugo Ernano enters service car driven by a colleague, the chase begins. Near a house full of boys Gaiato that time, Ernano decides to try to immobilize the truck with the service pistol. Shoots two for the air, and one for the left wheel. Despite the crash, the truck continues. Then Ernano decides to shoot on the right wheel. Problem? With the car's movement, the shots go up and reach the son of the robber who was in the place of hanging, the place of the dead. Given this scenario, what was the decision of the exalted Portuguese justice? A court in Loures decided to arrest the police (nine years) and give a compensation of 20,000 euros to the assailant due to the death of the child. The part relating to compensation is aberrant, the part relating to the arrest of GNR is more than questionable.

Let's start with aberration. Compensation is an insult to any moral code. A bandit who turns the child in the pal of a robbery can not receive 20,000 euros when the child dies in the assault course. The tragic death of the child could only aggravate the initial sentence (two years for theft) of the father, the great responsible for the tragedy. This is so absurd that even seems joke. Our judges are so far removed from common morality, they think impure and tainted by little people who end up producing these ethical aberrations. We are talking about the judiciary is unable to hold an individual who spank a baby.

And what about the arrest of GNR? Well, it is certain that the agent in question has a history of abuse. The laws that limit police power exist precisely to protect society of these excesses. I have friends police in various departments. When starting with complaints about the bureaucracy and do not know what, my reaction is always the same: a state of law, police work to be complicated; if you want easy job, emigrates to a police state. I do not want the Lisbon streets as a police force BOPE, that shoots to kill, that transforms the criminal an enemy. But I do not want this Portuguese judiciary burning ideological order to the police authority. Or an 8-martial or an 80 darling. In a country giving suspended sentences to pedophiles, arresting a policeman in this way is an act more than criticism. As the judge wrote President (who voted for won), Hugo Ernano had no murderous intentions; showed at most police incompetence. He should be criticized, it could even be suspended for x months but had never been treated like a criminal.

We always come back to it: the righteousness of the dictatorship, which had two swords, followed by a justice with two scales.
Google Tradutor para Empresas:Ferramentas do Google TradutorTradutor de Web sitesGlobal Market Finder

[Kalis]

Sure, I think it's ridiculous too. But to be honest, every time we get to glimpse foreign courts, it just baffles us Americans. It seems like there are no rights for the accused. How anyone thinks it's fair to not have double jeopardy clauses, and such, amazes me. That said, the US practice of closing arguments is messed up too.

Double jeopardy is a nonsense, you should not be able to escape punishment for a crime if new evidence comes up that proves you were guilty. As long as systems are in place to prevent malicious prosecution, then the entire reasoning behind double jeopardy is flawed.

I like criminals being in prison for crimes they have committed, not allowed to walk freely due to outdated oddities of the law.

[sionus]

This case goes back to 2008, if i'm not mistaken, and the story goes like this:

A evaded prision inmate, grabed his own son, puted him the his truck bacside, and went for a robbery job. The police reacted quickly, and after the inmate tried to kill a police officer with the truck, the police pulls his gun and accidently kills the 13YO boy that was hidden inside.

The result shamefull not just for me, but to my entire country, after court, the police officer was sentenced to 4 years of prision, with suspended time, and he has to pay 20k€ to the boys father (the one that grabbed the kid) and another 35k€ to the mother, meanwhille, he had an internal procedure in the force, which suspended him from active duty for a period of 9 months with is wage reduced by 2/3.

What ashames me was the fact that the judge didn't even considered the fact that the chieldrens father grabedd him to an ilicit activity, and that the police officer reacted in self defense not even knowing the boy was hidding inside the truck.

So my question his, how would this case be judged in your country, is it normal to punish police officers that whose duty is to protect law and zeal for everyones public integrity, what would happen to this police officer in your country?

You can try googling the police officer name, Hugo Ernano. There is even a suport facebook page in is name, but its in portuguese https://pt-pt.facebook.com/vamosapoiarhugoernano/

Here's the thing; he broke one of the cardinal rules of firearm safety. Be certain of your target, your line of fire, and what lies beyond your target. If you're not absolutely sure of what you're shooting at, and anything between you and where the bullet will end up you need to re-evaluate.

- - - Updated - - -

Double jeopardy is a nonsense, you should not be able to escape punishment for a crime if new evidence comes up that proves you were guilty. As long as systems are in place to prevent malicious prosecution, then the entire reasoning behind double jeopardy is flawed.

I like criminals being in prison for crimes they have committed, not allowed to walk freely due to outdated oddities of the law.

The rules on double jeopardy are there for a reason, because without them you'd flood the judicial system with the same case over and over every time any piece of evidence is found. On top of that, it forces prosecutors to only bring cases they believe they can win to the court systems.