Commentary: Testimony of Sean Bell's friends sank case (Hoslin/CNN)

[eppur_se_muova]

By Sunny Hostin
CNN

NEW YORK (CNN) -- None of us was there that fateful night when a young man lost his life on his wedding day, the night three New York Police Department detectives lost their careers and lives as they knew them.

But the people who were there told their version of events. And the judge, also sitting as the jury, decided whom to believe. Isn't that the very crux of our judicial system?

I predict that the Sean Bell case will be examined in law school classrooms across the country. It has given us a bird's-eye view into a courtroom practice that many had never heard of: the bench trial.
***
In explaining his decision, Cooperman said prosecutors had not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt because of a combination of factors. Chief among them: inconsistent statements by prosecution witnesses, their demeanor on the stand, their interest in the outcome of the case and their motives to lie.

"These factors," the judge said, "had the effect of eviscerating the credibility of those prosecution witnesses."
***
more: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/25/sunny.bell/index.html?iref=topnews

Read the whole article; the four para's I have excerpted above are not enough to tell the whole story.

EDIT TO ADD: No comment in the article on how this lead to **50** shots being fired. Just because witnesses may have undermined the case, doesn't mean the case wasn't justified to begin with.

[sasquatch]

1. The Judge would've let those cops walk or else his ass would've been gone

The NYPD would make sure Cooperman would've never served as a judge again.

[stray cat]

2. He has ruled against the police in high profile cases in the past

[sasquatch]

3. Could you provide a link?

[Fredda Weinberg]

4. I thought it was the fiber on the bumber. It proves the car did more than

graze the officer. Sorry, but whatever you think happened, the evidence is in.