Trooper Admits Negligent Homicide
Norman To Be Sentenced June 28 In Benton County
Last updated Thursday, May 3, 2007 10:34 PM CDT in News
By Robin Mero
The Morning News
BENTONVILLE -- More than a dozen law enforcement officers watched as their former comrade, Larry Norman, pleaded guilty Thursday to negligent homicide in the March 7, 2006, death of a disabled man whom police thought was a prison escapee.
"I mistook this young man's actions as threatening toward me and the other officers and I made the mistake of acting on this misunderstanding, sir," Norman told Benton County Senior Circuit Judge Tom Keith.
Prosecutor Van Stone added Norman broke cover unnecessarily just before Erin Hamley was shot and he failed to communicate with other officers on the scene before he arrived.
Keith set a sentencing hearing for June 28 and ordered a presentence investigation be conducted beforehand by probation and parole officers from the Department of Community Correction.
Keith will hear arguments from Stone and defense attorney John Everett and testimony -- perhaps from the Hamley's family and Norman. He will then determine the sentence, which can be up to one year in jail, a $1,000 fine, and may include other sanctions such as community service.
The grand jury's findings detailed Norman's action when responding to the scene on U.S. 412 west of Tontitown, where police had Hamley surrounded, mistakenly thinking he was prison escapee Adam Leadford. Norman disregarded his orders, played his AM/FM radio too loud to hear dispatches and did not communicate with other officers before fatally shooting Hamley, according to the grand jury's report.
Several of Hamley's family members, including his mother, Mary, attended Thursday's hearing. They did not speak to the media.
Stone said after the hearing the family supported the method of sentencing.
"They were satisfied with the fact that Norman stood up and admitted guilt, and for the judge to determine the sentence," Stone said. "Both sides felt it would be best to let Judge Keith make the determination."
Norman waived his right to a jury trial with his plea and also waived right to an appeal.
"The (Hamley) family didn't want to have to go through a trial," Stone said. "It's a good way to resolve this particular case, given all the circumstances."
The Arkansas Legislature approved a $1 million payment to Erin Hamley's estate because of the death. Arkansas State Police did not admit wrongdoing.
Bill Sadler, public affairs manager for the Arkansas State Police, confirmed Thursday a state warrant dated April 29 was released to the family this week.
The warrant was drafted payable to Mary Hamley, administrator of the estate, Sadler wrote in an e-mail.
State Police granted Norman medical retirement last year due to what his attorney called an "enormous psychological overlay" from the shooting.
Sadler said his agency won't comment on the case until it is resolved.
"Once sentencing has occurred, the department will attempt to answer questions and release the applicable documents relating to the case," Sadler wrote in an e-mail.
Robin Green, who was serving as prosecutor when Hamley was shot, requested the grand jury be convened in April 2006 to consider an indictment, to "put this decision in the hands of the people."
Green presented several optional charges to the 16-member grand jury, including manslaughter, a felony carrying a sentence of up to 10 years in prison.
Jurors chose the lightest charge: Misdemeanor negligent homicide. They released an eight-page report that called Norman's actions "troubling" and "disturbing."
A charge of manslaughter would require recklessness, Green said after the indictment.
"You know there's a risk, and you're consciously disregarding it," she explained at the time.
Norman was on the scene less than one minute before shooting Hamley. Hamley was lying on his back when shot but may have been trying to turn on his stomach, as Norman ordered, instead of reaching in his pockets as Norman said he suspected, the grand jury's report stated.
The slug Norman fired hit the pavement first, grazed Hamley's arm, then entered his body.
Some of the incident was captured on film by cameras mounted on police vehicles. The film will be made public after the sentencing hearing, Stone said. Much of the evidence will be opened to the public that day, including hours of interviews conducted by the grand jury of Norman and other officers on the scene.
Razorback Central
July 10th, 2009
July 9th, 2009
Reader Comments (172 comment(s))
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsibility of their authors. The Morning News does not review comments before their publication, nor do we guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by our comment policy. If you see a comment that violates our policy, please notify the web editor.
whatever wrote on May 4, 2007 1:38 AM:
" No, I don't agree with what this man did but if the victim wasn't left to himself so much this wouldn't have happened. Why in the world was he wandering the street to begin with? Where was his loving family when this was going on. Let's quit the police bashing....one day YOU will need them. Remember... the men and women that don't get Holidays off... "
Not Whatever wrote on May 4, 2007 3:09 AM:
" >"No, I don't agree with what this man did but if the victim wasn't left to himself so much this wouldn't have happened. Why in the world was he wandering the street to begin with? "
Now Whatever II wrote on May 4, 2007 3:13 AM:
" "No, I don't agree with what this man did but if the victim wasn't left to himself so much this wouldn't have happened. Why in the world was he wandering the street to begin with?" "
Not Whatever wrote on May 4, 2007 3:16 AM:
" Quote:"No, I don't agree with what this man did but if the victim wasn't left to himself so much this wouldn't have happened. Why in the world was he wandering the street to begin with?[end quote].......let me fill you in on some details. The dead man, the one killed in cold blood by a trigger happy trooper, the dead man, Eric, was mentally retarded. Got that? He was TRUSTING of others to the extent that sadistic little jerks would offer him a ride home from the Jones Center. Then they would drive him to Rogers, Tontitown, etc and dump him while thinking its was funny.
That's why he was away from home. Put this cop behind bars would be justice but their is little Justice in Ark. Luckily, for him, the state legislature bailed him out of jail using our tax money. "
Problem wrote on May 4, 2007 3:21 AM:
" Well some of you may just want to look at the very nature that caused this tragedy for all involved. Those spouting injustice blah blah blah. Its apparent that you do not know everything that transpired. You all scream that a crime was committed when in fact a mistake was committed which are two entirely different things. Yes, it was a tragic mistake and one that Mr. Norman and the family of the deceased has to live with. If the circumstances behind and leading up to this tragic even were different then there may very well had been a crime committed but circumstances being what they were at the time show a tragic mistake. A saying that I grew up with is "Do not judge your brother unless you have walked a mile in his moccasins". You weren't there and you dont know, and there is enough evidence that shows a mistake was committed, not a crime. "
Seen walking wrote on May 4, 2007 3:23 AM:
" Did anyone know that Erin was seen walking in Tontitown several hours prior to this incident? Walking westbound. The incident took place approximately 5 miles from where he was seen walking into Tontitown. The evidence was there to free Norman, but he and his family had suffered enough. They had to stop the pain in their own hearts before all the families involved could heal. God Bless Erin Hamley and God Bless Arkansas State Police Trooper Larry Norman. Both jewels in God's eyes. "
Boy the more I read the more it confirms! wrote on May 4, 2007 3:27 AM:
" Some of the people who write in do not get the point of this. A GRAND JURY decided the outcome of the charges after hearing everything. This was not decided by a bunch of lawyers or a judge. The charges were decided by "Registered Voters". The outcome of the sentencing is the judges decision. If you do not think that this cop is in his own living hell right now, you do not understand what it is to be a policeman. "
Not Whatever wrote on May 4, 2007 3:33 AM:
" [quote from Seen Walking}The evidence was there to free Norman, but he and his family had suffered enough.{end]...I have no idea of what's in your pipe but have a reality check. The dead, retarded young man could have been walking in Hot Springs or little rock and a hasty, non-attentive, rules-violating trooper would have been just as guilty. At least he admitted his guilt. SW can go back to having breakfast in the rattlesnake pit.
....... "
To Dallas wrote on May 4, 2007 6:16 AM:
" You didn't get anything straight.
First Trooper Norman,was covering other officers who were attempting to approach Mr Hamley, Mr Hamley did not do as commanded, he kept reaching across his body and into his pockets,
therefore the officers retreated and the Trooper who was covering them Trooper Norman shot.
Second: NO OFFICER EVER WANTS TO SHOOT HIS GUN. HOW DARE YOU!!!!!! This man was a great officer. Yes he has retirement, because he earned that he has protected our highways for over 18years, and because a family didn't make sure this young man was supervised, he now is no longer a Trooper.
You are correct justice wasn't served, Trooper Norman, should never had been sent to Grand Jury, let alone, go to trail for doing his job.
As for the earlier poster, wanting to blame "strangers" for giving Mr Hamley a ride from the Jones Center, then dropping in "where-ever", isn't it time the family takes responsibility
It appears everyone else is to blame.
Tragedy happened, a young man died, but not at the result of Trooper Norman doing anything wrong. "
Confused wrote on May 4, 2007 7:05 AM:
" Those of you who are so brilliant please tell me who would have paid the million if the state didn't. Do you think police officers make this kind of money dealing with people like "jeff". Police officer wouldn't make a million in their entire career. So either the state pays it or the Hamley family gets nothing. And bytheway, Jeff....yes police officers should expect and demand that you follow their directions and if you don't it should be considered a threat upon their lives. "
mumbles wrote on May 4, 2007 7:28 AM:
" Lets make this real simple, trooper Norman is guilty, he says so himself. What else is there to discuss? "
ex cop's wife wrote on May 4, 2007 7:47 AM:
" Our cops put their life on the line day in and day out. Yes they get paid for it, but not nearly as much as they should. When a cop thinks their life is in danger they need to do whatever they have to in order to protect themselves as well as the rest of the community. If any one of you thought your life was in danger you would do the same thing. "
Outraged wrote on May 4, 2007 8:09 AM:
" A mentally challenged young man was killed. A grand jury heard the following facts: 1. The former trooper sped to the site at over 100 mph (even though there were a number of officers at the scene). 2. While en route to the site he played his FM radio so loud that some of the commands from the actual law enforcement radio were drowned out. 3. Upon arrival he was directed to handle the traffic situation by the officer in command. The former trooper instead chose to ignore that order and get his shot gun.
Based on those facts it would seem that he (the former trooper) was very eager to get into the fray and as a result a young man was needlessly killed. A year in jail seems a little light for this crime, not mistake. "
dove wrote on May 4, 2007 8:26 AM:
" I feel so sorry for this family that has lost a son that can not be replaced and an innocent boy that did not deserve to die. We do not have justice in this world. "
I wonder wrote on May 4, 2007 8:26 AM:
" I wonder how many of you out there put on a bullet proof vest every time you go to work? Do you have any idea what policeman have to deal with every day? NO...you don't. I am not saying that Norman is innocent in all of this but what I am saying is you all (most of you on here) sound like a bunch of school kids!! Look at this...remember the guy who shot his son-in-law because he kept driving in circles in his drive way and then tried to run over the father-in-law? The father-in-law shoots and kills him and now the father-in-law is in trouble...why is everyone so eager to see people in trouble? People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones! Just because there is one cop who made a big mistake doesn't make them all bad... "
just wait wrote on May 4, 2007 8:27 AM:
" After sentencing, the video and other information will be released.
Then you will see what happened.
RIP Erin "
southern rebel wrote on May 4, 2007 8:29 AM:
" LOL...southern rebel said "One thing I have noticed down here is that if you are in a very serious situation with a cop, do exactly what they say or you will wind up dead".....WHAT????? NO kidding...why would you not do what they said in the first place.....where in the world are you coming from??? Did you just wake up from a 150year sleep or something? "
Another Opinion wrote on May 4, 2007 8:38 AM:
" I would venture to bet that a majority of you who are the bleeding hearts and cop haters are not registered voters. One poster who uses the foul language appears to be from Dallas..To him, I say "Stay Home"..NWA does not want or care about what you have to say. This is not the Big "D". There is no question this mans life is gone now. The Hamleys are now millionaires, their attorney is richer and yes the State of Arkansas has insurance, but they also have a deductible well above what was paid. Officer Norman's life is ruined forever, regardless of what people think, he did earn his retirement by law. It is all over and done with. It now rest in the Judges hands. If those of you who are so quick to critize Officer Norman do not think he has sufferred for his mistake, you are all very wrong. "
WOW wrote on May 4, 2007 8:42 AM:
" "Norman disregarded his orders, played his AM/FM radio too loud to hear dispatches and did not communicate with other officers before fatally shooting Hamley, according to the grand jury's report" --- How did they not rule this as reckless and give him the charge of manslaughter. Utterly ridiculous! "
To: whatever wrote on May 4, 2007 8:44 AM:
" Your agreement is so weak. No of this would have happened if Norman would have followed orders. How can you blame this man's death on his family. "
To problem wrote on May 4, 2007 8:49 AM:
" Last time I checked, you do time for crimes, not mistakes. Norman is just getting too light of a sentence in this case, face it. "
hello wrote on May 4, 2007 8:50 AM:
" people who live in glass houses should build a rock outhouse.... it dosent matter if erin was mentally challenged or not. adam wasnt mentally challenged. and i think it would have happened no matter who it was. and you can have the best caregivers for mentally challenged people and they can get away from you as well, it happens all the time. all it would have took that day was a little patience... and erin would still be here. "
To: Boy the more I read the more it confirms! wrote on May 4, 2007 8:55 AM:
" You obviously don't understand what it is like to be an innocent person who gets killed by a cop who disregarded his orders! "
Whatever again... wrote on May 4, 2007 8:58 AM:
" Believe me, I am NOT blaming the family but being that I saw him at the Jones Center ALL THE TIME BY HIMSELF and now all of them are just so "oh, we were always with him..." BULL! That young man was left for himself. No matter, they are still hurting and I am sad for them with that. I just think that they are making a big show b/c I KNOW how he was left to fend for himself sometimes. WHY WOULD A MENTALLY DISABLED PERSON BE LEFT TO LOOK FOR A RIDE HOME BY HIMSELF DUH!!!!
IT MAKES NO SENSE!!!!Anyhow, I DO NOT think that this officer did the right thing IF the facts that have been presented are true (disobeying orders, radio too loud, etc..) BUT I do think too many people are raking the cops over the coals. Next time something happens at your house why don't you call someone else so you won't have to be scared of our 'power hungry' cops. Who are you going to call when someone breaks in your house, threatens your child, etc..? You are going to call the ones you are bad mouthing. Sounds hypocritical to me. "
To: To Dallas wrote on May 4, 2007 8:59 AM:
" Norman did somethign wrong. What are you not getting here? The family did not shoot him. "
To: Confused wrote on May 4, 2007 9:02 AM:
" actaully if a cop averages $40,000 per year for 25 years, they could earn a million dollars in their lifetime. Brilliant! "
TO: ex cop's wife wrote on May 4, 2007 9:07 AM:
" Except that is not what this cop did. "Norman disregarded his orders, played his AM/FM radio too loud to hear dispatches and did not communicate with other officers before fatally shooting Hamley, according to the grand jury's report." -- why can't you that defend him see this. It is his fault and his fault alone. He should be punished and many feel he is getting a sentence unfitting of his actions. You can talk about own personal hell all you want. Agree, he probably is in one, but better than being 6 feet under like his victim!
"
To: I wonder wrote on May 4, 2007 9:11 AM:
" Then don't be a cop if you don't wan the risk. You cannot justify Norman's misconduct and insubordination that cost an innocent person his life with gross generalizations of "being a cop". "
to Another Opinion wrote on May 4, 2007 9:33 AM:
" how is norman sufferring he is free to do what ever he wants he is now retired is that suffering? and its okay for anyone to go around killing people as long as they have 1 million dollars to pay ..geezz people out here in nwa still live in the stone ages "
Still Infuriated wrote on May 4, 2007 9:45 AM:
" It's not that complicated. Good cops don't shoot unarmed, mentally retarded people while they're laying helpless on the ground. As a parent of a developmentally disabled child who is now an adult, I fear some cowboy cop like Norman will misterpret his playful antics for threatening gestures and gun him down. This unfortunate and harmless young man died alone on the ground beside a highway. It is not a death we would wish on anyone. Norman's actions infuriate me, and the slap on the wrist rubs salt in the wound. This is a gross miscarriage of justice and should not be tolerated by law-abiding citizens. "
To those that defend Norman: wrote on May 4, 2007 9:48 AM:
" I think Mr. Norman is probably a good person. However, his actions before the shooting (listening to radio too loud and not obeying orders) are why he got these charges. Is it okay that he did those things? Is it okay for a police officer to listen to a loud radio where he/she cannot hear dispatches and get to a scene and disobey orders?
He did make a horrible mistake, but he was the only one who shot Erin. Another officer even asked him if his gun went off accidentally after the shooting. He is charged not because he made a mistake, he was charged because of his actions leading up to the shooting. "
late comment wrote on May 4, 2007 10:39 AM:
" Hey Norman is guilty - he admitted guilt because he pulled the trigger.. I;m sure that he feels terrible for his decision - and I'm sure the family of the Erin wanted closure on this as soon as possible so they could go on w/their lifes and begin to heal.
We can all sit and point fingers all day long but it does not change anything & it doesn't bring this young man back so unfortunately no one wins in this debate. "
errr wrote on May 4, 2007 10:59 AM:
" Icant believe this. Just because he was a cop he is going ot get away with what he had done. He murdered Erin, period. He should get treated like the average citizen would be treated. If it was anyone else they would have already been thrown in Prision up to 36 years or what not. We need a protest against this. "
Southern Rebel wrote on May 4, 2007 11:22 AM:
" To the person who replied to my blog, since you didn't have the guts to sign it with your own moniker, my rebuttal. When a free man is not guilty of a crime he wil not willingly give up his rights in a law enforcement scenario. An individual will give mostly subtle physical signs of initial resistance and direct verbal potestations to any threat of imminent infringement of his or her freedoms. This is what a normal rreaction is. Obviously a criminal reaction is going to be somewhat different than innocent person. The problem with law enforcement's approach is every person they meet in the line of duty is a potential threat to their safety. Whether the risk is small or large that element still remains. When they are on the front line of crime prevention or intervention their attitude is a one of us vs. them mentality. It starts at the police academand it is further enhanced when they leave for placement. It is culuturally ingrained into the law enforcement profession. Now that said, their protection is outweighed by a citizens rights. No where in our outdated Constitution does it say that police officers can infringe on a citizens rights in order to ensure their own safety. The people are not sheep and they invariably will not act like sheep either. "
here is what worries me wrote on May 4, 2007 11:25 AM:
" Policemen are one of the most powerful figures in our society, yet it only takes a few weeks of training to become an officer. Scary! "
amazed wrote on May 4, 2007 11:33 AM:
" Here is a situation where a man, a policeman, who is trained to protect and defend, made a mistake. He knew the second he found out that it was a terrible mistake and will never forgive himself. He has to carry this horror for the rest of his life. He will have nightmares of the situation. He will always blame himself for his reaction. He admitted his guilt and will pay for what happened, but does he need to pay in jail? I do not think that is the answer. He will need help, mentally and emotionally for the rest of his life. I personally feel that this will be enough punishment. God knows, I wouldn't want to carry that horror the rest of my life.... "
shane wrote on May 4, 2007 12:03 PM:
" Here's what i think? i think all of you opionated people that are so quick to judge have never been in a situation where you had to react regarding your own life.
It is so easy to judge someone yet you are the same people who take offense when you are being judged. I pray that each of you negative people find salice in your lifes so that your not so bent on judging others! "
In some ways wrote on May 4, 2007 12:06 PM:
" I wish Judge Keith had not accepted the plea - though you gotta give Norman credit for making it - because a public trial might have gone a long way toward bringing everyone to the same page regarding the incident. [(I'm still curious about how the whole radio thing was gonna be explained?????) (yeah right) ] As for sentencing.... no envy here for Tom Keith. Maybe lots and lots of community service and some weekend time, though certainly not in Benton County. Just my two cents. "
David Hastings wrote on May 4, 2007 12:07 PM:
" I will only say this. i am a Police Officer and I will admit that there are Officers out there that take advantage of their positions. However if you look in the mirror most of us could say the same about ourselves. In one form or another. It is very sad that our society has dropped so low that we would think for a min that this Officer (Norman) took the life of someone else in Malice. He made an error, and I would just ask this to everyone reading this. If you are driving down the road going 75 miles an hour and you strick a car filled with kids, because you were talking on the phone. If one of those kids is killed are you a murderer. Should you be jailed for life and have to orphan your own children and family. Because if the answer to that question is yes then you need not worry about your tax dollars anymore you will be spending much more for jails and people to run them. This man made a mistake and it was an unfortunate, but it was a mistake. He has served this State the best that he could. You all are hipacrits and should be asshamed for blasting the very people that protect you. i wonder what would have been said if it had been the guy and he stood up and shot someone. What kind of slander would come out about that. "
Concerned wrote on May 4, 2007 12:13 PM:
" Outraged wrote ... A year in jail seems a little light for this crime, not mistake."
I agree. Police are supposed to protect the rights of citizens, even mentally handicapped ones. They are supposed to enforce our freedoms, not trample on them. The post-911 mentality is to let them (or the FBI, CIA, etc.) have ALL the power they want because people are scared. History has shown us that DOES NOT WORK, and it won't work now. It just creates monsters who abuse their power.
"
Concerned 2 wrote on May 4, 2007 12:21 PM:
" To Here is What Worries Me-
What are you talking about takes a few wks to become a cop? I took a civil service test, physical agibility test then proceed through several interviews, this is to be considered for hire. Once Hired, I attended a 12 week academy and then having a partner for some time before I was let out on my own. After this, I continually attend certification classes for police officers. This is a little more than a couple of weeks.
Norman made a wrong decision and an innocent person is dead, however the suspect did not follow commands given and was possibly reaching for a weapon (which was thought at the time). What troubles me is a mentally challenged individual was allowed to wonder without supervision. Disabled individuals need the supervision. If the family was unable or unwilling, then they had other options, care givers, adult day cares, etc. The family did not pull the trigger, however I do hold them negligent in the care of a disabled individual.
Parents can be charged with Child Neglect,Child Endangerment of child under the age of 18. Individuals can be charged with Neglect of the Elderly, etc why should this family not be charged with Neglect of the Disabled? They had a commitment to their child as every parent does, unfortunately, the protection, in this case had to extend into his adult life and they did not
"
Dear David wrote on May 4, 2007 12:34 PM:
" He ignored orders. Hard to compare the two. I think the scenario of a person on the cell phone that kills a car load of kids should receive this sentence. Norman should receive man slaughter. I feel he acted reckless andam astonished that the grand jury did not. "
misunderstanding wrote on May 4, 2007 12:36 PM:
" We can all argue until the cows come home. This incidents was based on a lot of misunderstandings. This boy did not understand what was going on an probably had some sort of routine he adhered to that did not involve a variable like being mistaken for an escaped convict. Someone mistook that boy for the escapee and called it in, another honest mistake. Norman arrived on the scene fearing that he was dealing with someone dangerous and not realizing until after the fact the boy was just scared and confused. The boy didn't understand why that that particular day that everyone was after him. This was a mistake that resulted from fear and misunderstanding. The criminal that boy was mistaken for was dangerous and people had a right to be afraid - remember his capture? If anyone is responsible for the chain of events that day it was Adam Leadford. Yes Norman made a mistake, an honest one. That boy had every right to be out walking, he had always done it and he isn't an animal because he doesn't interpret the world the way everyone else does. Norman and Hamley both are victims of circumstance. Be forgiving and please don't post judgements about situations that very few of you have encountered. The real criminal in this isn't Norman. NO COP wants to kill anyone and the assumption otherwise is childish and unfounded.Do you really need to prolong the suffering of others for the sake of a soapbox? "
Cops Wife wrote on May 4, 2007 12:49 PM:
" I am the spouse of a police officer, and a lot of you are hipacrits. Police officers go through alot of extensive training not "just a few weeks", they are trained when to shoot and when not to. Trooper Norman made a mistake that anyone else could have made. If and when they feel that their life is in danger or a fellow officers life is in danger they are trained to shoot or do whatever means it takes to take the person down. With this they were dispatched that it was the escaped prisoner, who was armed. Police officers are trained to shoot to kill, not injure and take the chance to risk getting shot themselves. Put your feet in the shoes of a police officer and take a day to do what they do or spend a day in a jail with 400 prisoners that are murderers and rapists. Would you feel safe with approximately 400 prisoners and only you and a few other officers. Trooper Norman made a mistake, and it took the life of a mentally challenged person. The family of this person should have keep a better eye on him, not letting him run all over the place by himself. Lets not judge others unless you can put yourself in that persons shoes at that particular time. "
To David Hastings wrote on May 4, 2007 12:49 PM:
" While you are correct in that many people in positions of authority few have weapons and the power of life and death. I have trouble with your excuses for this trooper. Based on the evidence present would you disagree that his actions were reckless (at a minimum). I agree with you that he did not shoot the mentally handicapped man out of malice but why did he disregard the instructions of the officer in charge (to handle the traffic situation) and instead immediately get his shotgun? I think this former trooper is a reckless cowboy and as a result of his actions an innocent man is dead.
Many in law enforcement complain that the general public has a low opinion of them and the comments in this blog seem to prove that. If law enforcement did a better job of weeding out those within your ranks who abuse their power you might find that the public might have more respect for you. "
Floored wrote on May 4, 2007 12:55 PM:
" I'm floored by all the comments about the family not taking care of this young man. Do you all really think that if someone is mentally handicapped they should be locked up and watched 24-7 for their whole life? What about when they have no family? Mentally challenged people have rights, too, and should be able to go for a walk, to the store, etc. You need to get real. "
To Cops Wife wrote on May 4, 2007 1:00 PM:
" You said "The family of this person should have keep a better eye on him, not letting him run all over the place by himself." then you said, "Lets not judge others unless you can put yourself in that persons shoes at that particular time." - - are you not ignoring your own advice? Plus, Norman ignored the orders, Norman pulled the trigger, it is Norman's fault the guys is dead, noone elses. "
David Hastings wrote on May 4, 2007 1:03 PM:
" I know that we have a very powerful position and that is why we are judged at a higher degree than the average citizen. The fact of the matter is when apples are compared to apples the cell phone user took the life out of the same negligence that the tropper did. His was a gun and the cell phone user's was a vehicle. Both just as deadly. This happens on a daily basis and everyone just turns their head because we are all guilty of using out phones when we drive and the thought of us being charged with a crime is upsetting. I can say with out a doubt that I do not know what I would have done if in the same situtation. I would like to think that I would have followed orders, but I felt that you or one of my fellow Officers was in danger I would also like to think that I would have done what I THOUGHT was right for you safety. I do not believe this fits the bill for reckless. I believe that he saw something and he acted on it. I will agree that he was wrong and that he made a mistake. I agree that we could do more to root out the bad apples. I do not believe that he was a bad apple. I think that is clear when you look at his record and length of time on the force. "
Dear David wrote on May 4, 2007 1:07 PM:
" You are well spoken and argue your side well. However, we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. Either way, I for one support the police and appriciate them. This case is just an extraordinary occurance and some us regular citizens think it could have been avoid had he not acted "recklessly" and avoid his commanding officer. "
David Hastings wrote on May 4, 2007 2:13 PM:
" (to another opinion) It has nothing to do with being a registered voter. I would like to believe that the God that I worship is a loving and forgiving God. He has told me that if I ask for forgivness that i will be granted it. I would suggest that you speak with your Pastor or local Minister and have them give you so advise on your thinking. "
David Hastings wrote on May 4, 2007 2:25 PM:
" (Dear david writer) I am grateful that you and I live in a Country where we can end out coversation like you did above. I support you in your beliefs as long as they are educated and well thought out, as you have shown yours to be. It is the ones that attack that upset me the most, but yet when the wolf is at their door they will beg for help from the very people they tear down. We live in a Country that the our own neighbors judge or actions. Mr. Norman was given what we accept as justice, and I believe that he will live with a very big burden on his heart and mind for the rest of his life. "
Hello wrote on May 4, 2007 2:29 PM:
" Looked to me like Norman was walking to his car, holding his wife's hand, going to his house, hell if it was me id be eating cold sandwiches up there in benton county...ohh and paying the one million "
HELL'O wrote on May 4, 2007 2:35 PM:
" had there not been a problem here there would not have been a grand jury. the prosecutor didnt want this on here shoulders so she let someone else decide because she knew the whole case stinks to high heaven. "
COnchicky wrote on May 4, 2007 3:55 PM:
" Well of course the state police did not abmit any wrong doing. they are never wrong,just ask them.
"
Problem wrote on May 4, 2007 6:02 PM:
" Ok to all you who are sitting there talking ill about this officer, or even the family of the deceased I will tell you this. None of you have "ALL" the facts in the case and you are basing your judgment upon only what you heard in the media which is just bits and pieces of information not the "WHOLE" of the story. That judge, those attorney's. that grand jury, and all present in the court got to hear "ALL" the facts.........Those that bad mouth Mr. Norman must not know him well or at all. Shoot I dont know him personally, have seen him a time or two in passing and anyone can check out information about his career, that is a matter of public record. I have to agree with David and many others that are police officers or spouses and families of them. This whole thing was a terrible tragedy on many fronts and we need not make it into more than it really is. I feel a lot of compassion for both sides in this and empathy, even sympathy for what they now have to endure for the rest of their lives. Berating either side does nothing but show what is in the heart of the person doing the berating. "
to problem wrote on May 4, 2007 6:16 PM:
" I agree with you. Berating either side is cruel. I think some of these people who post mean things about either side are far from making any valid arguments, their sole intention is to be hurtful and cruel. Cruel, hurtful people are what is wrong with our society. Does it really make people feel better about themselves to berate others do to an unfortunate circumstance? I will pray for all of the families shattered by this tragedy and for those who are unforgiving and cruel. "
to jeff wrote on May 4, 2007 6:17 PM:
" why am I not surprised that you are leading the hatemongers? "
Time to heal wrote on May 4, 2007 7:21 PM:
" Let both families begin to heal, the Hamleys are satisfied, so why should the general public keep these hateful heartful comments,Let it go and get on with your lives, be productive and make a positive difference in the world you live in tomorrow, pray for both families.
"
Jeff wrote on May 4, 2007 8:59 PM:
" Yes make a difference create a citizens oversite committee for starters.
Pro Normans use of the word MISTAKE is so pitoful any 3rd grader knows the difference in a mistake and a crime Norman Pled guilty to a crime he must be required to pay restitution to the state in the amount of 1 mil sell the house pal people are forced to put up property and homes for bonds everyday We do not feel sorry for Norman just as Norman has not felt sorry for those he has arrrested over the years that have put up property bonds ect Norman and Norman made his bed now he gets to sleep in it "
a million $$$$$$ wrote on May 4, 2007 9:24 PM:
" this is another awful mistake, the state should have never paid extortion money. the family is so sad because they were always with him, you say, it seems they are mostly feeling guilty, hugging the million will not bring the young man back. seems people just look for things to sue over. i never understand why a family wants money for a lost loved one, the lost loved one doesn't get any of it and they would be the ONLY person justified to receive it. "
THANKS JEFF wrote on May 5, 2007 7:58 AM:
" for that interesting little insight on why you hate Norman so much. You lose credibility with every post. Yeah those poor criminals he arrested in the line of duty. Do you want officers to preotect and serve? Why do you think he arrested those people? This isn't entirely about Norman with you, your posts drip with resentment towards officers in general. The hate, like you express towards the Law enforcement community, is a contributing factor to the problem.No wonder officers are in danger everyday. "
To Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 8:00 AM:
" Jeff why do you not the Grand Jury was good enough? They are citizens and they made their choice, the family made the choice - they are satisfied!!!!! So what is your problem.
could it be your are one of those " who Trooper Norman has arrested "
Officers are NOT sorry for the criminals they put behind bars,
Besides: this is about one very tragic day, and Trooper Norman did NOT commit a crime.PERIOD
He is paying a price for a tragedy, but he was doing his JOB, that he was TRAINED to do,
But this is old news and you will be here for months to come.
Trooper Norman did what the Hamleys wanted, and in personal opinion, no there should not have been a "pay-out"
the family had responsibilty - they committed the crime of neglect.
But what is done is done, the Hamleys are moving on,
Trooper Norman will be the one living with this for the rest of his life,
he would be leaving with this even had it been Leadford, No officer considers themselves a hero when someone is killed.
NO OFFICER!!!!! "
Orders?? Lawfull or Not? wrote on May 5, 2007 8:42 AM:
" Most of you don't realize but, this incidnet actually occurred just across the Benton County Line. Therefore, Trooper Norman was the only officer present that had juristiction over the incident. He was required to go to the scene and take over the command from the Washington County Sheriff's Office, who had left their Juristiction. All that said, there were mistakes made, but that was it MISTAKES. Mistakes do not equal INTENT, and that is what you need for Murder. "
crime wrote on May 5, 2007 9:26 AM:
" Negligent homicide is a crime. Norman pleaded guilty to negligent homicide. No one in the Hamley family has been charged. The criminal justice system is not always fair. Norman's plea - like it or not - means that he committed a crime. It does not make him a bad person. Not that anyone's mind is gonna be changed, but reality is such that Norman committed a crime, and is the only one charged in this incident, other than Leadford. "
To Crime: wrote on May 5, 2007 9:31 AM:
" My point was Trooper Norman did NOT commit a crime, this should never have been charged or gone to the Grand Jury, let alone a trial. Trooper Norman was doing his job, he was covering fellow officers, they retreated he shot.
No crime, he was protecting the approaching officers, and any other officer would have/should have made the same decision.
No crime on Trooper Norman. He had no choice but to plead. No justice was done in this case.
Other officers will doubt their judgements and they and other officers will not be going home, because of this "
Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 11:13 AM:
" Just because a person is charged with a crime does not necessarily mean that that person committed a crime. "
To: Orders?? Lawful or Not ? wrote on May 5, 2007 11:19 AM:
" Then exactly what was Officer Norman's INTENT when he pulled the trigger? "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 11:36 AM:
" To Orders you are sadley mistaken Trooper Shorty Small was on the scene long before Norman Arrived your post is fiction As for my credibility I have not lost any by posting people put up property that is fact. I have never met Norman or laid Eyes on the man I have never put property up for bond as I have not been charged with a crime nor have I ever had a dui.TO crime your post is almost funny explain why Small asked Norman if he accidently pulled the trigger That in itself proves that none of the other officers present including Small felt threatened to the point of killing an unarmed innocent man
You cant shoot on movement YOU HAVE TO SEE SOMETHING!! IT IS PAINFULLY OBVIOUS NORMAN VIOLATED THE LAW AND ALSO FORGOT EVERYTHING HE LEARNED IN ALL THE MANY HOURS OF TRAING WE HAVE BEEN TOLD HE HAS BEEN A PARTY TOO Norman WAS NOT A GOOD COP E DIDNT GET ANYTHING RIGHT THAT DAY including risking the safety of the public by traveling at very high speed with his radio jacked up real loud Bad Boy for sure "
To To orders?? wrote on May 5, 2007 11:38 AM:
" Trooper Norman was protecting the approaching officers!!!!!
He was doing his job!!!!!
Why is so difficult to understand
an officer is to enforce and uphold the law, Trooper Norman did not at any time disobey or commit a crime, did not happen.
"
To Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 11:46 AM:
" The only fiction here is you and your post, do you not realize that the officers have ear-pieces to monitor police radio traffic, the fm/am radio was not blaring, anytime there is background noise the video picks that up, Trooper Norman could here his police radio loud and clear, and he was Senior Officer, he out ranked Trooper Small. Trooper Norman did follow procedures, it is sad a young man lost his life,
Again this should never should have been sent to Grand Jury, a "pay-out" should never have happened,
A young man alone, not able to communicate with others, on a day when an ARMED escapee was in NWA, a tragic ending, fault not of Trooper Normans
He was covering his fellow officers,
what can't you understand about this.
Jeff your accusations are again incorrect, if you state an opinion that is your opinion, but you are not in any post stating fact, not now not ever.
Criminals post bail, Trooper Norman is NOT a criminal.
"
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 11:50 AM:
" To Crime Please explain your statement "No crime on Trooper Norman. He had no choice but to plead"
Tell us why he had no choice. your statement is hilarious Are you implying the state put a gun to his head? Did the state threaten to strip him of his monthly ck? Reality Norman forgot what is pounded into the rookie cops in training YOU HAVE TO SEE SOMETHING IE Weapon Before you shoot Fact Every Cop on the scene when Hamley was shoot freaked out Not One expected to hear a gun go off Thus the question did your gun go off accidently by Smal. Norman Very much commited a crime and also violated StatePolice sop You are fast running out of excuses for Normans ignorance that led him to commit a Crime. what is next the manufacture of the weapon and rounds that killed Hamley are the real killer? "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 12:01 PM:
" TO Jeff Now your telling us Norman Did Not Commit a Crime.Explain to us Why Norman was in court? Explain to us what Norman ment when he told the Judge He was guilty of Killing Hamley. Explain to us why Norman waived his right to appeal. I have never seen a man who is not guilty waive his right to appeal. Your above post is fiction and an embarressment to all law Enforcement and the State of AR "
?????? wrote on May 5, 2007 12:08 PM:
" Why does everyone know DIFFERENT facts?
The other officers were approching vs. retreating. The am/fm was blaring and he couldn't hear the dispatcher vs. the video cam didn't hear the blaring radio. Norman didn't commit a crime vs. Grand jury, Judge and a GUILTY plea. The family commited the only crime vs. no charges for neglect. Norman acted upon his training but was the only one that fired. Did he recieve different training than the other officers at the scene? "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 12:10 PM:
" To TO Orders Thank you so much for your very truthful statement"Why is so difficult to understand an officer is to enforce and uphold the law,
You are awesome thank you soooo much
NOW TEll US WHAT LAWS HAMLEY BROKE BEFORE HE WAS GUNNED DOWN BY NORMAN
It is very hard to defend the guilty your strawman supply is getting low quick "
To; Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 12:17 PM:
" I have been searching to find out where citizen law and badge law are differnt, but so far no luck. There are many on here that seem to think there is. "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 12:33 PM:
" Norman supporters are very very few in number probably count them on 1 hand if it came to a vote. How dare we question law enforcement is the funniest for me I now know where to look when I need slaves. I am unable to find any state city or county statue's Hamley violated I am able to find statues and State Sops Norman Violated The relationship between cause and effect for breaking the law is Why Ex State Trooper Norman is now a criminal. "
Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 12:58 PM:
" Keep it up Jeff, you will lose your credibility as you did in your comments on a few other articles here. Again you, nor anyone else know the exact things that transpired and you are one of those people that buy into everything the media feeds you while not waiting for any and all the real facts. The facts that will come out after all proceedings are completed. You have already touted yourself as a cop hater anyway so why not stop while you are ahead, or do you just like making a fool of yourself? lol.......Some of us actually use a little common sense when we think about what might have transpired, others of us are more in the know of specifics than others. Now I wager to guess that one of the reasons he may have committed to the plea, other than the incident weighing on his mind, was the possibility of cop haters like you ending up on the jury that could not decide on the case based on evidence presented because they are to preoccupied with their own vendettas against law enforcement. lol Yep, that about sums it up. lol "
To: Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 1:18 PM:
" So, you were an eye witness to everything that transpired that day? "
To Jeff: wrote on May 5, 2007 2:58 PM:
" Trooper Norman was a friend, and unlike you he has dedicated his life to helping others and making NWA a better place to live. He has been an excellent Trooper for the NWA area, he helped people, yes he wrote tickets, but those tickets slowed people down and just might have saved their live
I am a better person for having known Trooper Norman and have and will continue to give him and his family my support. He has friends because he is a good man,
So Jeff if all your ranting makes you feel better or "big" then you have my blessing - because you can not hurt Trooper Norman, he is now a better man than you will ever be. "
To: Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 3:37 PM:
" How is it that since you are not a police officer here and live in Oklahoma, you were 'at the scene' ? "
Justice Needed wrote on May 5, 2007 3:47 PM:
" The more postings that I read the more I am suspecting a cover-up! "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 3:58 PM:
" Hello Out There!! TO Problem He Pled No Contest because he commited the crime simple as that. Now you know why Norman is no a criminal.Using your reasing Judge Keith is a Cop hater Van Stone is a cop hater the grand jury are cop haters,Your the same joe that has been telling us all about this evidence that would exonerate Norman at his trial.NOW YOUR TELLING US THE INTEGRATY OF THE JUDGE, PROSECUTOR,Grand Jury AND 99.9999% of All CITIZENS WHO LIVE IN OUR AREA AND OTHER POLICE PRESENT AT SCENE IS QUESTIONABLE AT BEST In the interest of justice and the integraty of the judical system in BC I suggest you bring forth these facts right away "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 4:08 PM:
" It is very obvious Normans killing of an unarmed man was going to cost the state big bucks well over a million in defence and jury awards. I still want to know who Norman was protecting when he pulled the trigger.And protecting who from what? We need to get our legislatures to pass a bill that prohibits any and all benifits to cops convicted of a crime "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 4:15 PM:
" TO Jeff Your above post is the laughter of my afternoon I am not attempting to hurt your buddy the convicted killer Norman He did a good job of that all by himself. Norman did not help NWA become a better place as you imply Norman put a big black eye on this area and he did it all by himself.AS far as the better man your funny Norman is a convicted criminal now.and must disclose such on certain paperwork anything else? "
To Jeff..... wrote on May 5, 2007 5:25 PM:
" By the way since you know everything about this case........ The other Troopers name was Wilson Short not Shorty Small. I guess this is just another one of your "facts" that is wrong. Have a nice day. "
Facts wrote on May 5, 2007 5:50 PM:
" A police officer shot and killed an unarmed man laying on the ground with his hands in his pockets. "
Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 6:40 PM:
" To "To Problem", I never said I still live in Oklahoma, I said I moved back there, I just never added that I moved back here in 2000, not that its makes any difference because I never said where in Oklahoma I moved to also I never said I was at the scene either but neither were you!................TO: "Jeff" So what, I have plead "No Contest" in traffic court, didnt mean I was guilty of anything, just means that I decided that due to a mistake I made it was easier, less time consuming. Also I have seen many of your posts here, you like to put words in the mouths of others anyway, and they come off so biased its bad and thats how you loose credibility. See you try to read what isnt there because if you had been following my posts and many others you would see that none of us is not saying he didnt do anything wrong, another bad supposition, what we are saying is that he realizes the mistake he made, what it cost, and was remorseful about it, something that you dont find in the garden variety criminal you and a few are trying to make Mr. Norman out to be. "
To: Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 7:33 PM:
" I'll ask you again, how is it that you were at the scene when you are not a polce officer here and live in Oklahoma? "
T0: Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 7:49 PM:
" You Blew Your Credibility........ You come off sounding like YOU are the ONLY ONE that knows what happened there, by telling other posters that we don't know the "Facts" and that we are all wrong. Your facts are maybe from what you have heard from others that may or may not have been there, (Hence, Hearsay). If you want to keep trying to satisfy your own ego by trying to make everyone think you are the all knowing, then go right ahead.......I for one WILL NOT be reading any more of your postings or responses every again. "
Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 8:38 PM:
" "I'll ask you again, how is it that you were at the scene when you are not a polce officer here and live in Oklahoma?" I answered that question in my previous comment.............I have not blown my credibility as you seem to think. I am using a bit more common sense. I never said I was the "ALL KNOWING" that is your own presumption. Maybe you should try going out and talking to other officers, doing some extra research. Thing about this whole thing is that some want to look at this as some major crime that happens every single day, what I am trying to do is show you it is not a major crime, and it does not happen every day, and not all officers and troopers are bad, even when they make mistakes. Maybe it is hard to swallow but Mr. Norman is no more a murderer than you or I. He made a fatal error in judgment. Truth is I really dont care if anyone reads my comments or not. "
Problem wrote on May 5, 2007 8:59 PM:
" To: "Still Love Governments" If you dont like them, then go find you a deserted island somewhere. lol "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 9:36 PM:
" How strange now they are comparing traffic court to judge keiths court room when is the last time keith has heard a speeding case? Truth is the fatal error in judgement was just that fatal no different than the fatal judgement of a bank robber who shoots and kills Face the Fact Norman Waived all right to appeal Norman admitted guilt Now we are in the process of getting another bad cop off the streets how about the fayettville who 's dept say's he violated state and city statues and more bad cops are getting to be the norm all the more reason for a citizens oversite committee to be formed in the very near future Now you say How Dare You!!!!!!!!! "
Jeff wrote on May 5, 2007 9:41 PM:
" Wilson Short is refered to as shorty small Norman violated sop by not following Shorts orders yet he is not guilty nor is he a bad cop and as you have posted Norman outranked Short Opps is that why He Norman pulled the trigger ranking cops gets to make the hit on an unarmed man? "
Fact Bearer wrote on May 5, 2007 11:28 PM:
" In criminal trials, a plea of "nolo contendere" means that the defendant neither admits nor disputes the charge and is an alternative to pleading guilty or not guilty. This is also called a plea of no contest, stand mute, or, more informally, a "nolo" plea. "Nolo contendere" is Latin and literally means "I do not want to contend." While not technically a guilty plea, it is made as a part of plea bargains and has the same effect as a guilty plea. As it does have the same effect, it does not admit guilt in the part of the defendant. Trooper Larry Norman, still innocent. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by six. Split second decisions are what officers live by every day. God bless them and the work they do to keep anarchy from reigning down upon the general public. Will mistakes be made? Yes, mistakes occur every day in every job on earth. Thee without sin shall cast the first stone. "
Fact Bearer wrote on May 5, 2007 11:40 PM:
" To those on the scene and involved with this terrible accident, they know the truth. The video shows what actually happened. What does anyones AM/FM radio have to do with an inicident that occurred outside of a vehicle? Can someone hide a firearm (aka: gun) in a pocket? Yes! Can someone purposely disobey an officers directions? YES! DID ANYONE ON SCENE KNOW THAT THE SUBJECT THAT WAS SHOT WAS MENTALLY CHALLENGED AND NOT THE ESCAPEE? Did anyone on scene have a crystal ball to depict the future and let them know that the unthinkable would happen? Did anyone on scene have a tiny camera hidden in the mans pocket to see that it was not a gun? Did anyone on scene think that they would be tormented by misguided people who think that they know what happened, even though they were no where near the incident scene when it occurred? Did anyone on scene get to tell their side of the story to the public? Judge not lest yea be judged. "
Fact Bearer wrote on May 5, 2007 11:52 PM:
" Those that speak cruelty and spew garbage against the law officers of the world that protect us from evil are in the root form of the word, evil. Bad police officers exist. Those stories are quite clear and evident. This situation was not one of those, but simply a split-second decision made by a simple human. Officers cannot wait until someone gets hurt before defending themselves or others. If they do, the public then cries for their heads on a platter for not doing the job that we pay them for and then if they do make that split-second decision and it turns out to be a wrong one, they are crucified again and again in the media. What a shameful world we live in today where the protectors of good are hounded by the evil of the media and the evil public. "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God" (Matthew 5:9). To those that wish to stir the fire of the hatred of officers, remember this; God hates those who sow discord and stir up trouble (Proverbs 6:19). "
Fact Bearer wrote on May 5, 2007 11:59 PM:
" Other than the Benton County Officers that arrived and identified Hamley AS THE ESCAPEE? Other than the FORMER Prosecutor Robin Green, who arrived ON SCENE, who slapped the officers on the back and congratulated them on getting that dangerous man off the street and telling them what a great job they had done? Other than those that called in to the surrounding police agencies and reported that they had seen THE ESCAPEE walking along Hwy 412 in Benton County? Did anyone know that Trooper Larry Norman would end an un-blemished career as an outcast for doing his job? Does anyone know that you have to act with the information that you have at the time and when the young man was called by the name Adam, looked and acknowledged the officer calling out "Adam" and that it was the ONLY time he acknowledged their presence? "
To: F. Bearer wrote on May 6, 2007 12:57 AM:
" CHANGING YOUR NAME DOES NOT HIDE YOU, PROBLEM your still full of it....................
Norman pled GUILTY not nolo contendere, so therefore he is GUILTY, Not Innocent, Deal With IT.... Mistakes are made every day but I did not read about it killing any one...... His am/fm radio interfered with him hearing the dispatcher..... Did any one wait to SEE Hamley's gun? Did it ever occur to you that maybe Hamley looked over that way to see who was SCREAMING Adam. It is a shame you were not there so you could give a better account of what happened instead of preaching what you have heard. "
Not Suprised wrote on May 6, 2007 1:25 AM:
" I love the backseat drivers, everyones a critic, everyone is an expert. The courts try to understand what happens when an officer is out on a call, the short amount of time, the lack of information, or the abundance of bad information called in by our great citizens. The fact is that officers are only human, and street officers do not always have the luxuary of time to handle a problem. I am not saying Norman is right or wrong, he plead guilty for his own reasons. Don't forget that people plead gulity all the time for crimes that they may or may not have committed. Don't belive be look up some murder cases that have been over turned. "
Problem wrote on May 6, 2007 1:28 AM:
" To: "To F. Bearer" Thanks for proving a good point. lol Just so you know It was not me who wrote those four comment sections, however you proved how you think. That you jump to conclusion through assumption and ignorance and absolutely no common sense. That you blame innocent people of things that they did not do. lol I hope that you never serve on a jury cause you would be one to hang innocent people. lol. I am sure "Fact Bearer" will tell you the same, that we are not the same people. I have been accused of a lot of things by a lot of people, but never for being someone I am not. lol Again thank you for showing how you think "F. Bearer", I believe it is you who is hiding behind multiple monikers. lol "
Fact Bearer wrote on May 6, 2007 2:16 AM:
" To To:F.BearerMy reply? Oh yea of little faith. I never said I was NOT there. It is amazing the information given out by one who I can say with confidence, was not there. Please check your facts, not just the information given in the newspaper. Trooper Larry Norman pled "nolo contendere". You are pasting what the newspaper said into the fact file, when in truth, it is the farthest from. You also stated; "Mistakes are made every day but I did not read about it killing any one", except for the driver that falls asleep at the wheel, the mother that leaves her baby for just a second to grab the phone, the distracted driver that leans down to pick up a dropped cell phone, etc. These mistakes do not cause deaths? I know several children, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, grandparents and extended family that would disagree. To make a mistake is simple, to ask forgiveness and take accountability for their actions ... well, we know what our private citizens do. They sue someone else. Like a tire manufacturer, or a bathtub maker. Trooper Larry Norman stood up like a man and acknowledged his mistake, but never pled guilty to a crime, as one was not committed. "
Fact Bearer wrote on May 6, 2007 2:21 AM:
" To: Problem, my apologies for someone mistaking you as me. For those that wish to know and actually care. I am Fact Bearer. Bearer of Facts that I have either, A) Witnessed myself or B) saw evidence of such. There are no problem with my facts. For example, ask FORMER P.A. Green if she congratulated even ONE officer while on scene at the shooting. Me thinks her hope of judgeship would go out the window to have that knowlegde spread around. The case is over, the facts, not just as the media has told them, will come out. The media puts their spin on it. If it bleeds, it leads. Ask them, they will tell you, the juicier the story, the more apt it is to be on the front page or the first story of the night. OR, it will be just prior to the weather as most News programs are watched more at Weather time than any other. "
Fact Bearer wrote on May 6, 2007 2:27 AM:
" To Jeff, I quoute you: "How strange now they are comparing traffic court to judge keiths court room when is the last time keith has heard a speeding case?" When you say "they", is that all Law Enforcement or anyone that says anything other than what you spew? Or can anyone that was at the scene come under the scrutiny of "they". One thing is for certain, this should not have even seen the inside of a traffic court room, much less any other court room. YOU Jeff propogate the "Us against them" mentality that is degenerative and dangerou. Please turn off the hate switch and remember Proverbs 6:19. There will come that day when you must reckon with the Almighty. "
Problem wrote on May 6, 2007 3:23 AM:
" Fact Bearer, no need to apologize for someone else mistaking you as me, lol, been accused of much worse, so its no skin off my back.lol I think you are pretty much dead on though. "
Jeff wrote on May 6, 2007 6:47 AM:
" Fact Larry Norman never saw any weapon before he killed hamley
This is a violation of all police agencys Sop
Fact Larry Norman has a criminal record
Fact Norman Can never be a cop again
Fact Norman was a bad cop now he is gone "
Jeff wrote on May 6, 2007 6:51 AM:
" T Fact Bearer Your way off Yes the officers at the scene were allowed and gave statements to the general public
Fact You have to see something this is stressed over and over so your camera bla is just that and your pocket bla is just that Folks you better not wear clothes with pockets you might get shot because the cop does not know what is in them/ This is not fact you are full of hot air "
Tom wrote on May 6, 2007 7:00 AM:
" Trooper Larry Norman pled "nolo contendere". IS False
Trooper Norman Pled Guilty The Court record proves this. Norman Pled guilty because he is guilty as no weapon was seen or found "
Jeff wrote on May 6, 2007 10:11 AM:
" This is unreal we have Norman supporters telling us if we wear clothes with pockets we are in serious danger of being shot by police who can assume something is in your pocket for legal justification to shoot to kill.
This is very scary, east germany? "
To Jeff: wrote on May 6, 2007 10:21 AM:
" Use your common sense, if you are stopped by an officer, do as he ask, with our without pockets and yes if you put your hands in your pockets, they will assume you are reaching for a weapon, so do as they ask and there will be no problem. Pockets on clothing are not illegal, so don't try to get that started. Jeff you are
are such a police hater, and you are wrong about Trooper Norman, but what is new. You have no facts here or in the prior year. Your post are totally rants and never facts. "
To Jeff wrote on May 6, 2007 10:23 AM:
" You are wrong, not all officers at the scene were interviewed by the Grand Jury, meaning the officers that retreated were never interviewed, these are the officers Trooper Norman was covering and their retreat, caused him to fire his weapon.
Jeff were you there, no of course not, and you don't know who was interviewed and who wasn't. You want to be the"all knowing" but your aren't.
Busted once again. "
To Jeff wrote on May 6, 2007 10:25 AM:
" Your comment officers were interviewed: is incorrect. The officers who retreated were NOT interviewd by the Grand Jury, these were the very officers who Trooper Norman was covering, they retreated causing him to react and fire his weapon. They were NOT interviewed -- FACT. So once again Jeff you are so wrong. Busted again. "
To Jeff wrote on May 6, 2007 10:32 AM:
" You actually got one thing correct: Trooper Norman's career as a police officer is over. But he was NOT a bad cop, he was an excellent Trooper for NWA and his record and many hours of service to the citizens of NWA proves that, unfortunately, a tragic ending cost a young man his life and another
his career, Could this have been prevented: of course.
Once again, had Mr Hamley been able to communicate with officers this would never had happened, had Mr Hamley not been alone on hwy 412, had the citizen not reported seeing the escape convict
had the other officers not retreated.
had the officers not responded to the call, had there not been an armed escape convict in NWA, had the family reported Mr Hamley missing, had the family supervised him, any one of these could have prevented - but everyone played a part, and yet Trooper Norman is the one who was left with blame, he didn't to anything wrong
he followed procedures.
"
???? wrote on May 6, 2007 11:26 AM:
" To say that Norman "didn't do anything wrong" is disingenuous. Norman certainly did not act with malice, nor did he knowingly shoot the wrong suspect. Making a mistake IS doing something wrong. And in this instance the mistake resulted in the taking of an innocent life. A public trial would have been beneficial. Blaming the victim is ugly. Just appreciate the Morning News and other media for making availaable as much infomation as possible. "
to????? wrote on May 6, 2007 11:40 AM:
" No one blamed the victim, read the post!!! The problem Mr Hamley could not communicate, communications was vital, when someone can not communicate with others whether law enforcement or other citizens or health care providers, this is an issue where the family or care-giver must take responsibility and be with that person never leaving them alone.
Huge responsibility but that is the fact. The Morning News is not the one giving facts, these blogs are fiction and only opinion on 90% of the post, so don't relay on information here.
"
To Citizen wrote on May 6, 2007 11:58 AM:
" This was not intent, this was not something he went out and did maliously, why on earth would you even suggest or support such an act. The officers was on duty, following the other officers lead, when this horrible incident happened. If you feel the family should file suit, then what about neglect on the part of the family, what about the fact this young man was alone on hwy 412 and unable to communicate, what about the numerous times this young man was left alone and rode with strangers and ended up in Rogers, and the family never reported him missing, maybe DHS should be called - they are his family.Responsibilty should begin at home,
This officer did not "gun down" anyone
he deserves the respect he has earned over the past 15 years serving as a State Trooper.
The family is satisfied with the sentence with the plea, so why aren't you. Is this just about money??
So could all the family of the fallen officers be able to file suit against those families?
The number of fallen officers in NWA is far greater than the number of deaths of civilians by officers. "
TO: CITIZEN wrote on May 6, 2007 4:32 PM:
" As I stated before I was erased, the family has EVERY right to file a wrongful death suit. Norman did pull the trigger (for what ever reason) on an unarmed man and caused his death. No one can argue that fact..... And how Hamley lead his daily life has no bearing on it what so ever. "
to Citizen wrote on May 6, 2007 8:53 PM:
" It is all about money to you, and not about Erin's life.
And yes this is about how Erin was cared for, or wasn't, if you want to look at the whole picture, then yes this is exactly part of the equation.
They have stated they are satisfied with the settlement of one million, and they are satisfied with the plea from the Trooper,
so why aren't you,?
And again. could the fallen officers go back and file suit against the families of those who have their loved ones in the line of duty, - you didn't answer that. "
To: to Citizen wrote on May 6, 2007 11:00 PM:
" That's a rather inane statement. Just how do you figure I would profit from this?.....It's about Erin's DEATH and to possibly prevent another "incident" like that from happening again. It's the same thing that families do for the loss of a loved one. It's not about the money nor will it bring them back, but it will make those who caused the demise to be more careful in the future. It's rather hard to answer your question since it doesn't make any sense. How could a fallen officer file a suit and if he could why would he file it against the families who have their loved ones in the line of duty? Engage your brain before you start trying to think! You are so ready to fly off the handle at someone else you make no sense. "
To Citizen wrote on May 7, 2007 4:28 AM:
" You didn't read the post. I said, why would a fallen officer's family not be able to file suit against the family of the person who killed them,
You need to learn to read, Jeff.
From happening again: would you give the times this has happened in NWA,
You need to think long and hard before posting, your anger outways your intelligence.
"
justice wrote on May 7, 2007 6:07 AM:
" nolo contende(no contest) is a guilty plea by all intents and purposes. Norman is now a minor crimminal. Oh no, another fallen hero. "
Problem wrote on May 7, 2007 8:34 AM:
" Someone needs to take their Prozac. lol....Justice..........a plea of Nolo Contendere means: A plea entered by the defendant in response to being charged with a crime. If a defendant pleads nolo contendere, s/he neither admits nor denies that she committed the crime, but agrees to a punishment (usually a fine or jail time) as if guilty. Usually, this type of plea is entered because it can't be used as an admission of guilt if a civil case is held after the criminal trial. That is not an admission of guilt however it is an acceptance of punishment. "
Problem wrote on May 7, 2007 8:41 AM:
" Sorry to say Jeff but you are wrong about Larry Norman. It is clear that you have no idea about his career as a State Trooper for 18 years. His career was exceptionally good and what you need to get through your head is that one bad incident does not define, in whole, that persons character past or present. Larry Norman does not have a history of misdeed as you want to suggest by your ranting which goes to further show how you think..........A criminal on the other hand tends to have a common history of misdeeds and does not care about the consequences of his/her actions, they also have an innate aversion to authority........So you can not define a person by one incident and that is exactly what you are attempting to do with your rants. "
society wrote on May 7, 2007 9:10 AM:
" defines an awful lot of individulas with minor convictions by one incident, law enforcement officers are particularly good at it. Granted, many criminals do have long histories, but many people with a single infraction get lumped in together with the bad guys. "
To: To Citizen wrote on May 7, 2007 9:57 AM:
" Citizen is right. Your post on May 6, 2007 at 8:53 pm states, and I quote "and again, could the fallen officers go back and file suit against the families of those who have their loved ones in the line of duty - you didn't answer that." It makes no sense to me either! And your questioning their intelligence. "
The reason Norman fired ... wrote on May 7, 2007 12:13 PM:
" was not because he wanted to "kill" someone, or because he was a "heavy handed" cop, or that he was "trigger-happy". He was covering the approaching officers. Now, listen to me clearly, please. Prior to Trooper Normans arrival, all other officers were taking cover behind their cars, as they are supposed to do with a possibly armed suspect. Once Trooper Norman arrived, as well as another officer who was right behind Norman, they decided to approach as the suspect had laid down on the ground. Once Norman was in position to cover, the other officers started their approach. They depend on the cover officer to watch their backs and fronts while coming out of cover and into the open. They had nothing between them and the suspect, nothing but air. Now remember, at this point, he is suspected to be Leadford, armed and dangerous. When the approaching officers come out and into the open, exposed, the suspect rolls over and shoves his hand into a pocket. The officers in the open are thinking the same thing that Norman thought, he is reaching for a gun. Norman fired at the suspect, fearing he was going for a gun so the other officers could retreat to cover. The round struck the pavement and bounced up striking the suspect. Everything was done as training defines. Cover officer did his job, contact officers did theirs. End of story. "
jeff wrote on May 7, 2007 3:02 PM:
" Nolo contendre is a Latin term meaning "I will not contest" the charges, which is a plea made by a defendant to a criminal charge, allowing the judge to then find him/her guilty. It has the same effect as a plea of guilty, as far as the criminal sentence is concerned, but may not be considered as an admission of guilt for any other purpose.
A nolo contendre plea in a criminal case may not be used against the same person in a civil suit based on the same facts. It is often called a "plea of no contest." However, they may be required to be disclosed on certain applications, such as an employment or insurance application.
Blacks Law Dict. Implys the plea is considered a guilty plea Norman is trying to protect is house and monies by his pleading If The Hamleys suit Norman personally they will will have to prove Norman is neglegent without the benifit of the plea that made him a convicted criminal Was his plea an admission of guilt YES
"
Jeff wrote on May 7, 2007 3:12 PM:
" To Reason Norman Fired Are you trying to kid yourself Where was the weapon Norman had to have seen to have grounds to shoot. maybe if he was getting his wallet to show id What if he was getting an asma inhailer what if he was diabetic there are a host of things hand movement does not even come close to meeting the criteria of shooting someone. Why did the stste pay 1 mil if everything is kosher please your lying to yourself dont you hate that? "
Jeff wrote on May 7, 2007 3:21 PM:
" If everything was done according to training as the above imposter Reason Norman Fired implys all officers present would have fired, Vice A State Trooper asking Norman if he accidently pulled the trigger Can you believe the excuses we are hearing seems that they are getting lamer by the second as they are all used up strawmen are all dead and Norman is as guilty today as he was at the site of the killing only difference he has been convicted and found guilty "
Amy wrote on May 7, 2007 3:57 PM:
" TO PROBLEM............Norman pled GUILTY to NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE (ie: The act of killing one person by another person) not Nolo Contendre. The Arkansas State Police are the ones that denied any wrong doing. And people do define someone by an act they have commited. There are people in prison today that were law abiding citizens all their life until the day they pulled the trigger and took anothers life. We now know them as murderers. And you cannot deny that!
I am not saying Norman deserves that "Tag", but now he IS NOT the fine upstanding citizen that you are trying to make everyone think he is! "
You people wrote on May 8, 2007 3:28 AM:
" have been going on about this for 5 days now. Isn't that long enough? Let Erin Hamley rest in peace. The trial is over. Nothing any of you say here is going to change anything. Get a life! If you spent as much time on something constructive as you have this, who knows what you all could have done! Maybe help a family with a special needs child for an afternoon, spend a day with a police officer and see what they have to put up with. Put yourself in their shoes for 1 day, the family or the officer. Maybe you would realize things aren't always so black and white as you like to think they are. "
Jeff wrote on May 8, 2007 6:01 AM:
" We need to pass legislation requiring cops convicted of a crime to register with the city and state just as a sex offender including the requirment that a sign must be posted in their yard at all times
I find it pathetic that we keep hearing put yourself in their shoes for a day If the pressure is so great that it compels you to break the law then get out
I have heard many judges tell 1st time offenders that ignorance of the law is no excuse for committing a crime sorry folks the same laws apply to cops. Norman broke the law his violation of law resulted in a death NO Excuse. How many 1st time dui offenders have been prosecuted and convictions gained after being arrested by Norman How many got off by telling the judge you should walk in my shoes for a day This proves how ignorant some folks have gotten. Sorry folks we do not have 2 sets of laws one for cops and one for the rest of the citizens Our top cop in the usa is under fire and is being pressed real hard to step down and he hasnt killed anyone. Norman got off real light in lou of the crime he committed "
Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 7:05 AM:
" TO:"Amy" I never said that Norman plead Nolo Contedere, I simply provided the legal definition of the term because it is was being mis quoted..........Nolo Contendere is NOT and admission of guilt, but it IS an acceptance of punishment and there are several reasons why one would use such a plea............A persons overall character should never be defined by one single act, if that were the case then we would all be thieves, adulterers, lier's, murderers, ect....Not one person here has even said that Norman didnt do anything wrong, what we are saying is that he is not a murderer, even evidence supports that, if it didnt he would have received a harsher sentence. He acted upon the information they had at the time, and at the time of the incident. A MISTAKE was made due to that information, and a tragedy occurred......The courts, the attorney's, and the family were all satisfied with the findings and apparently even the family does not believe Norman to be a MURDERER, or even a bad person. If they thought that then they would have contested the plea, and an appeal would have been filed...........Cont'd "
Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 7:16 AM:
" Cont'd..........................What happened that night was a result of poor information, a duty was performed based on that information, an apparent lack of ability to communicate by the deceased, and the actions of the deceased based upon the information they had at the time.....They thought they had Ledford, they thought he was armed and dangerous according to the information they had, so yes the very action of the deceased reaching into his pockets would have been construed as a major threat due to that information...........I can tell you of several people that were convicted of crimes that they did not commit, many served long sentences, why? because at the time and based upon the information that was presented, a lot of that information was poor information, and some of those people, after serving several years were set free for various reasons, but most of all in the findings of the final cases, it was found that they were convicted mainly due to poor information, all tragedies btw, and all mistakes made by prosecutors, judges and juries, so by what some of you are saying are we to convict the judges, prosecutors, and jurors as well for mistakes made by poor information? If so, why weren't they all prosecuted for wrongful conviction, false imprisonment? "
Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 7:27 AM:
" Cont'd................Also according to the information that we have. The SHOT fired could very well be considered a warning shot why? because the shot hit the pavement, and Hamley was killed by the ricochet not the shot itself. Could the SHOT have been a shot to wound, incapacitate? It could be construed that way as well. It was apparent that Norman was attempting to protect other officers on the scene, according to the information in hand, from a potentially armed and dangerous man, because they thought they had Ledford..........Lae enforcement officers are not poor shots, as a military trained individual I can tell you that without a doubt. Now had Norman, or any other officer on the scene for that matter, had any REAL intention of killing the suspect maliciously they could have just as easily put one round in the head or heart. However as it stands the suspect was killed by the ricochet of the bullet off the pavement. A mistake was made that night and two men died, the suspect and Norman. Its a regret that Norman has to live with for the rest of his life. Does it make him a bad person, a rouge officer, certainly not, but the his sentence is worse than Life, or the Death Penalty. "
Jeff wrote on May 8, 2007 8:10 AM:
" Problem needs to read blacks Nolo Contedere is accepted only as a guilty plea it is used to keep plaintiffs from using the criminal verdict in a cival suit
If Nolo Contedere was accepted as neither a guilty or not guilty plea the judge could not render a guilty sentence
Problem is blowing smoke ignorance of the law is no excuse. "
Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 9:18 AM:
" Have you looked in the mirror lately Jeff. lol Only one I see blowing smoke is you. lol.............Interesting that you say that I am ignorant of the law since I have spent the last 7 years studying just that. You really have no idea. "
Jeff wrote on May 8, 2007 9:53 AM:
" TO Problem If you have studied law for the last 7 years as you imply then you need to post the truth blacks dict give a different definition for Nolo Contedere than you you have tried to omit the 1st part out of blacks as for the warning shot your kidding yourself that action alone puts the other officers at much greater risk keep up the good work pal "
Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 12:24 PM:
" Yep jeff when it comes to omission, look in the mirror. lol "
To: Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 1:05 PM:
" You make no sense. You say a ricochet killed Hamley and not the shot itself? A ricochet CAN NOT kill someone, a bullet can! You are running out of excuses! "
Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 1:29 PM:
" To:"To Problem" Well If you had read everything surrounding the case you would have noticed that the facts mention that the bullet struck the pavement then ricocheted and struck Hamley, so tell me me what of that does not make sense???? "
um, uh............. wrote on May 8, 2007 2:19 PM:
" I thought it was a shotgun. Shotguns don't use bullets. They shoot shells, which contain pellets. "
To: Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 3:33 PM:
" You stated "Hamley was killed by the ricochet not the shot itself" and NO it was not a warning shot (more excuses) the officers are trained to shoot to kill a "armed" suspect! "
To um,uh................. wrote on May 8, 2007 4:11 PM:
" Hamley was shot with a slug not pellets. These are two different types of shotgun rounds. The slug ricocheted off of the pavement before hitting Hamley. "
disappointed wrote on May 8, 2007 4:46 PM:
" we as a society have some of the blame on us. i recall a situation years ago where a black immigrant from africa was confronted by some of nypd's finest. he was gunned down when he went for his wallet instead of doing as he was told. they thought he was going for a gun. the point? we owe it to our citizens, especially the new ones (immigrants)and the less blessed (such as was Mr Hamley), to teach them how to deal with cops properly. but no, we would rather lay the entire burden on the cops. it is okay if they have to hesitate to ensure a person's intentions and it cost them their lives. after all, that is just part of being an expendable member of society, correct? to you who talk about shooting to wound, hesitating at the cost to the cop, etc, know little of police work. you gain a degree, a mortgage, cars, property, kids, dreams, hopes, etc and then take all of that to work every day not knowing if you will come home at the end of the day and you hesitate, you second guess your gut, your training, your common sense, etc, and see what can happen to you. some life. it is a miracle that any sane person would want the job. and then we crucify them when they goof up. "
To mankind wrote on May 8, 2007 5:34 PM:
" Guess you haven't been following the case for the past year, The officers were approaching Mr Hamley, he did not keep his hands out of his pockets, they retreated therefore the shot was fired. They didn't get close enough to 1. recognize, 2. arrest, 3. use taser, 4. handcuff.
Which leaves nightstick out. "
Problem wrote on May 8, 2007 6:37 PM:
" To: "To Problem" Fun taking things out of context isnt it? lol "
Amy wrote on May 8, 2007 11:44 PM:
" Your ramblings make no sense to me either, such as the posting on May 8 at 7:16am about the 'deceased'. Your trying to tell people what transpired that night (as if you were there) and I quote you "an apparent lack of ability to communicate by the deceased, and the actions of the deceased based upon the information they had at the time...."
also "so yes the very action of the deceased reaching into his pockets...."
Seems like they were asking an awful lot of a "deceased" person. "
Problem wrote on May 9, 2007 5:03 AM:
" Ahhhh and thats what I mean about taking it out of context and reading more than what is there. By "The Deceased" I was talking of Hamley, who is now deceased is he not? Whats sad, is that very few want to really debate, they want to look for something to use to discredit when they disagree. lol My accounting of what may have occurred on site at that time is no different than others who give a different accounting to make a certain person look like a monster. lol "
To Amy wrote on May 9, 2007 5:57 AM:
" Are you trying to be funny. The poster was referring to Mr Hamley, he was NOT deceased at the time of the actions,
again the poster was used the term "deceased" to recoginize who he was talking about, most of us understood.
"
Jeff wrote on May 9, 2007 7:59 AM:
" 60 min ran a special 2 or 3 weeks ago US Military men shoot unarmed citizens in Iraq after ide went off under their convoy and are being charged with murder Norman got off real light. Norman and Norman alone pulled the trigger Norman is the shooter Norman never saw a weapon or what even could be considered a weapon thus the charge and the guilty plea. Norman is the only shooter and is also the only party gharged and is also the only party who pled guilty Norman is now ex cop thank god "
why wrote on May 9, 2007 8:13 AM:
" why are you people humoring jeff's childish little rantings? just ignore him. he isn't gonna get it, so just stop trying to explain it to him. If you let it go, he might find another hobby. "
To: Jeff wrote on May 9, 2007 9:13 AM:
" I agree with you as to who was responsible and negligent in this case and let off with a slap on the hand, even if he gets the maxium sentence on his (sic) charge...Has anyone checked to see if there might be some Federal law that Norman violated when he pulled the trigger? Might be worth doing some research on. "
Pilot wrote on May 9, 2007 11:30 AM:
" I am sick and tired of all the baloney spewed on this string Now we see the pro normans are hurting real bad by reading the above post Fact Norman Violated Sop He shot without ever seeing any object that even remotely looked like a weapon Yo cannot shoot due to movement only folks would be getting shot dailey as almost 100 of all traffic stops have movement involved with the aid of your car for cover it is a shame problem and the 1 or 2 others dont want to admitt Norman commited a crime there continued implication that there are two sets of rules is very detramental to all law enforcement and only furthers the obvious disdain for police actions by the majority of the population "
1105 wrote on May 12, 2007 10:57 AM:
" To Pilot,
I am and always have been a supporter of Trooper Norman. The facts:an armed and dangerous escapee was in NWA, a young man who could NOT communicate with others was walking along hwy 412,
report from civilian it was Leadford, officers responded.,after numerous attempts to communicate Mr Hamley did NOT obey commands, Officers approach, Trooper Norman is the senior officer at this time, and he is covering the approaching officers, Mr Hamley will not stop reaching across his body into his pockets, which is perceived to be reaching for weapon, officers retreat, shot is fired. Anytime an officer retreats, the covering officer fires.
This was a tragedy, but Trooper Norman did NOT commit a crime, he was doing as he has been trained.
This incident should never had gone to the Grand Jury, there never should have been a trial. A mistake yes, but not a crime, Responsiblity, it is time we as parents become responsible for our children, no longer letter others raise them, and when something goes wrong, it is always someone elses fault. This young man lost his life, and Trooper Norman will never be the same, he lost his 15yr career,
He has served NWA as an outstanding State Trooper and he has earned his retirement, too bad it wasn't by his choice and too bad he isn't enjoying it.
Trooper Norman and his family will always be in my prayers. "
Pilot wrote on May 14, 2007 1:11 PM:
" To 1105 People do not get convicted for mistakes as you imply(Judges all accross the USA tell defendants every day ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law) People get convicted for crimes they commit. 1105 wants us to believe Norman pled guilty for a mistake No way Norman was convicted because he was neglegent.Normans neglegence resulted in the death of an innocent person.Normans neglegence deprived Erin Hamley of all his rights to due process Trooper Norman is a convicted criminal by choice(No one held a gun to him and made him shoot he shot the gun whoe's bullet killed Erin all by himself.Also Norman was on scene for less than 60 seconds He could not have attempted to communicate in the mannor 1105 wishes us to believe.1105 tries to shift blame to the parents Erin was of age 1105 admit it Norman commited a crime and now must do the time People like Norman need to have nightmares every night. remember Norman violated Erins rights to due process in a manor that is unthinkable that being Death. "
Pilot wrote on May 15, 2007 12:01 AM:
" To 1105 This has to be the most absured statement I have ever heard. 1105 You really went all out with this one "Anytime an officer retreats, the covering officer fires."
This is pure fiction at its best.
"
maljoir wrote on May 15, 2007 1:08 AM:
" The funny thing about this debate is how much people use hollywood to judge real life. For example, shooting a person in the back makes the other person wrong-always, shooting the gun out of the bad guys hand or shooting them in the leg-officers are super marksmen they dont have to shoot to kill, an officer cant shoot until the bad guy shoots first-that way you KNOW they realy mean to hurt the officer, Officer's have to see the gun first before he can shoot-always. The problem with all of the above is that its not realistic, there are too many varibles. Situations are too fluid. Also many people talk about SOP's and policy as if every department is the same or even worse that TV-land define's policy. Talk to any person who;s profession is represented on the almighty TV and see how true it is. Its about 90% fiction if not more in some cases. Want to learn more aout your local department, see if they have a citizens police acadamey. "
Pilot wrote on May 15, 2007 9:10 AM:
" TO maljoir In the past government officials could claim they were immune from tort actions Thank God that Congress realized that the ckecks and balances were way out of wack Now with our new tort reform we can file suit for violations of due process against police military ect The sop of each agency is very close to being the same some may let speeders go for 5 mile over some may have no policy. Certification for the police is thru the state not each agency as you seem to imply Tort reform is what caused the state to pay quick in the Norman case vice the possibility of spending much more that the small amount paid to the Hamleys TV played no part in tort reform "
maljoir wrote on May 15, 2007 9:56 AM:
" *sighs* Yes certification is through the state, the state mandate's certain training. But these are the minimum, sort of like graduating high school with a 2.0 versus a 4.0. the 2.0 is the minumum. Also remember this, many lawsuits are settled out of out. Why, the party with the deep pockets estimates the cost to fight verus the cost to settle. If one is less then thats what they do, not always but most of the time. Are some departments policies close to being the same sure. But again thats like saying a horse and zebra are close to being the same. "
Pilot wrote on May 15, 2007 11:32 PM:
" My bad I am amazed no one said a word tort and due process litigation are very different maljoir sigh sigh sigh all police shops in NWA are accepting the bare minimum . No one wants to be a cop "
1105 wrote on May 16, 2007 7:09 PM:
" To Pilot:Just a note for all those officers in NWA, your statement MUST be FALSE, we have hundreds that are employed as Law Enforcement Officers and are doing a great job, State Trooper, Washington County, Fayetteville Police Dept, Springdale Police Dept, not to mention
West Fork, Farmington, Lowell, Prairie Grove, and of course Rogers Police Dept and Benton County, just in NWA,
would you care to guess how many people are serving our community in NWA, looks like a LOT of people enjoy the career they have chosen as Police Officers.
Pilot - could you just once make a statement that is not false.
"
Not already registered?
Jeff wrote on May 4, 2007 12:18 AM: