It would be insulting to say that race held no sway in this verdict, because Blacks have long known it has always factored in - for centuries, not decades. A few shots from a racist police(wo)man must be more difficult to evaluate that it was it was racial motivation, but 16 shots into one human being is horrifying. What's extremely troubling is how an officer survives on a police force without that level of racist hate obvious to everyone around him. Worse yet is that if it ever was obvious, it must have been either acceptable, or easy to ignore. Either possibility was deadly.
4
The sad reality is that police departments all over the nation probably need some prodding - like this verdict - to give hard working, deserving officers the training they need to deal with these situations.
Training that let's them do their job and keeps them safe without victimizing others needlessly.
Their is much to learn and many skills and tactics to impart that will improve relations with police.
Respect for law enforcement will come more easily if evenhandedness and cool heads prevail.
People want a better relationship all around.
This guilty verdict is one catalyst toward better training, situational awareness and skills.
It's always OK to improve methods and tactics.
81
@Paul King I think that "training" should include psychological evaluation and determine if the candidate has predisposition to racial bias.
13
Reply to Paul King usa
Let us not forget there were several Chicago Police Officers present on foot at the scene - Not Shooting and awaiting someone with a taser. It appears all of them were following the less confrontational methods you are espousing. Only one rogue officer among many that were not.
2
@Paul King
Agreed, but they also will need to vet officers better.
2
Sure Laquan McDonald had a long record as some have said. But Van Dyke's record shows he wasn't pristine either. And neither's record came into consideration as evidence at the trial. Just the video and witness testimony.
I loathe the argument that police officer’s jobs are dangerous and difficult so they should be given leeway in these shootings. This is like if a fireman complained about the dangers of fighting a burning house and refused to extinguish it properly. It’s too dangerous! No, that’s your job. That’s what you signed up for.
And let’s be honest, if the cop arrived on the scene to a white, blonde 17 year old girl with a knife, heck even a gun, they wouldn’t start firing their gun at them 17 times. This should be labeled a hate crime if anything.
272
@Manish Absolutely correct. I just don't understand what is wrong in our country where police are not held accountable for their actions. The problem with that is that the police are encouraged to be bullies and to abuse their authority. They are trained to intimidate anyway. They demonstrate the still prevalent racism between blacks and whites.
34
@Manish
And their jobs aren't particularly dangerous.
I looked at BLS statistics for on-the-job fatality rates. A truck driver, cab driver, farmer, fisherman or construction worker is more likely to be killed on the job.
31
The Justine Damond case would suggest you are wrong.
3
It is more than disappointing that the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police (IFOP) has blasted the trial and conviction. On the one hand I understand it is the union's responsibility to defend their officers through a trial, but why disrespect the rule of law after someone has had a trial and been convicted?
The IFOP has called the trial a sham trial. I guess we all need to remember in the future what standards of behavior IFOP uses to judge police officers. But the Van Dyke shooting was so egregious it is utterly indefensible. This is why the video tape was suppressed. The IFOP should not encourage a culture where police officers treat each other like they are above the law and protect each other from legal consequences.
A much better union response would have been something like: "While the union supports its officers when they are accused of unlawful behavior on the job, we also respect the outcome of this trial and the rule of law. We also ask the public not to judge the thousands of police officers on the job by the actions of one officer."
Of course the above statement does not acknowledge that three other officers are awaiting trial for conspiracy on this case, so it is a little more than one officer.
16
People in and outside Illinois should not be confused by the fact that the verdict is termed "second degree murder." It is, in fact, what would have previously been termed "voluntary manslaughter," that is, an intentional act causing death but mitigated by "extreme emotional disturbance" (New York) or, in addition, in some states, including Illinois: "imperfect self-defense," e.g., the perpetrator believed his life to be in immanent danger (a "justification" defense) and, from his point of view, the belief may not have been unreasonable, but, judged on the basis of "the reasonable person" is was unreasonable.
Here is the relevant portion of the Illinois Statute (720 ILCS 5/9-2 - defining second degree murder as all the elements of first degree murder except that): "at the time of the killing he or she believes the circumstances to be such that, if they existed, would justify or exonerate the killing under the principles stated in Article 7 of this Code, but his or her belief is unreasonable."
(Article 7 provides for justification for homicide but requires the use of force to prevent bodily harm to be reasonable --- to the reasonable person.)
Thus, the jury accepted that the officer believed his life to be in jeopardy, but found that belief to be "unreasonable".
The penalties for second degree murder in Illinois range from probation to twenty years.
As for the convictions for "aggravated assault," I have grave doubt that they will withstand appeal.
9
I apologize. He was convicted of 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, not aggravated assault. My doubts remain, however.
Battery is defined in Illinois penal law as:
(720 ILCS 5/12-3)
Sec. 12-3. Battery.
(a) A person commits battery if he or she knowingly without legal justification by any means (1) causes bodily harm to an individual or (2) makes physical contact of an insulting or provoking nature with an individual.
Aggravated battery with a firearm is defined as committing battery by knowingly discharging a firearm.
In their compromise verdict, however, the jurors found the office not guilty of "official misconduct" presumably because they found him guilty of second degree murder by accepting that he honestly believed his life to be in danger (though his belief was found to be "unreasonable" to a usual "reasonable person.")
As noted, both battery and aggravated battery require that the perpetrator act "without legal justification". However, since the jury found no official misconduct (i.e., the officer was acting as a police officer is expected to), they may have compromised the convictions on the aggravated battery counts by finding partial legal justification for the murder (voluntary homicide) and for the official conduct (not misconduct).
The judge could sidestep some of these thorny issues by sentencing the officer to the maximum for second degree murder (20 years) and to 20 years for aggravated assaults to be served concurrently.
3
@M. Johnson. You are confused. For “Official misconduct” the officer had to “ Knowingly performs an act which he knows he is forbidden by law to perform”
For aggravated battery his actions had to be “ without legal justification”.
For second degree murder he had to have no legal justification but ( unreasonably) think that he did.
There is this no inconsistency with the not guilty on official misconduct which goes only to the officers state of mind. In other words even if he was wrong that he was acting properly he’s not guilty
The battery counts by contrast do not allow for an officer to get off because he wrongly believed he had legal justification.
There is no evidence of a compromise based on the verdicts
1
The whole thing is heartbreaking.
McDonald had a horrifying childhood that likely resulted in making bad decisions as an adult.
VanDyke lost everything he worked for in 14 seconds of shooting.
Both men paid with their lives.
24
@Nancy To be clear, Laquan is the only one dead.
31
@Nancy
Not so, Van Dyke is still alive. His family will still be able to see him. We are still awaiting his sentence. Bet you it would be light.
1
There is a long history of dehumanizing African Americans in a very segregated Chicago. There is a long history of cover-ups by CPD. Until CPD and we, as citizens, can see each other as human beings as opposed to immediate threats, these circumstances will not change. We can have compassion for Laquan McDonald, his family, and the community, who have been persecuted for decades by local, state and federal government. We can also have compassion for Jason VanDyke, who worked in a culture that devalues African Americans and covers up misconduct. I don't imagine he got into police work for that reason, but providing for your family and surviving can compel you to behave in unconscionable ways. I hope Chicago's next mayor prioritizes the real need to help the city heal, admit wrongdoing, and work toward a culture where we can value each other's inherent humanity.
45
@Colleen
I wish I could believe in the pure intentions of VanDyke. I don't. The impunity the police has (or had until recently) has attracted a minority of highly aggressive and bigoted people to their ranks. I feel sorry for the police member who saw what happened, knew it was wrong, but felt pressured into silence by their colleagues. I think VanDyke got lucky with the second degree murder verdict. Had a he been a black man and not a police officer he might be fighting life sentence or death penalty right now.
3
To me, a few circumstances stand out as particularly damning:
1. Eight armed officers show up to handle a vandalism complaint.
2. The video clearly shows Mr. MacDonald veering AWAY from officers, as they approach him.
3. 16 shots were fired AND THEN the other responding officers had to physically stop Officer Van Dyke from reloading. Nobody else fired a shot.
4. After Mr. MacDonald had fallen, an officer walked by his inert body and kicked the knife, all 3 inches of it, from his hand.
5. NONE of the officers on the scene attempted any sort of help to a critically injured man.
The police video shows all of these actions, clearly.
6. And then, officers on the scene perjure themselves in testimony to exonerate Office Van Dyke. (At least three are fired as at result.)
157
I know that American police officers are trained to handle potentially dangerous situations involving humans. I have witnessed white police officers professionally handle such situations involving African-American subjects. So, as an African-American male I am not wrong for expecting white officers to properly handle such situations.
A few years ago, while walking down 9th Avenue in Hell’s Kitchen in New York, on the way to a bar, I witnessed the NYPD professionally handle a deranged, young, shirtless and barefoot, mentally ill African-American man who had been walking down the boulevard yelling at people and throwing objects against storefront windows.
A group of white officers created a human barrier between the man and the public and patiently directed the man into the back of a police van without using pepper spray, batons, or guns.
4
It's about time justice was served !!
Justice in this case. If only he was going for Supreme Court Justice, a video would not have mattered.
1
Tyshawn Lee, a 9 year old boy, was murdered by gang members in Chicago.
It was not the same gang as the one Mr. McDonald was a member of.
I waited, and waited, and waited, to hear about the people of Chicago demanding justice for little Tyshawn- a truly innocent victim.
Nothing. No marches. No shouting. No demands. Silence. People were too busy defending gang members to care about the victims of gang members.
Why? Maybe because there wasn't a white cop to destroy.
Mr. McDonald did not deserve to die- but on the continuum of injustices his death should not merit this much outrage.
Tyshawn Lee deserves our outrage. And his loss requires us to admit that gang members may- MAY- be as dangerous as police.
His loss requires us to admit the possibility that the death of Mr. McDonald means another kid, like Tyshawn Lee, will not be murdered.
2
Maybe there is still hope for justice in America.
1
My spouse has been a federal law enforcement officer for 16 years and an MP in Army for 8 years. He says " you follow the evidence to fit the crime you don't make it up to fit what you want it to be." He's white and we're both happy to see this cop go down for being wrong and lying. We're glad the jury saw through his rehearsed testimony. It should've been murder not second degree murder, but his family can rest for now that justice was served. The officer is going to appeal the verdict and we hope he's found guilty again. Cops aren't liked in jail and we hope he suffers every day for what he's done. He did it willingly, with malice and 100% prejudice.
As for Freddie Gray both officers in the van were guilty and got off. They had no right to ride around with him in back of the van as long as they did without strapping him in. His head banged up against the vehicle door and inside the van the entire time. He yelled "I'm hurt and need medical attention" more than once with another inside who saw and heard it all. What happened to being innocent until proven guilty? But they didn't allow him to testify to what he saw and heard. The one not driving wanted to take him to the hospital, but the other officer refused. That officer had the same responsibility to call it in and didn't. This makes them both guilty. It's not only wrong they got off it's insane. Justice wasn't served for Freddie, but it's about time this officer was found guilty as charged.
18
Laquan McDonald- professional criminal. Gang member from the age of 12. Described, by psychiatrists, as 'aggressive' and 'prone to violent outbursts.' Lengthy, lengthy, list of past crimes.
His life taken too early. Mr. McDonald had decades of criminality and incarceration ahead of him. There are, without a doubt, dozens of people, today, who will not be victimized by him in the future.
What has this country come to when a violent, gang member, career criminal gets shot by police while breaking into cars and threatening people with knives?
We all know that Mr. McDonald was just moments away from turning it all around and becoming the perfect child and pillar of the community. But that opportunity was taken from him. Mr. McDonald chose to live by the gun- he would be more than willing to hurt any one of us posting here if it meant he got some cash.
Irredeemable. A parasite on his community. A parasite on our nation. A taker.
The one silver lining? A white cop has lost his life too.
4
Reply to WillT of durham nc
Perhaps LaQuan was everything you reported. The Officer did not KNOW the suspect, he had no prior knowledge of the suspect nor his history. From what I have read, the officer heard a report of an individual with a knife breaking into vehicles. The video I saw online (upon it’s initial release) shows many police vehicles already present and many officers outside of their vehicles. Officer Van Dyke, per the testimony of his partner spoke of shooting the suspect prior to assessing the situation upon arriving on the scene. Prior to communicating with anyone at the scene. In addition, Van Dyke compounded his previous errors by continuing to shoot an incapacitated suspect. It is the inhumanity ( and therefore his lack of professionalism- we as Americans do expect our police officers to be humane ) that resulted in the outrage and charges filed.
3
@WillT26 You may be right but we do not a police force that acts as judge, jury and executioner. Do you want a police force that makes a decision about the worth of your life and then shoots you when they determine you are not worthy of living? The police enforce law and should apprehend those who break it.
4
What a relief it is to finally see justice served in the killing of a non-threatening black man by a police officer.
This wide latitude that the police have to kill people is wrong, misguided, and also dangerous to the police themselves. In my opinion, many police officers who carry out such killings feel emboldened because they have seen their colleagues all over the U.S. get away with wrongful killings.
If Michael Brown's killer and Tamir Rice's killer could get away with it, then so can I, they rationalize. These carte blanche killings are destroying our police. We should be discouraging our police officers from killing as a first resort but instead, we are encouraging them to kill. Police officers who kill indiscriminately must always suffer the consequences; so that, their punishment will serve as disincentive to their colleagues to emulate bad behavior.
I sincerely hope that this verdict will not be looked at as an aberration going forward.
6
He's complaining about second degree murder when it should have been homicide? I want to know whether all the other officers involved have been put on trial for accessories after the fact or at the very least fired.
And for some people to say that Laquan McDonald was culpable because he was high is so ludicrous. Geez, is get high get shot our new policing policy? Last time I checked this was the US, not the Philippines.
10
@MomT
These are the same people that think Kavenaugh shouldn't be held accountable for he did because he was young and drunk.
4
IN MY OPINION, Justice was served by the courageous jurors who sat on the panel during the case where the disgraced police officer showed the court that he had, indeed, shot the teenager in cold blood. In my opinion, it may have been premeditated. But the jurys' findings are fair.
1
There is a Force Continuum that moderates a police officer's' response to any situation where they feels their physical safety is threatened. From hands-on, to OC spray, to use of an asp baton, to Taser, to firearm. The choice among these options depends on the suspect's delivery system: is he/she carrying a firearm, or is one being pointed at the police officer? If the suspect is holding a baseball bat but is 50 feet away, is that the same type of threat as if the person was within 10 feet of the officer?
If the suspect is holding an edged weapon, like a knife, is he within 21 feet of the officer? Charging the officer? Walking away?
This plays in to how a police officer is trained, and the job is clearly not for everyone. How Jason Van Dyke was trained and his background play a large part in this tragedy. Police are trained to neutralize or stop a threat. Laquan McDonald was walking AWAY from the officers on the scene, and at a brisk pace.
There was NO justification for Off. Van Dyke to fire his pistol once, let alone 16 times. And even if McDonald posed a direct threat, or if he charged the officer knife in hand, he fell to the ground after the first round or two hit his body. He was limp. He was no longer a threat. This was murder, plain and simple, and it was a just verdict.
5
16 bullets - and yet his fellow police support him.
The problem is much deep than one person.
15
Laquan McDonald was a dangerous criminal with a long record.
His death is sad but there can be no doubt that the people of Chicago are safer with him gone.
2
@WillT26So, as I understand you, you wish to live in a country where the police simply move around murdering people whom they determine might be detrimental to society?
5
@WillT26 Would you judge a terrible President the same way?
5
He had a knife. He was a threat to Police there. He got shot. Whats all the fuss about. Stay within the law and this wont happen to you. Skin color iud irrelevant.
3
@Lil Ung that should b the very last report. This isnt Detroit become human
This outcome is more than a verdict against one officer but a greater statement regarding police policy in the use of deadly force. When they feel threatened, officers are taught to shoot to kill and to keep shooting until that threat is eliminated. And therein lies the problem.
Officers need to be taught that not all threats are the same. Someone with a knife or baseball bat is a far lower threat than someone with a pistol. Such a confrontation must be generally classified as a no shoot situation. Further, officers who do encounter a suspect with a gun need to learn that shoot to wound is also an option. One shot can disable a suspect and bring him to the ground.
Here in Holland, officers will often wound a suspect. This was the case when a man injured two American tourists with a knife at Amsterdam Central Station. He was wounded by a shot from the police who responded in nine seconds and then arrested.
4
Yes, crying on the stand in your own defense only works when you are auditioning for a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.
5
I feel sorry for the officer. Been there. He should have stood his ground from where he was. If the kid charged him in this case he had enough time to shoot him. If he ran away you follow him. The kid was erratic with his behavior. The charge of guilt should have been mansluater for his bad judgement. It was a tough choice to go to a jury trial. An experienced judge would have convicted him of 2nd degree manslaughter.
2
One victory in about 15 losses is not really a victory to be celebrated. As a country we have so much further to go on this issue. Video is helping, but we still see officers getting acquitted when it is clear what they have done. In the Danny Shaver case the judge did everything to instruct the jury they had only one option, to acquit. This is why they kneel.
Many accounts suggest that this case was a slam dunk, that the officer had no chance. The sixteen gunshots surely did not help him. So the question becomes why he went to trial rather than seeking a plea deal.
The suggestion here is that jurors tend to believe cops blindly, so the cop here was looking for sympathy in the face of a sure defeat at trial. That suggests that his attorneys believed that jury prejudice would carry the day..
There are endless accounts of not guilty verdicts where guilt is apparent. But I am skeptical. Jurors hear the facts and they are instructed about the law. And most are guided by the interests of justice, not by flagrant prejudice.
1
The murder of Laquan McDonald and many similar atrocities against people of color is why Colin Kaepernick and others have taken a knee. This country since its very beginning has failed to treat minorities as full citizens.
4
Officer Jason Van Dyke need not worry. Take heart. Justice Kavannauh has gone to the SC. You may spend some time in jail because the packed SC in the final appeal will acquit you.
1
When will the media report the following facts and help save lives in my beloved Chicago?
1) The city of Chicago uses force against its citizens at a lower rate than nationally.
2) The small differences in the rates of use of force rate between blacks and whites is more equitable in Chicago than the national average.
3) Use of force does not occur in 96% of white arrests and 96.7% of black arrests according the the same data used in the Obama-era U.S. Department of Justice Report to condemn CPD for using “excessive force.” Police shootings represent less than 1% of total shootings in the city, and police homicides less than 2% of the total.
4) Citizens of Chicago were no more likely to be killed per arrest from 2009–2016 compared to American citizens on average in 2017. Chicagoans the past three years were far less likely to be shot by police than the first half of the decade.
5) The odds of being shot as a Chicago citizen are almost the same, around 1 in 300,000, as citizens nationwide for the years 2015–2016. This indicates a cognitive dissonance in the perceptions echoed throughout the city, and backed by the misleading claims of the Police Accountability Task Force Executive Summary: “CPD’s own data gives validity to the widely held belief the police have no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color.” Lethal force against blacks nearly matches CPD’s arrest and crime suspect data, and both are omitted in all reports and nearly all media coverage.
3
Of course police officers have a difficult thankless job but these unions and other officers offering unconditional support to these criminals makes me think oversight and nanny cams continues to be a great idea.
After reading one article, I am not nearly informed enough to say whether or not justice was served in this particular case.
But it is a tremendous relief to see ANY police officer held accountable in any way for the extraordinary number of police killings in America.
Police in American view the public as their enemy. Not surprisingly, with the advent of all these cameras revealing what cops actually do, the public is finally beginning to return the favor.
As a white male, I’m well aware that the highest number of unarmed citizens killed are, per capita, black men. Next in line is white men.
So this isn’t a racial issue (though it clearly is a gender issue).
This is a problem of a government out of control, terrorizing and killing citizens, rather than being held accountable by them.
It’s shameful and an embarrassment.
1
I have for a long time advocated that police salaries should be partly composed of a "safe policing bonus", from which $1000 would be deducted for every shot they fire, regardless of the reason. A policeman in legitimate fear for his life would fire those bullets needed to survive, regardless of whether it cost him $1000 per shot, but he would not spend $16000 to kill some youth who was already running away from him.
Yeah ok he went overboard and it was obvious, it's unsettling that we had to worry he'd have a Trump voter on the jury who'd bring his own facts. The question remains why did not one officer at the scene stop him, or at least arrest him? Is a cop uniform a license to kill?
If a cop in uniform goes to his wife's workplace to shoot her down, do the other cops wait until he finished off all 16 rounds before calling the union rep lawyer and circling the blue wagons then add insult to unjury pounding the taxpayer to fight an obvious murder in court?
I’m a 63 year old white guy. I was pulled over on my motorcycle for speeding yesterday. Helmet off, sitting on my bike the cop with eyes wide and hand on his guy asks if I’m armed. First question. With all the gun nuts carrying here in Florida, the cops are running scared.
I can’t imagine driving while black. It must be terrifying for a black person wondering if the cop will just shoot first.
The police officer should not have murdered him, and I agree the police officer should be locked up for this crime.
However, let’s not act like McDonald was some innocent kid on his way back home from the library eating an ice cream cone. He had a knife in his hand, and when told by the police to stop walking and drop the knife, he defiantly chose not to listen to them.
When a group of police officers are pointing their guns at you and telling you to halt and drop your knife, isn’t it a good idea for you to comply with those orders no matter if you are black, white, Latino, Asian, gay, straight, male or female?
So, regular Americans considered ALL the evidence in front of them and concluded the officer was guilty. Republican senators considered SOME OF the selected evidence in front of them and waived through a SCOTUS nominee to confirmation.
I know which group I'd rather have deciding the fate of someone of compromised character. Kudos on the Van Dyke verdict, Chicago. Do any of the jurors want to run for Senate?
The wheels of our justice system may grind slowly, but eventually justice is served.
For some reason only he knows, Van Dyke arrived at the scene revved up and ready to kill, not just shoot. A shame--never fired his gun before and suddenly goes nuclear. The jury made the right call.
Thank heavens for video. Without it, the police would have gotten away with this again, as they have since the Emancipation.
I think it was critical to this story to explain the race of each juror. We know that white man's justice is no justice at all. The jury convicted second degree murder. Essentially the killer got off scot free.
Amen to the verdict. Enough said.
Ow Trump will pardon him. According to Trump
Police need to go through lots of realistic trading scenarios for their own protection and protection of the public.
If they don’t show aptitude to make these decisions at the police academy, they shouldn’t be allowed to become police for their own protection and protection of the public.
14
@Curtis Blanco, agreed. Furthermore, the system that does not adequately vet candidates to the police force and therefore allows men and women onto the police force who are dangenerous to the public, needs to be held accountable. Until this happens, tragedies like this will continue.
@Curtis Blanco cops do all sorts of realistic training. Sometimes the local TV stations would take the camera in and show us what they do. It's just that some cops, for whatever reason, decide to go rogue and not follow what they were trained to do. If you're a fireman you know to put on your air tank and mask and not just rush into a burning building to rescue anyone.
The city and Police Union maintained a false narrative, for a year, that Lanquan had lunged at the officer. Until a journalist sued for release of the video.
57
@AAA
Thank god for the press and their role in preserving the truth.
4
Grateful jury made the right decision. Today particularly, it's nice to feel proud of at least one aspect of America.
38
The whole category of crime "rarely properly prosecuted police murder" needs to be addressed. And for the record, ‘We Just Didn’t Buy It’ can be translated to mean, "We were ready & willing to buy a pack of ridiculously biased lies about self-sense of danger, but he wasn't a good enough actor." In other words the jury was reviewing a movie not judging evidence, and got it right by happenstance.
7
@CK. I disagree. They did the right thing. A majority stated guilty and only two not guilty on first straw ballot. Maybe for those 2 there is a question but the jury is to be commended.
Juries should be deliberate, regardless
@CK "Blue legs good! Black legs bad!" to paraphrase Orwell. But that's how the police state known as Chicago has been run since at least 1968...
1
I’m always shocked when they can get a jury without at least one LEO fanatic. I was on a jury and a woman, before the trial said there was nothing she was not going to believe from the officers involved.
6
When Bill O'Reilly interviewed candidate Trump in August, 2016, the former sexual assaulter asked the latter how to solve Chicago's crime problem, with homicides up nearly 50 percent, Trump replied:
"How? By being very much tougher than they are right now. They're right now not tough. I could tell you this very long and quite boring story. But when I was in Chicago, I got to meet a couple of very top police. I said, 'How do you stop this? How do you stop this? If you were put in charge — to a specific person — do you think you could stop it?' He said, 'Mr. Trump, I'd be able to stop it in one week.' And I believed him 100 percent." Trump said.
When O'Reilly asked whether the unnamed officer told him how, Trump said: "No, he wants to use tough police tactics, which is OK when you have people being killed."
Unsurprisingly, the response from Chicago police was that Trump had not met with any top brass, and that "the best way to address crime is through a commitment to community policing and a commitment to stronger laws to keep illegal guns and repeat violent offenders off the street."
28
This incident reminds me again of an interview with a psychologist who described a white police officer confessing that he is afraid of black men. That fear appears to be what motivates so many killings, murders really, of black men. When will it stop?
27
@SueG
Maybe when black men stop being such violent criminals? Idk. Just a thought.
2
@SueG
I guess someone who has irrational fear of a sector of the population they are supposed to protect and defend is not qualified to be a police officer.
3
It’s too bad those jurors weren’t the ones voting on the Supreme Court nomination.
34
I support the juror's decision to convict. That said, I have witnessed police training videos where an attacker wielding a knife has closed the entire distance between himself and a defending police officer before the police officer could unholster his gun. With that as a given, this killing does NOT enter into the realm of self-defense because McDonald was shot 16 times - way over the top as a deterrent.
That said, officers are trained to keep firing until an attacker is no longer a threat.
This is about racism; poor police training; the stress of policing; poor choices (on both sides); and, a failure to properly evaluate police officer's on a regular basis and remove officers from the field when they are showing signs of stress (one of which is abusive behavior).
RIP Laquan McDonald
17
Hmm... Didn’t Van Dyke decide what the distance between he and Laquan would be by running up on him? Doesn’t that suggest poor judgment, especially for someone who had been on the force for almost 20 years? If Van Dyke was so afraid of Laquan, who was obviously walking and veering away from all the officers present, why was Van Dyke rushing toward him? It seems clear he was rushing toward Laquan to kill him, doesn’t it? Van Dyke exclaimed, as he rushed forth to offer “assistance” that the other nine or so cops did not need from him (unless he was transporting a taser to the scene), “Oh my god, we’re going to have to shoot the guy.” And that, tragically, is what he came to do and did.
As for the idea that a cop should “keep firing until an attacker is no longer a threat,” I am struggling to discern and pinpoint exactly when Laquan became a threat to Van Dyke. As one of the witnesses to the event, Jose Torres, testified, “He [Laquan] was just trying to get away from them [the cops].” Torres also questioned, “Why the f— are they still shooting him when he’s on the ground?”
It was an act so unconscionable, so unspeakable, it’s still traumatizing. As a Black citizen of Cook County, who is frequently in Chicago, it’s just terribly painful. Rest In Peace, Laquan.
3
I've talked to a cop who had quit working the area between Evanston and Chicago. She said it was too dangerous as residents hate and sometimes deliberately target, the police. Does anyone think cops want to work there? Pretty much everyone (normal) suffers from PTSD.
The police are often victims that no one talks about or supports for politically correct reasons. They feel that no one has their back and sometimes, out of fear, rage and trauma, they overreact.
9
@Kai There is no area between Evanston and Chicago. They are contiguous. Evanston is directly north of Chicago. For the last 7 years, there have been two or three murders a year in Evanston (less than the national average) and at most 6 or 7 in Rogers Park (population 52,000). Both areas are considerably more safe than large areas on the west and south sides of Chicago.
31
@Kai If they don’t want to work there or find it too stressful, quit. Don’t stay at a job that makes you sick or turns you into a frightened cop who loses his cool.
1
@Kai the police force has each others backs. That's why the public doesn't have their back anymore- because too often clean cops covered for dirty cops.
1
Sixteen shots on a darkened street hit their target. Most police handguns only hold 16 rounds, one in the chamber, fifteen in the magazine. To have all 16 hit their target means the shots were deliberately and carefully aimed. Not the action of a panicked person acting in fear of imminent attack.
A three inch blade? That's the blade of a small pocket knife. Police carry these knives around to place in the hand of their victims after they murder them. So they can claim self defense.
41
be careful of those life threatening "menacing stares"... apparently looking at the police in a "menacing" manner can get you shot...
65
@Robert "Menacing Stares" while Black...
2
@Robert Remember, there was no menacing stare from Laquan McDonald, he was looking and walking away from the officer all the time.
3
Yes, Apparently citizens of this "Exceptional" nation are now supposed walk or drive down the street in total fear. Ever mindful that should a delicate "peace officer" approach you, to smile or act very respectful. Even though this very demeanor will get you shot or suspect for being "menacing or disrespectful".
This would be almost laughable, if not for the fact that it happens - over & over & over.
5
This is extremely sad for both the victim and the cop. Only the video, which the police released only kicking and screaming, was able to bring out the truth of the confrontation and shooting. It may very well be that this police officer was not concerned with the life of a black person well before this sad event, and Chicago police with that kind of thinking should not be on the force.
28
@lester ostroy. why is this sad for the cop? He got what he deserved.
2
Laquan McDonald had a long life before him.
His absence will be missed.
Decades worth of crimes will go uncommitted. Cars not broken into. Wallets unmugged.
11
@WillT26 Shame on you and the people who liked your post. A human being was murdered. That is a grievous crime. Your post stands for the wrongheaded notion that people with drug or criminal histories should die because they might Re-offend in the future. You completely misunderstand the principle of the rule of law. It means the police can’t be judge, jury and executioner. Your callous comment shows no understanding of the law or humanity.
2
@WillT26 Even if this guy went out every night and was a petty criminal, he did not deserve to die. The police are not our court system, they aren’t vigilantes.
3
They accused prosecutors of "excluding white people" despite only one black juror being selected. Reminds me of the silly raving about a "war on white men" whenever white men don't get exactly what they want.
62
He got off easy.
Without that badge, it would be 1st degree murder.
44
@Chris - Without a badge he wouldn't have been involved. Hasn't been sentenced yet so we shall see.
4
@Chris If he were not a cop and black it would not even be prosecuted, because no witnesses would have come forward.
1
At least in this case justice delayed has not been denied on so many levels. Officer Van Dyke was not able to hide behind his shield. The facts came out and irregardless of the color of their skin the jurors called it as they saw it. Finally the politicians and police officials who tried to unfairly control the situation and delayed the release of the video have felt the wrath of the public's outrage.
25
@P Lock
Those politicians and police officials should also suffer the consequences for their actions.
2
Say a prayer for the relatively impoverished minorities trapped in Chicago’s inner city tonight. Over the past several decades, Chicago’s ghetto has set an unwelcome standard for gun violence. As of this weekend, Chicago has experienced 432 homicides of which most have been shootings with young adult victims by largely unknown offenders. Chicago’s violence is so bad that serious observers find a silver lining in the figure simply because it is lower than the murder rate by this time in 2017. Hopefully, a new city administration will bring necessary funding, educational and vocational improvements to significantly reduce the violence.
7
@Howard Gregory - Not that your prayer idea has meaning, but 98% of the people there are living real lives that include family, work, etc. and shootings have nothing to do with their lives. The gun violence is between groups of a specific demographic of young men handling drugs & money like when Capone had alcohol to distribute.
You write as though life in Chicago is a crime scene, it's not.
17
@CK
If you don’t mind, I would like to suggest that you share your comment with conservative journalists, such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Ann Coulter, for their opinions. I wonder if they share your view.
@Howard Gregory Nearly all of these gang murders are committed by known offenders, but no one wants to be a rat.
I lived in Chicago for17 years. I was astonished that a mostly whit jury would put away a white copy for killing a black youth. Absolutely astonished.
What's important here to understand about Chicago is that had not a court ordered the dashcam video released, Jason Van Dyke would be on the street. As it was, Mayor Rahm Emmanuel knew what was on the video and withheld it. How's that for civic responsibility? Then, after a judge forced the city to make the tape available, the city paid Laquan McDonald's family a puny $5-million...for what?
What of Officer Van Dyke's fellow officers who were at the scene and who perjured themselves, at first defending the shooting and then, after the release of the video, walked back their sworn testimony? This was a major cover-up from beginning to end, a miniature thumbnail sketch in the one-sided, tyrannical racist domination by the Chicago Police Department against all people of color. The only mayor who fought against it was Harold Washington and he died shortly after his second term began, in 1987. In effect, nothing changed.
Full disclosure: I saw a crime in progress and ran after a Chicago policeman to report it. He threw his flashlight at me. This was in 1974. Neither the mayor's office nor the heavily-white ethnic city councilmen will lift a finger to hinder the predations of the CPD. The department has had two black police chiefs but they were (and are) window dressing, a kind of opiate for the masses.
Nothing has changed.
36
I agree 100% with this verdict. After listening to 16 shots and getting all the information I really felt that Van Dyke didnt plan on murdering McDonald when he pulled up in that squad car. I really didnt feel that it was first degree murder.
Rather, second degree murder is the correct charge. He murdered McDonald, that much was obvious from the video. But from his testimony I dont believe he wanted to kill him or planned to kill him.
Van Dyke will spend a long time behind bars, and he deserves this verdict. The people of Chicago deserve this verdict.
11
My god what does it take to get a first degree murder conviction? He shot the kid 16 TIMES! 2nd degree murder conviction sentence starts at 4 years. Guess how much time he will serve? I guarantee less time then black teen doing time for selling marijuana.
42
Premeditation.
3
The jury gave the correct verdict. Guilty. The video camera is a boon to recording what actually happened and when it happened. Memory is faulty and sometimes self-serving.
I think that Officer Van Dyke acted as the personification of the Law: he was judge, jury, and executioner. Unfortunately, he was gravely mistaken. Sympathy for his family and the McDonald family.
12
Some Justice!
Amen.
9
If Mr. Van Dyke didn't shoot Laquan McDonald in the back, in cold blood, the Mayor (who decided not to re-run for election early next year), former District Attorney, and former Police Commissioner would still either have their jobs or be working toward another 4 years in Office.
And finally, Mr. Van Dyke wouldn't be looking at his career ruined, to say nothing of the prospect of spending time in prison.
All for those 16 shots into Laquan McDonald's back that didn't need to be fired.
10
If Jason Van Dyke had been appointed to the Supreme Court he would have been confirmed by the Senate.
37
We are all lucky he was tied up with this trial...
Who are you going to believe. Me or your lying eyes.
27
Anyone who says “this isn’t about race” is not thinking clearly. This has been about race for the entire history of the USofA. The phenomenon is hardly new. The technology is. These officers would not have even been brought to trial in the pre-smart phone days. They would have lied together on the police report and that would have been that.
Race is embedded in every story of this country, up to and including the “election” of Donald Trump. When his supporters say “we’re taking our country back!” ask them “from whom?” Wealth creation, poverty, and criminal justice all begin with issues of race. To deny that is just plain wrong. If we don’t own our racist past and present, we will not create a great future.
27
In the most prominent trial of a while police officer who shot an unarmed black male, 11 white jurors and one black juror reached a guilty verdict. The jurors insisted that the matter was not about race.
The media has turned these shootings into crisis of racism. But jury members insist they are all wrong. The message is that racial stereotyping by the media is is off base and harmful.
11
@michjas, the shooting itself is very much about race. But if you’re a juror, the decision is not whether the cop was racist, but whether he murdered.
12
@michjas
In an area with 25% black population the jury had one black juror, and still the defense was claiming that the prosecutors were discriminating against white jurors. Please, explain your argument to me again?
3
Another example of the disruptive effects of technology. Digital cameras prevent police from arbitrarily killing misbehaving young Black males, as they have been doing forever with impunity. The jury clearly said it was the dash-mounted camera footage that convinced them the officer was guilty. No camera, no conviction. Technology can't be all bad.
24
When he is sentenced to spend a long time in prison and the gates of prison close behind him, then justice will be done.
15
The other story here is not the conviction, but the conspiracy by police and city officials to suppress the tape. Until the tape surfaced several police officers lied about what happened that night and it’s still not clear whether mayor Emanuel was involved cin the cover up.
But what is clear is that without the tape this officer who committed murder would be walking away as a free man and likely to kill another unarmed black citizen.
71
I understand people’s frustration with the lack of a first degree murder verdict, but I find the second degree verdict more meaningful. A first degree murder charge only speaks only to the intentions of this officer(i.e., he killed Lacquan knowing his actions were illegal). A second degree charge (i.e., not believing his actions were illegal) sends a message to all police: being scared is not enough to justify killing someone.
34
@Tynan I find it hard to believe that this man was frightened of Laquan McDonald; the boy was staggering, barely conscious, and armed with a small knife. Lying on the ground, how much of a threat could he have been? What I saw was an act of unmitigated viciousness as VanDyke emptied his gun, firing long after McDonald had to be dead. This was a just verdict, the only verdict any reasonable person could have decided on.
17
@Lacey Sheridan
Whether or not he was actually scared , his defense was based on his being scared; in fact (as the article points out), many police who have faced similar charges have used similar defenses. The point is this sends the message that it can't be used as a defense.
3
@Lacey Sheridan He lay there and no cop went up to him to offer a word of compassion as he laid there or checked to see if maybe by some miracle he was still alive. They treated him like he was roadkill.
1
A badge is not a license to kill indiscriminately and without reasonable justification. Progress.
22
“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice”.
14
Yes, he shot him 16 times, more than enough to kill him. But who is more valuable to our society, a drug-addled thief or a young policeman? If anything, the cop should be charged with no more than manslaughter, if anything. My opinion, of course.
6
@Ayecaramba How do you determine a value of human life? Many have recalibrated their wayward lives to become upstanding citizens.
But no one has a god given right to say whose life is more worthy.
@Ayecaramba Indeed a question of Solomenic importance but possibly written in a deceptive way to obfuscate. Why not choose between "a drug-addled thief" or an "inexperienced trigger happy cop"?
More valuable? Thats purely a judgement call which I could not make. Maybe Solomons Wisdom would call for amputation of the offenders index fingers rather than being incarcerated for second degree murder? My opinion, of course.
6
@Ayecaramba divisive troll comment. NYT please check source -
18
Misuse of video cameras is destroying our police forces. The video always show just a moment in time and never captures how the whole incident unfolded. The police have to be ready to respond on a seconds notice when the criminal draws a weapon or attacks. Shame on armchair quarterbacks, who often hate the police to begin with.
3
@bill t What more could the video have shown? It was recording for a couple minutes before the shooting and before the officer arrived on the scene and still recording after the shooting.
THIS officer had time and DIDN'T have to shoot within seconds, the criminal did not draw a weapon or attack. The officer attacked unprovoked.
35
@bill t "Misuse of the video camera?" It shows the officer pulling up (there were other officers already present), drawing his weapon and firing. What more do you need to see? Mr. McDonald never approached the officer who shot him (although the officer stated that he had) and it's all recorded.
15
@bill t, this wasn't misuse of video cameras. This was the correct use of video evidence.
I've contributed to my local police benevolent association for years. I believe weeding out the bad cops is good for police in general.
55
More De-policing on it's way.
3
Finally, justice. Who could watch someone being shot in the back and say it was justified?
34
Boo, as this case shows- a cop.
2
It seems pretty obvious that the dash cam footage was the largest piece of the puzzle that resulted in a conviction. I know there were initial stories about Brandon Smith and his crew that brought this too light. Any follow up stories on their reaction, or why a group of independent freelancers were the driving force behind this instead of well established organizations like the Times? Also, are the fights to release this footage still the work of freelancers?
20
It is chilling to imagine what the verdict would have been had the shooting not been recorded on the dashcam. He refutes the video and some in the jury were obviously moved by his testimony.
18
Yes. No video would mean no conviction. Three other cops under investigation for submitting false reports on this matter in an effort to cover up this murder.
33
What always bothers me is the support of the police after the fact. They should remain neutral. Don't they realize that they are giving the impression that they believe that a police officer is always right, and that the public should simply accept their internal review? That they do not answer to us?
The policeman is not always guilty, or always innocent. And there are often gray areas. But the police union always sees things the same way. Any shooting, no matter what, is justified. This is very disconcerting to much of the public, myself included..
81
@Billy from Brooklyn More to the point, they went well beyond just supporting the officer. The police reports were clearly false. They outright LIED to protect one of their own. That is unacceptable.
48
@Jerry...hopefully the officers will be terminated from the force for lying in their reports.
@Billy from Brooklyn
You are absolutely right. You would think the union wold also be concerned about the integrity and the image of their profession and the image. My union wouldn't be putting so many resources to support just any employee no matter what they did.
2
There were 16 shots.
Rules out a not guilty verdict.
27
You do not have any idea about what you are talking about. The number of shots fired has zero to do with wether or not it was a good shoot.
1
@Jesse James
The autopsy report documents 16 shots that struck the victim.
1
A few things about the jury.
1) While having only one African American on a Cook County jury is ridiculously low the relevant number isn’t the 25 percent of those that live in the county. Only registered voters are called for jury duty. The percentage of African Americans registered is far below that of Whites. That’s why Laquan McDonalds uncle urged voter registration at his speech yesterday.
2) The jury was diverse in terms of SES and education. Everything from unemployed high school graduate and a fed ex driver to a wealthy financial analyst and an engineer.
3) The racial make up was 7 Whites, 3 Hispanics, 2 Asians and 1 African American
4) one of the jurors is working to become a police officer, a “ life long dream” .
Very few thought that this jury would vote to convict. It is worth noting that the aggravated assault convictions carry more jail time than the second degree murder conviction up to 100 years.
31
In Illinois, jury pools are drawn from drivers licenses and other id, not just voter rolls. The reason for the call to register to vote is because police are administered by elected officials. The point is to avoid illegal police violence in the first place by electing the right people, not to serve on juries after the killing.
8
Just watched the video. Murder was COMPLETELY unwarranted....just tase the kid and be done with it. The blatant disregard for human life is pretty insane.
137
@Chris Haynes After watching the video several times, it is hard for me to imagine what the officer could possibly been thinking. The officer's claim that he feared for his life as he fired shots at someone walking away and then lying on the ground was simply not remotely credible.
37
@Chris Haynes Tasers do not work well on guys who are stoned on PCP. What else should he have done?
1
@Ayecaramba Hmm...shot him in the legs, maybe. He might also have waited more than six seconds when the other cops at the scene saw no reason to shoot. Basically, he and his partner pull up next to other police cars, he hops out gun drawn, and shoots.
1
Finally!
57
The officer was allowed too much deference. From my perspective, I saw a unmitigated, unreconstituted sociopathic racist.
I guess second degree will have to do.
101
@Bob F. - after shots seven and eight, did anybody think the following shots were aggravated?
3
Throughout this piece, the writer refers to the defendant by his full name and title: Officer Van Dyke. But the victim, Laquan McDonald is referred to repeatedly only by his first name: Laquan. Why does the man who has been found guilty of killing someone deserve more respect than the young man who was killed? It concerns me that this disrespect was seemingly invisible to both the reporter and The New York Times editors.
294
@Philippa Kirby
That's certainly one way to look at it, but often in journalism stories the first name is used as a term of endearment rather than disrespect. The juxtaposition of the young victim [first name] is on purpose contrasted with the authority figure [Officer last name] who has violated [first name] the victim. I don't think it was intended as disrespect.
7
@Philippa Kirby
Well, as I always tell my psychology students -"Subconscious prejudice is the most powerful type."
2
@Philippa Kirby: That's former officer Van Dyke. And formerly alive human child Laquan McDonald. And this is why officers should be wearing cameras. I don't think justice was completely served here, but it was somewhat served.
7
Let’s see how many years he gets. I think it’s up to the judge’s discretion since it’s 2nd Degree Murder, but I may be wrong. That will be the real verdict.
94
@Sherry Yes. It is up to the judge. It’s probably the aggravated assault convictions that will matter most. Over 100 years possible with maximum time served consecutively.
17
@Sherry Van Dyke must also be sentenced for the 16 counts of aggravated battery, which are highly likely to greatly extend his sentence.
1
While our "government" moves further right, maybe regular white people are becoming embarrassed?
It is really repugnant to see "officers" of the law firing tons of bullets into the citizens they are sworn to protect. And it should be automatic firing for this kind of gross slaughter.
America's racism has always been barbaric and over the top ugly. It hasn't changed.
121
Finally the outcome we've all been waiting for. And I love the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police spokesman complaining about the "chilling effect" this will have on police as if that's some sort of threat. That's literally what we've been calling for! Mission accomplished!
173
@BrooklynDogGeek [[I love the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police spokesman complaining about the "chilling effect" this will have on police as if that's some sort of threat.]]
A threat is basically what it amounts to.
The implication is that cops who work in tough neighborhoods will sit in their squad cars and say "Let 'em kill each other. See if I care."
That may actually be what happens in some cases, but here is the problem with that. They're saying they'll leave the law abiding citizens to fend for themselves, which reinforces the mindset that "Y'all only show up when somebody gets killed." The taxpayer who calls about the noise complaint or the drug activity or the person with a gun, he gets no response. Cops roll by two hours later.
So the taxpayer stops calling and the cops stop getting intel about the problem areas. At that point, they are an occupying army. And we see how well that's worked out in Afghanistan.
18
@BrooklynDogGeek
Right.. Maybe now we won't have to fear a police officer will "mistakenly" come into our homes, shoot us for no reason, leave us to bleed out and then claim "oops, I made a mistake."
16
AAAAAAAAAMEN!
1
For all the right reasons, this is the first glimmer of hope we've had all week -- especially after the much contested hearings of Brett Kavanaugh, which was all but decided the moment Donald Trump put forth his name as a Supreme Court nominee.
At least in this case Justice has been served, and it isn't always blind.
52
The photo accompanying this article by Alyssa Schukar wonderfully captures the pain and anger these police shootings render in the black community (my community). The man at its center presents a touching juxtaposition of vulnerability and conviction. Simply beautiful.
27
@Michelle N.
So this is what you want "your community" to be?
16 year old kids who carry knives around and disobey police orders?
My kids are older than 16, I raised them to be a lot better than that. So here I am working hard to raise my kids right and having to deal with people and their "communities".
The problem in certain "communities" is not the police, It is a total lack of accountability within the "community".
The photo that so touches you demonstrates people hiding behind the color of their skin. The symbols waved are racist. Would you be so gleeful if demonstrators were waving "White Pride" flags?
I really don't want to live in a country with people who share your views. Whether they are white, black or something else. Because those views have consequence.
Sure, the cop should not have shot the kid 16 times. Sure any moron can pull up circumstances of police misconduct. But, I have yet to see any study that indicates a pattern of unequal policing based on race. To the contrary, Prof. Roland Fryer, of Harvard, unexpectedly came to the opposite conclusion in his study.
Exasperating
5
@James Please review what Fryer's study really shows. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-...
The study shows considerable racial bias in almost all types of police use of force, except shootings.
Many doubt that his conclusions with regard to shootings are correct (he's an economist, not a criminologist), but his study, which you mention, finds definite and considerate unequal policing based on race.
Exasperating, indeed.
I see whites waving flags with pride all the time. Every time I attend a Columbus Day parade or Bastille day parade I see people taking pride in their heritage. I don't have a problem with. But when blacks want to show some pride it's racist. Most blacks in this country don't have a clue as to what country their ancestors came from. So they have to use a "black" pride flag among other things to show off their heritage. And there's nothing wrong or racist with that.
Two jurors were initially leaning towards not guilty---what video were they watching?
63
One black juror, and "Defense lawyers accused prosecutors of excluding white people."
Despite a rare just verdict in a cop on black killing, somehow I don't get the feeling that the dawn of true justice has arrived in these cases. Preventing a true cross-section of the community to be seated on the jury and remarks like the "boy scout" one show us how the "race card" is still alive & well in our legal system.
Kudos to the jury though for "not buying it."
162
He thought he was acting legally at the time? As he fired shot after shot into Laquan’s limp body? And why wouldn’t he? Over 50 years since a murder charge of an officer. He believed the law was on his side. And there is the problem.
210
Thank heavens there is finally some justice. So many acts of murder by police have gone unpunished in spite of camera footage clearly showing they executed people at close range with no justification.
149
@Fern
Thank God there was camera footage!
Though the administration had to be forced through court action to show it to the public.
Now let's see what happens to Van Dyke's accomplices, the two who lied in attempt to evade justice and support the "blue wall."
11
how can be be guilty of 2nd degree murder and not guilty of 'official misconduct'?
did the jury shoot itself in the foot?
can it be ever be official conduct to murder someone?
cops are gun crazy: recall the woman cop who killed a guy in his own apartment.
39
@lin Norma - it appears that "aggravated assault" carries a stronger penalty than second degree murder. He could get 5 years for each count of the 16 counts he got for each shot he fired. That's 80 years.
4
@lin Norma
[[official misconduct
n. improper and/or illegal acts by a public official which violate his/her duty to follow the law and act on behalf of the public good. Often such conduct is under the guise or "color" of official authority.]]
I think the jury came to the conclusion that the officer was scared but that his reaction, as a veteran cop, was inappropriate and that 16 shots was extreme.
2
@lin Norma
Yes, I would have thought that all of the lying he did to cover up his crime would qualify as "misconduct". Had it not been for the video footage of the killing, he would have got away with it and had a few beers with his pals to celebrate.
1