Current Events > Teens charged with murder of 8 year old after police shot her

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://bit.ly/30iMy3i

Two teenagers who prosecutors say started a gunfight outside a Sharon Hill high school football game that led to the fatal police shooting of 8-year-old Fanta Bility in August have been charged with murder in connection with her death.

Angelo AJ Ford, 16, and Hasein Strand, 18, face first-degree murder, aggravated-assault, and gun charges in the Aug. 27 shooting, according to Delaware County District Attorney Jack Stollsteimer.

Ford remains in custody, denied bail. It was unclear if he had hired an attorney. Strand had not been arrested as of Wednesday and was being sought by U.S. Marshals, according to prosecutors.

Stollsteimer has said Fanta was struck by a bullet fired by one of three Sharon Hill police officers who were monitoring the crowd leaving Academy Park High School after the season-opening football game against Pennsbury. It remains unclear which officer fired the shot that killed her, but all three have told investigators they opened fire on a vehicle they mistakenly believed was involved in the shooting between Ford and Strand, which prosecutors said took place about a block from the stadium.

Fanta was struck once in the back and pronounced dead at the scene. Three other people were wounded by the gunfire from police, including her older sister.

The legal basis for charging the two teens is very simple, First Assistant District Attorney Tanner Rouse said in a statement. They were attempting to kill one another that night, and as a direct result a little girl is dead.

An investigative grand jury will be impaneled Nov. 18 to begin deciding whether the officers will face criminal charges, according to Stollsteimer.

Fantas shooting has drawn national attention and local protest marches, with activists and state legislators calling for the officers to be fired and criminally prosecuted. Sharon Hills borough council has hired attorney Kelley Hodge to lead an internal investigation into the police departments training policies, work that will likely begin after the grand jury completes its probe.

The Bility familys attorney, Bruce Castor, said Wednesday that the decision to charge the two teens was a gutsy move but said he believes that it will be difficult to convict them of murder.

Ultimately, Castor said, the familys attention is focused elsewhere.

I want the focus to remain on the Sharon Hill police officers whose negligent and reckless behavior in reacting as they did is what killed Fanta Bility, said Castor, who has sued the officers and the police department. From the point of view of the Bility family, these officers killed Fanta, and they need to be held accountable for that, and those responsible for their supervision and training need to be held accountable for that.

---

Fair, next
---

What in the hell

---

lilORANG posted...

Fair, next

WAT

---

what a world
---

Life sentences for those two teens pls

---

Cops aren't even fucking trying anymore

"Crime exists, and we wouldn't be here if it didn't, so any result of our negligence isn't actually our fault"

---

huh, that sets a precedent.

'yes, the officer shot the driver as he was pulling out his licence thinking he had a gun, but it was in response to a suspected gunfight halfway across the city. we have since charged the suspect with murder.'

---

It really depends on the exact layout of the scene. If it was simply gross negligence that has no reasonable justification, then it should be on the cops. If it's a case of just a tragic mistake caused by two assholes, then they should definitely receive the charges.

lilORANG posted...

Fair, next

You think its ok for cops to shoot at random vehicles because they believe a suspect may be in there?

---

Nemu posted...

It really depends on the exact layout of the scene. If it was simply gross negligence that has no reasonable justification, then it should be on the cops. If it's a case of just a tragic mistake caused by two assholes, then they should definitely receive the charges.

Why do you say this? If they mess up, it should be on them.
If they have guns and want to use them they need to be completely safe while doing so, or face charges. Not just...shrug all responsibility for their own actions onto others.

The teens could've been using Fanta as a human shield and it still shouldn't be on them if the cops shot her. Police officers have a lot of power and a lot of responsibility, it needs to be carefully controlled, even if it's difficult for them.

---

ViewtifulGrave posted...

You think its ok for cops to shoot at random vehicles because they believe a suspect may be in there?

Wtf, how did you get that from the article?
---

Dragon239 posted...

Why do you say this? If they mess up, it should be on them.
If they have guns and want to use them they need to be completely safe while doing so, or face charges. Not just...shrug all responsibility for their own actions onto others.

The teens could've been using Fanta as a human shield and it still shouldn't be on them if the cops shot her. Police officers have a lot of power and a lot of responsibility, it needs to be carefully controlled, even if it's difficult for them.

Not all situations can be boiled down to "they should have done X, Y, or Z." You're talking about live firefight. Sometimes people are just in a clusterfuck of a situation, and that leads to unfortunate deaths. Determining the fault of the officers depends on aspects like if they made a horrible judgement call even considering the situation and fired without even a second of thought, or if it's ultimately a wrong place, wrong time tragedy.

felony murder, next.

---

If it's a case of just a tragic mistake caused by two assholes

The teenagers did not pull the triggers on the guns of the police officers.

---

lilORANG posted...

Wtf, how did you get that from the article?

"The officers returned fire, police said, striking a vehicle that had been heading down Coates Street toward them. Their bullets struck the vehicle, and some went beyond it, striking Fanta, her older sister, and two other people walking near them as they left the stadium, authorities said.
The car, police later learned, had not been involved in the earlier shooting. Castor, who is also representing the cars occupants, has said they were recent alumni of Academy Park who were there to watch the football game."

read.

---

lilORANG posted...

Wtf, how did you get that from the article?

they opened fire on a vehicle they mistakenly believed was involved

justaguy3492 posted...

"The officers returned fire, police said, striking a vehicle that had been heading down Coates Street toward them. Their bullets struck the vehicle, and some went beyond it, striking Fanta, her older sister, and two other people walking near them as they left the stadium, authorities said.
The car, police later learned, had not been involved in the earlier shooting. Castor, who is also representing the cars occupants, has said they were recent alumni of Academy Park who were there to watch the football game."

read.

Let me take you back to grade school reading comp. What's the main idea here? Oh, it's about the kids being charged with murder?

Fair, next.
---

It's only a matter of years before some police department will be like "there's hostages, let's go in guns blazing and charge any surviving criminals with murder for the hostages we shot."

I get charging people for the deaths of others who die during the commission of a crime in cases like "two guys agreed to go rob a store and suspect A shot the cashier, so we're charging suspect B with manslaughter for helping carry out the crimes that directly led to the death of the cashier."

But this? If anyone dies, even from police negligence? Charging people for that is stupid. And it's been working pretty well against racial minorities and poor people unable to afford a proper lawyer.

Oh, but a rich kid not knowing basic concepts of road safety or right from wrong? Affluenza, no need for the kiddy gloves when they gotta coddle the killer instead.

---

lilORANG posted...

Let me take you back to grade school reading comp. What's the main idea here? Oh, it's about the kids being charged with murder?

Fair, next.

Which of the teenagers' bullets struck the child?

---

CyricZ posted...

The teenagers did not pull the triggers on the guns of the police officers.

If arsonists are charged with murder, no reason not to charge people who cause firefights with murder (if it is determined that the officers did not act negligently). Though I'm not familiar with the legal definition and how you determine fault in this case, so no real idea how easy it is to get these charges to stick.

CyricZ posted...

Which of the teenagers' bullets struck the child?

What is felony murder? I haven't even commented on the cops' roles, but that's all you can focus on. Why are you refusing to mention the asshole teens who got into a shootout in a public place?
---

Nemu posted...

If arsonists are charged with murder, no reason not to charge people who cause firefights with murder (if it is determined that the officers did not act negligently).

That's....not anywhere close to being the same thing...

---

Nemu posted...

If arsonists are charged with murder, no reason not to charge people who cause firefights with murder

What the fuck are you talking about

---

Nemu posted...

Though I'm not familiar with the legal definition and how you determine fault in this case, so no real idea how easy it is to get these charges to stick.

Felony murder theory of liability.

---

Fony posted...

elony murder, next.

This is beyond the idea of the Felony Murder.

Felony Murder you try to rob a bank and someone dies while this is happening.

In this case something happen at another location and the police randomly shots into the car that has nothing to do with. I know you love the cops but even you should not be cool with this .

---

This precedent was already set when cops lit up an empty car because they thought Chris Dorner was in it.

---

Nemu posted...

If arsonists are charged with murder, no reason not to charge people who cause firefights with murder (if it is determined that the officers did not act negligently). Though I'm not familiar with the legal definition and how you determine fault in this case, so no real idea how easy it is to get these charges to stick.

If a fire fighter shot a little girl think she was the fire. It would be on him.

---

Gwynevere posted...

What the fuck are you talking about

Hes talking about the felony murder rule, where a defendant can be charged with any deaths that occurred during a dangerous crime even if they werent the ones that killed the person. Reasoning is that the situation that led to the death(s) wouldnt have occurred if it werent for the crime being committed.

On one hand, I can agree with the teens being charged. On the other, what the hell were the cops doing opening fire without confirming what they were shooting at?

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

That's....not anywhere close to being the same thing...

Most arsonists are not planning for people to die. It's just a consequence of their stupidity. If someone dies in a firefight and it can be determined it is not the fault of the person who actually shot them, same thing.

doubt these charges are gona stick. seems like a smokescreen by the DA to have the officers be free from criminal implication.

---

We need badge cams

Nemu posted...

Most arsonists are not planning for people to die. It's just a consequence of their stupidity. If someone dies in a firefight and it can be determined it is not the fault of the person who actually shot them, same thing.

this girl didn't die in a firefight though. she died because cops shot at a completely unrelated vehicle.

---

Mormaurd posted...

Hes talking about the felony murder rule, where a defendant can be charged with any deaths that occurred during a dangerous crime even if they werent the ones that killed the person. Reasoning is that the situation that led to the death(s) wouldnt have occurred if it werent for the crime being committed.

This is pretty standard, I thought?

---

WeeWeiWiiWie posted...

This is pretty standard, I thought?

What's not standard is a license to kill literally anyone as long as you claim you thought you were doing it to stop a felony.

---

I'm confused. So two high schoolers start shooting each other, cops try to engage them and straight up miss?

I just can't picture how this all went down. I see two high schoolers firing bullets and three cops who decide to open fire on a random car

---

thronedfire2 posted...

this girl didn't die in a firefight though. she died because cops shot at a completely unrelated vehicle.

That's why it needs to be determined if the officers were acting negligently and thus murdered her, or if the officers were acting to the best of their ability in a horrible situation and accidentally caused an unrelated civilian death. Both are entirely possible outcomes.

WeeWeiWiiWie posted...

This is pretty standard, I thought?

Usual practice in cases like this, yeah. So its no surprise its one of the charges.

Could also be something the DA brings to the table as a charge that gets pulled for a plea deal. That happens a lot too.

---

Mormaurd posted...

Hes talking about the felony murder rule, where a defendant can be charged with any deaths that occurred during a dangerous crime even if they werent the ones that killed the person. Reasoning is that the situation that led to the death(s) wouldnt have occurred if it werent for the crime being committed.

On one hand, I can agree with the teens being charged. On the other, what the hell were the cops doing opening fire without confirming what they were shooting at?

Yeah, that much is well established. Trying to compare cops showing up and killing a random person to a person that intentionally set a building on fire is the part that's dumb as shit.

Either way, it shouldnt apply in this case because:

thronedfire2 posted...

this girl didn't die in a firefight though. she died because cops shot at a completely unrelated vehicle.

---

It would apply in this case since police responded to the shooting at that stadium. While unfortunate that the vehicle was mistakenly IDd, they wouldnt have responded if it werent for a shootout between the two teens.

Edit: it doesnt matter if it was the teens or the cops that shot the vehicle. Kids dead because of the violent crime the teens committed, which is grounds for felony murder.

---

Antifar posted...

It remains unclear which officer fired the shot that killed her, but all three have told investigators they opened fire on a vehicle they mistakenly believed was involved in the shooting between Ford and Strand, which prosecutors said took place about a block from the stadium.

In other words, all three officers fired their gun at an unconfirmed target. What would the sentence be if a random Joe did that? Triple it, and that's what these officers each deserve.

---

Mormaurd posted...

It would apply in this case since police responded to the shooting at that stadium. While unfortunate that the vehicle was mistakenly IDd, they wouldnt have responded if it werent for a shootout between the two teens.

Edit: it doesnt matter if it was the teens or the cops that shot the vehicle. Kids dead because of the violent crime the teens committed, which is grounds for felony murder.

monkmith posted...

huh, that sets a precedent.

'yes, the officer shot the driver as he was pulling out his license thinking he had a gun, but it was in response to a suspected gunfight halfway across the city. we have since charged the suspect with murder.'

---

Antifar posted...

Two teenagers who prosecutors say started a gunfight

Got it.

---

Umbreon posted...

In other words, all three officers fired their gun at an unconfirmed target. What would the sentence be if a random Joe did that? Triple it, and that's what these officers each deserve.

If the kid they killed was some politicians grandkid they would already be in jail.

---

Mormaurd posted...

It would apply in this case since police responded to the shooting at that stadium. While unfortunate that the vehicle was mistakenly IDd, they wouldnt have responded if it werent for a shootout between the two teens.

Edit: it doesnt matter if it was the teens or the cops that shot the vehicle. Kids dead because of the violent crime the teens committed, which is grounds for felony murder.

The point is that it's complete bullshit. If I get into a barfight and the cops get called, should I be on the hook for it if they barrel through 3 people smoking outside and then shoot the bartender?

---

Look at all the people who imagine non-existent scenarios as some kind of proof of something, lol. So dumb.

---

Um, even for a felony murder thing, this is fucking stupid.

Mormaurd posted...

It would apply in this case since police responded to the shooting at that stadium. While unfortunate that the vehicle was mistakenly IDd, they wouldnt have responded if it werent for a shootout between the two teens.

Edit: it doesnt matter if it was the teens or the cops that shot the vehicle. Kids dead because of the violent crime the teens committed, which is grounds for felony murder.

There are like always cops at events like this. It sounds like the cops assumed some random vehicle in the area at a time when random vehicles going through that area was completely reasonable due to a game just ending was involved in an incident and opened fire. It is entirely on the officers. There is no direct connection between the teens gunfight and this person's death.

---

monkmith posted...

huh, that sets a precedent.

Not really. The rule's roughly 200 years old and has been commonplace in criminal proceedings.

---

Gwynevere posted...

The point is that it's complete bullshit. If I get into a barfight and the cops get called, should I be on the hook for it if they barrel through 3 people smoking outside and then shoot the bartender?

I mean, the question really is were the officers actions unreasonable, given the situation (which is different than "was the outcome favorable"). And we just don't have enough information here.

---

Gwynevere posted...

The point is that it's complete bullshit. If I get into a barfight and the cops get called, should I be on the hook for it if they barrel through 3 people smoking outside and then shoot the bartender?

A typical bar fight isn't a felony unless you pull out a gun or something similar. It would normally be considered misdemeanor assault.

---