New Trial in Gidone Busch Shooting

A judge has overturned the verdict of one of the more notorious cases of police brutality and ordered a new trial: In 1999, police shot Gidone Busch of Borough Park, Brooklyn, 12 times. Police claimed the Hasidic man was charging at them with a religious hammer while his family charged they were using excessive force and later sued the city for unspecified damages. Busch had a history of mental illness, and other witnesses contradict claims that Busch had gotten very close to the police. A jury found the police not guilty of excessive force in the 2003 trial, but U.S. District Judge Sterling Johnson overturned that verdict, doubting the testimony of the police and one witness.

The NY Times article about the overturned verdict notes that since the shooting was of a Hasidic man, the case did not draw the same kind of outrage as the Amadou Diallo shooting, where a Bronx man was shot 41 times. This remind Gothamist of the film we saw earlier this year, Every Mother's Son. It's a documentary about the mothers of Busch, Diallo and another victim of excessive police force, Anthony Baez. The documentary put a more human face on stories that are splashed across newsprint and worked as both a cautionary tale about police force and a story about strength and healing as the mothers, Doris Busch Boskey, Kadiatou Diallo, and Iris Baez work to fight for their sons' memories and help others. The film, which was recently shown at the Tribeca Film Festival (where it won an audience award) and on PBS's POV, has a great site at PBS; there was an August update about the Busch case - apparently a juror was sleeping through the entire trial, another had ties to the police - and Busch Boskey's push for another trial.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jen Chung in News on September 10, 2004 7:49 AM

Comments [rss]

trustme

It wasn't a hammer. It was a very small ceremonial gavel. Trust the police to always hand out false and information, and the press to report it as fact.

S.D.

"so, the neighbors who wtinessed it are biased, and their accounts shouldn't be given much weight, but the cops version should be?"

Honey, I neither said or Implied that. What I did say was "let the trial determine that."

I Also point out: The neighbors ARE biased (So too are the cops). They've known this man for years. It will take an impartial judge and Jury to decide which witness to give more credence to. To further complicate matters: Two people will see the Same event differently. I could be wrong, but I think the entire confrontation lasted less than a minute. That's not a lot of time.

"Shoot in the leg"? Right.

Do you know:

How fast was that man approaching the cops? I don't.

How wildly was he swinging? I don't.

How much time they had to react? I Don't know this one either.

Were you there? I wasn't.

You want to Nail the Cops, Ok, I don't care. I do care about the rule of Law. Pure and Simple: That's my point. If a 2nd Jury Convicts, Fine.

"There is no way you can say some did not act excessively"?

Sure, Watch "Some did not Act excessivly".

Joking!

Look, I wasn't there. I'll say it again: "let the trial determine that."

SteveO

Exactly ... just because OJ was acquitted, doesn't mean he's not a double-murder. Just means the prosecution didn't prove their case. He still killed two people.

So did the 4 Dialo cops, they just weren't tried.

logic, whew

SD: Jen said 'a victim of excessive police force' not 'murdered by the police'. The man is dead, was known to be mentally impaired before the police got there, and, according to some testimony, was backing away from the police when they fired. If twelve officers opened fire on a man, who, at best, could fling an object at them, at least, say, 6, of them were firing 'excessively' -- assuming that several of them could reasonably conclude he couldn't possibly strike them with such disproportionate numbers (one hammer, twelve men -- he clearly wasn't Steven Seagal). In the Diallo case, as absurd as their claim was, he was reaching in his pocket. Busch's hands were in full view of the officers. There is no way you can say some did not act excessively. Murder must be determined by a trial, but a rational person can conclude the actions were excessive, even relying exclusively on the police testimony.

honey2

so, the neighbors who wtinessed it ae biased, and their accounts shouldn't be given much weight, but the cops version should be?

they have aninterest in making this hammer look like a wmd and poor mr. busch look like superman.

shoot him inthe leg,

S.D.

Ever see someone hit in the head with a Hammer? The Skull Fracture I've seen: It's not pretty. How would you Stop him? Ever try tackling a man who does NOT want to go down?

My point simply is:
<ul><li>How fast was that man approaching the cops?</li><li>How wildly was he swinging?</li><li>Are the Witness reliable or do they have a Bias (i.e. The poor man's Neigbors)?</li><li>What were the conditions on the scene?</li><li>What Equipment Did the cops have on site?</li></ul>Do they need to be held accountable for this mans Death? Absolutly. Are they Guilty of Murder? No idea as I wasn't there.

I say: let the trial determine that.

jt

Honey, you're spot on about what the police need -- better pay, better training, more accountability.

JT

honey2

This was excessive force. one guy with a claw hammer and how many police. He was hit by how many bullets, including one in the back. He had a HAMMER. yes, people have been killed by hammers--but not a group of specially trained men with GUNs. Commen sense.

The police need a raise. they need better training. AND they need to be held accountable for taking the life of someone they could have dealt with in a non-lethal manner.

Man,that escaped tiger in queens, with his man-killing jaws, was only shot with a tranquilizer gun. And Gidone Busch is killed for weilding a hammer? Common sense.

S.D.

"It's a documentary about the mothers of Busch, Diallo and another victim of excessive police force, Anthony Baez."

Jen, the NEW jury hasn't even been selected on this case, but in this one sentence you've apparently and definitively labeled this "excessive police force". IMO: You might want to be careful about that as the new Trial may come up with the same verdict. From everything **I've** read, it certainly looks like it may have been, But it may not be the case. (A juror was a Asleep and the Procecution TEAM NEVER noticed? Seems a little odd.)

NOTE: I'm not saying Excessive Force has NEVER Been used. I am saying, lets see what the New Trial brings out.

Furious D

Comparing the level of public outrage between Busch and Diallo is not quite apt. Diallo was shot on his doorstep while reaching for his I.D. In the Busch case, police responding to a call were met by an enraged man charging at them with a hammer. Not that that justifies his slaying.

Furious D

Comparing the level of public outrage between Busch and Diallo is not quite apt. Diallo was shot on his doorstep while reaching for his I.D. In the Busch case, police responding to a call were met by an enraged man charging at them with a hammer. Not that that justifies his slaying.