The Staten Island prosecutor, District Attorney Daniel Donovan, who failed to win an indictment in the Eric Garner killing appears to be riding his new-found to the U.S. Congress. If you believe that the killing of garner was wrong, here’s your chance to do something about it. Write-Ins will be permitted in this special election, whenever Gov. Cuomo decides it will be held. Why not launch a campaign to have everyone who is concerned by the shooting to write in Eric Garner’s name. That, if properly done, should certainly serve to properly frame Mr. Donovan’s name for the rest of his political career.
The video of the interrogation of John Crawford’s girlfriend has come to light and it sparks more questions than it answers. One of the responding officers, the one who shot Mr. Crawford, was also the shooter in the only other officer-involved killing in Beavercreek history, back in 2010. In that case, Officer Williams killed 45 year old Air Force Master Sgt. Scott A. Brogli after a domestic disturbance. According to a witnessing neighbor, Brogli was “too intoxicated to do anything”, but according to the officers, he stood up when officers entered his home and would not obey their commands. They stated that he charged them with a kitchen knife in his hand, which apparently prompted Officer Williams to subdue him with a shutgun blast to his chest. Unfortunately, in that case, there were no video cameras to counter Officer Williams version of events, as was the case in the Crawford shooting.
In a case where the prosecutor has openly stated that there were “no bad guys”, the investigating detective, instead of informing the victim’s girlfriend that Mr Crawford is dead, spends 20 minutes trying to get her to admit that Mr Crawford could have had a weapon, that he was at the Wal Mart with the intention of shooting someone, that she herself was under the influence, anything at all to find justification for having Killed Mr Crawford. When confronted on his tactics, the investigating Detective, Rodney Curd who Mr Crawford’s girlfriend, Tasha Thomas, “You lie to me and you might be on your way to jail,” stated that he was not aware at the time that the gun Mr Crawford was holding was a toy from that same Wal-Mart. That statement, in itself is farcical for several reasons.
First, every police officer that has ever been trained in this country has been taught the same thing. When confronting a individual with a weapon, as son as you neutralize the individual your VERY NEXT IMMEDIATE ACTION is to safe and secure the weapon. The very second any officer would have seen the toy from less than 10 feet away, much less touched it, they would have immediately been able to ascertain that it was exactly that, a toy.
Secondly, if the Officers had the time to somehow determine who it was that Mr Crawford had been speaking to, information that Detective Curd had, then surely there must have been time to determine where the toy came from.
Third, the very fact that the police even knew who Mr Crawford had been speaking to shows that they had already determined that they were going to pursue any chance of casting Mr Crawford in as bad a light as possible.
Keep in mind. Mr Crawford is dead. There is, once the gun is determined t be a toy, nothing illegal that Mr Crawford had done that would have justified a warrantless search f his cell phone to determine who he was speaking to and what their relationship was. Also keep in mind that Ohio is a open-carry state, and that Mr Crawford was in an establishment that sold weapons. Even if the gun HAD been real, Mr Crawford would still have been 100% within his right to have been holding it. Why, instead of trying to place a gun on his person before he entered the store, were there no questions asked as to whether Mr Crawford was licensed to carry it? Why was the automatic assumption made that in a state where gun ownership is 100% lawful, that Mr Crawford was in the process of doing something illegal? Why was the victim’s loved one interrogated like a criminal and threatened with charges instead of telling them Mr Crawford was dead? And more importantly, Why are we hearing these particular details from a foreign press organization while we concern ourselves with Lebron James possibly improperly touching Kate Middleton?
Finally, Knowingly “making false alarms” is a crime under Ohio law and is punishable by a fine or jail sentence. Where pray tell is the interrogation of Ronald Ritchie, the “witness” who called the dispatchers and told them Mr. Crawford was waving the gun at people and was loading it. Why has he not been charged for willfully making false statements that directly caused the death of a completely innocent individual.
In the wake of the non-decision regarding the killing of Eric Garner, I think it’s time to review a few things. It seems that the press has managed to confuse a couple simple salient facts and are thereby leading people to some erroneous conclusions.
1.) Yes, it is true that in the past, Mr garner had been known to sell individual cigarettes, or “Loosies”.
2.) Mr Garner was re-selling perfectly legal cigarettes that he himself had purchased.
3.) The premise behind this being a crime was that he was not charging a cigarette tax on these individual cigarettes and submitting said tax to the state.
4.) At the time of his killing he was NOT in fact engaged in selling “loosies”, he had in fact just broken up a fight between two other individuals.
5.) When the police officers arrived, they did not even approach the two individuals who were fighting, but instead approached Mr. garner because the knew that in the past he had sold “loosies”
6.) The very first officer to physically touch Mr Garner applied the choke-hold immediately.
7.) Choke-holds of this nature have been outlawed in New York for over 20 years.
8.) Again, since we can’t stress this enough, when the officers attempted to arrest him for selling “loosies” he was in fact NOT doing so, he was instead breaking up a fight between two other individuals, neither of which were even spoken to by the officers, much less cited for fighting.