Mike Freeman is set to announce whether there will be charges in the Jamar Clark shooting at 10:30 this morning.
Fox9 reports that Freeman will also show a number of videos – likely the ones that “Black Lives Matter” has been clamoring for.
My guess – and it’s only a guess? The videos will support the officers’ side of the story, and Freeman will announce no charges. Since Freeman isn’t running for office again, he can be the target for the community’s ire, taking some of the heat off of Mayor Hodges and Chief Harteau. Again – it’s my speculation.
UPDATE: No charges will be filed against the officers.
UPDATE 2: Freeman is showing the videos.
UPDATE 3: Nekima Pounds-Levy apparently wants to have quotas for charging and convicting officers.
UPDATE 4: Did someone just threaten to burn the city down?
UPDATE 5: Question from social media; “who let BLM (Pounds-Levy) into the press conference?” Answer: The same people who let them out onto 35W without repercussion. The cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul have coddled BLM more than they would any other protest group.
The thing that is strange to me is that if the videos show the police had reason to shoot him, as well as other evidence, why wasn’t that evidence released months ago? The whole issue is undergoing metastasis if you’re right because our watchdog is refusing to bark.
BB, while I agree in part, I hate to see these cases tried in the media, which can be prejudicial to one of the parties. On the other hand, if the video was conclusive, the DA should have made his decision earlier and released the video earlier.
he same people who let them out onto 35W without repercussion.
And Snelling Ave, and University Ave, and MOA, and the Airport,……….
it was very telling that Nekima Pounds-Levy so quickly moved from questioning the facts to ad hominem attacks on Freeman et al.
Clearly this is the good professors opportunity to move onto the national stage and to acquire the rewards she believes that notoriety will bring her.
Loren, agreed that you don’t try cases in the media, but it appears the guy’s prints were on the officer’s gun and, contrary to other “eyewitness” accounts, one officer was in a very vulnerable position. The decision should have been made by Thanksgiving last year, Christmas if they’d used a grand jury.
And the “eyewitnesses” that concocted the nonsense story should be prosecuted for perjury. Their lies are getting people hurt and/or killed, and they’re some of the nastiest enemies black people have these days.
who let BLM (Pounds-Levy) into the press conference?
When his worship 0baminus Rex shreds the Constitution and hence laws of this once-great country, BLM gets to live by their own laws without any repercussions. Get used to it, laws don’t mean shit anymore, unless you are taxpayer and a productive member of society, the few that still remain.
I must admit, it is refreshing to see a mob of Democrats demanding a lynching and threatening violence if they don’t get it.
JD, are you saying Blue is the new Black for descendants of the KKK?
Pounds-Levy and her ilk need to keep stirring the pot or they become irrelevant. Not enough media exposure teaching at St. Thomas.
If this means anything…..I work with a few liberal types (they are into conspiracy theories about Bush, Haliburton, Koch brothers, etc) and they totally side with the police. Its pretty common knowledge about Jamar and what a thug he was. Seems most everyone knows that he beat that gal and then attack the paramedics.
BLM folks are probably angeling for free money. And its fun for them to go out and protest. Something to do that’s kind of exciting.
“Blue is the new Black.”
Excellent. I’m totally stealing that.
The DFL’s moocher base will burn their neighborhoods down, then they’ll squirt tears because whitey doesn’t rebuild them fast enough, and because the weave shops, liquor stores, KFC and Popeye’s don’t rebuild at all.
The good thing is, they haven’t even finished cleaning up from the tornado, so there’s plenty of fuel lying around to get a nice fire going.
Should be quite the spectacle.
BLM folks are probably angeling for free money.
They are jealous of the Somalis who we give free money to so they don’t go jihadi on us.
BLM is anti-democracy, anti-free speech, and pro-lynch mob.
My, they get good press.
Professor Levy-Pounds realized that no white reporter was going to challenge her when she took over the Prosecutor’s Press Conference. Although I agree with her in this – I have more questions now such as; how did the two cops roll up on the scene and rather than move Clark away from the ambulance or at least give the driver enough room to get out and get the ambulance moving instead go right to a take down maneuver? And why does it matter that the cop who did the take down learned that technique while training to be a San Diego cop and that’s SDPD procedure? Doesn’t the City of Lakes have their own procedure? Is it different? Freeman tried to Klobuchar the thing – saying ‘folks’ when he should have said witnesses. Swear to God I thought he was going to ask Levy-Pounds for a hot dish recipe.
PS: That whole “Clark stated he was ready to die”. Totally superfluous and self-serving. Sounds made up to me. Swiftee? You ever had a cop lie about something you said or did? I had a detective tell me once that cops will say whatever they have to up until they are on the witness stand. I wonder if they said that under oath?
Seflores, I haven’t read through all the evidence, but it strikes me that if the deceased’s fingerprints were on the weapon of one of the officers, that pretty much settles it. Evidence from witnesses is always messy, whether from the accused, officers, others, whoever, but that’s one thing that’s hard to fake.
And why the takedown maneuver? First of all, I’m not terribly worried about whether it was MPD or SDPD, as long as it doesn’t tend to injure needlessly. Second, he was believed to have inflicted the wounds that put the woman in the ambulance and was going towards it–and then film shows he clearly got one officer on his back. Direct contradiction to the BLM witnesses, BTW. So the context indicates it was clearly warranted.
You know if you are looking for an interesting show that is relevant here check out ESPN’s 30 for 30 episode called “Fantastic Lies.” It’s long but I found it riveting. You come away with a real fear that if a powerful person in the government, even a county attorney comes after you, it takes a lot of money to fight it. The second thing you will come away with is how our biases can really carry us away and the facts be damned. We know they did it or didn’t do it. Here is a Youtube link. It’s about the Duke Lacrosse team rape allegations. It’s unbelievable to me that was 10 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvTtJ4LxZPI
BB – With all due respect, your comment is non-responsive of mine.
I’m not questioning the shooting – I heard enough “why couldn’t they just shoot him in the leg” yesterday (although he did make a head shot at close range with a moving suspect engaged with his partner – no easy feat or just lucky). I’m also not questioning the justification for pulling the trigger; Clark’s DNA was on the cops utility belt, gun handle, holster, etc. (Although, noting passout76’s comment, where an improperly motivated prosecutor colluded with the DNA lab to fake evidence – it happens, though I don’t believe that it happened here.)
The cops were rolling up on what they often claim is their least favorite scenario – a domestic. I’m questioning why the cop so quickly attempted to physically engage and restrain Clark within 30 seconds of getting out of his squad car – if Freemen said that all Clark was doing was ‘tapping’ on the ambulance door – oh and ‘fidgeting’ whatever that is.
It seemed to me in listening to Freeman, that the cops showed up, got a quick briefing from the ambulance supervisor, one of them drew his firearm while the other did a take down maneuver just like they do in San Diego. (WTF does that even mean?) He either did it wrong or Clark got lucky or engaged his drunk strength – anyway, it resulted in Clark getting his hands all around and on the cops gun. That was as they say all she wrote.
Clark wasn’t anyone’s idea of a ‘good neighbor’. I just don’t like the idea that a cops first instinct is to get physical control of the situation or suspect because ‘they can’.
Just based on what I heard Freeman say/read from his report – it would appear that the cops escalated the situation.
where an improperly motivated prosecutor colluded with the DNA lab to fake evidence
Since that is ALWAYS possible, not probable but possible, why don’t we just throw entire legal system out the window, disband police force and let the Army patrol our streets?
As I heard Freeman: The EMT/paramedics were held up in the back of the ambulance by an agitated Clark trying to get in / access their patient, etc. They called for help. Officers rolled up to find Clark on the outside of the ambulance, hands in pockets. Clark refuses to show his hands. Cops then, reasonable in cop mind-set, fear that Clark has weapon in hand, in pocket. Cops draw their weapon, and close with Clark. Cops holster weapon, grab arms and attempt to handcuff Clark, to prevent him from going back into the pocket for the then suspected weapon. Struggle ensues, Clark tries to pull cop’s gun. Both officers are in close range contact with Clark, with one cop covering most of Clark’s body. Head is only available target. Clark is shot in head at close range.
Seflores, I think you’ve just conceded that my response to you was actually pretty good. They had indications that he’d inflicted the injuries on his ex-girlfriend and was refusing to leave her alone in the ambulance. If indeed domestic situations are volatile–and having seen them up close, they are in my view–his refusal to back down from the ambulance justifies the takedown.
Really, what the community needs to learn from this disaster is that if the cops are called because of something you’re doing in the wee hours of the morning, do what they tell you to do. They’re in a situation where they can’t see the whole surroundings like in daylight, they’re tired, you’re tired, mistakes will happen if you don’t mind your Ps & Qs. And maybe, just maybe, consider the possibility that getting stinking drunk/stoned in the wee hours may not be the best plan for an evening out.
Loren you omitted a part of a timeline: Cop takes first shot but his gun does not go off. He then adjusts his position and takes another. Them cops need to learn how to use their firearms. That split second between two trigger pulls could have been enough for Clark to take purchase and squeeze the trigger. I cannot even imagine the vitals on the cop when his first shot did not go off.
BB: Not arguing with you. My point was not that I’m questioning the justification of shooting Clark. I’m simply questioning the sequence of events and wondering if there could have been an alternate outcome. I had a fairly misspent youth. At one point I was involved in trying to ‘end’ homelessness (before I wised up to the fact that the Government / Media / Democrat Party Industrial Complex needs druggies, drunks and mentally ill people to be homeless like the American Cancer Society needs smokers to keep getting cancer) and saw first hand that plenty of cops (more than just a few ‘bad apples’) will apply force first and ask questions later particularly if they perceive that the party having force applied to them doesn’t have the juice to do a damn thing about it after the fact. I’m not defending Clark or people that are in general confrontational with the police. But I’m also no fan of law enforcement issuing a measure of ‘street justice’ when people fail to mind their P’s & Q’s in the mind of some cop.
JPA: Take your Ritalin, Garth.
JPA, I did leave that out, as I felt it did not add/subtract to the overall.
It is interesting in that what caused the failure to fire? The gun should have already had a round chambered, so the gun should have been in battery. If he re-racked the slide, there should have been an unexpended round on the ground. I didn’t look at the evidence for the extra round. Or if the slide was not fully forward, why not? Does this gun do that often? Would hate to carry it if that is the case.
As I understand it, a semi-auto should not be in contact with the target, as this can cause the action to not work properly. In reading the testimony and autopsy report one gathers that the gun was against Clark’s head as he was warned that he was about to be shot. If it was touching his head, that could account for the failure to fire. (This is not a limitation of revolvers, however, which is one of the benefits listed by Mas Ayoob to carrying a revolver).
this can cause the action to not work properly
I just can’t see how it would. Let me ask an expert. Stay tuned.
Sef, alas, I am beyond Ritalin’s help.
Sef, hindsight being 20/20 and all, I’ll still take a stab at it. If indeed he’d knocked his ex cold and was trying to get into the ambulance, I really don’t see a way that it could have ended much differently. Taser doesn’t work with winter coats well, nightstick either, pepper spray around an injured person is a super bad idea….the only thing that would have made this radically different would be police officers so physically superior that the deceased would have collapsed like a sack of potatoes.
NW, I don’t see how contact with the muzzle could effect firing of the first round. It shouldn’t effect the reload action, as the slide moves backwards with recoil, and no part of the gun moves forward, but stuff happens so maybe? I never have fired my semi-auto in contact with anything. Hope I never HAVE to.
My expert pointed me to an official transcript which says “slide was depressed”. That would put gun out of battery and indeed it would not fire. However, you are pushing up against a recoil spring. If you have ever racked a gun, you know we are not talking a couple pounds of force here but a lot more. To exert enough force against flesh to put slide out of battery would leave a mark. I would surmise a large one. Of course, since I presume that side of the head was blown off, there is no way to tell now.