The inquiry, which reviewed available records for more than 200 police shooting cases over the last decade, found that these cursory police investigations create a separate standard of justice and fuel the fear among some citizens that officers can shoot people with impunity.
In at least a dozen cases, police shot civilians in the back or from behind. But in the Ware case, as in many other police shootings, it took a civil suit for the troubling details of the case to emerge publicly.
It's part of a series- make sure to read it all.
Hours after Officer Phyllis Clinkscales fatally shot a young man trying to steal her car, Chicago police investigators and commanders ruled the shooting justified.
And they continued to keep one of their own safe regardless of what emerged.
They have stood by that conclusion even as she gave differing accounts of what happened the night she shot 17-year-old Robert Washington in June 2000.
They stood by her even though all four of the gunshot wounds were on the back right side of Washington's head and neck, including a "muzzle imprint" that suggested the gun barrel had been pressed against his skin.
They stood by her even after the department's civilian oversight agency found her account didn't square with the autopsy on Washington and initially recommended she be fired.
The case has been re-opened as a result of the Tribune's investigation; an instance of the press deserving considerable praise.
One wonders if any charges will be filed against the officials who conspired to cover up these crimes- obstructing justice, accessory after the fact, negligence, dereliction of duty- surely there must be something that can be done to make sure that they are held responsible for their actions? I would wager that it's only by rigorously prosecuting officials who rule these shootings justified after "cursory investigations" that we will see a change in how the police are treated.
No comments:
Post a Comment