Family of Australian woman fatally shot wants Minnesota cop charged

[webfact]

Family of Australian woman fatally shot wants Minnesota cop charged

By Chris Kenning

 

Justine Damond, also known as Justine Ruszczyk, from Sydney, is seen in this 2015 photo released by Stephen Govel Photography in New York, U.S., on July 17, 2017. Stephen Govel/Stephen Govel Photography/Handout via REUTERS/Files

 

(Reuters) - The family of an Australian woman who was fatally shot wants the Minneapolis policeman involved charged, their attorney said on Tuesday, the same day investigators sent the evidence collected to the local prosecutor.

 

State investigators did not release their findings in the July 15 shooting of Sydney native Justine Damond, 40, who died from a single gunshot fired by Officer Mohamed Noor. The policeman was in a patrol car with Officer Matthew Harrity.

 

Damond had called police about a possible sexual assault near her house and had approached the police after their arrival, authorities previously said. Damond was living in Minneapolis and engaged to be married.

 

The shooting sparked outrage in Minnesota as well as in Australia, where Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull called the incident "shocking" and "inexplicable." Minneapolis' police chief resigned after city officials said procedures had been violated during the incident and Damond "didn't have to die."

 

The attorney for Damond's family, Bob Bennett, said her family believes the officer should be held accountable.

"They certainly believe charges are merited," he said in a telephone interview.

 

The most likely charges may be second-degree manslaughter, which carries a sentence of up to 10 years, Bennett said.

 

Attorneys for the officers could not be reached. Noor previously expressed condolences to the Damond family in a statement, but declined to discuss the shooting.

 

Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman will review the case file to determine what, if any, charges might be brought after the findings were submitted Tuesday, according to a statement. A decision is expected by the end of the year, his office said.

 

Harrity told investigators he was startled by a loud sound near the patrol car shortly before Noor fired through the open driver's-side window, striking Damond. Court documents said a woman slapped the back of the car before the shooting.

 

Noor was put on paid leave after the shooting. Neither officer had their body cameras activated, police have said.

 

Damond's family has not yet filed a civil lawsuit, Bennett said. He is the same lawyer who reached a nearly $3 million settlement for the family of black motorist Philando Castile who was shot and killed by Minnesota police in July 2016 during a traffic stop.

 

Because of past criticism over a lack of transparency when grand juries consider possible charges in police shootings, Freeman plans to decide on charges himself, his spokesman said.

 

Freeman's office said in a statement it might ask for additional investigation into the matter.

 

(Reporting by Chris Kenning; Editing by Jonathan Oatis)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-09-13

[FreddieRoyle]

I don't see why they want Mohammed Noor charged, he was made a policeman although it was abundantly clear he was totally unsuited. He was already being investigated for 3 complaints for his behavior, and yet because he was fast tracked into his position for the sole reason that he was a Somalian muslim made him untouchable. Who-ever it was that pulled the PC stunt of hiring this guy over more suited applicants who were rejected because they were not diverse enough should carry the sole blame here. I can't think of a punishment severe enough, but it must be severe enough to end this PC affirmative action silliness.

 Was it mayor Betsy Hodges who made this guy an armed officer?

[khwaibah]

51 minutes ago, webfact said:

Family of Australian woman fatally shot wants Minnesota cop charged

 

Understand the families feelings but they can wish in one hand and shyt in the other and see which hands fills up first.

[mrdome]

1 hour ago, FreddieRoyle said:

I don't see why they want Mohammed Noor charged, he was made a policeman although it was abundantly clear he was totally unsuited. He was already being investigated for 3 complaints for his behavior, and yet because he was fast tracked into his position for the sole reason that he was a Somalian muslim made him untouchable. Who-ever it was that pulled the PC stunt of hiring this guy over more suited applicants who were rejected because they were not diverse enough should carry the sole blame here. I can't think of a punishment severe enough, but it must be severe enough to end this PC affirmative action silliness.

 Was it mayor Betsy Hodges who made this guy an armed officer?

It's not as simple as that and this isn't a "PC stunt" as you've called it. Some cops seem heavy handed/"totally unsuited" at one point in their career.

 

Most of all, we do need cops from all segments of the population on the street, period. Your skin color or your religion - since you brought it up, Freddie - has obviously nothing to do with your actions.

 

[FreddieRoyle]

7 minutes ago, mrdome said:

It's not as simple as that and this isn't a "PC stunt" as you've called it. Some cops seem heavy handed/"totally unsuited" at one point in their career.

 

Most of all, we do need cops from all segments of the population on the street, period. Your skin color or your religion - since you brought it up, Freddie - has obviously nothing to do with your actions.

 

No, we need properly trained cops with an attitude and mentality that suits the job of serving the local citizens. Whether they be black, white, pink or florescent green is irrelevant. In this case somebody decided that to be politically correct that this Somali should be made an armed policeman, and then the problems started. Even with the 3 warnings he was still able to carry a weapon. This Australian lady in pygamas paid the price of a PC stunt, and this must be investigated and results made public to stop this type of silliness from ever happening again.

[mrdome]

freddie, you keep alluding he failed his training from the start or wasn't properly trained and that he was pushed through regardless of his performance,  comments for which you have zero proof and which the Minneapolis Police Department would vehemently deny. It wasn't a "PC-stunt", regardless of how many times you repeat that.

 

Let's face it, if it had been a black victim and a white cop, the comments - if there were any at all - would be quite different.

 

[FreddieRoyle]

17 minutes ago, mrdome said:

freddie, you keep alluding he failed his training from the start or wasn't properly trained and that he was pushed through regardless of his performance,  comments for which you have zero proof and which the Minneapolis Police Department would vehemently deny. It wasn't a "PC-stunt", regardless of how many times you repeat that.

 

Let's face it, if it had been a black victim and a white cop, the comments - if there were any at all - would be quite different.

 

Well you might be right, it is possible he was the only applicant for the job in which case the situation is understandable. But, you know and I know that there will have been many many applicants for this job - as there always is for police jobs and indeed any civil service positions. If you can find proof that he, Mohammed Noor was the sole applicant for a police job in Minnesota than I will apologize and admit you are correct and that I was wrong. If, however, there were many applicants and some were of better moral standing, with better attitude and suitability for the job but they were caucasian or latino so it was given to Mr. Noor because he was from Somalia and it would be great opportunity for his boss to signal their virtue and political correctness then your assertion that we need "cops from all segments"regardless of suitability is doubling down on the silliness.

 

Huge amount of info here - including Mr Noor's personnel files with the police dept and full background plus details of this case and previous complaints against Mr. Noor.

http://heavy.com/news/2017/07/mohamed-noor-justine-damond-ruszczyk-minneapolis-police-officer-somali-mohammed/

Edited September 13, 2017 by FreddieRoyle
adding link with more case details

[lovelomsak]

4 minutes ago, mrdome said:

freddie, you keep alluding he failed his training from the start or wasn't properly trained and that he was pushed through regardless of his performance,  comments for which you have zero proof and which the Minneapolis Police Department would vehemently deny. It wasn't a "PC-stunt", regardless of how many times you repeat that.

 

Let's face it, if it had been a black victim and a white cop, the comments - if there were any at all - would be quite different.

 

Let's face it, if it had been a black victim and a white cop, the comments - if there were any at all - would be quite different.

  You are so right. There would have been riots looting,beatings etc.

  You are seeing justice being sought in a legal way not thugs on the street as it would be  had been white cop black victim.

[retarius]

Malcom Turnbull says it is 'inexplicable'. It isn't inexplicable at all, US cops are trigger happy and use maximum force in every conceivable situation.

[Jonnapat]

1 hour ago, retarius said:

Malcom Turnbull says it is 'inexplicable'. It isn't inexplicable at all, US cops are trigger happy and use maximum force in every conceivable situation.

Well said, sir.

[jesimps]

2 hours ago, mrdome said:

It's not as simple as that and this isn't a "PC stunt" as you've called it. Some cops seem heavy handed/"totally unsuited" at one point in their career.

 

Most of all, we do need cops from all segments of the population on the street, period. Your skin color or your religion - since you brought it up, Freddie - has obviously nothing to do with your actions.

 

It does when you're unqualified to do the job and are there purely due to PC quotas.

[nausea]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

A decision is expected by the end of the year, his office said.

Has to be a misprint.

[Mansell]

5 hours ago, khwaibah said:

 

Understand the families feelings but they can wish in one hand and shyt in the other and see which hands fills up first.

The correct saying is, wish in one hand and fill the other one with water, and see which one fills up first....I believe with what you wrote one hand is going to fill up, and not in a nice way.

[taipan1949]

4 hours ago, mrdome said:

It's not as simple as that and this isn't a "PC stunt" as you've called it. Some cops seem heavy handed/"totally unsuited" at one point in their career.

 

Most of all, we do need cops from all segments of the population on the street, period. Your skin color or your religion - since you brought it up, Freddie - has obviously nothing to do with your actions.

 

Lets be serious, the Koran kicked into the brainless Somali and he shot a woman not covered from head to toe. He needs murder two and after a supposed release from jail he should be deported. I can't believe I held my temper writing this piece so I better quit before I am banned.

[taipan1949]

Lets be serious, the Koran kicked into the brainless Somali and he shot a woman not covered from head to toe. He needs murder two and after a supposed release from jail he should be deported. I can't believe I held my temper writing this piece so I better quit before I am banned.

[Srikcir]

Information gathered by Heavy.com on Noor:

http://heavy.com/news/2017/07/mohamed-noor-justine-damond-ruszczyk-minneapolis-police-officer-somali-mohammed/

Seems balanced and not opinionated.

[joecoolfrog]

52 minutes ago, taipan1949 said:

Lets be serious, the Koran kicked into the brainless Somali and he shot a woman not covered from head to toe. He needs murder two and after a supposed release from jail he should be deported. I can't believe I held my temper writing this piece so I better quit before I am banned.

I think being banned from a forum would be the least of your worries , clearly you need to see a mental health practicioner.

[iReason]

2 hours ago, jesimps said:

It does when you're unqualified to do the job and are there purely due to PC quotas.

 

Care to substantiate those statements?

[tryasimight]

6 hours ago, joecoolfrog said:

I think being banned from a forum would be the least of your worries , clearly you need to see a mental health practicioner.

Why...he has his belief, you have yours.

I tend to agree with the poster not you.

What do they call it in Afghanistan...blue on green killing or something like that, you know when the locals are taken in by the US soldiers as trusted people and then the go nuts and kill as many US soldiers as they can.

 

What a perfect job for a an islamic nutter to have....a US policeman.

Kill someone and then have the loony left not only protect but support you!!!

 

Of course you will eventually get found out, but wow....what damage you can do in the meantime.

 

[hawker9000]

13 hours ago, mrdome said:

It's not as simple as that and this isn't a "PC stunt" as you've called it. Some cops seem heavy handed/"totally unsuited" at one point in their career.

 

Most of all, we do need cops from all segments of the population on the street, period. Your skin color or your religion - since you brought it up, Freddie - has obviously nothing to do with your actions.

 

No!   What we need, "most of all", is cops who can handle the job.  I don't care where they're from.

 

PCness and the perceived "need" for a "diverse" police force (IOW, a police candidate chosen, and even fast-tracked, on the basis of race and national origin) does NOT trump actual qualification and being well-suited for the job.  You have a perverted sense of priorities when it comes to public safety.  Noor's history documents the fact that he obviously had no business with a badge and a gun.  The taxpayers will now no doubt enjoy doling out a hefty damages award as soon as the master-shyster gets around to filing the civil suit.

Edited September 13, 2017 by hawker9000

[observer90210]

Somali, Muslim and USA bashing time....ready, get set....goooo!!!!

 

For the kind information to our friends the white supremacists or racists, stigmatizing the cop's ethnicity, issues involving malslaughter or use of lethal force by US cops are nothing new and it has nothing to do with being white, black, muslim, male or female....

 

It is the US Criminal Justice system that is thus, like it or not, that permits use of lethal force by the Police not on a proportionate basis of retaliation, but on the sole basis of the officers individual assessment if he/she felt threathned  - the fact that the adverse party was armed or not is not a sine qua non criteria of consideration to the use of lethal force.

 

Edited September 13, 2017 by observer90210

[halloween]

5 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Somali, Muslim and USA bashing time....ready, get set....goooo!!!!

 

For the kind information to our friends the white supremacists or racists, stigmatizing the cop's ethnicity, issues involving malslaughter or use of lethal force by US cops are nothing new and it has nothing to do with being white, black, muslim, male or female....

 

It is the US Criminal Justice system that is thus, like it or not, that permits use of lethal force by the Police not on a proportionate basis of retaliation, but on the sole basis of the officers individual assessment if he/she felt threathned  - the fact that the adverse party was armed or not is not a sine qua non criteria of consideration to the use of lethal force.

 

Officers have to reasonably feel they are threatened. There are also a few common sense rules for fire-arm use, such as identifying your target, considering the likelihood of hitting those behind and between you and your target.

Firing across your partner at a target with very limited view, in the dark, because somebody slapped the car to gain your attention or because of aerial fireworks fails all safety and reasonability tests.

[joecoolfrog]

10 hours ago, tryasimight said:

Why...he has his belief, you have yours.

I tend to agree with the poster not you.

What do they call it in Afghanistan...blue on green killing or something like that, you know when the locals are taken in by the US soldiers as trusted people and then the go nuts and kill as many US soldiers as they can.

 

What a perfect job for a an islamic nutter to have....a US policeman.

Kill someone and then have the loony left not only protect but support you!!!

 

Of course you will eventually get found out, but wow....what damage you can do in the meantime.

 

Im sure your mate can refer you to his mental health specialist , there is hope !

[lovelomsak]

19 hours ago, taipan1949 said:

Lets be serious, the Koran kicked into the brainless Somali and he shot a woman not covered from head to toe. He needs murder two and after a supposed release from jail he should be deported. I can't believe I held my temper writing this piece so I better quit before I am banned.

There may be more truth to that than most of us realize.

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, lovelomsak said:

There may be more truth to that than most of us realize.

More likely that an easily frightened person that should never have been been given a gun - was given one .

[observer90210]

5 hours ago, halloween said:

Officers have to reasonably feel they are threatened. There are also a few common sense rules for fire-arm use, such as identifying your target, considering the likelihood of hitting those behind and between you and your target.

Firing across your partner at a target with very limited view, in the dark, because somebody slapped the car to gain your attention or because of aerial fireworks fails all safety and reasonability tests.

One could obviously argue and debate the issue with the usual lexical syntaxal tricks  for months -  I think the only who gain in such arguments are the US lawyers and nobody else, as the police fraternities in the US are powerful lobbies so as the NRA...so no messing with them!!

[hawker9000]

11 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Somali, Muslim and USA bashing time....ready, get set....goooo!!!!

 

For the kind information to our friends the white supremacists or racists, stigmatizing the cop's ethnicity, issues involving malslaughter or use of lethal force by US cops are nothing new and it has nothing to do with being white, black, muslim, male or female....

 

It is the US Criminal Justice system that is thus, like it or not, that permits use of lethal force by the Police not on a proportionate basis of retaliation, but on the sole basis of the officers individual assessment if he/she felt threathned  - the fact that the adverse party was armed or not is not a sine qua non criteria of consideration to the use of lethal force.

 

'A very simple-minded, PC, and agenda-driven (i.e., cop-hating) narrative version.  You entirely leave out the word "reasonableness" from your indictment of U.S. law enforcement.  It is NOT enough that the police officer "feels threatened" in order to deploy deadly force, if that threat isn't reasonable.  And THIS situation DOES have all to do with race and ethnicity because the policeman in question was hired and placed ON THAT BASIS, and was obviously not qualified by reason of temperament or judgment.  'Not racial in the sense of any particular race or ethnicity, but racial in the sense of this individual having been placed on the force BASED ON RACE rather than competitive aptitude.

 

Cops - a few - CAN BE surly and self-important.  I know; I've experienced it.   But I think this rarely extends to the point of shooting somebody without justification.  This simply isn't such a case.  This cop was obviously incompetent, and the public was not well served by a hiring and placement decision based on a "diversity" mandate rather than suitability.   I strongly suspect that he went all the way through his academy or training regimen with instructors observing but looking the other way at shortcomings because they were under political pressure to "pass" him.

[observer90210]

12 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

'A very simple-minded, PC, and agenda-driven (i.e., cop-hating) narrative version.  You entirely leave out the word "reasonableness" from your indictment of U.S. law enforcement.  It is NOT enough that the police officer "feels threatened" in order to deploy deadly force, if that threat isn't reasonable.  And THIS situation DOES have all to do with race and ethnicity because the policeman in question was hired and placed ON THAT BASIS, and was obviously not qualified by reason of temperament or judgment.  'Not racial in the sense of any particular race or ethnicity, but racial in the sense of this individual having been placed on the force BASED ON RACE rather than competitive aptitude.

 

Cops - a few - CAN BE surly and self-important.  I know; I've experienced it.   But I think this rarely extends to the point of shooting somebody without justification.  This simply isn't such a case.  This cop was obviously incompetent, and the public was not well served by a hiring and placement decision based on a "diversity" mandate rather than suitability.   I strongly suspect that he went all the way through his academy or training regimen with instructors observing but looking the other way at shortcomings because they were under political pressure to "pass" him.

Was not attacking the police officers but the CJ system.

 

One can reasonably doubt that you would have had a similar reaction had the officer been a white and the victim a somali.

 

Sorry, but I won't take your path of the very biased racial issue of your post. You will surely find other people willing to entertain your racial concerns. 

Edited September 14, 2017 by observer90210

[halloween]

40 minutes ago, observer90210 said:

One could obviously argue and debate the issue with the usual lexical syntaxal tricks  for months -  I think the only who gain in such arguments are the US lawyers and nobody else, as the police fraternities in the US are powerful lobbies so as the NRA...so no messing with them!!

What "usual lexical syntaxal tricks"? Any use of lethal force has to be justified as the response of a reasonable person. There is no such justification here.

[observer90210]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

What "usual lexical syntaxal tricks"? Any use of lethal force has to be justified as the response of a reasonable person. There is no such justification here.

Let's relax here.... I was refering to the cunning lawyers who play topsy turvy during court hearings to bail out the guilty...remember our friend OJ?......nothing else...