Jump to content

Cop Who Shot Aussie Yoga Instructor After She Called 911 Gets 12yrs

Doc Reeves

By Doc Reeves
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

Doc Reeves

Doc Reeves 6434

Posted
Posted

 

You guys remember the dipshit Minnesota cop who shot across his partner, thru the patrol car and into an innocent woman because he was startled.  Well he was convicted of murder in April.

 

https://news.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/8xzk9x/the-cop-who-killed-a-woman-who-called-911-is-going-to-prison-for-12-years

The former Minneapolis cop who shot and killed a woman who’d called the police to report a sexual assault is going to prison for 12 and a half years, a judge ruled Friday. 

Mohamed Noor’s sentencing followed his April conviction for third-degree murder and manslaughter in the death of Justine Ruszczyk Damond, a 40-year-old life coach and yoga teacher. On the night of July 15, 2017, Damond called 911 twice to report a suspected sexual assault because she thought she heard a woman screaming for help in the alley near her home. Once the officers arrived, she approached the squad car of Noor, 33, and his partner, Matthew Harrity. Noor thought Damond posed a threat to his partner because he heard a loud thump on the side of the car and saw Damond with her arm raised. So he shot her, in the abdomen. 

Neither Noor nor his partner had their body cameras turned on at the time of the shooting, which sparked outrage across the country and led to the city’s police chief, Janee Harteau, stepping down in July 2017. Their cameras turned on only after Noor shot her, capturing her saying “I’m dying.” 

“My intent was to stop the threat and save my partner’s life,” Noor, a Somali immigrant, said during his trial, according to NBC News. “I felt like my whole world came crashing down.”

Damond’s father, John Ruszczyk, asked for the full, recommended sentence — 12 and a half years — and said Friday his daughter’s death made it feel “as if I have lost a limb or a leg,” according to the Associated Press. Damond’s fiancé, Don Damond, said Friday that his “heart aches every day” for her.

Earlier this week, Noor’s attorneys asked that he be sentenced to jail for only two weeks a year: the week of the anniversary of Damond’s death in July, and the week of her birthday in April, according to KSTP-TV, an ABC affiliate in St. Paul, Minnesota. Noor’s attorneys had argued putting him in prison would make it difficult for him to make amends. 

It’s rare for a police officer to face charges in an officer-involved shooting at all. Only 97 officers have been arrested for murder or manslaughter connected to an on-duty shooting since 2005, according to data compiled by Bowling Green University’s Police Integrity Research Group. Of those 97 officers, only 35 were convicted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3448

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, po elvis said:

It is clear if you are simple minded.

Spare me the bullshit. Everything about this case from the response from the PD to the union's response to the actual justice served is an exception to how cases like this typically end. So explain to me how exactly it's simple minded to point out this exception as if this country doesn't have a long and thorough history in this department. Go back and stick your head in the sand and pretend I'm the one who's simple minded here. 

Edited by Catdaddyhorn
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 5025

Posted
Posted (edited)

This jury got it right. It could have been a few more years but it was never gonna be life or the chair.  This is almost the best case scenario.  A police officer did his job so incompetently that it cost an innocent person her life and he’s getting punished. It should be seen as job well done, not confirmation of racism.  We should be happy that this could set a precedent for similar future cases. The fact that white officers have gotten no punishment for killing minorities is in no way the fucking fault of this jury. 

If literally every possible outcome of this case outrages you, then I don’t know what to say. 

Edited by Lhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3448

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Lhorn said:

This jury got it right. It could have been a few more years but it was never gonna be life or the chair.  This is almost the best case scenario.  A police officer did his job so incompetently that it cost an innocent person her life and he’s getting punished. It should be seen as job well done, not confirmation of racism.  We should be happy that this could set a precedent for similar future cases. The fact that white officers have gotten no punishment for killing minorities is in no way the fucking fault of this jury. 

If literally every possible outcome of this case outrages you, then I don’t know what to say. 

The hypocrisy is what outrages me, not the fact that justice was done. I don't understand how that isn't obvious. Philando Castile's murder happened damn near down the street from this yet his murderer is free.

Edited by Catdaddyhorn
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 5025

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

One message is clear. If the victim is white and the cop isn’t he’s going to jail. 

This is your quote.  THIS case is not confirmation of racism. This jury got it right. 

I understand that it’s the other cases that enrage you.  I agree, but I am happy that In this case the officer was held accountable

Edited by Lhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12535

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Lhorn said:

This jury got it right. It could have been a few more years but it was never gonna be life or the chair.  This is almost the best case scenario.  A police officer did his job so incompetently that it cost an innocent person her life and he’s getting punished. It should be seen as job well done, not confirmation of racism.  We should be happy that this could set a precedent for similar future cases. The fact that white officers have gotten no punishment for killing minorities is in no way the fucking fault of this jury. 

If literally every possible outcome of this case outrages you, then I don’t know what to say. 

It's both.

The jury got it right, but you're delusional if you think they get the same outcome with the races of the cop and victim reversed.

This cop is a fucking murderer and deserves to rot for awhile.  But there are a ton of other cops (in the same fucking city no less) who did just as bad and are walking around with a badge and a gun right now.

Edited by Al_4_ISU
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 5025

Posted
Posted (edited)

Where did I say that I thought a white cop would have been convicted or that racism doesn’t exist in the way white cops are treated?  Quote me please. 

Ive made it excruciatingly clear that I am only saying the jury got it right in THIS case. Despite that you are making up an argument in my behalf. 

I said in my other post that I agreed that the out outcome of other cases are enraging. Show me where I’ve expressed the delusional belief that white cops and cops black victims are treated the same as the reverse. 

Edited by Lhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catdaddyhorn

Catdaddyhorn 3448

Posted
Posted

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/03/opinions/mohamed-noor-conviction-justine-ruszczyk-death-raises-questions-jackson/index.html

(CNN)This op-ed has been updated with the news of Mohamed Noor's sentencing.

The sentencing of a former police officer in Minneapolis punctuates a case whose ripple effects raised profoundly uncomfortable -- and unanswered -- questions about race, policing and the use of force in the United States. The 12 1/2 year sentence he received Friday for the fatal shooting of Justine Ruszczyk is outrageous and disturbing.
Police are seldom -- if ever -- indicted, much less convicted, for shooting African American men. Yet, where the victim here is a white woman and the police officer is black, he gets the book thrown at him. This sentence is lengthy and unjust,and shows a capitulation by the judge against her oath to administer justice.
Mohamed Noor, a 33-year-old Somali-American, who was serving as a police officer with the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) back on July 15, 2017, had been convicted of murder and manslaughter. According to local station WCCO, Noor has appealed the conviction.
 
I've thought and prayed about this for two years, since the time I took" her life, Noor said before the sentencing. The state had asked for 150 months, while Noor's attorneys argued for a probationary sentence. During the hearing, Ruszczyk's fiancé, Don Damond, made an emotional statement: "I'm not sure how such a thing could happen to you, to us." Before announcing his fate, Judge Kathryn Quaintance said, "Good people sometimes do bad things."
 
A court should never succumb to the desire for vengeance. Officer Noor is the first officer convicted in Minnesota in such a circumstance. And he happens to be black. Coincidence? He had 44 letters submitted to the Court which spoke to his character, gentle nature and community service. His ex-wife even weighed in to inform the court of his humanitarian efforts and kind demeanor -- all to no avail. Even a local legislator wrote a letter urging the court to spare him jail. Nope.
During Noor's trial, the jury of ten men and two women heard from 60 witnesses over the course of a month, whose testimony included prosecution and defense "use of force" experts. Not surprisingly, these experts offered completely different opinions as to whether Officer Noor acted "reasonably" in discharging a single round of his service revolver into the abdomen of Justine Ruszczyk, who had called 911 to report a possible assault happening in an alley near her home.
From the defense perspective, Officer Noor was "startled" in a dark alley and feared for his life. In that darkness, he perceived a deadly threat as he sat in the passenger seat of his police cruiser, and saw someone approaching him and his partner, Matthew Harrity, who was way too close for comfort. Officer Noor's contention is that he fired upon the perceived threat in order to protect his life and that of his vulnerable partner, who was a sitting duck in the driver's seat.
The prosecution countered with a critical question that seemingly said it all: "What is threatening about blond hair and a pink T-Shirt?" And with that said, we as a society must address the elephant in the room: Race. Officer Noor is an African American man. Ms. Ruszczyk, the victim, was a white woman from Australia.
Every police shooting, like other cases, turns on its own set of facts. Those facts are often varied and murky. But despite the factual inconsistencies in some police shooting cases, there is generally one constant: the lack of accountability for the officer firing the weapon. Not in this case. Here, there was an indictment, a prosecution and a guilty verdict. So here's the obvious question: did the race of the officer and the victim play a role in the outcome? What are the moral questions involved in the prosecutor's invoking the victim's "blondeness" to imply she posed no threat?
How and why is it that Noor was convicted? When a white officer shoots an African American male, the results too often seem like fait accompli. In those instances, the officers are generally not even indicted, much less found guilty at trial. Some may be quick to contradict this claim by pointing to Officer Jason Van Dyke in Chicago, who killed Laquan McDonald on October 14, 2014. They may also point to Officer Michael Slager in South Carolina, who killed Walter Scott in April 4, 2015. But both of these examples are false comparisons. And in fact, they are not even close.
 
In Van Dyke's case, there was a stomach-turning video completely contradicting Van Dyke's narrative as to what occurred. His police report indicated that McDonald was lunging at him, but on camera, Van Dyke is shown firing repeatedly upon McDonald, even as he lies dying on the ground. In the absence of the video one wonders whether there would have even been a prosecution, much less a conviction? And for his crime, Van Dyke was only sentenced to six years and nine months in prison.
In South Carolina, Michael Slager shot Walter Scott in the back as he was running away. Thereafter, he planted evidence. Perhaps because the jurors could not believe their lying eyes, his case ended in a mistrial. It was not until the Justice Department intervened, and a sought a life sentence, that Slager pled guilty and accepted 20 years.
In Noor's situation, there is no video tape nor audio evidence. Both Noor and Garrity wore body cameras but they were not turned on and Noor did not provide a statement. In such a circumstance, the conviction of a police officer is unheard of. In fact, Mike Freeman, the prosecutor in Hennepin County, where Noor was tried and convicted, could not identify a single instance in Minnesota's history where a police officer was convicted in such a circumstance. Coincidence?
 
In fact, a year before this incident, also in Minnesota, Philando Castile was killed by Officer Jeronimo Yanez during a traffic stop. He was shot seven times even though he specifically told the officer that he had a weapon when he was asked to produce his license and registration. His girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, who was in the passenger seat, looked on in terror -- as did her four-year-old daughter. Officer Yanez was tried on three felony counts and acquitted on each.
It seems the jury was persuaded that Officer Yanez legitimately feared for his life. The facts would not allow the prosecutor to ask the question that was asked in Noor's case, namely, "What is so threatening about a blonde?"
The uncomfortable questions about this case don't have good answers, but we must ask them nonetheless. Was Noor afforded the same deference by the jury as his counterparts of a different hue? Unlike other officer-involved shootings, this time, the person wearing a blue uniform was Somali, African American, and Muslim. Can't he be just as frightened as his fellow officers were when they discharged their weapons against unarmed black men?
 
And should a white suspect be viewed as putting a police officer at ease while a black suspect heightens an officer's fear and anxiety? How and why can a prosecutor argue so matter-of-factly that "a blonde in a pink shirt" is harmless, while a person with coarse hair, who happens to be black, represents a significant danger? How stereotypical is that? But that was the very argument made here -- and it was overwhelmingly successful.
Interestingly, the shooting also occurred in the district of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, the first naturalized citizen from Africa, the first nonwhite woman from Minnesota, and one of the first two Muslim women, to serve in Congress. In that regard, society has come a long way. But it appears we have much further to go.
Every life is precious and every questionable police-involved shooting is gut-wrenching. We grieve for the family -- no matter the color. Police shootings provide police departments across the country with an opportunity to learn and to improve. In this case, police procedures were re-evaluated and revamped -- as was officer training.
 
But while revamping police procedures and training, we need to also revamp our cultural attitudes. The sentencing of Mohamed Noor is not even close to the end of this story. Yes, police must be held accountable for their unlawful transgressions. No one can ever be above the law. But the law must apply with equal force to police officers of every color and origin. Similarly, the way in which jurors evaluate these tragic police shootings should never turn on the color of a victim's hair or skin. Instead, the critical inquiry must continue to be whether the officer reasonably perceived a legitimate threat to his or her life. And that must always be a color-blind assessment.
We need to do some soul searching as a society to see how this could happen. Courts should promote justice -- not propagate injustice. And that's exactly what happened here.
This article has been updated to clarify that Justine Ruszczyk was shot in the abdomen, not the chest.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16641

Posted
Posted

 

On 6/7/2019 at 9:25 PM, Lhorn said:

This is your quote.  THIS case is not confirmation of racism. This jury got it right. 

I understand that it’s the other cases that enrage you.  I agree, but I am happy that In this case the officer was held accountable

 

 

First - The bold is a kind of a simplistic take. Those two concepts - evidence of racism and the jury getting it right - are not mutually exclusive. The point is that it can very clearly be seen as a sign of racism in that, if the skin colors alone were reversed, the outcome of the case would be too. It is another data point in a whole sea of them that shows the criminal justice system gives white people preferential treatment over people of color. That is racism in action, and it is worth speaking up about. That doesn't mean it is a value judgement on the jury, the victim, or anyone else, nor was that ever said or implied.

Second - You want take it to 11 because "literally every outcome of the case" enrages him - a pretty big leap given the original comment - all the while you are the one getting worked up and dying on the hill with this straw man about THIS case and THIS jury? As if the case exists in a vacuum or the comment had anything to do with the jury? Come on, man.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 5025

Posted
Posted (edited)

Taking it to 11?  Settle down.

You make the case that the jury can do the right thing and the racist thing at the same time. I would say that the jury did the right thing. The juries letting off white cops for similar offenses is the racist act not the fact that an officer of color is held accountable. We agree that he should have been held accountable right?  What is the outcome of this horrible case that would make you satisfied?  You can’t say “that a white cop and a black victim have the same outcome” because that option was not available to this jury. 

To make it very clear, I am in favor of defendant being judged without regard to their color and that the treatments off all races being similar. 

As I’ve said before we should hope that this case helps build a precedent that Leo  can and should be punished for their actions. 

Edited by Lhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16641

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Lhorn said:

Taking it to 11?  Settle down.

You make the case that the jury can do the right thing and the racist thing at the same time. I would say that the jury did the right thing. The juries letting off white cops for similar offenses is the racist act not the fact that an officer of color is held accountable. We agree that he should have been held accountable right?  What is the outcome of this horrible case that would make you satisfied?  You can’t say “that a white cop and a black victim have the same outcome” because that option was not available to this jury. 

To make it very clear, I am in favor of defendant being judged without regard to their color and that the treatments off all races being similar. 

As I’ve said before we should hope that this case helps build a precedent that Leo  can and should be punished for their actions. 

No, I didn't. Read my post again.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16641

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Lhorn said:

“Those two concepts - evidence of racism and the jury getting it right - are not mutually exclusive.”

sorry where would I have ever gotten that idea

I also explicitly stared that the outcome of the case being evidence of racism in the criminal justice system isn't a value judgement on the jury. What that means is that, while the case can in fact be interpreted as evidence that a white victim killed by a black cop is going to get a different outcome than if the roles are reversed, it doesn't mean the jury did the wrong thing or that the outcome of the case in itself is bad. No one said the outcome was wrong. No one said the jury did anything wrong.

I am going to step away from the discussion now because at this point it is clear that you are more concerned with sticking to your guns than the substance of the issue. Have a good night - be safe if you're in the Austin area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lhorn

Lhorn 5025

Posted
Posted (edited)

I apologize if it appears that I am coming at you or being aggressive.  I’m just here for debate. No harm meant and I want you to know that even if we disagree on certain points I respect your opinion. (I did express a bit of ire at ISU Al because I felt he was suggesting that I didn’t believe racism and different standards existed for black and white officers.  That is so far from what I believe that I don’t want those words put in my mouth).

Thank you for explaining your point further.   

It seems like we agree that this case was handled correctly. I am also in agreement that when white officers are not held to the same standard, racism within the system is the reason. I’ve never disputed that. 

i think our real difference of opinion is whether justice being done in this case is valuable at how we look at other cases where there is a different outcome.  My opinion has always been that no matter how egregious the double standard, I think this jury handed down the proper decision. As an analogy, the proof of racism is not that a top of his class white Harvard trained lawyer gets a great job, it’s that a similarly qualified African American candidate doesn’t.  Your opinion may vary.

Im not in Austin but thanks for wishes of safety.  Same to you and your family.  No hard feelings

Edited by Lhorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...