No Charges for Cleveland Police Officers in Shooting Death of 12-year-old Tamir Rice

No charges for Cleveland police officers in shooting death of 12-year-old Tamir Rice

By Dr. Peter A. Barone   * Most of the information came from the Washington Post

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty announced that a grand jury will not bring charges against police officers involved in the killing of 12-year-old Tamir Rice, who was carrying a toy gun.

(Interesting the way in which the news presents the first sentence. He was playing with a toy gun that looked exactly like a real weapon and the officers were called to the scene as they are in the majority of the police shootings).

CLEVELAND — After more than a year of investigation, a grand jury declined to bring charges against either of the two police officers involved in the fatal November 2014 shooting of Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old boy who was playing with a toy weapon in a Cleveland park.

In announcing the decision here Monday, Cuyahoga County prosecutor Timothy J. McGinty said he did not recommend that the grand jury bring any charges. McGinty added that he believes both of the Cleveland police officers involved in the deadly encounter were reasonable in their belief that Rice had a real weapon, and that new analysis of the video of the shooting leaves it “indisputable” that the boy was pulling the weapon from his waistband when he was killed.

(He took the exact actions that individuals with real weapons take when they intend to shoot someone and which all officers are trained to respond to when confronted with these types of actions.)

McGinty said that the shooting death of Rice did not meet the standard of a crime.

(The officer had no criminal intent to shoot a young child he was simply defending his own life which he has the right to do in accordance with the supreme court.)

“The death of Tamir Rice was an absolute tragedy but it was not, by the law that binds us, a crime,” McGinty said, before adding that he informed Tamir’s mother of the decision before announcing it publicly. “It was a tough conversation. … She was broken up.”

The boy’s mother, in a statement released early Monday night said the decision not to charge the officers involved in the death of her son left her family without any faith in the justice system.

(Here is the major PROBLEM today people use the word JUSTICE to mean they did not get what they wanted and if they did then it is justice but if it is not the law does not matter because what matters is what  they feel they want done. Justice is not what you want it is WHAT IT IS IN ACCORDANCE TO THE LAW!)

“Prosecutor McGinty deliberately sabotaged the case, never advocating for my son, and acting instead like the police officers’ defense attorney,” Samaria Rice said, adding that she believes race was a factor in her son’s death and extended solidarity to the families of other black men and women killed by the police. “I don’t want my child to have died for nothing and I refuse to let his legacy or his name be ignored. We will continue to fight for justice for him, and for all families who must live with the pain that we live with.”

Now we have uninformed individuals who are ignorant of the system saying things about the prosecutor not advocating for her son. Well that is absolutely correct. The prosecutor DOES NOT represent the victim; they represent the people and they seek the truth and not revenge. When officers see a gun they are not looking at race, religion, or even age; they are looking at the weapon and want to survive.  

Tamir Rice’s death came just days before massive protests and unrest would break out in Ferguson, Mo., and New York City after officers in those cities were cleared in the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner.

These cases should not in any way have an effect on the decisions made by the prosecutor and the grand jury.

The deadly shooting here prompted a round of protests that at times blocked freeways and interrupted public meetings, with local residents demanding indictments for Loehmann and Garmback. Local activist groups vowed on Monday, a cold and rainy day here, to again take to the streets, and Mayor Frank Jackson urged calm during a late afternoon news conference.

The individuals here want to protest the proper and legal decision made by the system because it did not fall in line with what they wanted because if they wanted justice then the system provided that but that is not what they wanted so now they are going to do what they feel is right to correct the system.

And, though some protesters gathered, all remained calm in downtown Cleveland and at the Cudell Recreation Center, the westside park where Rice was killed. By 3:45 p.m. some demonstrators had begun to gather, with signs demanding “Justice for Tamir Rice” and declaring the boy “stolen by law enforcement.”

It is not clear why they do not say what they really mean because justice has been done and the system has accessed and evaluated and made their decision but again because it was not the result they wanted in their minds there is no justice and there won’t be until the system acquiesces to their definition or what they see as being justice. 

On the day of the shooting, the two officers were responding to a call about a young man with a gun who was pointing it at people outside a local recreation center. Although the caller specified to the dispatcher that the person in question was possibly a child playing with a toy, that information was not relayed to the officers and the officers responded to the call as an “active shooter” situation, authorities said.

This is what the officers were provided and with the change in the way law enforcement responds to active shooters they acted the way they are trained. Not to mention the ORANGE tip to indicate it was not real was REMOVED. How much did this contribute to the legal actions of these officers.

The officers approached the park from a side street, pulling directly up on the grass where Tamir was playing rather than approaching from the paved parking lot.

“I made the decision to approach the park from West 99th,” Garmback, who was driving the cruiser, said in his statement. “West 99th dead ends at the park, very near the swing set. From there I knew we would have a good view of the swing set, and good access, if necessary, as that is where the male was reported to be.” Tamir Rice was not at the swing set, having moved to a nearby gazebo. “I believed at first the male was going to run,” Garmback said. “I think I told my partner ‘watch him he’s going to run.’ However he stopped and turned toward the cruiser.”

Both officers said that, as their cruiser continued to drive toward the boy — now on the snow-covered grass — they were moving at about 10 miles per hour, and that when they attempted to stop, the car slid.

As that happened, “I started to open the door and yelled continuously ‘show me your hands’ as loud as I could,” Loehmann said in his statement.

“I kept my eyes on the suspect the entire time. I was fixed on his waistband and hand area. I was trained to keep my eyes on his hands because ‘hands may kill.’” The officer said that, as he exited the car, he saw Tamir lift his shirt and reach into his waistband; Loehmann said he attempted to run to the back of the vehicle.

“The suspect had a gun, had been threatening others with the weapon and had not obeyed our command to show us his hands. He was facing us,” Loehmann wrote. “This was an active shooter situation.”

Everything done here was correct. The officer does not have to wait to be shot at before using deadly force when considering the totality of the circumstances which the officers did.

Loehmann said that he then saw Tamir Rice’s elbow moving upward, and that the weapon was coming up out of his waistband so he fired two shots. “I saw the weapon in his hand coming out of his waistband,” he wrote. “The threat to my partner and myself was real and active.”

This offices actions were right on target and correct in this situation.
McGinty and other officials from the prosecutor’s office said Monday that they believed the officers’ story, noting that the toy gun appeared identical to a real weapon, that the 12-year-old looked much older than he was, and that both officers behaved in ways consistent with the Cleveland police’s policies for dealing with an “active shooter” situation. And, McGinty added in a news conference Monday afternoon, an enhanced video of the shooting showed that Tamir Rice was reaching into his waistband and pulling out the toy weapon.

All of their actions on camera and meets the standard for the actions they took and yet there is still a call for justice. Justice was done and delivered.

“If we put ourselves in the victim’s shoes, as prosecutors and detectives try to do, it is likely that Tamir — whose size made him look much older and who had been warned that his pellet gun might get him into trouble that day — either intended to hand it to the officers or to show them it wasn’t a real gun,” McGinty said. “But there was no way for the officers to know that because they saw the events rapidly unfolding in front of them from a very different perspective.”

If someone warned him then why did they not do something about letting him keep the toy gun with the orange tip removed.

Cleveland police sent the case to the Cuyahoga County Sheriff’s Department, which later provided its investigation to McGinty’s office in order to determine whether charges would be filed. As the investigation stretched from weeks to months, and eventually past the one-year mark, the Rice family and civil rights activists grew increasingly agitated — convinced that no charges for the officers were coming.

“However … I conclude that Officer Loehmann’s belief that Rice posed a threat of serious physical harm or death was objectively reasonable as was his response to that perceived threat.”

This is the correct decision.

Congresswoman Marcia Fudge (D) said in a statement that that McGinty’s decision to release pieces of evidence throughout the ongoing investigation tainted the process, and that he should have stepped aside and allowed for a special prosecutor.

Why Democratic congresswoman; why??

How was it tainted? How??

Why should he have stepped aside because you also want a different type of justice which is what the family wants and not what the law called for as it did?

“Although the grand jury decision may be the right one, we will never know because the prosecutor refused to step down and allow an independent review,” Fudge said. “The prosecutor conducted the investigation in a manner that I believe inappropriate and as a result he has lost the trust and confidence of our community, and, indeed, mine as well.  I accept the decision, but the means do not justify the end.”

The legal cases will be provided in the next posting.

 Dr. Barone