Police Brutality, Misconduct and Shootings

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares119 Views

    2 Indianapolis Officers Are Acquitted of Manslaughter in 2022 Death

    by

    Herman Whitfield III had told officers “I’m dying” and that he couldn’t breathe after one of the officers deployed a Taser, according to body camera footage.Two Indianapolis police officers were acquitted on Friday of involuntary manslaughter charges in the 2022 death of Herman Whitfield III, after he was handcuffed and placed face down by the officers, who were responding to reports that he was having a mental health crisis.A jury also acquitted the officers, Adam Ahmad, 32, and Steven Sanchez, 35, of all of the other charges they faced, including reckless homicide, a felony, and felony and misdemeanor battery charges, according to court records. Officer Sanchez had also faced a second count of involuntary manslaughter for using a Taser on Mr. Whitfield, but that charge was dismissed before trial, according to one of the officer’s lawyers.Officers Ahmad and Sanchez will return to normal duty after they complete a refresher training, Chris Bailey, the chief of police for the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, said on social media. As part of a standard protocol, the officers had been placed on various administrative duties after they were indicted, according to their lawyers, John F. Kautzman and Mason Riley.“We had always maintained that they did not do anything wrong in this case,” Mr. Kautzman said in an interview on Friday evening. “They certainly did not engage in any kind of criminal activity.”On April 25, 2022, Officers Ahmad and Sanchez arrived at the Whitfields’ home after Mr. Whitfield’s mother, Gladys Whitfield, called 911 saying that her son was having a mental health crisis. Body camera footage that was released after his death showed Mr. Whitfield, who was 39, walking around the house naked.In another portion of the footage, Mr. Whitfield starts running and an officer draws a Taser and pulled the trigger, stunning Mr. Whitfield. He falls and the officers handcuff him, face down. Mr. Whitfield can be heard saying “I’m dying” and that he can’t breathe and, later, the officers are seen performing CPR on him.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 63 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Read the Justice Department’s Report

      by

      E. MPD Unnecessarily Escalates Encounters with Children.
      We have serious concerns about MPD’s treatment of children and the lasting impact of
      police encounters on their wellbeing and resilience. 42 During interactions with children
      regarding minor issues, MPD officers escalate the encounters with aggressive and
      demeaning language and, at times, needless force.
      At times, MPD aggressively escalates encounters with children who have committed no
      crime or where the child is a victim. In one incident, officers handcuffed and used force
      against a 16-year-old Black girl who called MPD to report she had been assaulted.
      Before arriving at the precinct to give a statement, officers handcuffed the girl after she
      refused to give them her phone. When she became agitated and reactive, the officers
      responded with insults and threats, telling her, “When [the handcuffs] do come off . . .
      Ooh, I’m itching,” “I leave my gloves on when I fight,” and “If I gotta whip your ass, I will.”
      After three hours, officers removed the handcuffs to reposition them. As she complained
      that her hands were hurt and swollen and tried to move her wrists, the officers grabbed
      her and pushed her face down onto the ground to handcuff her again. The girl was then
      arrested and charged with disorderly conduct.
      MPD has escalated interactions when enforcing laws that are intended to keep children
      safe. After two Black boys (ages 15 and 16) ran from an officer who was citing them for
      a curfew violation, officers demeaned the boys and threatened violence. When one boy
      asked if they were going to jail, the officer responded, “If it’s my decision, hell yeah . . .
      I’d have so much damn fun rolling your ass down to jail. I’d love doing that shit.” Another
      officer threatened to assault the boys when he worried that he may have lost his MPD
      mobile device during the foot pursuit: “I am fucking these little kids up, man… I am
      fucking you all up, I just wanted to let y’all know that.”
      MPD officers have mistreated children in crisis, even when it is clear the child has
      significant disabilities. In one incident, a CIT officer threatened to take a 14-year-old
      Black boy to adult jail because the boy ran away from home. The boy was diagnosed
      with autism, ADHD, bipolar disorder, and developmental delays and had the intellectual
      functioning of a four-year-old. The boy’s mother had called the police after the boy, who
      had been released from a mental health facility that day, got upset at bedtime, threw a
      garbage can and a chair, and ran from home. After the boy was found, a CIT officer
      raised his Taser toward the boy, who was calm and compliant, and told him, “I don’t
      want to use it on you, but if you don’t listen to me, I can.” Officers planned to take the
      boy to the hospital for psychiatric treatment. But the CIT officer continued to threaten
      him, saying that he would take the child to jail “with the big boys,” and “If I have to come
      42 Interactions with the police can lead to damaging and lasting outcomes for children, especially Black
      and Latinx teens, including post-traumatic stress, increased levels of depression, diminished academic
      performance, and increased chances that a child will engage in delinquent behavior in the future.
      56 More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Why Botham Jean’s Family Won’t Get $100 Million Awarded by Jury

      by

      Cities have paid out billions of dollars in police misconduct cases, but depending on the case, families may not receive any money at all. A recent $100 million penalty for a police shooting case in Dallas may never lead to a payout.The family of George Floyd received $27 million after he was killed by police officers in Minneapolis. The family of Breonna Taylor got $12 million. Richard Cox, who was paralyzed after a ride in a police van in New Haven, Conn., got $46 million.But the family of Botham Shem Jean, who was killed by an off-duty officer, Amber R. Guyger, as he watched television in his apartment in Dallas in 2018, may never see a penny.That is not because the courts did not value his life. On Tuesday, a jury awarded his family almost $100 million. The difference lies, rather, in who was held responsible for his death.How do police violence cases usually work?In many high-profile cases of police violence, the city or county where the misconduct occurred is responsible for any payout connected to wrongful death or injury. Those taxpayer-funded payouts have amounted to billions of dollars: In 2023, New York City paid nearly $115 million in police misconduct settlements, according to an analysis by the Legal Aid Society.Awards to victims or their families can vary greatly, depending on factors such as the projected earnings over a victim’s lifetime, the sympathies of juries in a given jurisdiction and the amount of publicity generated by the case. Some families win money in civil rights claims even when the officers involved are not criminally charged or disciplined.But in order to have a successful case, plaintiffs must surmount at least two significant legal obstacles. First, officers are granted qualified immunity from lawsuits if victims cannot show that the officers have violated their “clearly established” rights. Second, municipalities can be held responsible only if the plaintiff’s rights were violated because of a negligent policy or practice — for example, if the police department had ignored previous bad behavior on the part of an officer or had failed to properly train its officers.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Federal Jury Finds Ex-Officer Brett Hankison Guilty of Violating Breonna Taylor’s Rights

      by

      The former detective fired 10 shots through Ms. Taylor’s apartment in a raid that set off a wave of protests across the country.The former police detective who fired 10 shots through Breonna Taylor’s apartment in a fatal raid in Louisville, Ky., in 2020 was found guilty on Friday of violating her rights by using excessive force.But the jury cleared the former officer, Brett Hankison, of violating the rights of Ms. Taylor’s neighbors.Mr. Hankison, who is white, was the only officer to be charged for his actions during the raid, though none of the shots he fired hit Ms. Taylor. Two other officers, also white, fired the shots that killed Ms. Taylor, a 26-year-old Black woman who worked as an emergency room technician.The shooting was among several police killings that set off a wave of protests across the country in 2020.It was not the first time that Mr. Hankison faced a jury in the case. Last year, a judge declared a mistrial after jurors failed to come to a unanimous verdict on federal civil rights charges.This is a developing story. Check back for updates. More

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Mexican Military Fatally Shoots Six Migrants

      by

      The country’s defense ministry said the military officers who opened fire might have mistaken the migrants for cartel members.At least six migrants were killed in southern Mexico on Tuesday night after military officers shot at the vehicle they were traveling in. The episode called attention to a growing concern in Mexico — ever more powerful armed forces that operate with little oversight — and a continuing one, the dangers faced by migrants in the country.Mexico’s defense ministry said in a statement on Wednesday that the officers were doing “ground reconnaissance” in the state of Chiapas when they spotted a pickup truck traveling fast, and that the truck’s driver tried to evade the soldiers. Behind the pickup truck were two vehicles that the military said were similar to those organized crime groups in the region use: stakebed trucks, small flatbeds with fencing in the cargo area.The officers may have mistaken the migrants for cartel members, according to the ministry defense ministry.The military said the officers “heard explosions,” so two of them opened fire, bringing one of the trucks to a stop. It was carrying a group of 33 migrants from around the world. Four people died at the scene and two at a hospital, officials said. Ten others were injured. The rest were handed over to Mexican immigration officials.The military did not say whether the migrants were armed.The authorities did not immediately release the identities of the victims. A collective of migrant rights groups said in a statement that among the dead were four men, a woman and a girl. The targeted migrants, the statement added, came from Nepal, India, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Cuba.“These facts are neither accidental nor isolated,” the collective said. “They are a direct consequence of ordering military deployment to contain migratory flows under a logic of persecution and not of protection.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      NYPD Unwilling to Impose Discipline for Stop and Frisk, Report Says

      by

      The department’s discipline for illegal street detentions is lax at every level, according to an extraordinary review ordered by a federal judge.At every level, the New York Police Department has failed to punish officers who have violated the rights of people stopped on the street, according to a new report — a failure that reaches all the way to the top of the force.The report, the most comprehensive independent review of discipline since a landmark court decision in 2013, found that police commissioners during the past decade have routinely reduced discipline recommended for officers found to have wrongly stopped, questioned and frisked people, undermining efforts to curb unconstitutional abuses. The report, by James Yates, a retired New York State judge, was ordered by Judge Analisa Torres of Manhattan federal court and made public on Monday.Mr. Yates was assigned by the court to conduct a “granular, step-by-step analysis” of the department’s policies and discipline governing stop and frisk, a tactic of detaining people on the street that was being used disproportionately against Black and Latino New Yorkers.The 503-page document that resulted paints a picture of an agency unwilling to impose discipline on an abusive practice that has prompted criticism that the department oppresses many New Yorkers.The commissioners “demonstrated an inordinate willingness to excuse illegal stops, frisks and searches in the name of ‘good faith’ or ‘lack of malintention,’ relegating constitutional adherence to a lesser rung of discipline,” Mr. Yates writes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      N.Y.P.D. Understated Woman’s Wound in Subway Shooting, Lawyer Says

      by

      Kerry Gahalal, who was struck when officers shot a knife-wielding man at a Brooklyn station, was not simply “grazed” as officials said, according to a lawyer for the woman’s family.A 26-year-old woman who was wounded when New York City police officers shot a knife-wielding man at a Brooklyn subway station was not “grazed” by gunfire as officials have said, according to a lawyer for her family. Instead, the lawyer said on Saturday, she has a bullet lodged in her leg and is unable to walk.The woman, Kerry Gahalal, was one of two bystanders to be struck when the officers shot the man, Derrell Mickles, during a confrontation last Sunday at the Sutter Avenue L train station in the Brownsville neighborhood. The other bystander, Gregory Delpeche, was in critical condition on Friday.The contention that police officials had minimized the severity of Ms. Gahalal’s injury came a day after the Police Department released video footage of the episode that appeared unlikely to end questions about whether the officers had acted appropriately under the circumstances.The shooting is being examined by the department’s Force Investigation Division and the Brooklyn district attorney’s office. Police leaders and Mayor Eric Adams have said that the use of force was justified because Mr. Mickles had threatened officers with a weapon. Critics say it was a dangerous escalation of what had begun as an effort to enforce the minor offense of fare evasion.Ms. Gahalal turned 26 the day before the shooting and was taking the subway to Manhattan with her husband for a celebratory dinner when the L train they were on stopped at the Sutter Avenue station, the lawyer for her family, Joel Levine, said.Discussing the shooting, in which Mr. Mickles and an officer were also wounded, Jeffrey Maddrey, the chief of department, said at a police news conference last Sunday that a male bystander (Mr. Delpeche) had been struck in the head and that a female bystander (Ms. Gahalal) had been “grazed.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      NYPD Officials Defend Shooting on Brooklyn Subway That Wounded Bystanders

      by

      “We are not perfect,” said John Chell, the Police Department’s chief of patrol, as protesters gathered in Union Square.New York City police leaders said Wednesday evening that officers had done the best they could when they shot a man wielding a knife, also hitting a fellow officer and two bystanders — including one who suffered a grave head wound.Police officials said that in the “next couple of days” they would release body-worn camera footage captured by the officers who fired their weapons Sunday at the man they said had the knife, Derell Mickles, 37. He was hit in the stomach and is expected to recover.Also shot was Gregory Delpeche, a 49-year-old hospital administrator who was on his way to work and in an adjacent car when officers firing struck him in the head. He was in critical condition. A 26-year-old woman was grazed by a bullet, the police said. The Brooklyn district attorney’s office is investigating the actions of the officers.John Chell, the chief of patrol, said that despite those injuries, the officers had acted according to the department’s guidelines, which allow officers to use deadly force when they believe their lives are in danger.“We are not perfect and every situation is not the same,” he said. “This is a fast-moving, fast-paced and a stressful situation, and we did the best we could to protect our lives and the lives of the people on that train.”The shootings were the violent culmination of a confrontation that started after Mr. Mickles twice evaded the fare to get into the Sutter Avenue L train station in Brooklyn, the police said. The officers’ response has set off criticism that the police are being too aggressive when trying to stop fare evaders and has led to demonstrations, including one Wednesday night in Manhattan.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Sentence for Paramedic Convicted in Elijah McClain’s Death Is Reduced to Probation

      by

      Peter Cichuniec was sentenced in March to five years in prison. On Friday, a judge reduced the sentence because of “unusual and extenuating circumstances.”The punishment for a Colorado paramedic who was sentenced to five years in prison for his role in the 2019 death of Elijah McClain was reduced to probation on Friday.The paramedic, Peter Cichuniec, a former paramedic with Aurora Fire Rescue, was convicted of criminally negligent homicide and the more serious second-degree assault for the unlawful administration of drugs in the case, which drew national attention after the death of George Floyd and became part of the movement against police brutality.Mr. McClain, a 23-year-old Black man, died after a confrontation with the Aurora police, in which officers put him in a chokehold and a paramedic injected him with ketamine. He died in a hospital several days later.Mr. Cichuniec, 51, was the senior-ranked paramedic who gave what prosecutors described as an excessive amount of the powerful sedative. In March, Judge Mark Warner of Adams County District Court sentenced Mr. Cichuniec to five years in prison, the statutory minimum.On Friday, the judge reduced the sentence to four years of probation. “The court finds, really, there are unusual and extenuating circumstances, and they are truly exceptional in this case,” the judge said in a hearing, according to The Denver Post, referring to a provision of Colorado’s mandatory sentencing law that allows modifications.The judge noted Mr. Cichuniec’s lack of criminal history and his good character, according to The Post, and said that Mr. Cichuniec had to make quick decisions that night. He has been in custody since his conviction in December.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More