https://archive.ph/B5jPf https:// www. justice. gov/usao-dc/pr/department-justice-closes-investigation-death-ashli-babbitt
Department of Justice U.S. Attorney’s Office District of Columbia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, April 14, 2021
Department of Justice Closes Investigation into the Death of Ashli Babbitt
The focus of the criminal investigation was to determine whether federal prosecutors could prove that the officer violated any federal laws, concentrating on the possible application of 18 U.S.C. § 242, a federal criminal civil rights statute. In order to establish a violation of this statute, prosecutors must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the officer acted willfully to deprive Ms. Babbitt of a right protected by the Constitution or other law, here the Fourth Amendment right not to be subjected to an unreasonable seizure. Prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so “willfully,” which the Supreme Court has interpreted to mean that the officer acted with a bad purpose to disregard the law. As this requirement has been interpreted by the courts, evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent required under Section 242.
The investigation revealed no evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully committed a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. Specifically, the investigation revealed no evidence to establish that, at the time the officer fired a single shot at Ms. Babbitt, the officer did not reasonably believe that it was necessary to do so in self-defense or in defense of the Members of Congress and others evacuating the House Chamber. Acknowledging the tragic loss of life and offering condolences to Ms. Babbitt’s family, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and U.S. Department of Justice have therefore closed the investigation into this matter.
https://archive.ph/Xez1L https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-no-charges-for-unnamed-officer-who-killed-ashli-babbitt-during-jan-6-capitol-riot
Apr 14, 2021 6:59 PM EST
BREAKING: No charges for unnamed officer who killed Ashli Babbitt during Jan 6 Capitol riot
https://archive.ph/kDpwo https://technofog.substack.com/p/the-doj-is-lying-about-the-ashley 14 Apr 2021 20:31:07 UTC
The DOJ is Lying about the Ashley Babbitt case
The force was excessive so the DOJ punts on "willfulness"
Techno Fog 24 min ago
This included reviewing video footage, getting statements from officers and other witnesses, collecting physical evidence, and the results of Ms. Babbitt’s autopsy.
They explain:
“As members of the mob continued to strike the glass doors, Ms. Babbitt attempted to climb through one of the doors where glass was broken out. An officer inside the Speaker’s Lobby fired one round from his service pistol, striking Ms. Babbitt in the left shoulder, causing her to fall back from the doorway and onto the floor.”
You’ll notice there’s no mention of a verbal warning to Ms. Babbitt or other efforts to subdue her without the use of deadly force.
Continuing on, the DOJ maintains that the “focus of the criminal investigation was to determine whether federal prosecutors could prove that the officer violated any federal laws, concentrating on the possible application of 18 U.S.C. § 242, a federal criminal civil rights statute.”
The press release focused on the term “willfully”:
In fact, the DOJ has brought Section 242 prosecutions with less egregious facts.
As the DOJ has argued in other cases, the officer’s prior training on the use of force could be viewed “as evidence that his conduct was willful.” Are we to think that this officer didn’t have training on when force became excessive?
In another case, the DOJ argued to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that to establish “willfulness,” the jury was required to find that the defendant “intended to use more force than was reasonable under the circumstances – i.e., force that violated [the victim’s] well-established due rights as a pretrial detainee.”
What makes the Babbitt case different? The victim and the location.
This case should have gone to the jury. If this killing took place in Minnesota or Chicago the results would have been different.
Fascinating that accidentally killing a black career criminal sparks outrage, but zero people care about shooting to kill a white woman who was a veteran.
Note that whatever happened was not the cop's fault. The people who issued the orders were to blame.
I was told "I was just following orders" was not a valid defense.
Why are you defending an establishment mercenary? Are you part of the cucked-right? I think you are.
He's probably one of the most cucked users here.
It literally is, though.
Because your useless existence is made possible by those who risk their own lives to keep feral lowlifes at bay, which is why said feral lowlifes want to abolish the police.
I am not a part of the 'right'.
To be fair, they work just as hard to keep us from keeping feral lowlifes at bay. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
In some of my (TW) darker moments, I think: the police don't exist in order to protect us from the criminals, but to protect the ruling class against us.
Considering that it was the ruling class which instituted the police, this is not unlikely, but it does not necesarily reflect on the motivations of those joining the police.
Considering how the cops treat leftists vs non-leftists.
We are the feral lowlifes.