AFTER A grand jury dismissed assault charges against two suspended Buffalo officers who shoved an elderly man to the ground during last summer’s protests over police brutality, the prosecutor who brought the charges said he still believed “a crime was committed.” After a grand jury declined to bring charges against any of the Rochester, N.Y., police officers involved in the death of a Black man who had been pinned to the ground with a mesh hood placed over his head, the state’s attorney general bluntly said she was “extremely disappointed” and had wanted a different outcome. Those assessments are likely shared by those who were sickened by the viral videos of a 75-year-old man bleeding as his head hit the pavement and of someone in the throes of a psychotic episode forced to lie naked in ice and snow as officers stood around and laughed.
The cases are the latest examples of police not being called to account for actions that result in unnecessary injury and death. Martin Gugino suffered a brain injury. Daniel T. Prude’s death was ruled a homicide caused in part by “complications of asphyxia in the setting of physical restraint.” Before them, there was Eric Garner, who died after being placed in a prohibited chokehold. Breonna Taylor, shot to death by police who raided the wrong home. Tamir Rice, killed because he was playing with a toy gun. Stephon Clark, fatally shot standing in his grandmother’s backyard holding a cellphone. Elijah McClain, dead after being wrongly stopped by police and injected with a strong sedative. Most of these victims were Black (Mr. Gugino is White), and no one was ever really held responsible.
“The criminal justice system has demonstrated an unwillingness to hold law enforcement officers accountable in the unjustified killing of unarmed African Americans,” New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) said last month after the grand jury refused to bring charges in connection with the deadly encounter of seven officers last March with Prude. She outlined a multifaceted approach to reforming the system and said the cornerstone is changing the law that governs the use of force from one of “subjective simple necessity” to one of “absolute last resort.” Only after every non-lethal option has been exhausted should lethal force be employed. “The system,” she said, “too often allows officers to use deadly force unnecessarily and without consequence.” Ms. James also proposed changes in how police interact with and are trained to deal with emotional distress. She wants the state to follow the lead of New Jersey in mandating a statewide system of certification for police officers.
Ms. James would not comment on what charges she had recommended to the grand jury, citing the secrecy of the proceedings. But she petitioned the court to release minutes related to the grand jury’s investigation. The judge granted the request, but the officers are likely to appeal the ruling. Ms. James is correct that the public has a right to know what was discussed behind closed doors. She is right, too, that this case underscored yet again the need to get serious about reforms in policing.
Read more: