Tamir Rice protesters want Cleveland prosecutor to step down

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

CLEVELAND (AP) — Protesters upset by a decision not to indict two white police officers in the shooting death of Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old black boy who had a pellet gun, marched to the home of the prosecutor Friday and repeated calls for him to resign.

More than 100 people stood outside the home of Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Tim McGinty during the peaceful protest, which also included demands for a federal investigation into the shooting.

A march leader told protesters not to vandalize McGinty's home, which is in a neighborhood on the west side of Cleveland. Police officers accompanied the marchers and stood in McGinty's driveway but did not intervene.

The protesters chanted, "New year, no more!" and "McGinty has got to go!"

FULL story at link.


People protest a grand jury's decision not to indict two white Cleveland police officers in the fatal shooting of Tamir Rice, a black 12-year-old boy who was playing with a pellet gun, Tuesday, Dec. 29, 2015, in Cleveland. (AP Photo/Tony Dejak)

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1af944b0d3b04f7998d74b2d9d9bcfb9/tamir-rice-protesters-want-cleveland-prosecutor-step-down

[daleanime]

1. Hell yes....

[Ken Burch]

2. If McGuinty doesn't resign, can he be recalled? n/t.

[cstanleytech]

3. Why should they resign or be recalled for refusing to prosecute a case that is unlikely to

lead to a conviction by a jury? I could understand if there was compelling evidence to prove the officers were informed that it was a kid and or that it was likely not a real gun but everything I have read says that the information was not provided to the officers like it should have been so getting a conviction is just not likely to happen.
Now if there a trial and charges filed the only one I could understand it being filed in this case would be against the dispacher who failed in notifying them.

[Chakab]

4. Whether or not they thought that he as a child is totally irrelevant

to issue of charges being warranted. The question is whether their behavior was criminally negligent due to the manner in which the patrol car approached Rice and rapidity with which Loehmann discharged his weapon.


Additionally, if Loehmann did actually think a that Rice was an adult, it makes his actions look even worse because Ohio is an open carry state. It's perfectly legal for an adult to brandish a weapon in public, and the police do not have cause to summarily execute a person for doing do.

[Live and Learn]

5. +1000 nt

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

6. "open carry" and "brandishing" are two different things

One is legal, the other is not.

If you leave the gun in its holster, you should be ok. If you hold the gun in your hand and wave it around and point it at stuff, cops may react unfavorably.

[ManiacJoe]

16. And Tamir was not open carrying.

At best he was doing a holsterless carry in the waistband of his pants, which would be an illegal concealed carry.

[TipTok]

19. Brandishing is illegal..

... Which is what led to the original 911 call yes?

[Uponthegears]

7. Seriously?

Let's do exactly the opposite of what a grand jury is supposed to do and see if your excuses for murder hold up. Let's take all the evidence and putting it in a light MOST FAVORABLE to the murdering cop.

We have a video that some experts testified show Tamir Rice "going for his gun," (but other experts disagreed). We also have the cop testifying that he "thought" Tamir was going for a gun. We also have the cop testifying that he was never told that the gun might be fake and a dispatcher testifying that he never passed along the "toy gun" information. Okay, fair enough, there is evidence which, if believed and if construed in a light most favorable to the cop would support an acquittal (let me repeat here that a grand jury is supposed to disregard all evidence of innocence and resolve all factual conflicts in favor of the prosecution).

Here is my question. WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THE COP? WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THE DISPATCHER? Couldn't you just as reasonably have believed the experts who said the video shows that Tamir Rice made no threatening gestures? Couldn't you just as reasonably concluded that evidence of dispatcher communications not containing the "toy gun" information does not prove the non-existence of other unrecorded and/or undisclosed communications that DID contain that information (in other words, it does not conclusively demonstrate the cop's lack of knowledge)? Couldn't you just as reasonably have concluded that the cops driving right up to within just a few feet of Tamir was not merely evidence of "poor decision-making," but evidence that they really didn't believe that Tamir had a real gun at all and therefore KNEW he posed no danger to them whatsoever? Couldn't you just as reasonably have concluded that THE COPS WERE LYING?

I ask these questions not just because the answer to them is obviously "yes" and under the standard used by grand juries this cop should have been indicted. I also asked them because why on god's green earth would ANY supposed Democrat give the benefit of the doubt to a system designed to subjugate and kill people of color and the cops it empowers to do just that?

[valerief]

8. Ohio is an OPEN CARRY state. What did Rice do wrong? nt

[cstanleytech]

11. That doesnt mean you can have the gun in your pocket, under your coat or concealed in any way.

Not to mention to legally open carry in Ohio you still need a license plus if you open carry you do walk around with your weapon drawn pointing it and pretending to pull the trigger, atleast not if you dont want someone to call the cops.
Oh and BTW I am opposed to open carry, I think it will lead to nothing but even more senseless deaths.

[Mosby]

9. he really should step down or be terminated

His JOB was to obtain an indictment from the grand jury and he didn't even try - in fact he said he didn't think the shooter should be prosecuted. Refuse to do your job, you get fired, pretty simple.

[cstanleytech]

12. His job like most district attorneys in the US also comes with prosecutorial discretion though

which grants them alot of leeway in the decision to pursue cases, now if you want to remove that discretion feel free but be advised that there could some unintended consequences such as the unintended consequences from the three strikes laws or the minimum sentencing guidelines being implemented have caused.

[Mosby]

14. he abused his discretion

If he didn't want to pursue prosecution then why did he empanel a grand jury in the first place? I'll tell you why, he wanted to move the responsibility to not do the right thing from him to the grand jury so people would blame the jury for the failure to prosecute.

[cstanleytech]

15. Depends on how you look at it.

If you believe cases should be based on evidence then the prosecutor might have made the correct decision due to the fact that the officer's were not forwarded the details of the call.
If on the other hand you are a purely outraged person that just wants the officer's punished even though they were not provided that information then yes you will believe he abused his discretion.

[Calista241]

17. He didn't abuse his discretion

His job is to win cases he can win, not make political statements and put people on trial that have no chance of ever being convicted. There was no chance, none, for a conviction in this case. Reasonable doubt is an impossibly high bar to overcome given all that we know in this case.

What is he going to say motive was? Is he going to get up there and say that the officer just woke up that morning and wanted to kill a kid, and Tamir Rice was his first available opportunity? How is he going to counter the officer's argument that Tamir Rice was waving the gun around and pointing it at him? The 911 call states that the kid was doing exactly that. Is the prosecutor going to argue that it's unreasonable to shoot someone that's pointing a gun at you?

The police forces in our country need reform, but the cases people are picking to get outraged about are not smart. There's a million cases of the cops seizing people's money, houses and assets, and throwing people in jail for stupid shit, that present WAY better opportunities to advocate for reform than Tamir Rice and some others.

And yes, Ohio is an open carry state, but open carry does not include having the gun in your hand and threatening people. Open carry is about visibly carrying a firearm around in a holstered / safe position unless it is needed. A drawn weapon is considered brandishing, and that is a crime.

[RobinA]

18. Well Said. nt

'

[bobthedrummer]

10. As you should well know, Omaha Steve-the usual route of corruption/evil is promotion. K&R.

Chapter 21-Omaha
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016139460

[jen63]

13. If this fails,

McGinty is up for reelection in 2016. Folks need to keep up the pressure and Cleveland activists should absolutely GOTV!!!