WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department won’t prosecute a former Ferguson, Missouri, police officer in the shooting death of an unarmed black 18-year-old, but in a scathing report released Wednesday faulted the city and its law enforcement for racial bias.
Federal officials concluded there was no evidence to disprove former officer Darren Wilson’s testimony that he feared for his safety, nor was there reliable evidence that Michael Brown had his hands up in surrender when he was shot.
The decision in the August 9 shooting had been expected, in part because of the high legal standard needed for a federal civil rights prosecution. Wilson, who has said Brown struck him in the face and reached for his gun during a tussle, also had been cleared by a Missouri grand jury in November and later resigned from the department.
A separate report issued Wednesday said blacks in Ferguson are disproportionately subject to excessive police force, baseless traffic stops and citations for infractions as petty as walking down the middle of the street.
The Justice Department issued more than two dozen recommendations to improve the closely aligned police department and court system, including training officers to de-escalate confrontations and better oversight of its recruiting, hiring and promotion procedures.
Federal officials on Wednesday described Ferguson city leaders as cooperative and open to change, and said there were already signs of improvement.
Similarly broad federal civil rights investigations of troubled police departments have led to the appointment of independent monitors and mandated overhauls in the most fundamental of police practices. The Justice Department maintains the right to sue a police department if officials balk at making changes, though many investigations resolve the issue with both sides negotiating a blueprint for change known as a consent decree.
“It’s quite evident that change is coming down the pike. This is encouraging,” said John Gaskin III, a St. Louis community activist. “It’s so unfortunate that Michael Brown had to be killed. But in spite of that, I feel justice is coming.”
Others said the federal government’s findings confirmed what they had long known and should lead to change in the police department leadership.
Brown’s killing set off weeks of protests and initiated a national dialogue about police use of force and their relations with minority communities.
The findings of the investigation, which began weeks after Brown’s killing last August, were released as Attorney General Eric Holder prepares to leave his job following a six-year tenure that focused largely on civil rights. The report is based on interviews with police leaders and residents, a review of more than 35,000 pages of police records and analysis of data on stops, searches and arrests.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Wow, what a skewed article. The DOJ made reference to all the complete inconsistency in witnesses who said Brown had his hands up, etc. They did not say they “couldn’t” prosecute, they said all evidence indicates they “shouldn’t” prosecute. That is not even in this mentioned in this article, unless the author decides to be a real journalist and update it.
The DOJ report on bias by the Ferguson police department is likely 100% accurate, and exposes an absolute disgrace that is practiced by most police departments nationwide. It’s good to see this all get exposed, and hopefully some major changes are made (like disbanding that department for starters, what they did should be classified as criminal).
So like I said from day one, there is NO doubt that big time racism is practiced by police, no doubt whatsoever. And it’s a huge problem. But using the Wilson-Brown thing as your rallying cry was a joke. There are very legit cases, like Garner and Rice. This was NOT one of them. All you had to do was read the transcripts, but nobody wants to do that. It’s easier to just listen to some talking head that cherry picks info.
Its just very difficult to build a case of federal civil rights violations based upon one isolated act. Its much, much easier to do so against an entire department, particularly with the evidence they have.
They said they had enough evidence in the Brown case, and that evidence in no way warranted any kind of prosecution. They did not say there was not enough evidence. They said the witnesses who claimed Brown had his hands in the air surrendering either changed their stories at least once, or they actually finally admitted they never saw what happened. These people were shown on TV in what was a circus designed for ratings (create controversy). Meanwhile several black witnesses who were right there said Brown was charging at Wilson, the only difference in their testimony being the speed at which he was moving. Those people chose not to go on TV and become part of the media circus, although I am sure they also feared getting threats as well. The media hyped this whole thing for ratings, like they always do.
As to the PD, there was ample evidence of wrongdoing. So if there is a positive to come out of this whole thing, maybe it will be a nationwide movement to have police stop the racism that is practiced far too often, and hold police accountable when they act as such.
But that does not translate to “cop always wrong, black person always right”. Each case has specific circumstances. But it seems many extremists on the left or right just want to choose sides, and then cherry pick info that fits their agenda. Same thing conspiracy theorists do.
Please refrain from putting words in my mouth, I am quite capable of saying my own words…as I think I have proven quite often on this board.
And I certainly have never said cop always wrong, black person always right. Though I can see how you might be getting a bit defensive of your protection of police, given the number of high profile killings where the police are in the wrong.
I was not referring to you at all, I was making a statement (just conversation) about extremists, which I have not at all found you to be, so sorry if I came off like that.
My main rebuttal to you personally was that DOJ felt they had ample evidence to evaluate in this specific case, and they felt no prosecution was warranted based on that ample evidence. You said in your initial comment it was hard to prosecute on an single isolated act, but there have been thousands of hate crime indictments for isolated acts over the years.