Unarmed Woman shot by Minnesota Police

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**nels1031**

Update!

Civil suit filed by Victims family:

The family of the Australian woman fatally shot by a Minneapolis police officer has filed a lawsuit seeking $50 million.

Minneapolis, MN – The family of the Australian yoga instructor who was fatally shot by a Minneapolis police officer after she called 911 to report a possible assault in the alley behind her home has filed a lawsuit alleging her civil rights were violated.

Her family has also accused police officials and the officer’s partner of “conspiracy to cover up the true facts surrounding the killing of Justine,” the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.

The incident occurred on July 15, 2017 when 32-year-old Officer Mohamed Noor responded to the call from 40-year-old Justine Damond with his partner, Officer Matthew Harrity, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.

With Officer Noor in the passenger seat, Officer Harrity pulled into the alleyway with the patrol car’s headlights deactivated, and removed the safety hood from the holster of his duty weapon.

He said that he heard a dog barking as he neared Damond’s home, and that he slowed the vehicle to two miles per hour, but never stopped.

Approximately two minutes later, the officers approached the end of the alley, and waited for a bicyclist to pass as they cleared from the call.

Officer Harrity said that moments later, he heard a voice and a thump towards the rear of the patrol car, and then “caught a glimpse of a person’s head and shoulders outside his window.”

He said that the person, later identified as Damon, was approximately two feet away, and that he could not see her hands, and did not know if she had any weapons.

The startled officer recalled having said, “Oh s--t,” or “Oh Jesus,” and grabbed for his duty weapon, believing his life was in danger. He said he drew the weapon and held it to his rib cage, pointed downwards.

Officer Harrity said that he then heard a noise “that sounded like a light bulb dropping on the floor, and saw a flash.”

After checking to see if he had been shot, Officer Harrity said he realized that Officer Noor’s right arm was extended towards him, and that Damon was standing outside the driver’s side window with her hands on the left side of her abdomen, covering a gunshot wound.

She said, “‘I’m dying,’ or ‘I’m dead,’” according to the court documents.

Officer Harrity rushed to her aid, and told Officer Noor to re-holster his weapon and to activate his bodycam.

He initiated CPR, and Officer Noor eventually took over. Damond died at the scene.

Officer Noor was charged with third-degree murder “perpetrating eminently dangerous act and evincing depraved mind,” and second-degree manslaughter “culpable negligence creating unreasonable risk” in Hennepin County District Court on March 20, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.

Noor’s employment with the Minneapolis Police Department was terminated following his arrest.

The lawsuit by Damond’s family claimed that Noor and Officer Harrity conspired to keep their body-worn cameras from collecting potential incriminating evidence.

The civil rights complaint, which is seeking more than $50 million in damages, was filed in federal court in Minneapolis on behalf of Damond’s father, John Ruszczyk, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.

The lawsuit alleged that cameras would have contained “evidence that would incriminate Noor, evidence that would expose the false statements of Harrity, and evidence that would show the public and the jurors in both the criminal and civil trials the truth of the circumstances of Justine’s death.”

It also claimed that failure of officers to activate bodycams was common in the department, and said the officers in Damond’s case failed to activate their bodycams “knowing that evidence needed to convict a police officer would be lost. ... Noor and Harrity did so to protect themselves — to insulate any lies they might later tell.”

The lawsuit also named former Minneapolis Police Chief Janee Harteau, current Police Chief Medaria Arrandondo, and the city of Minneapolis, FOX News reported.

**tneva82**

Well. This case again makes me happy here police by law can shoot only to stop dangerous action toward other without other option. Simply other raising hands suddenly etc isn'' enough.

**nels1031**

Looks like the long knives are coming out.

Alot of filler in this article, but some sketchy new details about Noor’s behavior while a member of the Minn. police.

Minneapolis, MN – Field training officers and two psychiatrists raised concerns about former Minneapolis Police Officer Mohamed Noor’s fitness to serve the community for more than two years before he fatally shot Justine Damond in July of 2017, court documents showed.

Damond, 40, called 911 to report a possible assault in the alley behind her home.

The then ran outside to speak with the Officer Noor, 32, and his partner as they started to leave the area.

As she approached their patrol vehicle, Officer Noor shot from the passenger seat, across his partner, hitting Damond at the driver’s side window.

Information regarding early concerns about the former officer’s fitness for duty came to light on Wednesday, after Noor’s attorney filed a motion seeking the dismissal of the murder and manslaughter charges filed against Noor in the wake of Damond’s death, FOX News reported.

In their response, Hennepin County prosecutors filed documents pertaining to Noor’s early 2015 pre-hiring evaluations, during which two psychiatrists expressed concerns that he was unable to handle the stress of police work and was unwilling to deal with people, the Star Tribune reported.

The evaluators also noted that, in comparison to other recruits, Noor was more likely to become impatient over minor infractions, to be more demanding, to struggle getting along with others, and to have a limited network of social support.

According to the evaluation, Noor “reported disliking people and being around them,” but didn’t meet diagnostic criteria for mental illness, chemical dependency, or a personality disorder, the Star Tribune reported.

As such, Noor was deemed as “psychiatrically fit to work as a cadet police officer for the Minneapolis Police Department,” the prosecution’s filing read.

A civilian human resources employee reviewed the psychiatric report and contacted the psychiatrist about the seemingly conflicting information it contained, but was told that the evaluator stood by his recommendation, the Star Tribune reported.

Officer Noor’s behavior on the street soon raised red flags, as well.

On Apr. 8, 2016, a field training officer reported that Officer Noor was avoiding calls, and that he preferred to drive in circles while ignoring calls that he could have assigned himself to, KARE reported.

The requests for service were simple – such as checking on a suspicious vehicle and addressing a road hazard, the field training officer noted.

Court documents also referenced dashcam footage of a May 18, 2017 traffic stop that showed Officer Noor as he approached the driver to address a minor traffic violation, the Star Tribune reported.

According to a police report, Officer Noor had witnessed the driver making a vulgar hand gesture towards a bicyclist before the driver passed another vehicle on the right while failing to signal.

"When the defendant approached the driver's side of the stopped car, the first thing he did was point his gun at the driver's head,” the filing read.

Officer Noor and his partner did not “document their display of force or any justification for it,” and the failure to signal citation was ultimately dismissed after Officer Noor failed to show up for the court hearing.

Two months later, on July 15, 2017, Officer Noor and his partner, Officer Matthew Harrity, responded to Damond’s report of a possible assault in the alley behind her home, the Star Tribune reported.

With Officer Noor in the passenger seat, Officer Harrity pulled into the alleyway with the patrol car’s headlights deactivated, and removed the safety hood from the holster of his duty weapon.

Officer Harrity said that he heard a dog barking as he neared Damond’s home, and that he slowed the vehicle to two miles per hour, but never stopped.

Approximately two minutes later, the officers approached the end of the alley, and waited for a bicyclist to pass as they cleared from the call.

Officer Harrity said that moments later, he heard a voice and a thump towards the rear of the patrol car, and then “caught a glimpse of a person’s head and shoulders outside his window.”

He said that the person, later identified as Damond, was approximately two feet away, and that he could not see her hands, and did not know if she had any weapons.

The startled officer recalled having said, “Oh s--t,” or “Oh Jesus,” and grabbed for his duty weapon, believing his life was in danger. He said he drew the weapon and held it to his rib cage, pointed downwards.

Officer Harrity said that he then heard a noise “that sounded like a light bulb dropping on the floor, and saw a flash.”

After checking to see if he had been shot, Officer Harrity said he realized that Officer Noor’s right arm was extended towards him, and that Damon was standing outside the driver’s side window with her hands on the left side of her abdomen, covering a gunshot wound.

She said, “‘I’m dying,’ or ‘I’m dead,’” according to the court documents.

Officer Harrity rushed to her aid, and told Officer Noor to re-holster his weapon and to activate his bodycam.

He initiated CPR, and Officer Noor eventually took over. Damond died at the scene.

Noor’s employment with the Minneapolis Police Department was terminated following his arrest.

Noor was charged with third-degree murder “perpetrating eminently dangerous act and evincing depraved mind,” and second-degree manslaughter “culpable negligence creating unreasonable risk” in Hennepin County District Court on March 20, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.

Damond’s family has also filed a $50 million wrongful death suit, accusing Noor and Officer Harrity of conspiring to hide evidence by not activating their bodycams during the fatal encounter, the Star Tribune reported.

The lawsuit alleged that cameras would have contained “evidence that would incriminate Noor, evidence that would expose the false statements of Harrity, and evidence that would show the public and the jurors in both the criminal and civil trials the truth of the circumstances of Justine’s death.”

It also claimed that failure of officers to activate bodycams was common in the department, and said the officers in Damond’s case failed to activate their bodycams “knowing that evidence needed to convict a police officer would be lost. ... Noor and Harrity did so to protect themselves — to insulate any lies they might later tell.”

The lawsuit also named former Minneapolis Police Chief Janee Harteau, current Police Chief Medaria Arrandondo, and the city of Minneapolis, FOX News reported.

**Future War Cultist**

So he is an unstable nut job then.

Also, body cameras should be mantadory in every department, and not having them switched on should be a sackable offence. From the minute you go out on patrol, camera on. If it stops working for some reason, you stop, report it, and get it fixed. The fething binmen in my city have cameras on their lorries and they have to make sure they’re working too before going out. There’s absolutely no excuse.

**Ouze**

I used to think body cams would solve some of these problems, but then a bunch of cops choked a dude to death for selling loose cigarettes with video rolling, and it didn't matter.

The real problem I think is the level of discretion that prosecutors and juries allow police - thinks that would clearly send a non-officer to jail often don't even merit charges in a police officer, and that's a problem.

Thanks for updating this thread.

**Henry**

Future War Cultist wrote:
So he is an unstable nut job then.

Are you suggesting he has a psychological condition and so should not be prosecuted?

**Breotan**

Henry wrote:
Future War Cultist wrote:
So he is an unstable nut job then.

Are you suggesting he has a psychological condition and so should not be prosecuted?

More like he may have a psychological condition and should never have been a cop in the first place.

**Future War Cultist**

Breotan wrote:
Henry wrote:
Future War Cultist wrote:
So he is an unstable nut job then.

Are you suggesting he has a psychological condition and so should not be prosecuted?

More like he may have a psychological condition and should never have been a cop in the first place.

Yeah, this.

Too many warning signs. Something should have been done sooner.

**Baragash**

I had read it as Henry making a cynical "jest" about the reason he shouldn't have been a cop being used as his defence.

**Henry**

No jest. Whether he should or should not have been employed is one thing that should be looked at. After all, he was considered stable enough to be employed.

But whether he should or should not have been employed is a different question to what should be done now. Future War Cultist reads the essay and concludes he's a nut job (I read that as he has a psychological condition) who should not have been employed. People with psychological conditions can usually use them as mitigating against their culpability. This suggests, with no sarcasm or jest involved, that Future War cultists thinks this person should not be prosecuted due to having a psychological condition.

**Future War Cultist**

I think that he absolutely should be prosecuted. What I’m getting at is who the feth vetted him and allowed to carry a badge and a gun, and why nothing was done over the earlier incidents.

**Ouze**

Henry wrote:
People with psychological conditions can usually use them as mitigating against their culpability.

There is a vast chasm between having a psychological condition that makes you unqualified to do police work, and being legally insane; the latter of which is the legal standard (M'Naghten Rule) not not being convicted in a court of law.

By the way, people who aren't convicted because they are found not guilty by reason of insanity don't just walk free - they are then typically involuntarily committed and then spend more time on average institutionalized than they would have if found sane and imprisoned.

**Vaktathi**

Ouze wrote:
I used to think body cams would solve some of these problems, but then a bunch of cops choked a dude to death for selling loose cigarettes with video rolling, and it didn't matter.

The real problem I think is the level of discretion that prosecutors and juries allow police - thinks that would clearly send a non-officer to jail often don't even merit charges in a police officer, and that's a problem.

Indeed, and on top of that, training standards and police mindset are also a huge issue. "Officer safety" is promoted above and beyond everything else to the point that the most minor of movements can be cause to clear leather and open fire as a threat, they are seemingly trained to be deathly terrified of everything.

Lethal force is used in situations that in any other developed nation would never be addressed by resorting to a firearm, and the statistics are shocking. German police kill 20 fewer times as many people per capita every year as US police do. Per capita, in 2014, they killed 0.00875 people per 100,000 residents. The NYPD kill 0.15, the LAPD kill 0.5 and Kern County CA kills 1.5, for a rate that it 17x, 57x, and 171x the rate of people killed by police in Germany respectively. The total number of shots fired by police in Germany in 2014 was a grand total of 46, while in the US we see many incidents every year where police fire that many or more in a single shooting.

The shift from police being "peace officers" into "law enforcement" has not had successful results.

**d-usa**

Working in a correctional setting also makes one jaded in that regard. Other LEOs are frequently quick to point out that Correctional staff aren’t “real law enforcement”. But while they have the “luxury” of shooting to kill every time someone looks scary, I am frequently the only person interacting with hundreds of criminals at a time with a handy can of mace to protect myself with.

**Easy E**

Thanks for the update.

I am no longer in the area, so lost track of this case.

**tneva82**

Vaktathi wrote:
Ouze wrote:
I used to think body cams would solve some of these problems, but then a bunch of cops choked a dude to death for selling loose cigarettes with video rolling, and it didn't matter.

The real problem I think is the level of discretion that prosecutors and juries allow police - thinks that would clearly send a non-officer to jail often don't even merit charges in a police officer, and that's a problem.

Indeed, and on top of that, training standards and police mindset are also a huge issue. "Officer safety" is promoted above and beyond everything else to the point that the most minor of movements can be cause to clear leather and open fire as a threat, they are seemingly trained to be deathly terrified of everything.

Lethal force is used in situations that in any other developed nation would never be addressed by resorting to a firearm, and the statistics are shocking. German police kill 20 fewer times as many people per capita every year as US police do. Per capita, in 2014, they killed 0.00875 people per 100,000 residents. The NYPD kill 0.15, the LAPD kill 0.5 and Kern County CA kills 1.5, for a rate that it 17x, 57x, and 171x the rate of people killed by police in Germany respectively. The total number of shots fired by police in Germany in 2014 was a grand total of 46, while in the US we see many incidents every year where police fire that many or more in a single shooting.

The shift from police being "peace officers" into "law enforcement" has not had successful results.

In Finland use of gun for police is so much discouraged one cop is currently being under pretrial investigation(not sure if that's proper legal term for the finnish term though but fairly literal translaton) for misconduct having shot at leg of a knife wielder for excessive use of force(the person shot had been making a scene at parking lot hitting cars with knife. Police ordered him to drop the knife but he refused). Not convicted yet anyway but gives idea how strict limits we have for use of force.

**godardc**

That's stupid, what this police officer should have done ? Let himself being hurt ?
...
I am legally alowed to kill anyone coming to me with a knife if they are within 7 meters, and I am a fu****g national guard

**Mario**

godardc wrote:
That's stupid, what this police officer should have done ? Let himself being hurt ?
...
I am legally alowed to kill anyone coming to me with a knife if they are within 7 meters, and I am a fu****g national guard

And from the post above he was attacking cars. So if you were a car you would be in your right to defend your self. Maybe the dude was far away from anybody else when when police officer shot him in the leg, maybe he was moving towards a human target. It seems like they are looking into it to see if the police officer's behaviour was appropriate. That sounds like a reasonable process to me. The officer did their thing and now the investigation is doing their thing.

What would happen if you kill somebody who has a knife within 7 meters of you? Would people just accept that you killed somebody without looking into it? What if you lied about the circumstances? Shouldn't an investigation be the least that's done when somebody uses (deadly) force, especially if they are in a privileged position when it comes to access to deadly weapons, training, and their job (like police or military)?

**Kilkrazy**

It may be stupid, but it works.

The police in most western countries except the USA are trained to de-escalate violent situations and shoot to disable rather than kill, as a last resort instead of a first resort.

The exception I think is the UK, where we don't have armed police except for the special firearms units who are scrambled to gun crimes and terrorist incidents. They go in hard and fast in chaotic situations.

Anyway, the point is that it's the USA that has a high incidence of police killing people, not the rest of the western world. The USA also has a high incidence of the police killing innocent people.

**Just Tony**

Ideally I'd like for them to pull every single police officer off the street, REGARDLESS of their jurisdiction, and put them through mandatory retraining on non-lethal methods, de-escalation tactics, and general reevaluation of personality traits to make sure we don't have someone like that freak that had "You're fethed" and skulls on their AR.

Ideally I'd like this training to last about 6 months. Not let a single cop back on the street until the entire police force is reeducated. The whole 6 months.

**tneva82**

Kilkrazy wrote:

It may be stupid, but it works.

The police in most western countries except the USA are trained to de-escalate violent situations and shoot to disable rather than kill, as a last resort instead of a first resort.

The exception I think is the UK, where we don't have armed police except for the special firearms units who are scrambled to gun crimes and terrorist incidents. They go in hard and fast in chaotic situations.

Anyway, the point is that it's the USA that has a high incidence of police killing people, not the rest of the western world. The USA also has a high incidence of the police killing innocent people.

Yep. Here shooting is pretty much last resort only to be used if there's _clear direct threat_ to police or some other person. Until then no shooting allowed. Now albeit I don't know exact situation from the above case(I'm going by news, not being personal witness) but simply not dropping a knife when ordered is NOT grounds for shooting unless he's actually immediate threat to somebody. If he's just hacking at cars that's not life threatening situation to anybody. Now if he were to make a dash toward person with knife at hand that's another thing.

**Steve steveson**

Kilkrazy wrote:

The exception I think is the UK, where we don't have armed police except for the special firearms units who are scrambled to gun crimes and terrorist incidents. They go in hard and fast in chaotic situations.

Even then they try to deescalate and subdue if they can and firing a shot is seen as the very last resort. Even the "hard and fast" screaming "armed police" is intended to cause confusion and an opportunity for the police to subdue rather than shoot.

**Ouze**

Just Tony wrote:
to make sure we don't have someone like that freak that had "You're fethed" and skulls on their AR.

Out of all the police shootings, that one was one one of the most infuriating. Good work by his lawyer keeping the bodycam footage away from the jury, I guess, because that was clear-cut capital murder.

**LunarSol**

Just Tony wrote:
Not let a single cop back on the street until the entire police force is reeducated. The whole 6 months.

This sounds like something that would end poorly....

**d-usa**

After the Purge is over, police will restore order?

**Just Tony**

LunarSol wrote:
Just Tony wrote:
Not let a single cop back on the street until the entire police force is reeducated. The whole 6 months.

This sounds like something that would end poorly....

d-usa wrote:After the Purge is over, police will restore order?

I think both would come about. But at least the police will come at it with a different mindset and restore the peace nonviolently.

**Easy E**

I think the UK model is pretty awesome, and would probably work in urban areas of the US. How does the UK model work in more rural and less urbanized areas?

**timetowaste85**

Whoever vetted him should also be charged with man-slaughter. They’re saying he was unstable, but “should” be fit for duty? I support cops because I have friends in the force and most cops have been decent to me (barring one guy who sounded unstable himself) but guys like this give police officers a bad name. If he was “cleared” to work, he should be “cleared” for prison. Along with the guy who assessed him for duty.

**A Town Called Malus**

Easy E wrote:
I think the UK model is pretty awesome, and would probably work in urban areas of the US. How does the UK model work in more rural and less urbanized areas?

Well, at least in England (I know Northern Ireland is different as a hold over of the troubles which means that many of their officers are issued firearms as routine but Wales and Scotland could also have different policies), even the more rural areas will have dedicated firearms officers (there's around 6,500 AFOs in the UK, of which 2,500 are in the Met, leaving 4,000 outside London). That is required as many of the firearms in the UK are in the hands of farmers (shotguns and rifles for pest control) and the gun clubs which have ranges for shooting are also outside of the cities and so people who own legal firearms (such as rifles) will typically live reasonably close to one of these clubs as part of the condition for owning a gun in the UK is that you either have a need for it (such as a farmer needing it for pest control) or use it for recreation at a licensed gun club a certain number of times a year at a minimum. The firearms teams will be located around the county with each covering their own patch but within range of each other if necessary. And, importantly, all of those firearms police are held to the same high standard. They need to complete retraining every year to keep their position on the firearms response team and that training is not just go on a course for a couple of hours and plink on a range to demonstrate aptitude. It includes psychological evaluation, fitness, firearms safety, proper procedure for engaging with the public etc.

Firearms officers are also not allowed to take their weapons home. When they are not on the clock, their weapons are stored in their police station armoury.

Obviously "rural" in the UK will not translate to "rural" in the US due to the much larger area of the US.

**Future War Cultist**

I’m not sure if unarmed police could work in the US. Wouldn’t they be sitting ducks? Keep the guns, but just recruit and train better.

The Police Service Of Northern Ireland all carry guns (the only territorial police force in the UK who do so) and they do all right. Vetting and training is stringent and rigorous. Even putting your hand on the grip of your gun while it’s in its holster requires a bloody good reason. Training emphasises deescalation, not in your face ‘respect mah authorita!’ bs.

I’ll try to find a link, but there was an incident once where dissident republicans (IRA wannabes basically) phoned in a fake 999 call in an isolated rural area at night to lure the patrol into an ambush. Despite coming under fire in the dark, they held their nerve and didn’t return fire, but instead called for backup. I think they then managed to swamp the area and force them to surrender. I don’t see why any police in a rich democratic country can’t be trained to this level of restraint.