• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Investigation into Babbit shooting closed

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
39,063
Reaction score
45,723
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/department-justice-closes-investigation-death-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.

So it was a civil rights investigation, not a murder investigation and not a use of force investigation.

Hmmm....
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
35,325
Reaction score
8,700
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
39,063
Reaction score
45,723
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
How close do you believe the officers should have allowed the mob, which was calling for the death of our elected leaders, to get to them before opening fire?
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.
 

Excast

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2019
Messages
2,865
Reaction score
4,410
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.

You are in your home with a mob outside that is saying they want to hang your wife and children. You have no idea what they are armed with, but their calls for violence have been loud and clear.

You're going to let them walk in and hope for the best?
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
45,762
Reaction score
29,189
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This is the guy who claimed the insurrection, the murder of a cop, the intended murder of much of congress, and the intention that this defeat certification so that one of Trump's election-theft schemes had time to work, was really just a kegger....a wild college party.

And now he wants to insinuate that the real culprit is the DOJ, for not investigating the cop for murder. As if there's no real difference between cops shooting a black man dead, in the back, and a cop in a secure area shooting someone who comes rushing through a broken window at him in the midst of a violent insurrection aimed at the nation's ****ing capitol

:rolleyes:



https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/department-justice-closes-investigation-death-ashli-babbitt

So it was a civil rights investigation, not a murder investigation and not a use of force investigation.

Hmmm....

But I really do thank you for rewriting my understanding of history. Here I thought that the British who invaded us, killed US troops/civilians, set fire to the Capitol building were in the wrong. Turns out they were just having a party, and it's the US soldiers who were murderous aggressors.

The things you learn...
 

Craig234

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
17,041
Reaction score
5,961
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.

That doesn't work. Should a mob be able to march on trump in the oval office, and if security can't stop the mob by asking them to leave and pushing them, they can't use deadly force until they're actually are at trump and attack him? I would like to see every effort made to avoid deadly force, better systems tools and warnings, but they don't have to watch the mob kill lawmakers before protecting them.
 

lwf

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
10,395
Reaction score
5,864
Location
PNW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.

What would you do to a criminal member of a violent mob breaking through a window in your house and climbing inside where people you are sworn to protect are hiding?
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
45,762
Reaction score
29,189
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
And where are all those excuses about how the cop did not know that she did not have a weapon, how she wasn't following police commands? Has anyone demanded to know whether she had any health conditions or was on drugs, such that being shot might result in death where it otherwise would not? What about her criminal history? Did she shoplift once when she was a teen?

Funny.... it's a dead black dude and we hear all that.

:unsure:




Oh well, I'm sure the problem is just that I read poopy fake nooz like the NYT, WaPo, The Economist, and the like. I'm sure I'd see the *real* truth if I turned to OANN, newsmax, breitbart, and infowars.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
45,762
Reaction score
29,189
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
What would you do to a criminal member of a violent mob breaking through a window in your house and climbing inside where people you are sworn to protect are hiding?

He would thank them for their patriotism, apparently.
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
39,063
Reaction score
45,723
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Why was a use of force investigation not conducted? Why was a murder investigation not conducted? We expect such an investigation every time a cop kills a black man but in this case it was a white chick that supported Trump and the DoJ just DGAF.
 

lwf

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
10,395
Reaction score
5,864
Location
PNW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why was a use of force investigation not conducted? Why was a murder investigation not conducted? We expect such an investigation every time a cop kills a black man but in this case it was a white chick that supported Trump and the DoJ just DGAF.

If the capitol police officer had pulled her over on the road and there was a struggle and she was shot, I'm sure there would have been. And who says there wasn't an internal use of force investigation? The video makes it clear that Babbit was a criminal aggressor and the capitol police officer acted in his duty to defend elected officials. He did not approach her, he was not questioning her, or singling her out. He was inside a locked and barricaded door protecting our elected officials, and she broke through this door. What more do we need to know?
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,087
Reaction score
27,257
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Treason has consequences. The Trump cult is lucky more of them weren’t killed.

Amid setbacks, prosecutors abandon some claims in U.S. Capitol riot cases
By Sarah N. Lynch
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...laims-in-u-s-capitol-riot-cases-idUSKBN2BG30C

But the Justice Department has since acknowledged in court hearings that some of its evidence concerning the riot - carried out by a mob of supporters of former President Donald Trump to try to overturn his election loss - is less damning than it initially indicated.

The department suffered another blow this week when U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta threatened to impose a gag order on prosecutors after Michael Sherwin, its former head prosecutor on the Capitol cases, told CBS’s “60 Minutes” program that evidence pointed toward sedition charges against some defendants.

A charge of sedition - meaning incitement of a rebellion - has not been brought against any of the more than 400 people arrested to date. The most serious charges have been assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement.

Prosecutors are in the early stages of building criminal cases ahead of the trials stemming from an attack that left five people dead including a police officer, forced lawmakers to hide for their own safety and interrupted the formal congressional certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory.

But missteps by the government could harm its credibility as accused ringleaders begin asking courts to drop some of the most serious charges.

“They are trying to build the most horrendous cases they can because the public wants it - and this is politicizing criminal justice,” said Gerald B. Lefcourt, who for decades has represented high-profile defendants in political demonstrations, including Black Panther leaders and “Chicago Seven” trial figure Abbie Hoffman.
A charge of sedition - meaning incitement of a rebellion - has not been brought against any of the more than 400 people arrested to date. The most serious charges have been assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement. So no indication of treason, nor any treason charges, if all the federal prosecutor can make a case for assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement.
 

Excast

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2019
Messages
2,865
Reaction score
4,410
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Why was a use of force investigation not conducted? Why was a murder investigation not conducted? We expect such an investigation every time a cop kills a black man but in this case it was a white chick that supported Trump and the DoJ just DGAF.

Maybe there should have been more of an investigation so you could read why it's a very bad idea to storm the Capitol and attempt to crawl through a breach into the House chamber while the mob you are a part of has called for killing the people inside.
 

nvflash

Changing the law does not change the truth.
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
528
Reaction score
211
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.
They don't need to be engaged by people using deadly force, they need only be able to reasonably assume it.

We hold the right to peaceably protest our government and petition them for redress of grievance, not storm the Capitol, beating back police and security, vandalizing and knocking down doors and barricades.

Nor do we have the right to burn and loot when we don't feel we get justice, anywhere in the nation.
 

MamboDervish

Looking Forward
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
3,479
Reaction score
2,606
Location
The Big Apple
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.
That's horseshit. When you're confronted with a breach of an invading force of hundreds of people, that IS deadly force!
 

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
61,727
Reaction score
17,982
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/department-justice-closes-investigation-death-ashli-babbitt

. 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.

So it was a civil rights investigation, not a murder investigation and not a use of force investigation.

Hmmm....

and based on video evidence alone that would never be the case lol

She was a Qanon terrorist nutter terrorist that got her dumbass self killed 🤷‍♂️
The guy that did it deserves a medal IMO because who knows what he prevented

its actually a miracle only won of those tinfoil hatter nutters got themselves killed, I commend the LEOs for showing so much restraint when they didn't have to and much more force was justified.
 

Schism

Excellent Point
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
4,434
Reaction score
1,679
Location
Eugene, Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A charge of sedition - meaning incitement of a rebellion - has not been brought against any of the more than 400 people arrested to date.

It never will. This is a media driven fantasy to hang Trump's effigy in the public square.

I suggest they fly in that big baby Trump ballon and let people attack it on live TV.

It might satisfy some of the thirst.
 

Schism

Excellent Point
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
4,434
Reaction score
1,679
Location
Eugene, Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That's horseshit. When you're confronted with a breach of an invading force of hundreds of people, that IS deadly force!

Interesting. Do you believe the very same standard applies in Portland and Seattle?

How about anywhere that rioters get in the face of police and hurl rocks, bottles, and fireworks? Is that too "deadly force"? <--your words
 

less right

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2019
Messages
4,445
Reaction score
1,765
Location
Northern Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If the police were not engaged by people using deadly force then they should not have responded with deadly force.
They were already beating a policeman to death on the front steps. Not deadly enough?
 

Schism

Excellent Point
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
4,434
Reaction score
1,679
Location
Eugene, Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
They were already beating a policeman to death on the front steps. Not deadly enough?

Does striking a police officer under any circumstances warrant use of force by LEO?

Or only in this circumstance?
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
35,325
Reaction score
8,700
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why was a use of force investigation not conducted? Why was a murder investigation not conducted? We expect such an investigation every time a cop kills a black man but in this case it was a white chick that supported Trump and the DoJ just DGAF.

The DoJ isn’t obligated to conduct a murder investigation just because a traitor in the act of committing treason got killed.
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
35,325
Reaction score
8,700
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Amid setbacks, prosecutors abandon some claims in U.S. Capitol riot cases
By Sarah N. Lynch
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...laims-in-u-s-capitol-riot-cases-idUSKBN2BG30C

But the Justice Department has since acknowledged in court hearings that some of its evidence concerning the riot - carried out by a mob of supporters of former President Donald Trump to try to overturn his election loss - is less damning than it initially indicated.

The department suffered another blow this week when U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta threatened to impose a gag order on prosecutors after Michael Sherwin, its former head prosecutor on the Capitol cases, told CBS’s “60 Minutes” program that evidence pointed toward sedition charges against some defendants.

A charge of sedition - meaning incitement of a rebellion - has not been brought against any of the more than 400 people arrested to date. The most serious charges have been assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement.

Prosecutors are in the early stages of building criminal cases ahead of the trials stemming from an attack that left five people dead including a police officer, forced lawmakers to hide for their own safety and interrupted the formal congressional certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory.

But missteps by the government could harm its credibility as accused ringleaders begin asking courts to drop some of the most serious charges.

“They are trying to build the most horrendous cases they can because the public wants it - and this is politicizing criminal justice,” said Gerald B. Lefcourt, who for decades has represented high-profile defendants in political demonstrations, including Black Panther leaders and “Chicago Seven” trial figure Abbie Hoffman.
A charge of sedition - meaning incitement of a rebellion - has not been brought against any of the more than 400 people arrested to date. The most serious charges have been assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement. So no indication of treason, nor any treason charges, if all the federal prosecutor can make a case for assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement.

Yawn. Treason is difficult to prove, legally speaking, in the court system. Hence the reason prosecutors are often more interested in going for “lesser” charges that are easier to confirm and therefore ensuring that the treasonous Trump cultists don’t avoid rotting in jail where they belong.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
147,113
Reaction score
49,116
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,087
Reaction score
27,257
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Yawn. Treason is difficult to prove, legally speaking, in the court system. Hence the reason prosecutors are often more interested in going for “lesser” charges that are easier to confirm and therefore ensuring that the treasonous Trump cultists don’t avoid rotting in jail where they belong.
No argument about treason being difficult to prove in court.
No argument that prosecutors file lesser charges they feel they have a strong case for.
Not even an argument that those rioters are charged to the full extent the law permits fro which there is sufficient evidence.

Just that it appears the evidence has left the prosecutors with evidence to only change "assault, conspiracy and obstruction of Congress or law enforcement.", and not treason or sedition.

So I'd guess you can't really call those rioters traitors, nor call their activities that day as treason. 🤷‍♂️
 
Top Bottom