This points out what I posted earlier. A half ass response and a needless, egregious death.
When I worked, had I not gotten my lazy ass out of the car and searched the alley on foot, my sergeant would have had apoplexy. And I would have had to do the search alone, since I never had the luxury of a two man car.

Unfortunately he doesn’t sound much more worthless than several cops I’ve worked with.

Mohammed Noor trial starts tomorrow

http://www.startribune.com/att...oor-trial/507825992/

Police body camera footage in fired Minneapolis officer's murder trial will not be shown to public gallery

Body camera footage recorded by former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor immediately after he fatally shot Justine Ruszczyk Damond is expected to be played at his upcoming trial, but out of the public’s view, a judge ruled Friday.

Only the judge, attorneys and jury will be allowed to view the video and other “graphic evidence,” bucking common courtroom practices in Minnesota.

“I do that because there’s privacy interest involved,” Hennepin County District Judge Kathryn Quaintance said at a Friday morning pretrial hearing. “It’s inflammatory, potentially. It’s emotional and it shows the deceased in extremely compromising situations, and I don’t see any value in that being shown outside the people directly involved in the case.”

The same arrangement will be used when body camera footage recorded by Noor’s partner and two other officers at the scene and photos from the medical examiner’s office are introduced as evidence at Noor’s upcoming April 1 trial.

The evidence is expected to be displayed on a TV screen with its back facing the victim’s and defendant’s supporters, the media and members of the public sitting in an approximately 30-seat gallery.

While there is no information on how often such protocol is used in Minnesota to obscure public view of evidence presented in court, anecdotally, the practice is rare.

Graphic squad footage and a widely shared Facebook Live video of the 2016 fatal shooting of Philando Castile were played in full view of the public when St. Anthony police officer Jeronimo Yanez was tried in 2017 in Ramsey County District Court. Medical examiner photos documenting the 10 gunshot injuries, some from the same bullet, that Castile sustained were also shown with no obstructed view. Such videos and crime scene and medical examiner photos are commonly displayed to entire courtrooms without limitations

Quaintance’s decision was not questioned or challenged by assistant Hennepin County attorneys Amy Sweasy and Patrick Lofton, or Noor’s attorneys, Thomas Plunkett and Peter Wold.

The judge’s ruling came after Sweasy said she had four body camera videos on a jump drive to give to the court for review. Her offer came out of a Feb. 28 in-chambers discussion between attorneys and the judge about how to present “graphic evidence” at trial.

“ It evoked a very strong reaction” in the grand jury proceeding , Sweasy told the judge about the evidence. “We want you to see it before we hit play here.”

Quaintance said that in addition to the TV arrangement, she would describe the evidence to the jury before it is displayed.

The jury would also be allowed to take a break afterward to “help people recover from that,” the judge said.

Noor and Harrity did not have their body cameras on at the time of the shooting, but turned them on immediately afterward.

The prosecution and defense spent several hours in the afternoon cross-examining each other’s expert witnesses, including defense witness Emanuel Kapelsohn and prosecution witnesses Derrick Hacker and Timothy Longo. Both sides have sought to severely limit or completely prohibit the other’s experts from testifying. Quaintance said she would rule on the experts possibly next week during jury selection.

So what is Noor's defense?
Cultural differences?
Shooting unarmed white women is acceptable in his culture.

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
So what is Noor's defense?

He doesn’t actually have to have a defense. It’s up to the prosecution to prove that he committed an offense. In this situation he will of course almost certainly make a defense of some sort. One likely possibility:
“We were dispatched to a possible crime in progress, it was dark, we didn’t see anyone at first, but then she appeared suddenly out of nowhere, and it looked like she was holding a weapon. I was startled and believed I needed to defend us immediately. I’m really, truly sorry, but it could have happened to anyone.”

Another possibility ends with, “I had my gun drawn because of the situation, and when she appeared suddenly I was startled and convulsively clenched my hand, and the gun discharged unintentionally.”

See: I should have been a defense attorney.
It will be interesting to learn how close I am.

“A jury has been seated in the trial of Mohamed Noor, the former Minneapolis police officer facing charges in the shooting death of 911 caller Justine Ruszczyk.

Jurors include a night manager at a grocery store, a Minneapolis firefighter, a railroad engineer, a carpenter who writes on the side, a gynecologist, a middle school librarian, an immigration officer, an investment consultant and a retired computer analyst…”

https://www.mprnews.org/story/...monday-in-noor-trial

https://www.apnews.com/cea9444...4e3c980b000a398f6552

A woman who was shot by a Minneapolis police officer responding to her 911 call about a possible sexual assault near her home lost so much blood from her single wound that she might not have been saved even if she had gotten quicker medical help, a medical examiner testified Wednesday.

Justine Ruszczyk Damond was hit in the iliac artery, a key artery in the abdomen, by the single shot from Mohamed Noor, now on trial on murder and manslaughter charges in the July 2017 death of the dual citizen of the U.S. and Australia.

Hennepin County assistant medical examiner Lorren Jackson said 1.6 liters of blood were found in Damond’s abdominal cavity. Noor and his partner tried unsuccessfully to resuscitate Damond right after the shooting.

Attorneys for Noor, who was fired after being charged and has never talked to investigators about what happened, argued during opening statements Monday that he used reasonable force to defend himself and his partner from a perceived threat. Noor’s partner that night, Matthew Harrity, told investigators he heard a thump right before the shooting that startled him.

Prosecutors’ plans to introduce body camera video showing the aftermath of the shooting were stalled when Plunkett moved to exclude the footage, arguing it would be prejudicial to his client. The footage doesn’t capture the shooting itself because officers turned them on only afterward. It shows the officers’ attempts to save Damond.

Judge Kathryn Quaintance agreed to hold off on the footage until she has time to review case law.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Attorneys for Noor, who was fired after being charged and has never talked to investigators about what happened, argued during opening statements Monday that he used reasonable force to defend himself and his partner from a perceived threat. Noor’s partner that night, Matthew Harrity, told investigators he heard a thump right before the shooting that startled him.

In what fantasy world could a CCW holder claim justifiable self defense because a pajama clad woman thumped the trunk of their car?

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Prosecutors’ plans to introduce body camera video showing the aftermath of the shooting were stalled when Plunkett moved to exclude the footage, arguing it would be prejudicial to his client.

No kidding...that's why prosecutor's introduce evidence. LMAO!!!!

From a blogger attending the court case

https://www.powerlineblog.com/...the-noor-trial-8.php

Noor shot Justine in the abdomen on her left side. The bullet traveled from front to back and lodged next to her spine at L5-L6. As I think about that, Justine must have been standing near the driver’s side of the Harrity/Noor squad car at the time she was shot and facing it. For me. that makes the shooting even more difficult to understand.

There is no L6.

And, to hit her that low from the passenger seat, she must have been one tall gal.

quote:

There is no L6.

hard to argue that one.

The person reporting must have misheard.

another source:

https://www.duluthnewstribune....-shootings-aftermath

Jackson said the bullet entered Ruszczyk's body to the left of her navel and passed through the iliac artery, a major artery in the abdomen, before lodging in her spine.

Can an officer legitimately shoot someone because he's been startled? Doesn't there have to be a weapon present?

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
From a blogger attending the court case

https://www.powerlineblog.com/...the-noor-trial-8.php

Noor shot Justine in the abdomen on her left side. The bullet traveled from front to back and lodged next to her spine at L5-L6. As I think about that, Justine must have been standing near the driver’s side of the Harrity/Noor squad car at the time she was shot and facing it. For me. that makes the shooting even more difficult to understand.

Yep. The last paragraph of the OP in this long thread:

“She had called 911 to attend a noise and possible assault in the alley, and was reportedly speaking to two officers through the drivers side window when the officer in the front passenger seat shot her through the drivers side door.”

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Doesn't there have to be a weapon present?

That is a not uncommon misconception

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Can an officer legitimately shoot someone because he's been startled? Doesn't there have to be a weapon present?

Historically, these things happen. Very unfortunate that they do--but they do. Law of averages. I'm not saying they are right, but shootings that shouldn't have happened, happen. "Accidental", "Negligent", "Parasympathetic response", etc.

Prior to the more recent BLM movement, these incidents were usually very localized with little media attention. Almost universally viewed as unfortunate accidents and handled internally, sometimes leading to firings. But rarely--almost never--leading to criminal charges.

I have worked with several people in my career who had accidentally shot someone. Some of them had died. None of them had been charged criminally, maybe one or two of them had the cases referred to the DA's office for consideration.

Things used to be different. Then again, we used to be able to wack a badguy upside the head with a lead sap and knock them out cold, in "the good old days". Right or wrong. Maybe one of the old timers can give some better insight.

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
Historically, these things happen. Very unfortunate that they do--but they do. Law of averages. I'm not saying they are right, but shootings that shouldn't have happened, happen. "Accidental", "Negligent", "Parasympathetic response", etc.

I can understand that. I wonder how things would have played out if 12 hours after the incident the officer and chief had come out and apologized for a dreadful mistake, announced the immediate resignation of the officer and surrender of his peace officer's credentials and offered significant compensation to the family?

Would there still have been criminal charges? At this point, his attorney has to throw everything he can into the defense, but the notion that the thump on the trunk makes his actions reasonable is ridiculous. If that's all they've got, Noor is toast.

It is going to be base on what a reasonable officer would do in this situation. Then you get into the areas of policy and best practices which can really muddle things up for a jury....bored to death by competing expert witnesses and power point presentations......with lawyers added in.

It will be interesting IF any of his field training records are introduced as those will be a two edge sword: one edge to convict him and the other edge to really up a settlement or punitive damages against the city in the civil action against them. I will be shocked if any derogatory records are put in by the prosecution (they sure as hell won't be mentioned by the defense team). It wouldn't shock me if the prosecution half asses the case in order to better protect the city.....and that Somali community. A settlement in a civil suit would be much less if he is acquitted.

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
It is going to be base on what a reasonable officer would do in this situation.

In which case he is also sunk.

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:

It will be interesting IF any of his field training records are introduced as those will be a two edge sword: one edge to convict him and the other edge to really up a settlement or punitive damages against the city in the civil action against them. I will be shocked if any derogatory records are put in by the prosecution (they sure as hell won't be mentioned by the defense team). It wouldn't shock me if the prosecution half asses the case in order to better protect the city.....and that Somali community. A settlement in a civil suit would be much less if he is acquitted.

You think his training records would be used to help convict him? Heck, I'd think the defense would introduce it to help exonerate him on the fact that the city inadequately trained him for political reasons and threw him out on the streets knowing he was a danger to himself, his fellow officers, and the public.