My wife and Arts Editor posted about yesterday’s shooting of Philando Castile here on UMB as well as on FB. As frustrating and personally upsetting as it is to have another police shooting of a black person in the Twin Cities, I must agree with Governor Dayton’s action of asking the Federal DoJ to investigate. The reported protests are necessary as they emphasize the seriousness of this homicide1, but they do not of themselves prove anything substantial concerning the incident, only that the community is concerned and requires an immediate and thorough investigation. Once the facts are known, then we can classify this as systemic, a flawed process, an overwrought officer, or even infiltration of the law enforcement community by a racist intent on murder. But without the collection and analysis of facts, the frustration shared by the community and myself must be a catalyst to action – but not direct the action in any specific way. Down that path lies ideologues and more injustice.
Or so says the software engineer in me. At the risk of addressing separate issues, I was a little frustrated with the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement when they loudly disagreed with the County, and later the Federal, prosecutors in the Jamar Clark incident. I watched the video evidence presented at the first press conference with DA Freeman, and I was unable to draw any firm conclusions as to whether the officers should be exonerated or placed on trial. DAs are required to pursue legal action when they believe it’ll be successful, and in this case I can easily understand how Freeman, based on that video, the only neutral record of the incident made public of which I’m aware, could not, in good conscience, move forward with such a case.
I’m aware that BLM protested that certain evidence, consisting of eyewitness accounts, was ignored. But there’s a couple of problems, as I understand it. First, there was some confusion between accounts; indeed, the witness in the ambulance later recanted her on-the-spot remarks, leaving any analysis doubtful. If the accounts had not changed nor clashed, then Freeman might have something to work with.
Secondly, eyewitness accounts are often untrustworthy. Not to impugn any eyewitness anywhere, but it’s a simple matter of poor processing by our brains when they’re stressed. This has been, and continues to be, investigated by psychologists; here’s a source. The point here is that eyewitness accounts must be considered carefully before they are used. A neutral, technological source that has not been compromised is far preferable to eyewitness accounts. In the Castile case, the reported smartphone feed will no doubt be invaluable, although as I understand the matter, it only came online just after the shooting. I do not know if the police had body cameras or not.
Taking those two points together, it seems clear that the eyewitness reports had to be discounted. Why didn’t any more videos surface? That would have been far more useful.
My final thought with respect to the Jamar Clark incident is this:
Suppose Freeman had taken the officers to criminal court.
Suppose the State then lost.
That jurisdiction would now be exhausted. Perhaps the Feds could still prosecute under civil rights laws, but they might be discouraged by the first loss.
And then suppose new evidence came to light.
Mr. Freeman chose not to prosecute – at this time. In terms of likelihood, he and his successors probably never will. But they have the option to do so if something new comes to light.
And that’s important.
1 A homicide is defined as “occur[ing] when one human being causes the death of another human being.” It does not imply murder, and by using homicide I merely wish to be accurate without casting premature aspersions upon anyone.
