EXPERTS SAY THE POLICE SHOOTING OF 12-YEAR-OLD BOY WITH PELLET GUN WAS JUSTIFIED

The shooting of 12-year-old Tamir Rice by a Cleveland, Ohio cop was justified according to two independent experts brought in by the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor

On November 22, 2014, two Cleveland, Ohio cops received a call about a man waving a gun in a city park and pointing it at people. They pulled their patrol car right up in front of the ‘man’. As rookie officer Timothy Loehmann got out of the car, he observed the suspect reaching for a gun in his waist band. Loehmann reacted by shooting the ‘man’ dead. The suspect turned out to be 12-year-old Tamir Rice and the gun was a non-lethal pellet gun. Rice was black and Loehmann is white.

The shooting of a young black boy by a white police officer had the makings of, a perfect shitstorm, but surprisingly the protests that followed were relatively mild. That may not be the case if and when a grand jury fails to indict Loehmann.

The Cuyahoga County Prosecutor called on two independent experts to evaluate the shooting. Their findings were released Saturday night.

According to the Associated Press, retired FBI agent Kimberly A. Crawford concluded that:

Loehmann's use of force did not violate Tamir's constitutional rights, the only facts relevant to such a determination are those the patrolman had at the time he fired his weapon.

Considering Officer Loehmann’s close proximity to Rice and lack of cover, the need to react quickly was imperative. Delaying the use of force until Officer Loehmann could confirm Rice’s intentions would not be considered a safe alternative under the circumstances

Loehmann, she wrote, "had no information to suggest the weapon was anything but a real handgun, and the speed with which the confrontation progressed would not give the officer time to focus on the weapon."

“Even if Officer Loehmann was aware of Rice’s age, it would not have made his use of force unreasonable. A 12-year-old with a gun, unquestionably old enough to pull a trigger, poses a threat equal to that of a full-grown adult in a similar situation.”

"It is my conclusion that Officer Loehmann's use of deadly force falls within the realm of reasonableness under the dictates of the Fourth Amendment," Crawford wrote, though she noted she was not issuing an opinion as to whether Loehmann violated Ohio law or department policy.

The AP reported that Lamar Sims, the chief deputy district attorney in Denver, also concluded that:

Loehmann's actions were reasonable based on statements from witnesses and a reconstruction of what happened that day.

Sims said the officers had no idea if the pellet gun was a real gun when they arrived, and that Loehmann was in a position of great peril because he was within feet of Tamir as the boy approached the cruiser and reached toward his waistband.

"The officers did not create the violent situation," Sims wrote in his review. "They were responding to a situation fraught with the potential for violence to citizens."

Subodh Chandra, a lawyer for the Rice family, disputed the findings and accused the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor of trying to whitewash the unlawful shooting of Tamir.

It should be noted that Loehmann, in his previous job as an Independence, Ohio cop, had been evaluated as an emotionally unstable recruit and unfit for duty. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that another cop wouldn’t have shot the boy under the same circumstances.

In my opinion, Loehmann was justified in shooting Tamir, but tactically speaking, his partner should not have pulled their patrol car right in front of the boy.