How many arti­cles have I writ­ten in which I make the case that pros­e­cu­tors are cul­pa­ble in police cor­rup­tion when they drag inves­ti­ga­tions out, hop­ing that pub­lic out­rage will dis­si­pate, then issue deci­sions claim­ing that they did exhaus­tive inves­ti­ga­tions and found no crim­i­nal conduct?
The oth­er ques­tion is, how often has this writer argued that the idea of a neigh­bor­ing police depart­ment tak­ing over an inves­ti­ga­tion, then politi­cians, pros­e­cu­tors, and police claim that that-that con­sti­tutes an inde­pen­dent inves­ti­ga­tion is laughable?
If you do not know, nei­ther do I because I have writ­ten so many of these types of pieces. I am a lit­tle trou­bled by offi­cials, whether politi­cians, lawyers, or police, who think so lit­tle of our abil­i­ty to think for ourselves.
Thanks to a spe­cial pro­vi­sion in Wisconsin Law, a Judge was asked to take a sec­ond look at a case in which a police offi­cer shot a man sit­ting in his car to death.
The black offi­cer had killed two oth­er peo­ple while on duty in his short five-year career, but pros­e­cu­tors ruled that they saw noth­ing wrong in all three cases.
The fam­i­ly of the last of the offi­cer’s vic­tims decid­ed to use the spe­cial pro­vi­sion in Wisconsin law to ask a judge to take a look, and what do you know? The judge over­ruled the pros­e­cu­tors and ordered a spe­cial pros­e­cu­tor to pros­e­cute the case with­in 60-days.
We know that pros­e­cu­tors’ offices depend on the police to do inves­ti­ga­tions, but police are not doing any­one a favor when they do their jobs; it is their job to go after criminals.
Whenever an offi­cer or a group of offi­cers believe they are too big or impor­tant for the job, they should step away; no one has a right to be a cop.
Prosecutors should not fear retal­i­a­tion from police offi­cers or their unions. The prob­lem, as I have con­sis­tent­ly point­ed out, is not the sup­posed close work­ing relationships.
It is about race in some cas­es, cam­paign dona­tions, and polit­i­cal endorse­ments. That is what’s at stake, not work­ing relationships.
Philidelphia’s District Attorney Larry Krasner, a for­mer Public defend­er, has done heavy lift­ing before and after being elect­ed District Attorney in his city. In the process, he has come up against immense pres­sure from police, police unions, police apol­o­gists, and sup­port­ers of the sta­tus quo who want things to remain the way they have always been.
DA Krasner cleaned house when he took office and estab­lished an office where the rule of law applies to every cit­i­zen with­in the reach­es of his jurisdiction.

»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»>

Wisconsin officer to be charged in death of Black man after judge overrules prosecutor

Milwaukee County Judge Glenn Yamahiro said prob­a­ble cause exist­ed to charge Joseph Mensah in Jay Anderson Jr.’s death.

MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin judge on Wednesday found prob­a­ble cause to charge a police offi­cer in the 2016 slay­ing of a Black man who was sit­ting in a parked car, tak­ing the rare step of over­rul­ing pros­e­cu­tors years after they declined to charge the officer.

Milwaukee County Judge Glenn Yamahiro said prob­a­ble cause exist­ed to charge Joseph Mensah with homi­cide by neg­li­gent use of a weapon in Jay Anderson Jr.’s death. He ordered a spe­cial pros­e­cu­tor to file the charge with­in 60 days formally.

Yamahiro’s deci­sion marks a vic­to­ry for Anderson’s fam­i­ly, who took advan­tage of a lit­tle-used pro­vi­sion in state law to ask the judge for a sec­ond look at the case.

Mensah, also Black, dis­cov­ered the 25-year-old Anderson sleep­ing in his car at 3 a.m. in a park in Wauwatosa, a Milwaukee sub­urb. Mensah said he shot Anderson after Anderson reached for a gun, but Anderson’s fam­i­ly dis­putes that. The judge on Wednesday said the evi­dence did not back up Mensah’s ver­sion of events.

Anderson was the sec­ond of three peo­ple Mensah shot to death dur­ing a five-year stint with the Wauwatosa Police Department. Prosecutors cleared him of crim­i­nal wrong­do­ing in each case.

Anderson’s fam­i­ly asked Yamahiro to review that case under an obscure state law that allows judges to direct­ly ques­tion wit­ness­es in what’s known as a John Doe pro­ceed­ing. A judge who finds suf­fi­cient evi­dence for charges can file them direct­ly, leav­ing pros­e­cu­tors out of the equa­tion. At least six oth­er states have sim­i­lar statu­to­ry pro­vi­sions, but attor­neys say the process is rarely used in Wisconsin.

The judge said he decid­ed that the sin­gle charge against Mensah was war­rant­ed based on tes­ti­mo­ny about the cir­cum­stances of the shoot­ing. Mensah should have been aware that pulling his weapon on Anderson cre­at­ed an unrea­son­able risk of death, Yamahiro said.

The judge said that Mensah could have tak­en steps to de-esca­late the sit­u­a­tion, includ­ing wait­ing for back­up that was on the way.

Anderson’s behav­ior was con­sis­tent with some­one intox­i­cat­ed, had been asleep, and was try­ing but hav­ing dif­fi­cul­ty com­ply­ing with Mensah’s orders, Yamahiro said.
Read the full sto­ry here; https://​www​.nbc​news​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​u​s​-​n​e​w​s​/​w​i​s​c​o​n​s​i​n​-​o​f​f​i​c​e​r​-​b​e​-​c​h​a​r​g​e​d​-​d​e​a​t​h​-​b​l​a​c​k​-​m​a​n​-​a​f​t​e​r​-​j​u​d​g​e​-​o​v​e​r​r​u​l​e​s​-​n​1​2​7​5​310

It nev­er stops read more.
https://​www​.nytimes​.com/​2​0​2​1​/​0​7​/​2​8​/​n​y​r​e​g​i​o​n​/​n​y​p​d​-​o​f​f​i​c​e​r​s​-​d​i​s​c​i​p​l​i​n​e​-​r​a​p​e​.​h​tml

https://​www​.thedai​ly​beast​.com/​o​u​t​r​a​g​e​-​g​r​o​w​s​-​a​f​t​e​r​-​d​e​p​u​t​i​e​s​-​b​e​a​t​-​n​a​t​i​v​e​-​a​m​e​r​i​c​a​n​-​m​a​n​-​k​i​l​l​-​h​i​s​-​dog

https://​atlantablack​star​.com/​2​0​2​1​/​0​7​/​2​8​/​u​n​a​c​c​e​p​t​a​b​l​e​-​a​t​l​a​n​t​a​-​o​f​f​i​c​e​r​-​s​e​e​n​-​d​e​l​i​v​e​r​i​n​g​-​h​e​a​d​-​k​i​c​k​-​t​o​-​h​a​n​d​c​u​f​f​e​d​-​m​e​n​t​a​l​l​y​-​i​l​l​-​w​o​m​a​n​-​s​u​s​p​e​n​d​e​d​-​w​i​t​h​o​u​t​-​p​a​y​-​s​e​c​o​n​d​-​c​o​p​-​r​e​l​i​e​v​e​d​-​o​f​-​d​u​t​y​-​f​o​r​-​n​o​t​-​s​t​o​p​p​i​n​g​-​h​im/

.

.

.

.

PLEASE SHARE THIS ARTICLE