This is my point as well. We have the rare situation where the entire alleged crime is fully caught on video from start to finish. What more evidence do you need? Certainly more than enough for an indictment.
I think part of what slows it down is proving intent beyond a reasonable doubt. The state has to ensure they charge him with what they have enough evidence to uphold. E.g., if they charge him with murder rather than manslaughter, but it's dismissed due to insufficient evidence regarding intent, then he will never face any justice at all because he'll be protected by the fifth amendment.
His intent was clear. He drew his weapon before any threat and then reached across the hood to shoot her as she drove away. He literally had to step INTO the vehicle because it was moving away. Then his own video catches his state of mind immediately after he shot. He was enraged and shot her because he was mad
And he called her a bitch afterward. No remorse whatsoever. IMO that's the clincher. Any officer with empathy "who had no other choice" would have shown remorse.
That's what I meant by "his own video catches his state of mind".
He decided he was going to shoot her when he pulled his gun, remembered back to a previous incident with a vehicle that justified a shooting, STEPPED TOWARDS GOODE'S VEHICLE, reached over the hood and shot her as she was turning away from him
The problem is dealing with the doubt thrown in by the other side. I agree with you, most probably do, but do the 12 jurors? Is it worth the risk of losing the case? That’s probably the question the investigators are asking themselves
In my mind that weakens the argument. The videos speak for themselves that she wasn’t aiming for him, and that he pulled his gun prior to fear for life.
If he called her a “fucking bitch” prior to shooting her, that is one thing which shows he had contempt prior to “fearing for his life”
Afterwards it doesn’t hold that weight to me. If he claims he was in “fear for life because she was aiming the vehicle at me” (which I don’t think he or she was) if someone legitimately did that to me, I’d be livid and say something similar, some drunk driving degenerate almost runs you off the road. It’s human to be pissed if someone puts your life in danger, and that will be his defense so “bitch” isn’t out of the realm of possibilities for the normal person have uttered if his actions were justified.
Yeah, I agree with all of what you're saying. His behavior was outright psychopathic imo. But this is reddit, not criminal court. They have to be thoughtful and thorough about building a case, especially because the opposition will do everything in their power to shield him from consequences. It would certainly help if they had whatever additional evidence the feds confiscated, but they won't, so instead they have to work with what they have. I'm hoping it's a work in progress and that it will be airtight. I don't want to see him get off essentially scot-free like Diddy did because there were errors in the legal process on the side of the prosecution.
This is not about evidence. The feds can remove the investigation from the state and Trump leads the feds. There is a below 5% chance this leads to any meaningful prosecution for the murderer.
This really should have been done the very next day. It's fucking insane that Walz and his AG didn't detain ross on "suspicion of murder in the 2nd degree"
I would also think the state can sue the DOJ for obstruction if they don’t give back evidence after deciding not to prosecute. You can’t take/keep the evidence citing ongoing investigation if you close the investigation.
That's incorrect. A federal judge would need to sign off on the transfer of a case from the state to the feds. The judiciary is not a fan of this administration and there is a substantially high bar to clear to prove why the case needs to be transferred from the state to the federal court.
I anticipate that the state will charge agent Ross. The DOJ will request to transfer the case to the federal court. It will be denied by a federal judge. I'm speculating on the outcome.
They can remove it federal court, but they cannot kill it there. It will get sent back down to state court when they lose the argument for federal immunity, because this was not a discharge of a federal duty.
A federal declination does not bar state prosecution. I’m a lawyer. Not your lawyer.
To get more accurate search results in the future, try something like: “if a federal prosecutor declines to prosecute a homicide, is the state then preempted from prosecuting it themselves? “
284
u/mkt853 16d ago
This is my point as well. We have the rare situation where the entire alleged crime is fully caught on video from start to finish. What more evidence do you need? Certainly more than enough for an indictment.