Failure To File Charges Difficult To Understand

[4651feeder]

Bystander shot, paralyzed by Goshen police in April sues officer and city | News | elkharttruth.com

When this was first reported back in April one was left with impression by our sketchy newspaper article that Mr Cuevas was collateral injury from a stray bullet of the 25 reported shots fired by police. I missed any follow up report when our prosecutor determined there would be no charges filed against officer Smith back in June for not correctly identifying his target and intentionally shooting the innocent bystander twice in the back. Am I being too judgemental to believe at the very least this officer should no longer being carrying a gun protected by a badge?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The second hardest criminal charge to prove (Attempted Murder is first) is Reckless Homicide.

It's Becker's call. However, I will give you that it is odd (to me) that there was no Special Prosecutor appointed but don't know all the facts.

To me, doing what I do, this smacks of gross negligence, not Reckless Homicide but I admit my bias.

I am afraid your remedy is at the ballot box, 4651.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The second hardest criminal charge to prove (Attempted Murder is first) is Reckless Homicide.

It's Becker's call. However, I will give you that it is odd (to me) that there was no Special Prosecutor appointed but don't know all the facts.

To me, doing what I do, this smacks of gross negligence, not Reckless Homicide but I admit my bias.

I am afraid your remedy is at the ballot box, 4651.

Why are attempted murder and reckless homicide so difficult? I can see an issue with proving intent in the first case, but the second seems pretty clear, at least from the layman's perspective.

 

[T.Lex]

Why are attempted murder and reckless homicide so difficult? I can see an issue with proving intent in the first case, but the second seems pretty clear, at least from the layman's perspective.

As to the attempted murder, in Indiana there is a byzantine analysis for what the "right" intent is. (That's going from memory, when I was the designated "attempted murder instruction DAG" doing appeals.)

I'm not sure that reckless homicide would be 2d. Arson would be my 2d place.

(These are all absent some sort of admission.)

Reckless homicide for an on-duty officer, engaged in a defensible police action shooting, would be a REALLY difficult case to make.

My advice to any prosecutor in that situation, though, would be to get a special prosecutor involved.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Why are attempted murder and reckless homicide so difficult? I can see an issue with proving intent in the first case, but the second seems pretty clear, at least from the layman's perspective.

Attempt=specific intent to kill (it's tough).

Reckless homicide with a cop in the line of duty? Yeah, no way, not even in Lake or Marion County.

 

[HoughMade]

Attempt=specific intent to kill (it's tough).

Reckless homicide with a cop in the line of duty? Yeah, no way, not even in Lake or Marion County.

To be fair, in Lake County, if its not a federal crime, no one who draws a paycheck from the local gvts. is getting charged with anything.

 

[4651feeder]

Elkhart County's other 2017 officer involved shooting has now been announced as going to a Grand Jury. While this article fails to mention it, previous articles have stated this driver was a thirteen year old boy out for a joy ride. Prosecutor's office requests grand jury in officer-involved shooting

As a person who may not have all the facts; these two incidents do cause me to wonder why one created justification for a Grand Jury and the other supposedly didn't.

 

[Fargo]

Elkhart County's other 2017 officer involved shooting has now been announced as going to a Grand Jury. While this article fails to mention it, previous articles have stated this driver was a thirteen year old boy out for a joy ride. Prosecutor's office requests grand jury in officer-involved shooting

As a person who may not have all the facts; these two incidents do cause me to wonder why one created justification for a Grand Jury and the other supposedly didn't.

Well, the facts are really different and the legal analysis is very different in those circumstances. As best I can tell, there doesn't appear to be any indication of malice in the first case, while the second one lends itself much more to that analysis.

Also, if there was blowback on the first case, the prosecutor may want some cover by running it by a grand jury.