A federal review in the 2015 fatal shooting of Samuel DuBose by former University of Cincinnati police officer Raymond Tensing has concluded, without filing criminal charges against the former officer. The decision was announced Friday by the U.S. Attorney's Office, in consultation with the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.The FBI has similarly concluded its investigation. "Ray and I are very pleased with the decision and very happy that this case is finally over," said attorney Stew Matthews. "We're coming up on the sixth anniversary of the incident itself... It's something that he has been living with every day and been concerned about every day."Tensing shot DuBose, 43, in the head after pulling him over for a missing front license plate July 19, 2015. He testified that he believed his life was in danger when DuBose tried to drive away during the traffic stop.Tensing was tried twice for murder but the jury was deadlocked both times.Justice Department officials say they have notified DuBose’s family of this decision via the family’s counsel."They are outraged. They had really hoped there would be a federal criminal prosecution after two state court hung juries," said attorney Al Gerhardstein who represents DuBose's family. "To their credit, they have continued the fight. Audrey DuBose is out on the street protesting. She was very active during the Floyd protests. She's on her way to Cleveland to protest there and seek justice for people like her family, and they aren't gonna give up, but they're very disappointed."Federal civil rights statutes – which are written by Congress – require federal authorities to prove beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously to a jury of 12 that a defendant willfully used unreasonable force with the specific intent of violating a victim’s constitutional rights. To establish willfulness beyond a reasonable doubt, federal authorities would be required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the former officer acted with the deliberate and specific intent to do something the law forbids. This is one of the highest standards of intent imposed by law.
A federal review in the 2015 fatal shooting of Samuel DuBose by former University of Cincinnati police officer Raymond Tensing has concluded, without filing criminal charges against the former officer.
The decision was announced Friday by the U.S. Attorney's Office, in consultation with the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.
The FBI has similarly concluded its investigation.
"Ray and I are very pleased with the decision and very happy that this case is finally over," said attorney Stew Matthews. "We're coming up on the sixth anniversary of the incident itself... It's something that he has been living with every day and been concerned about every day."
Tensing shot DuBose, 43, in the head after pulling him over for a missing front license plate July 19, 2015.
He testified that he believed his life was in danger when DuBose tried to drive away during the traffic stop.
Tensing was tried twice for murder but the jury was deadlocked both times.
Justice Department officials say they have notified DuBose’s family of this decision via the family’s counsel.
"They are outraged. They had really hoped there would be a federal criminal prosecution after two state court hung juries," said attorney Al Gerhardstein who represents DuBose's family. "To their credit, they have continued the fight. Audrey DuBose is out on the street protesting. She was very active during the Floyd protests. She's on her way to Cleveland to protest there and seek justice for people like her family, and they aren't gonna give up, but they're very disappointed."
Federal civil rights statutes – which are written by Congress – require federal authorities to prove beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously to a jury of 12 that a defendant willfully used unreasonable force with the specific intent of violating a victim’s constitutional rights.
To establish willfulness beyond a reasonable doubt, federal authorities would be required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the former officer acted with the deliberate and specific intent to do something the law forbids. This is one of the highest standards of intent imposed by law.
Source link
