Yesterday I wrote a column in the Hill about the FBI reportedly finding no evidence a planned insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th. In a related story, the Capitol Police has now entirely cleared the still unnamed officer who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt despite her being unarmed. The decision was marked by the same lack of information that characterized an earlier decision from the Justice Department. There is little media coverage of the obvious disconnect in the handling of this shooting and other uses of force against protesters in recent riots. Even law professors are largely silent on the implications of a finding that the shooting of an unarmed protester is justified. Babbitt seems to be treated as “fair game” because she was part of the January 6th riot.
Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, was a decorated security forces controller who served multiple Middle East tours from 2004 to 2016
A memo from the commander of the Capitol Police’s Office of Personal Responsibility simply says “no further action will be taken in this matter” after the officer was exonerated for use of force. However, there are very troubling questions about the shooting, as previously discussed.
Not only was there no claim that Babbitt was believed to be armed, but there were officers directly behind her and in front of her at the time. As I noted earlier, if the officer intended to shoot Babbitt, it would not likely meet the standard for a justified shooting under governing cases like Tennessee v. Garner (1985). If the officer fired blindly or wildly, it would appear to have many of the same negligent elements as the Wright shooting.
I was highly critical of the maddening findings of the Justice Department in the case. In rejecting charges, the Justice Department statement notably does not say that the shooting was clearly justified. Instead, it noted that “prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so ‘willfully.’” It stressed that this element requires a showing of “a bad purpose to disregard the law” and that “evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent.”
Violent riots are unfortunately common today in cities ranging from Minneapolis to Portland to Washington. The use of live rounds however have never been authorized absent a particularized showing of a significant threat to an officer or others. Nothing in the announcement in the Babbitt case answers how such a showing was made by the officer. Will the media support local police using live ammunition to break up the next violent riot? We have seen protests turned into riots repeatedly in the last few years, including racial justice protesters taking over police stations and city hall buildings. Officers did not use live rounds when protesters broke through doors of police stations or a city hall. They did not use live fire when protesters were breaking through windows and barriers to burn down police buildings. Will the Babbitt standard now apply?
Reasonable people could disagree on the shooting. I fail to see the justified basis under controlling legal standards but I may have the bias of a criminal defense attorney. What I object to is the absence of specificity in the facts and answers to satisfy the standards under cases like Tennessee v. Garner. Instead there is a conspicuous use of conclusory analysis to dismiss the allegations. There is also the general lack of interest in the media and in academia on the implications of these decisions to clear the unnamed officer.
Is it sad that a human is dead? Yes.
Did she join a mob that stormed the capitol, broke through barriers, broke through closed door and windows, with people threatening the lives of elected officials from doing their duty? Yes.
Did she choose to disrupt teh peaceful transition of power that protects our Dempocratic Republic? Yes.
Was that officer the last line of defense for our elected officials evacuating? Yes.
Was she waned not to proceed several times but chose to do so? Yes.
Did she have military training that clearly let her know that she was breaking teh law? Yes.
Sorry for her loss of life, but this was justified.
And so believes the American Public that believes in These United States, the rule of law, and the American Constitution.
Was she armed? Nope.
Was that officer the last line of defense for our elected officials evacuating?
Prove it. There were several law enforcement in the same space as the victim. For your statement to be true, there would have been no other security personnel between the murderer and elected officials.
So prove it.
Olly,
“ For your statement to be true, there would have been no other security personnel between the murderer and elected officials.”
There was a staggered defensive position in that hallway. The officer closest to the door IS the first line of defense. His job was NOT to allow anyone to breach that door. Babbitt being the idiot she is proceeded into a secured zone which was justified. The officer shooting her warned her several times. She ignored them and got shot as a consequence.
The officer was right at the door. There WAS no body else with him. That’s why he used his weapon.
what about the police that died. who is responsible for their lives they were their threatening death to Mike Pence and other government officials . These actions need to be resolved now
This all comes down to Election Day. How the people vote, and who they vote for. It’s up to the electorate.
How can us Citizen vote & trust the votes will be correctly counted now that we know for sure every state has a rigged voting system?
Confidence in our leadership is almost completely gone.
*
Not even Prof Turley will admit that there was a 1,000,000 + people showed up in DC 1/6 with Trump to peacefully demand Congress fulfill it’s Constitutional Duty and briefly investigate the election results. And a few hundred showed up for Biden/Pelosi/McConnell, etc.., to cause Trouble, Block that peaceful effort & create that their Insurrection/Sedition against our nation.
*
People are ignoring the fact that there are publicly known Capital Police that invited Citizens into the capital that day but there was also some LEO/related working to instigate a riot.
One of the things I’d like to know is who were those 2 azzholes behind Babbitt? One of them brought a motor cycle helmet into the capital bldg. We can see them talking with one mouthing to the other that he’s not going to do it & then hands the helmet to the other guy. The guy that took the helmet then bust out the window out that Babbitt crawled through.
( Babbitt, an Idiot for doing so. As soon as people saw that type crap happening the should have either stopped it or Turned & Left the bldg.)
The guy w/helmet he’s seen multiple times moving back & forth through police lines, then seeing him say “Oh Ph’k” something, after Babbitt was shot, then back through police lines, moving to a low spot on the staircase out sight a bit but we can still see him changing out at least his shirt, throwing in his backpack. And that’s the last we see of him on that camera.
That’s way hundreds of thousands/millions of us want those 14,000 + hours of Capital surveillance videos of 1/6/21 released.
Who were all of the Govt agent provocateurs that day caught on video working to insight trouble 1/6/2021???
Reichstag’s Fire, another one in a long line of False Flag Operations?
Oky1 says:
“Not even Prof Turley will admit that there was a 1,000,000 + people showed up in DC 1/6 with Trump to peacefully demand Congress fulfill it’s Constitutional Duty and briefly investigate the election results.”
Turley has never been an irrational conspiracy- driven Trumpist. Duh!
Post the Pictures & we’ll count together!
The front lines in the fight against political tyranny is right here at home, not anywhere abroad.
Shocking that there is an almost nonexistent response from the legal academy. Shocking, I tell you.
To the elite in DC , “guardians” and political scum all , the ends justify the means…at our & freedoms expense always.
The comments are pretty funny to read—I’m sure that every one of you would die on a hill defending the right of an individual homeowner to protect themselves if someone was breaking and entering—up to and including shooting someone to death. Yet, all blinded by the politics of the moment with Babbitt. Really hypocritical. The undeniable truth is that she was part of a mob who were breaking and entering at a federal building attempting to disrupt lawmakers from doing their job. I’m sure in some of your cross-crossed brains, you would have been pleased with no protection and outright harm and damage to those legislators? And Turley, as always, is just uber-partisan and would argue the other way if it was a home invasion. Take a step back and look at what you’re arguing for!
TW-You find humor in an unarmed person being shot at point blank range with an obvious barrier between the shooter and the victim? You think it’s alright that the shooter is behind a barrier and had to stick his weapon beyond the barrier to make the shot because he or anyone else was not in imminent danger? You think he didn’t recognize that the person was completely unarmed and he could have pushed her back had she made it through an opening? Then you want to compare the conduct of a supposedly trained officer in the use of deadly force and the actions of the home owner and a home break in? You must be a capital police officer.
Shooting an unarmed white woman no charges, no loss of job without pay, exoneration? Well can’t D Chauvin be freed for a crime of misadventure? Why are capital police setting up satellite offices in several cities outside Washington, I thought Washington was the capital? Can NYPD setup an office at the capital?
It seems that the DOJ, in this case, forgot “negligent homicide,” as a prosecutable offense. If the white woman, was a woman of color, would they have ignored that charge?
The capitol polizei are controlled by the political elite…… what better way to extend their tentacles than to have their “red guard” planted anywhere and everywhere they can”justify”……. joke is on us, and my are they laughing.
MEDIA repeats story of FBI clearing the officer ad nauseam, but “crickets” about FBI finding that neither Trump nor his allies were involved in orchestrating or organizing January 6 riot. MAINSTREAM MEDIA (NBC, ABC) also remain silent on FBI finding that there was no “conspiracy,” i.e., organized, planned attack on the Capitol to overturn election. We MUST demand “mainstream” media (with ma and pa viewers) impartiality
and fair reporting of both sides.
I also have been comparing the coverage of NBC chuck todd and ABC george stephanopoulos. When Trump was president, both repeatedly and constantly interviewed Democrats and those critical of Trump.
When they DID interview a Republican, it was generally a Trump opponent, e.g., losers romney, kasich, etc. Now Democrat Biden is president, they continue to Lmost exclusively interview Democrats, and both are NOT interviewing Republicans and those critical of Biden. When they DO interview a Token Republican, it is again an anti-Trump one (cheney, romney, etc.) it is not China or Russia or Taliban that we should fear. It is an left-wing agenda-driven MEDIA.
I too like the Good Professor am prejudiced by my Service as a Police Officer and Federal Special Agent and have an absolutely unchangeable opinion about the shooting of Ms. Babbitt.
It was cold blooded Murder.
She was unarmed…no threat to the Officer…there were other Police Officers within arms reach of her to include a SWAT Team….all of whom were in the line of fire and who could have been killed as well.
The Officer should have been charged with Murder and prosecuted for that crime.
The use of Deadly Force is supposed to be the very last option….the Officer made it his first option.
A Citizen was killed because of that and now we see a cover up of that illegal killing by the government.
Ralph,
“I too like the Good Professor am prejudiced by my Service as a Police Officer and Federal Special Agent and have an absolutely unchangeable opinion about the shooting of Ms. Babbitt.”
You’re not a police officer nor a Federal special agent. You’re just a BS wannabe. You can tell by your BS claim.
“She was unarmed…no threat to the Officer…there were other Police Officers within arms reach of her to include a SWAT Team….all of whom were in the line of fire and who could have been killed as well.” There were no police officers in his line of fire. They all left. that is why the crowd was able to get up to the door and Babbitt clamber over the window. She was just inside the room on top of furniture used to barricade the doors. There was no SWAT team either. The only police were those behind the door and one of them was the shooter.
If you were really what you claim to be you would know that the the rules in that situation are different. Babbitt was forcing her way into a perimeter setup to protect legislators. Babbitt was warned multiple times and she ignored the commands. Even you as an officer would know that if someone is not obeying commands and is intent on breaching a protected zone he has every reason to shoot. Even in military installations you are warned that “deadly force is authorized” it doesn’t say only if you are armed. That policy is the same in such situations. The safety of the legislators comes first and anyone assigned to protect them is going to be justified in shooting someone who threatens their safety. He followed policy and we all know that when you stick to policy you are always in the clear, right officer?
Policy does not include committing elective abortion when there does not exist an imminent or probable threat that cannot be mitigated through non-lethal force. The officer and DOJ rely on novel jurisprudence (think penumbras and emanations) to justify her homicide.
Svelaz…… Once again you prove your ignorance…far better you remain quiet and only be remembered as being a Fool rather than keep posting and reminding us of that fact.
Ralph, you’re not a police officer or a former federal agent. If you were you would know that the officers “near” her couldn’t do anything. Those same officers left their positions when they realized they were outnumbered. They were called out to go somewhere else.
They were in no position to do anything. The officers behind the door had a better advantage. Surely you should know that…”officer”.
The cop who shot her was the last line of defense between her and members of congress.
There was no imminent, no probable, not even plausible cause to abort her. Yes, a novel justification for self-defense, which progressed from Pelosi et al refusing executive aid for crowd management.
A angry mob having direct aces to Members of Congress is an imminent and very real threat.
But progressives like you cheered when the Kavenaugh protesters were beating on the locked doors, and spewing hate into congress critters faces.
The implications of this are staggering.
In their zeal to justify the murder of a despised woman, the Lefties are justifying political murder.
Let’s see how much glee they show when one of theirs is murdered.
Either we have justice, or we have tyranny.
Lefties are furthering the decline of our country.
Monumentcolorado,
I find it funny that many here are either deliberately ignorant or just plain stupid. This wasn’t a murder at all. It was a justified shooting according to the law. It is why they didn’t find anything wrong. Babbitt was committing a crime and she was trespassing into an area where legislators were still in the room. Those protecting them have a duty to prevent any threats and whether they armed or not they WILL be exercising deadly force. Every police officer in the nation has the exact same duty. Remember, police officers can “defend” themselves when they think their lives or those of others are in danger and that often involves using deadly force.
Babbitt was already committing a crime in a situation where hundreds of individuals were already using weapons to smash and beat others with. It was a dangerous situation and Babbitt stupidly did something that got her killed. She was no innocent bystander and she was not murdered.
I thought you righties were all about the rule of law. What happened to it? Babbitt broke the law and in the process proceeded to force her way into a protected area where she was repeatedly warned not to go into while a gun was being pointed at her. She didn’t listen and suffered the consequences of not following orders. What happened to righties idea that if you don’t obey police officers commands you WILL get shot. Remember that? So now it’s murder? Babbitt became a criminal the second she decided to trespass into the capitol just like everyone else who did. The implications are just simple. Break the law and you suffer the consequences. There is nothing new about this. Babbitt was just an idiot who got shot while trying to force her way into a protected zone where legislators were still present. If pence was still in there it is guaranteed anyone attempting to get in would have been shot. Babbitt was just a criminal idiot.
More proof we live in two separate nations
Pro-Life and Pro-Choice.
Coverup. There was no insurrection. There was a protest. Remember when Climate Change protesters stormed Nancy Pelosi’s office for a sit in?? Good times. The right political party. No problem.
It is difficult to cover up something that was broadcast live on TV and the traitors themselves streamed to Facebook. They openly chanted their attempt to block the counting of the EC and install and unelected president.
Were you asleep during the Kavenaugh protests?? When progressives were spewing their hate right into the faces of congresscritters. They should have shot them I guess.
Looking forward to God providing us a birth of a New Nation moment. It will be our job to pick the Legal high jump bar up off the ground and go back to a truth based Legal system. Ashli Babbitt will be the Hero of this epic reset to Honor. The World as one Family will plant the seeds of Liberty growing a prolific crop of peace of mind and safety.
I’m so g-ddamned disgusted with this nation I can barely breathe. I can’t believe I was stupid enough or foolish enough to throw away 21 years of my life in defense of a constitution that so many are so willing to just throw away. Lesson Learned.
Well, the shooter’s name is LT. Michael Byrd of the Capitol Police according to Townhall.com. Did he fear for his life? I doubt it. Looks to me like Kyle Rittenhouse will be home free in his self-defense claim. I see where the dead skateboarder’s father is calling his son a hero. I’m sorry his son took a skateboard to a gunfight, but I see nothing heroic in his son’s actions. They should drop the charges against Rittenhouse, just look at the video.
He feared for the life of the Members of Congress. Hell, all of us watching on TV feared for the Members of Congress. Had he not shot her she would have had direct access to Congresspeople.
There was not an immediate or imminent threat, or a probable threat, or even a plausible threat. The unarmed woman was alone, surrounded by officers when the shooter made a Choice to abort… murder her.
The DOJ statement about the level of intent required to be proved relates to a criminal civil rights violation. What about a basic charge of manslaughter or another type of criminal homicide? Those would require only the various levels of intent the DOJ listed as not relevant in a criminal civil rights charge.
Disgusting. Why are they protecting the name of the murderer? They certainly don’t protect the name when the victim is someone of a different political group, race, or criminal. Another example of a two-tier justice system. Lady Justice is no longer blindfolded and it’s gross.
It’s called a “cover-up.” Looking at the two reports together produces a chilling revelation: There was no evidence of any illegality or planned insurrection, yet an officer shot and killed an innocent woman. And the Democrats are covering it up because they really need that “insurrection” narrative. Of course, the FBI’s report puts Nancy’s little Inquisition on shaky ground, and will make Cheney and Kinzinger look like even bigger fools. But the double standard just smacks you in the face: Had a police officer used this level of force against a black person, or against any BLM/Antifa thug who wasn’t holding a weapon, his head would roll, and there would be the usual rioting and looting. There are police awaiting trial now who used force for better reasons than this Capitol officer — and they’ll probably spend a good deal of time in jail. But Nancy protects her own.
No evidence other then the the video and what the traitors openly said.
An executive offer of crown management rejected, a peaceful assembly of hundreds, an invitation extended, a woman aborted by a trained shooter with a depraved state of mind, agitators of leftist and likely administrative orientation, a rug pulled from underfoot, a riot forced to justify a handmade tale and violation of civil rights.
You keep wearing that tinfoil hat.
The government should always show justification for using deadly force.
In this case, many Americans believe that Ms. Babbitt was deprived of her rights because she represented a despised political movement.
Injustice breeds Injustice.
Now the civil suit. Eventually there will be a large settlement to the Babbitt family, but the Injustice remains.
And the taxpayers will pay for what was probably a wrongful shooting – murder.
And a murderer will go free.
And worst of all, more Americans will lose faith in the justice system.
Monunemtcolorado,
“In this case, many Americans believe that Ms. Babbitt was deprived of her rights because she represented a despised political movement.”
No, she deprived herself of her rights the moment she decided to commit a crime by trespassing illegally and participating in an insurrection. It’s interesting that you never mention she was there illegally along with everyone else. You want to call it an injustice as if she didn’t do anything wrong as if someone breaking into your home is not a crime and shooting the intruder would be a deprivation of their rights. Come on. Your arguments are just really, REALLY poor arguments trying to justify a criminal’s stupid decision.
There will be no settlement because the shooting is deemed justified. It was certainly not a wrongful death, especially when her own family admitted that what she did was wrong. Kinda makes it harder to sue for wrongful death when your own family admits the dead criminal was wrong to be there in the first place.
The insurrection is a handmade tale. The agitators were of leftist and official orientation. The chaos was forced by a woman aborted and a rug pulled from underfoot. The right to self-defense is limited to mitigating an immediate threat, which may or may not include elective abortion of the threat. The elective abortion of an unarmed woman, surrounded by officers, was justified by a novel legal defense.
Interesting. Could the family force release of the name in a civil action for wrongful death?
One can only imagine the public reaction if an unarmed black woman who was apparently not threatening to physically harm anyone was fatally shot by a white cop. “Say her name!” So much for white privilege.
Exactly
From the Nazis braying Jew privilege to the neo-Nazis braying White privilege and baby “burdens”. The Pro-Choice religion follows a progressive path and grade.