After the brutal murder of George Floyd in May of 2020, protests against police brutality and racial discrimination sparked across the country like wildfire. The New York Times estimates reactive protests in over 140 cities in the United States and even several, large protests in foreign countries. During the height of the protests, many ordinary citizens that had not previously taken part in civil unrest, took to the streets in an attempt to make a difference by showing their support for black Americans.
However, these peaceful demonstrations were not met with grace by police officers. Specifically in Dallas, clashes with police grew hostile in late May-early June, as the Dallas Police Department began using non-lethal ammunition as a means for crowd control. The results of this tactic included one protestor hit in his left eye so hard that he had to have it surgically removed; and another suffered two large cuts under his left eye, a broken cheekbone, and limited vision in that eye when he was hit by a "sponge round."
As a legal screener at the Dallas Office of Community Police Oversight in 2020, there were far more injured and traumatized citizens of Dallas than can be counted. The trouble that remains in our legal system is no longer identifying these systematic abuses perpetrated by the police, but rather, gathering enough evidence for a jury to convict.
To illustrate the issue, earlier this year, a Dallas grand jury declined to convict Officer Rudloff who had over 26 years of racial profiling in his career. He was accused of assaulting two protestors, Verastique and Morse, who appeared to testify at his trial. However, as they entered the grand jury room, there was a sign placed on the witness box (completely unknown to the jury) that read “Do Not Mention Race While Testifying.”
So, as the witnesses took the stand to testify about the racial targeting they witnessed by the DPD during the protests as well as their own assaults, they were prohibited from discussing race. This rule deprived them of their ability to emphasize an integral piece of their respective stories. Although the current and previous District Attorneys deny ever seeing the sign or placing it there, there have been no measures to remove it. In fact, the current DA, Creuzot says the sign is okay as long as “race is not an issue” to the case, but gave no standard or further elaboration as to when race would be considered at issue in case.
As it pertains to Dallas, racial disparities in policing are prevalent with a tendency to disproportionately effect minorities. While limiting testimony to exclude race in cases where "race is not at issue" might hold some merit, in excessive use of police force cases, there is utility in pointing out race as a potential motivation behind the crime.
In my opinion, and contrary to Texas law, grand juries should not be available for trying cases that allege police misconduct. First, the results skew heavily in favor of the officer in question. The reasoning behind that follows the structure of a Grand Jury. The prosecutor has all the power, there are no judges or defense lawyers present, and the prosecutor is the only one that can give recommendations to the jury.
Because prosecutors and police typically work side by side on cases, it is in the prosecutors best interest not to go against their fellow public servants. This conflict of interest makes the decision from grand juries less credible in police misconduct cases. Second, grand juries have a total lack of transparency, therefore excluding the public from a very relevant discussion of our collective communal standards of our public servants.
Instead of grand juries, prosecutors should file a criminal complaint on their own following an investigation. In 2016, California was the first state to ban the use of grand juries in deciding whether police officers would face criminal charges when they kill people in the line of duty. More states, such as Texas, should follow suit in order to ensure a just avenue for holding police accountable for their behavior while on duty.
No comments:
Post a Comment