New York Attorney General Letitia James’ Office of Special Investigation (OSI) released its report on the death of Malick Williams, who died on July 9, 2022 in Brooklyn. Following a thorough investigation, which included review of body-worn camera (BWC) footage, civilian cellphone video, interviews with involved officers and other witnesses, and evidence from the scene, OSI concluded that a prosecutor would not be able to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that the New York City Police Department (NYPD) officer who shot Mr. Williams was justified.
On the evening of July 9, three NYPD officers were patrolling in Brooklyn, when they spotted a vehicle that failed to signal a turn and directed the driver to pull over. After the car pulled over at the intersection of Nevins Street and Flatbush Avenue, the officers asked each of the four individuals inside to provide identification. When one of the occupants failed to provide valid identification, the officers ordered everyone out of the car. Mr. Williams then ran off, and an officer chased after him on foot.
The pursuit ended on Lafayette Avenue when Mr. Williams turned around and fired a gun at the officer. The officer then fell to the ground and fired his weapon in response, striking Mr. Williams. Additional responding officers then performed first aid until EMS arrived and took Mr. Williams to a local hospital, where he was pronounced dead. Officers recovered a gun at the scene.
Under New York’s justification law, a person may use deadly physical force to defend against the imminent use of deadly physical force by another person. When the defense of justification is raised at trial, the prosecution must disprove justification beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, Mr. Williams fired his gun at an officer while on a public sidewalk among other people, putting multiple civilians in danger. Under these circumstances, based on the law and the evidence, a prosecutor would not be able to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer who fired was justified, and OSI determined that criminal charges could not be pursued in this matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment