Justine Damond shooting update

Several members of ATS opined that the investigation into the Justine Damond shooting in Minneapolis by Officer Mohamed Noor was going to quietly slip by the wayside and be forgotten about.

Well, fear not amigos, because not everybody has forgotten. So, that being said, I bring you a (small) update about the case:

Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman has stepped on his crank yet again, getting caught on hidden camera at a public function bitching about the BCA investigation.

“I’ve got to have the evidence. And I don’t have it yet. And let me just say, it’s not my fault,” Freeman said. “So if it isn’t my fault, who didn’t do their jobs? Investigators, and they don’t work for me. And they haven’t done their job.”

Now, bear in mind that BCA turned their investigation over to Freeman way back in September, so he's had the case to evaluate since then. A big stumbling block in the investigation is that Noor had refused to talk to investigators and continues to refuse to do so. "What about his partner, Shammy?" you might be asking.

So I can’t talk to her because she’s gone, and the other cop just gave us some (expletive), OK?

Sounds like Noor's partner isn't helping anybody either, if Freeman is to be believed.

Freeman caught on candid camera...again.

Freeman, after being asked about the video, acknowledged that the video was authentic and kinda sorta almost said "sorry about that."

"I was wrong to discuss the agency's work on the Justine Damond case in a public setting," Freeman said in a statement. "On Saturday, I apologized personally to Minnesota Department of Public Safety Commissioner Mona Dohman."

Freeman's comments about his comments

Sorry, fellow denziens of ATS, but I think Mr. Freeman is setting the stage for no charges to be brought against Noor and to point the finger at everybody but himself. Freeman says he plans to make an announcement "next week" (being the week of Christmas) about the investigation. Previously he had stated he would announce a decision about charges by the end of the year, but he's now saying only that "that's the goal." As stupid as I think it is when somebody from the FoP starts running to the media about a shooting and trying to craft their narrative, I find it even more monumentally stupid when a prosecutor is going out and publicly impugning an investigation that's been sitting on his desk for three months.

a reply to: Shamrock6

But, I thought that this was a grand conspiracy to cover up a rape in an alleyway (or inside her house)...nothing to verify that brilliant theory, yet?

As far as Mr. Freeman is concerned--this sounds about right for most prosecutors out there, where it's never their fault, and freely airing frustrations is par for the course.

I don't blame the officers for being tight-lipped one bit--it sounds like this process could have been birthed in a tent of a circus. They need to get on the ball, though, as her family and friends and the community deserve answers for what happened.

ETA: I was pondering this very incident last week while I was lamenting the ridiculousness occurring in another thread, so thanks for the update...that there is no update.

Thanks for the update, hard to follow it around here anyway without the man thread being open. After other cases would not be surprised if he isn't charged accordingly. Sad that this may make more an example of corruption when it comes to these shootings. Hurts me personally as well, being a granddaughter of a police officer.

Also to add, never got the whole conspiracy to cover up a rape in the alley. Highly doubt that was the case of the police being involved in what she said she heard in the alley(non police related instead). That just seemed more of something to throw off details of the developing story.

a reply to: dreamingawake

Also to add, never got the whole conspiracy to cover up a rape in the alley. Highly doubt that was the case of the police being involved in what she said she heard in the alley(non police related instead). That just seemed more of something to throw off details of the developing story.

That was a strange, strange rabbit hole somebody tried to drag everybody down, for sure.

Thanks for the update, hard to follow it around here anyway without the man thread being open. After other cases would not be surprised if he isn't charged accordingly. Sad that this may make more an example of corruption when it comes to these shootings. Hurts me personally as well, being a granddaughter of a police officer.

Honestly I think it's a lack of evidence more than anything. Before I took the time to look it up today, a coworker and I were discussing the case Freeman would have to make: it's gonna have to be very, very science-heavy. Without any sort of camera footage and no statement from Noor and nothing from his partner, and no other witnesses that we know if, what is there really to go with? Assuming the best about his partner and his statement is that he didn't see Damond until Noor shot her then that adds nothing, but detracts nothing. Assuming the worst and he's willing to lie for Noor, then the case is even more dead in the water.

a reply to: Shamrock6

What is strange about the cops raping someone in an alley way?

2 cops in NY just got busted for the very same thing and tried to claim it was consensual.

Seriously, you're in denial.

a reply to: SR1TX

It’s not any more, or less strange, than the idea that Noor and his partner took the call so they could murder Damon. Or that Damon caught Noor with his hand down his partner’s pants. Or that the partner was trying to run over a cat. Or any of a hundred other possibilities.

Of which there appears to be absolutely zero evidence for. So no, I’m not in denial that it’s possible they were doing something they weren’t supposed to be doing. I’m in denial that there’s any evidence to support the theory.

Because there isn’t.

But thank you for your super valuable contribution to the thread

originally posted by: SR1TX
a reply to: Shamrock6

What is strange about the cops raping someone in an alley way?

2 cops in NY just got busted for the very same thing and tried to claim it was consensual.

Seriously, you're in denial.

Two other individuals in another city with evidence that they did that is different than a fabricated story backed by no evidence. What you're doing is using a logical fallacy to try to lend credence to your theory.

Sir, here's how it works: When you make the extraordinary claim, you need to provide the evidence to support the claim, not just wild fantastical theories. And when you don't provide that evidence, you don't get to go around telling people that they're in denial when they don't buy into your theory and then expect to be taken seriously...again.