Via the N-G (http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2009/12/08/states_attorney_shooting_was_accident_no_charges)
URBANA – Champaign County State's Attorney Julia Rietz has concluded that the shooting of a Champaign teen by a police officer in October was an accident and that no criminal charges will be filed against Officer Daniel Norbits.
Rietz this morning released her own 13-page summary of the Illinois State Police investigation into the Oct. 9 shooting death of Kiwane Carrington, 15, and the arrest of his friend, Jeshaun Manning-Carter, 16, also of Champaign.
The shooting occurred in the back yard of 906 W. Vine St., C, at a home where Mr. Carrington spent a lot of time with the son of the resident.
Thanks for posting, wayward.
Commenters, please keep it civil.
The text of the state's attorney's summary is up at http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2009/12/09/text_of_states_attorneys_report_summary
The conclusion seems reasonable considering the circumstances. However one point made in the report seems somewhat hazy. The report states that the pathologist found no evidence of a "close contact" wound. Testing was not performed on clothing for gunshot residue. So how far was the gun from Carrington when it was dishcarged? If a struggle was going was ongoing both individuals will be in close contact.
Interestingly, witness statements made during the original interviews changed over the course of time and were proven to be lies. Shame on them. If you want credibility and public support tell the truth and stick with it.
Having read the report and the N-G's summary of it, I'm struck by one startling inconsistency:
...
So the shot wasn't close range, but we didn't test the clothing, but the gun went off during a struggle. Attorney Rietz, would you please clarify?
No surprise. Forgone conclusion, considering the way the investigation was done. This is only the end of part one, and the beginning of part two.
Accident = Carelessness
A 15 year old child is dead at the hands of a police.
If this were a one-time incident after a stellar record of fine police work, it might be tolerable, but that is not the case.
Finney needs to go.
EXCELLENT QUOTE FROM FINNEY:
"When the gun went off ... in fact I didn't even know who it was. I had no idea whether it was him or the bad guy but when the gun went off I looked up. He was still dealing with him, still with the kid. He had his hands on him trying to hold him down," Finney said.
Bad guy? What bad guy? How did he reach a determination that the child he was dealing with is a bad guy? Did he mean black guy? Or did he mean that all black guys are bad? Or did he mean that anyone who he encounters is a bad guy? WHAT DID HE MEAN?
If you didn't have any doubts about Finney before, this should change your mind.
Separate interviews conducted on the afternoon of the shooting of Deborah Thomas, 42; her boyfriend, Dennis Atkins, 45, who often stayed at the Vine Street house; and Thomas' children, Issiah Thomas, 15; , and Ebonee Thomas, 15, revealed that Mr. Carrington often stayed overnight at their home and ate there, including much of last summer until he went to the Juvenile Detention Center in August. But the Thomases and Atkins all agreed that no guests, including Mr. Carrington, were allowed to be there when they were not home.
I thought she said that he was welcome to be there anytime?????????????????????????????
How is this relevant in any way:
"Rietz's summary said both Manning-Carter and Mr. Carrington had a history of contacts with police but neither Finney nor Norbits was involved in any of those.
At the time of his death, Mr. Carrington was on probation for the underlying offense of possession of alcohol by a minor. Just three weeks earlier he had been investigation for setting a fire in his bedroom with a lighter.
On Sept. 28, his sister had reported him as a runaway, a report that remained open the day he died."
So what. Why does it not list Finney's history and Norbits' history, too?
Finney: history of bad leadership and complaints by community
Norbits: involved in the killing of another innocent citizen
Seems like SA and NG are working hard to make the kids look bad and the cops look good - even though that not the case.
The fact that the three musketeers are giving the press conference tells you all you need to know: Mayor supports City Manager's decision to keep the Chief of Police rather than finally admitting failure and firing him.
This is sad.
When I disrespected my teacher at school, it never happened again after my dad found out about it.
When I had my first brush with the law (not counting speeding tickets), it never happened again after my dad found about it.
When I became stronger and faster than my mom and didn't think I needed to follow her orders anymore, it never happened again after my dad found about it.
Since this shooting, I've been wondering if this had ever happened to Kiwane Carrington would he would have been raised like me. I doubt it.
I see no mention of Kiwane's dad in the news article except for "On Oct. 9, a man came to the school identifying himself as Mr. Carrington's father but since school officials had never seen him before, they refused to give him any information."
I never would have got myself shot for being stupid when I was 15 and neither would most of you. If an officer was pointing a gun at me and told me to raise my hands and get on the ground, you can guess what I would have done.
"Bad guy? What bad guy? How did he reach a determination that the child he was dealing with is a bad guy? Did he mean black guy? Or did he mean that all black guys are bad? Or did he mean that anyone who he encounters is a bad guy? WHAT DID HE MEAN?"
He was probably referring the guy who was involved in a physical altercation with the other police officer, who did not comply with their commands. This is getting nutty.
This tragedy is such a great teaching moment to send a message to kids that they need to make smart decisions and respect the law. I'm afraid the exact opposite is happening and there will be more kids who think it's appropriate to not comply with an officer's demands.
For the people who are being divisive about this, claiming they are victims, saying that the police are monsters, wondering how this could have happened...you need to look in the mirror.
Based on the many legal explanations posted by Keith Hays, it seems a great shame and community disservice that this investigation was not put into as neutral an enviroment as is humanly possible. Whether any of us agree or not with the outcome, at least the question of objectivity would not be the "elephant in the room."
Pattsi Petrie
Pattsi, isn't that what they tried to accomplish with the State Police? Who should have investigated it?
"This tragedy is such a great teaching moment to send a message to kids"
More like:
Message was: Cops are not worthy of your trust or respect.
Message is now: Cops are REALLY REALLY not worthy of your trust or respect.
so did Norbits and Carrington struggle/fight or not?
and the "close range" shot issue is perplexing
To B for Business @ 1:13 P--again based on Keith Hays' response to my inquiry posted on IP, the SA probably ought to have brought in an outside SA who then in turn would have chosen the investigating unit, maybe from out-of-state or a judge, possibly retired. The result may have turned out as the present report; nonetheless, the questions of fairness and "CYA" probably would have been neutralized.
Pattsi Petrie
Let us start with the objective evidence as reported by States Attorney Reitz:
“Dr. Scott Denton, MD, Forensic Pathologist, performed the autopsy on October 10, 2009. A toxicology screen was run, the results of which indicated that Carrington had THC in his system, indicating recent marijuana use. Dr. Denton determined cause of death to be a gunshot wound of the left arm with reentry into the chest, with the direction of the wound to be left to right, front to back, and downwards. Dr. Denton observed no evidence of close range firing. In a follow up phone conversation, Dr. Denton indicated that he defines close range firing as less than 18 to 24 inches, that he saw nothing obvious to suggest close range firing, but that he conducted no tests on Carrington's clothing to for the presence of soot or gunpowder residue. Such tests would be necessary to further determine the range of the weapon.”
The other item of objective evidence contained in Ms. Reitz statement is her description of the weapon Officer Norbits carried:
“Officer Norbits carries a Glock 45, which is standard issue for the Champaign Police Department, and is the weapon carried by the majority of US law enforcement agencies. The Glock does not have an external safety. It has internal safeties to prevent accidental discharge due to dropping or jarring the weapon. When the trigger is pulled, the internal safeties are deactivated and the weapon fires. ISP laboratory reports indicate that the weapon is in proper working condition.”
Now let us examine the subjective statements of Officer Norbits as reported by the States Attorney:
“ He reported "We yell for them to get down, they're not. The one I was dealing with, uh, hands are going in and out of pockets....I remember trying to put my hand on his shoulder and pulling him, telling him to get down. Get down on the ground. He moves, twists. Something happens where I no longer have a hold of him....we re-engage....I remember trying to get him down on the ground...and the gun goes off...He falls down...on his back right there at the back door.
…
“He reported that he and Carrington were facing each other, that he had his left hand on Carrington's shoulder, and his weapon in his right hand. He reported that he did not recall Carrington trying to reach for his weapon. Officer Norbits reported that he did not recall consciously discharging his weapon.”
And now Chief Finney’s statement as reported by the States Attorney:
"My guy was trying to get back up and I was trying to put some distance between us so I could either holster my gun or if I needed to, use it. Norbits was yelling something to the effect let me see your hands. The guy that was in the doorway had his hands in his pockets and began to look like he was either going into his jacket or going into his pants pocket....we haven't closed the....of the door when a shot goes off and when the shot goes off I look at Norbits and....Officer Norbits, and he is still got his hand or something on the guy and my guy is right up next to him. We're real tight in proximity and....they're trying to get up. At that point Norbits indicates that the subject's been shot." Chief Finney further reported "...from what I could see out of the corner of my eye Norbits was dealing with him and this guy was struggling and he had hands on him. When the gun went off...in fact I didn't even know who it was. I had no idea whether it was him or the bad guy but when the gun went off I looked up. He was still dealing with him, still with the kid. He had his hands on him trying to hold him down." Chief Finney described Norbits as "face to face" with Carrington. He said he did not see the shot fired, but heard it because he was dealing with Manning-Carter, and they were "real close....almost touching each other...right in that doorway." He reported hearing Officer Norbits say "show me hands..." and reported seeing that Carrington was fumbling around with something in his pockets or jacket. He reported that Officer Norbits immediately began giving first aid to Carrington after he had been shot.”
Norbits’ statement and that of Chief Finney are the subjective accounts of participants who have a powerful interest in determining the outcome. Both statements are at odds with the objective findings of Dr. Scott Denton who found no indication that the shot was fired from less than 18-24 inches away from the boy. The bullet entered Carrington’s left arm, then his chest coursing from left to right and downwards. Norbits reports that, “that he had his left hand on Carrington's shoulder, and his [Norbits’] weapon in his right hand.” Chief Finney says, “they were "real close....almost touching each other...right in that doorway”.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
Norbits: involved in the killing of another innocent citizen
Would that "innocent citizen" be the same one who was trying to choke Officer John Kim to death? Your quick with the facts. Make sure that you understand what the facts are.
"So the shot wasn't close range, but we didn't test the clothing, but the gun went off during a struggle. Attorney Rietz, would you please clarify?
SA Reitz's summary does not say that the clothing was not tested. It does say that the forensic pathologist did not test the clothing. I would not expect that he would do so.
I would expect that in a case of this nature and sensitivity that the boy's clothing would have been collected by the investigating officers and turned over to the Illinois State Police Crime laboratory to be tested for gun shot residue.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
"Bad guy? What bad guy? How did he reach a determination that the child he was dealing with is a bad guy? Did he mean black guy? Or did he mean that all black guys are bad? Or did he mean that anyone who he encounters is a bad guy? WHAT DID HE MEAN?"
He was probably referring the guy who was involved in a physical altercation with the other police officer, who did not comply with their commands. This is getting nutty.\
The point is that the Chief of Police entered the situation already thinking in black and white terms: we're the good guys, they're the bad guys. Maybe there is a third possibility: neutral guys. As in, we don't know if these kids are bad or good yet.
"As in, we don't know if these kids are bad or good yet."
Was he conducting this inteview after he was involved in an altercation with the teens who failed to comply with his commands?
When using a Glock...
Rule #1
Do not place finger inside trigger guard unless you INTEND to shoot.
We all know that the State Police would not white wash an investigation into activities by local police because they're separate entities. Just ask Mike Callahan, retired Illinois State Police lieutenant and author of "Too Politically Sensitive," the account of the Rhodes murder investigation in Paris.
Given the circumstances of the shooting, it is inexplicable why no forensic testing on Carrington's clothing would have been done to try to determine how far away the gun was when it was fired. If Keith Hayes is correct that the medical examiner wouldn't have done that, but it would have been tested by a forensics lab, why wouldn't Rietz have explained that in the report?
One should not make charges of conspiracy lightly. On the other hand, since Rietz's husband is a local police officer, her conclusions about what happened do not give one a high degree of confidence in impartiality. A special prosecutor should have been appointed to look at this case.
Ezra, I'm currently reading "Too Politically Sensitive." It's a very interesting read.
It seems like there's a good chance that there will be a civil suit.
I Didn't Know The Gun Was Loaded
Hank Fort & Herb Leighton 1949
LYRICS ONLY
Oh Miss Effie was her name
Through the west she won her fame
Being handy with the gun
But she drove the men insane
Cause she'd whip out her pistol
And shoot most any guy
And sing out this alibi
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'm so sorry my friend
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'll never, never do it again
But one night she made a slip
Shot the sheriff in the hip
So the law it took a hand
And made Effie take the stand
And she pled, 'oh your honor
I'll know you turn me loose
When you hear my one excuse'
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'm so sorry my friend
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'll never, never do it again
I didn't know the gun was loaded
But regarding the gun that I toted
All I did was hold it high and go ...
BANG, PING, HUHH, ZSSS
I'll never, never do it again
Yes the jury all agreed
That Miss Effie should be freed
But the sheriff's jealous wife
Was indignant (yes, indeed)
So she borrowed a pistol
And shot this village belle
And sang as Miss Effie fell
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'm so sorry my friend
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'll never, never do it again
I didn't know the gun was loaded
But regarding the gun that I toted
All I did was hold it high and go ...
BANG, PING, HUHH, ZSSS
I'll never, never do it again
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
"Was he conducting this inteview after he was involved in an altercation with the teens who failed to comply with his commands? "
Failure to comply with cop commands <> "bad guy"
When using a Glock...
Rule #1
Do not place finger inside trigger guard unless you INTEND to shoot.
When confronted by a police officer...
Rule #1
Do exactly what they say.
I know, seems simplistic, but for some reason every few months we have to explain this simple rule. Very few people get killed by a cop's gun when complying exactly as told.
I get the feeling that people don't want the truth and they will not be happy until the officer is facing Murder 1 charges.
I can think of few better ways to get yourself shot than to do what these two did.
It's really simple. Raise you hands, get down on the ground, and explain that you are not breaking in. You don't get shot.
This doesn't happen if the kids apply just a little bit of common sense. What a tragedy.
"Failure to comply with cop commands <> "bad guy""
Calling the suspects bad guys after getting into an altercation is completely reasonsable. Using suspect is more PC, but you're really digging deep on that one.
Things are starting to become clear: juvenile detention, drugs, missing school, under investigation for starting a fire, discipline reports, and reported runaway.
Everyone is so quick to assume the cops are monsters but nobody is talking about teaching kids to use better judgement. And the cycle repeats.
We're a government of laws, not of men, even men in uniform.
It may make you feel righteous to say:
When confronted by a police officer...
Rule #1
Do exactly what they say.
or
Failure to comply with cop commands <> "bad guy"
But those are anti-American sentiments.
it is still really a shame that this was not an era and/or place when the cops could have arrived at the house, saw the teens, and said "what is going on fellas?" instead of "Get down!"
"Calling the suspects bad guys after getting into an altercation is completely reasonsable. Using suspect is more PC, but you're really digging deep on that one."
Listen to what you're saying. We're talking about the Chief of the Po-Po's here. It's not appropriate for the Chief to be going around calling people who are not guilty of a crime BAD GUYS, especially right after one of his numbskull employees has shot and killed someone without any justification.
Very disturbing that the cops conspired to turn the shooting into an "accident".
Things are starting to become clear:
Finney disrespects citizens and citizen complaints
Finney's boys rough up black kids for no reason
Finney's boys brush complaints under the rug
Finney's boys kill innocent citizens
Finney refuses to display any sort of contrition when his numbskull employees screw up.
Seems like this Finney guy may be a major bad apple.
You don't want the cops in your neighborhood??? Start acting like civilised human beings!!! you mess with the bull you get the horns!
"it is still really a shame that this was not an era and/or place when the cops could have arrived at the house, saw the teens, and said "what is going on fellas?" instead of "Get down!""
Exactly. The result of a negative culture and bad attitude, due to a glaring lack of leadership in CPD.
"you mess with the bull you get the horns!"
Should the police department be a "Bull"??
How about if the police department works on its image a bit and gets people to think of the police department as an advocate for all citizens?
In the present mess, that means that police would be concerned with the interests of the property owner AND the interest of the young citizens present on the property. The cops had a fiduciary duty to the young citizens, not just the property owner.
it is still really a shame that this was not an era and/or place when the cops could have arrived at the house, saw the teens, and said "what is going on fellas?" instead of "Get down!"
According to Ms. Reitz summary this is what was actually said:
Officer Norbits saw Chief Finney walking around the house. Officer Norbits walked up the drive. When he was at the southeast corner of the house he saw Finney draw his gun and say "stop or I will shoot you." He could not see around the corner of the house.
Interesting...
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
Should the police department be a "Bull"??
They are the authorities, the next time you need help call pizza hut.
he saw Finney draw his gun and say "stop or I will shoot you."
Sounds like a real thug. This guy is the Chief of Police??
Things are starting to become clear: juvenile detention, drugs, missing school, under investigation for starting a fire, discipline reports, and reported runaway.
Everyone is so quick to assume the cops are monsters but nobody is talking about teaching kids to use better judgement. And the cycle repeats.
And speaking of judgment...using marijuana certainly helps to impair good judgement. It looks like Carrington was a major problem waiting to happen. Still have questions about the gunshot range though.....
In every criminal case (Lawyers, cops confirm this) witnesses and prepetrators are interviewed how soon after an incident or arrest? Within what 12 to 24 hours if you have immediate access to them, is that correct?
What the heck were the Illinois State Police and the magic "Multi-jurisdictional Investigative Team" doing Friday Oct. 9, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, before finally getting around to interviewing Finney and Norbits about the shooting on Wednesday, Oct. 13?
In the Kaiyewu case last April, the shooting officers were in the interview room within 3 hours after the shooting.
In Norbit's interview, he says, "I can't remember..." several times. Huh? Why the delay to interview him?
They compiled police reports against the surviving youth about a residential burglary and had that ready to go by Tuesday morning, Oct. 12. for Rietz to prosecute in Ladd's court. But they don't have time to interview Norbits and Finney until the next day on Wednesday?
And no accounting about the police breaking down the door and ransacking the house after the shooting?
Finney does not volunteer to investigators Norbits' quote of Finney: "Stop or I'll shoot you." When WDWS's Pfingston calls Finney on it today, he says, "I said something like,'Don't make me shoot you', because when we display a weapon we have to provide a warning that we will actually use it." So why didn't you tell investigators that, Chief?
And yes Ms. Rietz, displaying a gun at suspects is lawful. But isn't it a bit reckless to wrestle teenagers half your size with one hand while aiming a gun at the suspect in the other? Is that a standard apprehension technique police use when trying to get someone on the ground? The 'ol one handed move with a gun aimed at the person's side? (the bullet entered through the side, from a distance greater than two feet. How long are Norbit's arms anyway?)
And really? Not one word spoken by either youth? Just stoned little robots not saying word as guns are pointing at them.
And yo, gun experts. Can you tell us how much pressure is needed to pull the trigger of a Glock pistol in order for the gun to fire. Can you be "unconscious" to your own squeeze of the trigger after your senses are "heightened"? And what's this Ms. Rietz, so quick to recount all the misdeeds of the youth. So quick to recount all the good commendations of Norbits. And you miss Norbits' involvement in the Greg Brown case that cost the City of Champaign six figures to the Brown family in civil court?
I don't get it, they said on Oct. 12 the surviving youth was trying to get away through a break in the fence. What happened to that? What happened to the dislocated shoulder? The sprained knee? the cuts? No accounting of that? Where was the "pushing past" to flee? Instead we get "walked forward".
Finney and Norbits admit in what interview there is, that it was they who initiate physical contact by grabs onto shoulders. And somebody try to position these four people for us when the gun goes off. Who's on the ground, who's standing, who's touching who? Finney says he broke away to either "reholster his gun, or use it." huh? It's a mess.
They got some 'splaining to do here. Perhaps that goofy civil rights organization is right, the feds ought to come in and do a redo of this bizarre investigation. This time with polygraphs. As the story goes on and everywhere....
I thought the "bad guys" were the ones who shot the little kid.
Kiwane Carrington has a history of contacts with law enforcement. Neither Officer Norbits nor Chief Finney were involved in any of these previous contacts and there is no evidence that either of them have had prior contact with him. In April, 2007, he was placed on a formal station adjustment for theft from Meijer’s. In May, 2007, he was found in possession of a stolen bicycle. In August, 2007, he was placed on a Formal Station Adjustment for Theft for stealing bottles of soda from a coin operated machine. In November, 2007, he was placed on a Formal Station Adjustment for Possession of Cannabis at Jefferson Middle School. In March, 2008, he was placed on a Formal Station Adjustment for Criminal Damage to Property at Columbia School. In 2008, he was picked up for curfew violations 3 times. On one of those occasions, he ran from the police but was later apprehended. Also in 2008, he was reported as a runaway on three occasions by his guardian. Finally, in 2008, he was arrested twice for Aggravated Battery for fighting with other juveniles in school. No charges were filed in these matters as reports indicated that Kiwane’s mother was suffering from cancer. Efforts were made to provide him with counseling and support. In January, 2009, Carrington was arrested for Possession of Alcohol by a Minor and Possession of Cannabis. A juvenile delinquency petition was filed in that matter. In 2009, while that matter was pending, Carrington was reported as a runaway, and failed to appear in court as ordered on 2 occasions. He was placed on pre-trial release orders, and petitions where filed due to violations of those pre-trial release orders 3 times. Warrants were issued for his arrest due to the failures to appear and violations of the court orders, and he was detained in the Champaign County Juvenile Detention Center on five occasions, most recently from August 14, 2009, through September 3, 2009. On September 19, 2009, he was the subject of an arson investigation for setting a fire in his bedroom with a lighter. He was placed on probation for the underlying offense of Possession of Alcohol by a Minor on September 22, 2009. As a condition of his probation, he was ordered to obey the household rules of his sister/guardian, and attend school regularly, with no tardies or discipline reports. He was also ordered to refrain from consumption of alcohol or use of illegal drugs. On September 28, 2009, he was reported as a runaway by his guardian/sister. That runaway report remained open on October 9, 2009.
Richard Kelly, the principal of the READY School, was interviewed on October 14, 2009. Kelly reported that Carrington was a student at the school. Kelly reported that Carrington did not attend class every day, and that he would show up in the lobby of the Illinois Terminal, where the READY School is located, and socialize with other students, but would leave when classes started. Kelly reported that he saw Carrington in the lobby on October 8, 2009, in the morning before school. He said he told Carrington to get in touch with his sister because she was worried about him. Kelly said Carrington said he was not going to stay at school that day because he did not want Kelly to have him arrested. At that time, Carrington left. Investigators also spoke to Donna Shonk, director of the READY program. Shonk reported that on October 9, 2009, a man came to the school and identified himself as Carrington’s father. Neither Shonk nor Kelly had previous contact with the father, and refused to release any information to him because he was not Carrington’s legal guardian. Attendance records indicate that Carrington attended school 15 days, and was absent 21 days for the 2009 school year. He was also the subject of 3 discipline reports in September, 2009.
James Taylor Jessee, 18, of Pesotum, was interviewed on October 27, 2009. Taylor was a READY classmate of Carrington’s. Jessee reported seeing Carrington on University Avenue by Carle Hospital on Friday, October 9, 2009, in the morning. He picked Carrington up and drove him to Columbia Street, where he said he was meeting a friend. Jessee admitted that he and Carrington smoked cannabis during the drive.
I see that my 2005 complaint against Norbits appears in the personnel records which CPD provided to Reitz's office regarding the recent killing of the unarmed teen. I did not know the name of the unpleasant officer who I dealt with in 2005 until today.
I submitted that complaint along with what I would characterize as irrefutable evidence that two officers (apparently including Norbits) entered the private area of our office without being invited to do so, yet CPD found that he had done no such thing. I complained that the officers were rude and abusive, yet CPD determined that was not the case because the witness could not recall the exact words the officers had used when he was being rude and abusive - although the witness could recall that they were rude and abusive.
I believe this is the emailed complaint which I provided to CPD, emailed to Holly Nearing and Robert Finney:
"This is the statement which I would have liked to provide, but which the officers refused to accept.
-------------
David Pollitz entered our office at approximately 4:30 pm and asked for a manager. He identified himself as the person who had called two prior times and repeatedly asked the same question regarding availability tomorrow. He was told that we do not reveal exact capacities or availabilities. When he appeared at our office, he was told that we would not spend any further time having circular conversations with him. He was asked to leave multiple times. He refused to leave.
I called 333-8911 and asked that an officer be sent to remove the person. While I was on the call, I asked him to step away from the counter. He refused to step away from the counter, which made the counter unusable.
I have video evidence of the situation.
...
Officers arrived. I advised them that I was preparing a written statement and asked that they wait. They grew impatient and entered the rear office without being invited to do so. I asked them to return to the customer area. They demanded that I speak with them immediately. I explained that I wished to provide a written statement so that there would be no misunderstanding. This made them both very angry, and they grew loud and abusive in their insistence that I speak with them immediately.
The officers told me that I have a bad attitude. On the basis of my bad attitude, they told the trespassing customer that he could go."
"Kiwane Carrington has a history of contacts with law enforcement...."
SO WHAT. This has no relevance whatsoever to the shooting. I don't want cops shooting teens who do smoke pot and I don't want them shooting teens who don't smoke pot.
It's nice to hear from the local law enforcement community, though. You've shown your true colors once again.
The result of a negative culture and bad attitude, due to a glaring lack of leadership in CPD.
The result of a negative culture and bad attitude, due to a glaring lack of respect for authority.
Anon 5:28 please read Anon 6:17. Buy a vowel if necessary, but get a clue.
Very sad situation but no amount blame-gaming the police is going to bring that young man back. The real shame is that those who profess to seek justice for the dead Kiwane, didn't do more justice by the live Kiwane.
High on dope, in a house even the occupants say he was not welcome and a big police intervention sheet.. Refuses to obey police....whew, pretty clear cut.
Anonymous 6:17 - So if a guy has enough contacts with authority, he gets a floating sign over his head saying "bad egg" such that people who have never "had prior contact with him" can just psychically tell that he's no good? Does it work like the yellow first-down line on televised football games, or what?
"High on dope, in a house even the occupants say he was not welcome and a big police intervention sheet.. Refuses to obey police....whew, pretty clear cut."
Yeah, shoot that sucker right now. He has no right to live.
What if you demonize and condemn to death a whole class of kids, does that make you a "bad egg"? Does that mean we can just shoot you?
I mean half the posters on here are rude and confrontational, I don't believe that justifies deadly force.
I mean half the posters on here are rude and confrontational, I don't believe that justifies deadly force
Kill them all.
or
Hire them to be Champaign police.
Preface: I'm not an officer or wannabe officer, but I'd like to share my thoughts, which are pro-law enforcement. We bash the police department but I would venture to say that nearly every poster here feels safe in their homes and neighborhoods. The reason you feel safe is precisely because the police are out there actively looking for problems and aggressively confronting them. I live in St. Joseph and I can tell you that I appreciate the deputies that work out here. They don't hassle folks who aren't doing anything wrong, and they do confront crime, not turn a blind eye to it. Someone famous (this quote has been attributed to various personalities throughout time, most commonly Edmund Burke) once said something to the effect: All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Well folks, keep denigrating the police and eventually *they* will do nothing. Remember, cops aren't robots and they aren't perfect and to think that they won't become prejudicial against a person or portion of the community that badmouths them and doesn't appreciate their efforts is madness. The facts point to the fact that the dead burglar has a long criminal history and was high during the time of the shooting. Doesn't that matter to anyone?
I wonder what Edmund Burke would have said had the cops drilled his 15-year-old son through the chest -- accidentally, of course.
Remember, cops aren't robots and they aren't perfect and to think that they won't become prejudicial against a person or portion of the community that badmouths them and doesn't appreciate their efforts is madness.
OR, you could say...
Remember, TEENAGERS aren't robots and they aren't perfect and to think that they won't become DISENFRANCHISED FROM a person or portion of the community that badmouths them (SUCH AS: THE CPD) and doesn't appreciate their efforts (OR POTENTIAL) is madness.
The police have a difficult job, but anyone who trusts them is a fool.
I think this result was a forgone conclusion long ago. It's not just Reitz - it's the entire judicial system. Anyone who has spent much time in a courtroom understands that the police can do almost anything and get away with it.
And that is the bigger problem the we face in this country. The police are granted way too much power and way too much deference in regard to their actions.
I don't know how that problem gets solved. But this case illustrates conclusively that the judicial system will do double flips of logic rather than bother holding officers accountable for their actions. Even when the citizens that the police and the judicial system are sworn to protect are killed in the process.
If I was a cop this result would worry me. It would be better for all of us if the police were held accountable in some way when they kill an unarmed citizen. Since that is obviously not going to happen in this county, the criminals among us may decide to take justice into their own hands.
Let us hope and pray that doesn't happen. But that is the true tragedy of injustice: it tends perpetuates itself.
Anonymous 8:02: "The facts point to the fact that the dead burglar has a long criminal history and was high during the time of the shooting. Doesn't that matter to anyone?"
Actually, the facts don't confirm he was a burglar, merely that he was suspected of possible burgling by the neighbor, and that he smoked some pot in a car that MORNING. He was shot in the afternoon.
That said, sure, he has a long history. How on earth is that relevant to the snap judgements made during the incident? Supposedly neither of the investigating officers knew the guy, so how would they know his history? You might like to argue that, well hell, a bad egg like that one surely must have fought. Well, if he did, then THAT will be in the report, and those actions would certainly be relevant, but posting up the kid's history is just trying to do justification after the fact. My cynical half might even suggest that someone is trying to do a "well, no big loss really" move.
Also one more thing, Anonymous 8:02 - you might claim it's natural for the police to become "prejudicial against a person or portion of the community that badmouths them and doesn't appreciate their efforts", and it very well may be.
But the moment they become prejudicial like that? It's time for them to hand in their badges and retire. They've lost the qualifications for the job at that point, and they're only harming the rest of the force by remaining.
As I expected Carrington's clothing was collected at the autopsy and delivered to the crime lab. The lab report indicates that the clothing was "examined and inventoried". It does not report any conclusions as to the presence or absence of gunshot residue. The report, dated November 19, 2009 indicates that the evidence, including the clothing, will be retained for 30 days and then disposed of - the lab's standard operating procedure. In light of the apparent contradiction between the officers' accounts and the objective findings of Dr. Denton as to the range from which the shot was fired the clothing is still available for testing to resolve that contradiction.
Lab Report
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
Oh Oh Dennis... I looked up the PDF Seems your complaint against Norbits was UNFOUNDED> That means the City did not believe you.................
Oh dear...............
http://cdn.news-gazette.com/media/pdf/carrington/CPD_Officer_Norbits_Daniel_Personnel_Records.PDF
Thank you, Akibare.
And Keith, should we assume that Mr. Ivy or some other attorney will issue an immediate subpeona/restraining order of some sort to ISP for retention of Mr. Carrington's clothing, so that testing can be done on it? The clock is ticking on the 30 day deadline.
"should we assume that Mr. Ivy or some other attorney will issue an immediate subpeona/restraining order of some sort to ISP"
I think those my be requested by an attorney but are issued by a judge, Keith am I right??
I would expect that either the attorney representing Carrington's family or Mr. Ivy or both will promptly apply to the court to secure all of the evidence in this case and to request the tests that Ms. Reitz says were omitted.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
First you were rude to a potential customer and then you were rude to the police who rightly decided they had better things to do than wait for you to finish your masterpiece. The police are not your private security force. They work for the city, not for you, and you don't get to tell them how to do their job.
Keith,
If Officer Norbit's gun wasn't dusted for fingerprints as part of this investigation, could attorneys also request that test? Wouldn't the gun fall into the category of "evidence"?
For the love of God people..............No one on this page will ever be please. Facts are facts are facts. Bad guy?? Suspect?? What the heck are you guys talking about on here??? A 15 year old boy is dead. The reason is right in front of everyone. He attempted to gain entry into a house he had no business being in without the homeowner being present. This was stated by them on audio and video tape even though they changed their story later. When confronted he refused LAWFUL commands to get down on the ground. A struggled ensues and the gun is discharged. Carrington is the one who set this whole set of events into motion............................no one is to blame but him.........period. The adults in this child's life should be ashamed of themselves. They are trying to push their lack of upbringing of this child as everyone else's fault. Take some responsibility. Even though it's to late for him.
I just had a very interesting conversation with a friend of mine. Her son was stopped last Friday night coming home from a basketball game by the Champaign Police. He was with four of his friends, out after curfew and had to many people in the car. The officer found marijuana in the car. Obviously my son is facing a stiff sentence at home. One of the friends he was with was Robby Finney who is Chief Finney's son. My son admitted they were all going to smoke from a pipe they had in the car. The only kid she think's got arrested was the front seat passenger and the driver. I wonder if being the Chief's son has its perks??? Anyone know about this???
I'm finding the discussion about retention of the clothing for 30 days and then being disposed of interesting.
Keith, when did the clock on that start after the lab was done? Is the fact that the State's Attorney took an extended amount of time in reviewing the report going to let the clock run out on disposal of Mr. Carrington's clothing?
And you make no mention of Officer Norbits's uniform? Was it not taken into evidence, too?
"When confronted he refused LAWFUL commands to get down on the ground. A struggled ensues and the gun is discharged."
This is not objective fact, it's the police department's self-serving account of the situation.
An unarmed 15 year old is dead. That's all you need to know to accurately conclude that the police deparment messed up.
According to the police dispatchers report, the neighbor who called the police reported seeing THREE suspects around the house so the TWO officers who were first on the scene were under the impression that they were up against THREE suspects and were therefore outnumbered.
While each officer had his hands full with ONE suspect a piece, the TWO officers both kept their eyes on the SCREEN DOOR for a THIRD suspect to appear (possibly armed). Under those circumstances, I bet those cops were extremely on edge as they had two uncooperative suspects who may have been acting uncooperative because they know they have a buddy in the house (the third suspect) that had their back (with a gun?).
In the transcript of the interview of said neighbor (taken the same day of the incident), he says he only saw TWO suspects around the house but 7 or 8 cops at the time the shot was fired.... What's up with the discrepancy? Maybe I'll give the neighbor a call since his phone number is listed in the report!!!
I think Reitz sat on this report until after the verdict came in from the gang rape case that was reported on last week.
The lab report is dated November 19th. Not all the evidence collected was delivered to the crime lab.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
"When confronted he refused LAWFUL commands to get down on the ground. A struggled ensues and the gun is discharged."
This is not objective fact, it's the police department's self-serving account of the situation.
Your comment is quixotic. What do you consider not objective fact? Are you suggesting that lawful commands to get down were not given? Are you suggesting the the commands, although given, were not lawful ? Are you suggesting that Carrington did actually obey commands that were given? Are you suggesting no struggle occurred? Are you suggesting a gun was not discharged?
An unarmed 15 year old is dead. That's all you need to know to accurately conclude that the police department messed up.
An officer may have messed up, but certainly not the department. Please describe how you believe the department might have messed up. Once you have read the report, tell us if you believe the officer intentionally shot at Carrington.
Maybe I'll give the neighbor a call since his phone number is listed in the report!!!
And of course you will identify yourself as "December 9th, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Anonymous (not verified)"
I think Reitz sat on this report until after the verdict came in from the gang rape case that was reported on last week.
Please explain the significance that the shooting report was released after the rape case verdict.
The State's Attorney only determined that there is no basis for criminal charges against the officer. The state's attorney correctly expresses no opinion about posible civil action on behalf of Carrington, nor about any violation of police procedures. There is no dispute about from whose gun the bullet came and that the victim and officer were approximately within an arm's length's of each other when the gun discharged.
Can anyone explain what additional insight can be provided by testing either the victim's clothes or the officer's weapon ?
What is there for anyone to disagree with the released State's Attorney report? For those who disagree with the report, please describe your hypotheses about what might have happpened?
illinipunditposter
The people who convicted these police officers before any facts were shared are never going to be satisfied, no matter what you do. Their argument is political, not logical. I didn't spend much time following all the speculation and after reading the report, I'm glad I didn't waste any time.
It is reasonable to review how an officer responds to a report of a possible breaking and entering after seeing suspicious activity. Combine that with the kids not responding to orders and having hands in pockets, I know I would have had a gun drawn and my hand on a trigger.
Logically, the police are going to review this situation and determine how to avoid a tragedy. I bet they are doing it right now, if they haven't already done it. It is reasonable for anyone in any situation to aviod turning a bad situation into worse situation. The police should assume that people are going to obey their orders and this assumption shouldn't ever change.
Sadly, nobody on the other side of the equation is taking similar steps. When people are raised to think they are victims and don't need to respect authority, this kind of tragedy is inevitable. When people are going father children and expect them to raise themselves, this kind of tragedy is inevitable. When people are raised to think they are entitled to special treatment, this kind of tragedy is inevitable.
I am so incredibly embarrassed for the people screaming that the police are the root of our problems.
I am so incredibly sad for Kiwanne Carrington. No mention of a dad, and the people of the community aren't willing to take accountability for their own problems. Maybe the N-G should track his dad down and ask him some questions.
I shouldn't say "nobody" when referring to the other side of the equation. Actually, there are some GREAT mentoring programs for kids with single moms who need a father figure to get in the kids' face when they start to get off course. It would have been great if this tragedy would have been used to focus on the real problem and bring people together to solve the parent problem, the real problem.
Instead...
That said, sure, he has a long history. How on earth is that relevant to the snap judgements made during the incident?
Establishing patterns of behavior is very relevant. Considering the large number of law/rule violations in Carrington's short life involving numerous sources (police, school, sister, friends, probation officials) makes the scenario described by responding officers, that he defied orders and resisted, much more plausable. Resistance and disobedience was in keeping with Carringtons established behavior pattern.
The insinuations made regarding gun-powder residue on Carrington's clothing, prints on the gun, and the time lapse between incident and interviews is all merely grasping at straws to deny the stated facts. The adjectives used by those same individuals making the insinuations to describe Carrington (scrawny, shy, innocent, quiet, etc) all may be very true but are irrelevant to his documented behavior. No one is saying the young man was bad to the core but he certainly made some bad choices, one of them prompted a sequence of events that caused his own demise.
This kid was shot dead by accident.
Now taxpayers will pay-up in a civil wrongful death suit.
Disgusting. Fire this Norbits cop who can't even stay
home on administartive leave. His cop buddies including the
Chief of Cover-ups Finney can't hide from the truth.
Thanks for blowing away a kid and probably $2 million in settlement money.
Go back to Carbondale, Finney!
Does anyone know where you can see the documents online? The News- Gazette seems to have removed the links they had. Thanks
I don't trust anyone who says that "the real problem" is entirely the responsibility of "other people" and "other people's children". The history of CPD and American law enforcement highlights a very different problem.
Many of us are working our butts off to train youth on how to stay alive when they encounter the police. Is it too much to ask that others work on holding the police accountable for training on how to not antagonize and kill minority youth?
The PDF's that were on line had the Officers dates of birth on them. Hopefully the NG has taken them down, redacted the DOB and then will put them back up on line.
" The history of CPD and American law enforcement highlights a very different problem.
Many of us are working our butts off to train youth on how to stay alive when they encounter the police. Is it too much to ask that others work on holding the police accountable for training on how to not antagonize and kill minority youth?"
So, bringing up the behavior of the actual kids involved is totally prejudicial and racist, but somehow, connecting all past actions of all American law enforcement to these cops is a good thing to do.
I don't understand how any events in the past can determine whether or not this particular kid was shot on purpose by this particular cop.
Listen to what you're saying. We're talking about the Chief of the Po-Po's here. It's not appropriate for the Chief to be going around calling people who are not guilty of a crime BAD GUYS, especially right after one of his numbskull employees has shot and killed someone without any justification.
Very disturbing that the cops conspired to turn the shooting into an "accident".
- Justification has nothing to do with it, it was an accident. Now you can either accept that, or keep on with the conspiracy theories; which get you nowhere. "Conspired"?? The evidence indicates that it was an accident. How is that so hard to understand.
Or: The result of a negative culture and bad attitude, due to a glaring lack of leadership in a 15 year olds life.
Great job summarizing this incident. I agree with you ( B is for business). Now to answer the close shooting question. A close contact shot is determined by burning powders and things from the gunshot being burnt into the wound area. If the young man (victim) was wearing several layers of clothing then this would have stopped the powders from reaching the wound. The medical examiner could have tested the clothing but this would only tell them that the person was involved in a shooting. Since there was no burn marks on the wound then testing the clothes is not needed. When a gun is shot this powder goes all over everything in the area.
Now for words to live by. If the police tell you to do something ......do it. Complain later but for now DO IT.
"Many of us are working our butts off to train youth on how to stay alive when they encounter the police. Is it too much to ask that others work on holding the police accountable for training on how to not antagonize and kill minority youth?"
Hopefully, you are not promoting a negative culture that makes the cops monsters. If so, you're going to be shooting yourself in the foot and that's no accident, just sad. Hopefully, somebody is working their butts to train youth to not pursue the path that Kiwanne Carrington was going down. Again, horribly sad.
I hope the police are accountable and trained to treat everyone the same in every situation. I hope they would not treat me differently because I'm not a minority youth. I hope they would not treat a minority youth any differently than they would treat me in the same situation. I hope they would treat me the same if I ingored a cop's orders.
These kids don't all have good parents. These kids go to school and see they are expected to be treated special, where the school addresses a problem based on stats and not common sense. Again and again, so incredibly sad.
People who choose to be victims are going to continue to be victims as they keep fighting for it. After a tragedy like this, you hope the cycle will be weakened. Instead, the opposite...
I try to tell myself this is just the Internet, I shouldn't take this stuff too seriously.
But... damn.
For the most part (with a few exceptions, some of which I've removed), this discussion has been relatively civil given the emotional nature of the topic. Thanks, everybody.
I suspect that most of the pro-police commenters here are Caucasian (as I am), and have never suffered the indignity of being accused by Champaign police officers of the heinous crimes of Walking While Black, Driving While Black, or Standing Here Minding My Own Business While Black. I have little trouble believing that two black teenagers who aren't really doing anything wrong (at least in their minds) would resist the commands of a couple of cops who seem to have already judged them guilty before proven innocent (after all, Finney already concluded they were "bad guys").
How is it possible for Norbits to have fired the shot from more than 24 inches away if he was in contact with the victim at the time? And why was his finger on the hairtrigger of his weapon while he was grappling with the victim?
I'm surprised I don't know the answer to this, but does the law state that one must obey the commands of a police officer? I'm not talking about resisting arrest, but if I'm walking down the sidewalk, and a cop walks up to me and tells me to lay down on the ground, does the law say I have to do it?
Can anyone explain what additional insight can be provided by testing either the victim's clothes or the officer's weapon ?
There is no reason for further testing of the weapon involved. There is no conflict with the proposition that the 45 caliber round was fired by the weapon identified as that of Officer Norbits.
For a short time yesterday Officer Norbits statement was available as a pdf file on the News Gazette website. In his statement Norbits saya that at the time the shot was fired he and Carrington were face to face. Norbits had his gun in his right hand. Norbits left hand was on Carrington's right shoulder. The gun went off.
The autopsy report reveals that the bullet entered Carrington's upper arm, went through the muscle, entered the boy's chest and coursed downwards through his body through the lungs and heart and came to rest behind the boy's liver. Dr. Denton found no evidence that the shot was fired at close range, withiin 18 to 24 inches of the arm.
That is wholly inconsistant and casts extreme doubt on Norbits' description of the event. It is impossible for the muzzle of the gun that fired the shot to have been 18 - 24 inches away from the boy if Norbits and Cunningham were in the positions that Norbits described.
Examination of the boys clothing for gunshot residue would establish the distance from which the shot was fired and either demonstrate that the officer's account is plausible or that it is not.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
yes you have to obey a lawful order by a police officer.
"One hopes that the people get angry enough to demand something better than the treatment they are offered."
One hopes that the people start to demand the same treatment, consideration, and respect as everyone else. One hopes that people start to extend the same treatment, consideration, and respect to everyone.
If we do those things, neither side will need to demand anything.
"I'm surprised I don't know the answer to this, but does the law state that one must obey the commands of a police officer? I'm not talking about resisting arrest, but if I'm walking down the sidewalk, and a cop walks up to me and tells me to lay down on the ground, does the law say I have to do it?"
Hopefully, one is smart enough to obey the command of a police officer and complain about it later.
Hopefully the penalty for not being acquiescent won't be death.
Anyway, bring on the civil suit. Get out that checkbook, Champaign.
Yeah, okay, rah rah. But my question is, is it my legal right to say no until I've been put under arrest.
Ernest Terga,
I removed your earlier comment, and if you post anything similar to it again, you'll be banned. If you have any questions, please email me. Thanks.
According to the News-Gazette, the law firm that is going to handle the civil suit won an $18 million dollar settlement against the city of Chicago for a wrongful death case, and another one in (I think) Tennessee for $4.4 million dollars.
That, people, is a chunk of change. The city hasn't been served yet, so we don't know just how big a check Champaign's going to have to write. But look on the bright side -- maybe it will only a few million.
From everything I've read, I don't think the plaintiff(s) would have much chance of a payday. Had Carrington complied the officer's command the officer would not have been in a struggle which caused his gun to go off. Considering the information given to the officers going into the situation, they were justified in having guns drawn. Just my opinion though, Keith could make a more qualified speculation.
You must obey a lawful order from a police officer. You don't even have the right to resist an unlawful arrest.
I'm sure that those who condemn the police will be satisfied with nothing less than murder charges against the officers. The fact is that the police responded to reports about possible burglars and found two suspects when they showed up. Carrington's history is relevant because it supports the idea that he wasn't obeying orders--he'd already run from the police in the past. The standard for judging officers is what they knew at the time--they have to make split decisions under very difficult circumstances.
In this case I'm sure if they hadn't shown up or responded late, they would have faced charges that they are not enforcing the law in minority neighborhoods in the same way that they do in other neighborhoods. The question is whether people want the law enforced or not. If they don't, then some neighborhoods are probably going to turn into the Wild West.
I see the guardian who had no control over this individual has already filed a civil suit. At what point is there personal responsbility for one's own actions? Where is the family?
That being said, it's always a tragedy when someone dies, especially if it could have been prevented.
Sounds like a great kid....a little different than he is being portrayed by the media....
"Yeah, okay, rah rah. But my question is, is it my legal right to say no until I've been put under arrest."
I don't know the legal answer, but it is definately your choice to ignore the order and risk being put under arrest. The bigger question is why would you want to do that? In this scenario, are you wearing nice clothes or something? Hopefully, you don't speculate like this in front of kids who might use that rationale and take an unecessary risk. If you have been wronged, you can complain about it later. If you have kids, you can give them common sense advice and suggest that they avoid trouble, and not ask for it.
Do these kids a favor and stop teaching them that *they* can decide if they are doing something wrong or not when they are confronted by the police (or other authority figures for that matter). That's not the way it works in a lawful, civilized society. Don't like it? Take the associated risks. A community problem? Yes. To the extent that certain subgroups of the community teach and encourage such defiance and then cry racism when the consequences of such defiance are negative and not associated with any other community subgroup. Hey. Maybe that's because the first reaction of most subgroups is not to challenge authority. Why are black kids 'disproportionately' disciplined in the schools? It's not racism. It's bad behavior seemingly rooted in an apparent culture of disrespect for adults and/or authority. Equal treatment extends to holding kids to the same behavior expectations across the board. It extends to expecting all subgroups of the community to get with the program in terms of how law enforcement works and how the rest of society responds to it. It is what it is. Don't like something about it? Work through the proper channels to address issues and concerns as opposed to condoning flagrant disrespect for authority. Where does the latter get you?
Reitz just said that she saw no need to test for gun shot residue on Carrington's clothing.
If there is no residue on the clothing, it will call into question the entire statement from Norbits and blow up his whole story. Especially considering there is no statement from anyone but cops.
It is crazy that you would not test the clothing.
Reitz on Penny is turning into a campaign commercial - jeesh.
Let me help everyone out with the gun shot residue question. The test only will show the presence of ANY gun shot residue on the clothing. It will not determine how close someone was to a gun when it was shot. Everyone needs to calm down about this portion of the case.
<em>Reitz just said that she saw no need to test for gun shot residue on Carrington's clothing.</em>
That's just incredible. Wouldn't the State Police have undertaken those tests in the course of their so-called independent investigation?
so how close does a Glock need to be to put residue on a hoody?
Pat, Anon 11:11 would like to buy a "U"
C-L-_-E
The autopsy report reveals that the bullet entered Carrington's upper arm, went through the muscle, entered the boy's chest and coursed downwards through his body through the lungs and heart and came to rest behind the boy's liver. Dr. Denton found no evidence that the shot was fired at close range, withiin 18 to 24 inches of the arm.
That is wholly inconsistant and casts extreme doubt on Norbits' description of the event. It is impossible for the muzzle of the gun that fired the shot to have been 18 - 24 inches away from the boy if Norbits and Cunningham were in the positions that Norbits described.
Examination of the boys clothing for gunshot residue would establish the distance from which the shot was fired and either demonstrate that the officer's account is plausible or that it is not.
How long is Norbitt's arm? Upper arm and lower arm. When that right arm is bent where would the right hand be? The question is...was Carrington shot at close range during a struggle or from a distance?
The clothing needs to be examined for soot deposition, powder burns and stipling.
<em>If you have been wronged, you can complain about it later.</em>
You're making some big assumptions. For instance, you may be assuming that the complaint process which the person would avail herself functions properly. Some things we know about the Champaign complaint process:
• Champaign does not respond to FOIA requests regarding complaints.
• Champaign demands that complaints be tendered orally to the officer who is assigned to handle the complaint, even when initial complaint is submitted in writing
• Champaign "restates" complaints to suit their needs
• Champaign requires that complainant sign a blank affidavit which officer fills in later
• Champaign refuses to provide complainant with copy of affidavit after it has been filled out by a "brother" of the target of the complaint
• Champaign refuses to reveal details (ie interview notes) of its internal investigations
• Four of five (if I recall correctly) possible outcomes of complaint process are favorable to police
• Champaign seems to selectively ignore information which would tend to support complaint when doing so is in their best interest.
• Complaints are investigated only by those who have a vested interest in finding against complainant. There are no checks and balances whatsoever.
• Complainant has no recourse but to talk with City Manger, who also has a vested interest in finding against complainant.
The game is rigged to perpetuate employment of those who need to be exposed to checks and balances the most.
"The game is rigged to perpetuate employment of those who need to be exposed to checks and balances the most."
But you don't act a like a moron to prove a point.
Doesn't a Glock have a safety? How does a gun 'go off''---Doesn't someone have to pull the trigger? Why does this guy have his gun out on an unarmed kid anyway? Why not a billy club or pepper spray or something else non-lethal they carry? These are a few questions I have. If anyone knows the answer, I'd appreciate it.
As for a civil suit, a jury might see this very differently when Norbits and Finney (and everyone else involved) is subject to cross-examination. I would predict a hefty price for the city. Do they have insurance to cover it, and if so, for how much?
"Doesn't a Glock have a safety? How does a gun 'go off''---Doesn't someone have to pull the trigger?"
Glock's don't have a safety switch that disables the ability to fire, it just has multiple mechanisms to prevent firing without a deliberate trigger pull. Generally this is irrelevant to the situation though since having drawn their firearms for the possibility of having to use them there would be no reason to have a safety switch engaged and thus not ready to fire if need be. With a Glock pistol in working order the only way for it to "go off" is if the trigger is pulled. The report states that the officer's Glock was in working order so the "accident" must have involved pulling the trigger. From the wording it seems that they're trying to imply that he unintentionally pulled the trigger during the struggle.
I'm assuming the Glock in question is actually the model 21, though the report called it a "Glock 45" of which there is no such model number but several in .45 ACP, including the full size model 21. They do not have a "hair trigger" as one post implied but a 5 lb trigger pull standard (they are essentially double action so every pull is the same weight) and 12 lb on some models due to some law enforcement standards.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
"Doesn't a Glock have a safety?"
It was established early on that this particular model does not have an external safety.
"Doesn't someone have to pull the trigger?"
Yes.
"Why does this guy have his gun out on an unarmed kid anyway?"
As he initially approached the scene, the officer would have no way of knowing the age of any suspects, or even for sure how many there are. The fact that they were unarmed could only be ascertained with certainty after the fact, and in this context, any suspect's refusal to keep his or her hands out of their pockets would be highly problematic, to say the least.
One other thing that I have noticed is the increased incivility taking place in these discussions. People can disagree. People can challenge government. People can ask questions, and they ought to have that right. I disagree with the notion that people who don't live in Champaign have no right to comment. What Champaign does often affects people who don't live here. What I do disagree with is the way that many of the speakers argue their points. Rudeness detracts from their message and damages it. Last night several of the speakers were out of line, and you have to wonder if the point is to try and provoke some action on the part of the City.
Dear RedStateWannabe,
Check out this link on gunshot residue (GSR). This might answer some of your questions.
http://www.firearmsid.com/A_distanceGSR.htm
There is not an exact answer to your question about the presence on GSR other then "It just depends." Depends on the gun, the barrel length, the caliber, etc. etc. Take a minute and read for yourself
Thank you, Glock21 for clearing up the Glock questions.
But what gets me is that the first thing you learn in weapons handling is that you keep your finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot. The officer had his finger on the trigger. So either he intended to shoot or he was just poorly trained. Poor training is the most likely explanation
"But what gets me is that the first thing you learn in weapons handling is that you keep your finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot."
I'm not sure how that rule translates into police work in situations where they have a reasonable expectation of danger. It's one of the big rules for firearms handling for civilian situations, but I'd imagine that certain police and miltiary situations have some exceptions to the rules we're taught at the range.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
Thanks Anon, and I did check it out. It confirms my opinion that this test should be done. Get the results from the clothing, then run some tests with the weapon to get a best guess min/max distance. It will either corroborate Norbits story or not.
Is there a good reason why the testing would not be done? (Cost?)
If you're going to be a police officer and carry a gun, shouldn't they be required to participate in random drug testing? At the very least, shouldn't they be required to submit to drug and alchohol tests after a shooting or accident?
If I get in a car accident and someone is killed or seriously injured, I'm probably going to get an alcohol test. Why wouldn't that logic applied to a police officer who was involved in a shooting?
I can't imagine that city council would front an attitude about people from Urbana taking the mic. Is it true that Champaign police officers are not required to live in Champaign?
There was a public commenter who was making some very good points last night.
Apologies for double post. Gordy, please edit that.
Glock 21: ” but I'd imagine that certain police and military situations have some exceptions to the rules we're taught at the range”
Most likely not. Finger off trigger until ready to shoot, especially in a potential deadly force encounter. It doesn’t hamper your ability to squeeze off a shot if your finger is outside the trigger guard at the outset. If anything, it prevents Accidental Discharges (ADs).
But if PTI is training cops to go into situations with your booger hook on the bang switch, then I’d say the curriculum needs improving.
Assuming that the officer did err by having his finger prematurely on the trigger, does such justify criminal prosecution?
Establising that the officer's finger was indeed misplaced seems problemsome.
Michael Fuerst
I guess the people commenting on the situation need and analogy to explain how this may have happened.
1) Take an egg into your dominate hand
2) Go to the nearest night club and start a shoving match with a random subject while holding said egg...remember keep that trigger finger off of the egg
3) Check the results
Bring a napkin because you will crush the egg at some point during the confrontation.
Look into involuntary contraction.
The NG reposted all the documents related to the investigation.
Julia Rietz stated that the only purpose of her investigation was to determine whether criminal charges should be brought against the police officers involved. I can understand that; there might not be a basis for criminal charges, and it would be for other forums to determine whether there is a basis for administrative or civil charges. But if that was the only purpose of her investigation, then why did her report not analyze the elements of murder and negligent homicide and then explain why those elements were not met in this case. I don't think there is any evidence that Officer Norbitts set out to deliberately kill Kiwane Carrington, so we can dismiss possible murder charges as being within the realm of possibility. But, if it is true, that the officer's finger was on the trigger, and that it takes a pull of from 5 to 12 pounds, according to previous commenters to pull the trigger, and that basic weapons handling courses state that you keep your finger outside the trigger guard until ready to shoot, why was the possibility of negligent homicide not considered? Dismissed, if the facts don't meet the elements of that crime, but at least considered and discussed in the report?
The fact that the report spends pages and pages dissing Kiwane Carrington, when his past history really is irrelevant, makes me suspicious of it. If Kiwane had been an Eagle Scout, with an unblemished school and social record, would that have made these actions murder or negligent homicide? Of course not. The fact that Kiwane should have been in school; should not have smoked pot; should not have tried to break into the house really doesn't matter. Either the officer acted lawfully or he did not. And whether he acted lawfully or not is not dependent on the good character of Kiwane Carrington. So why talk about all this other stuff?
I'm not sure how that rule translates into police work in situations where they have a reasonable expectation of danger.
In Norbits' statement (which I read last evening in its entirety before the NG took down the link) he answers your question saying that he was trained to keep his finger in the "index position", that is extended along the barrel and not within the trigger guard until ready to fire. He said he did not recall putting his finger within the trigger guard and that bothered him.
He also said that he approached up the driveway following Chief Finney. He said he could not see the backyard but said that Chief Finney drew his weapon and shouted, "Stop or I will shoot you." Norbits said that he did not see what the Chief was reacting to but drew his weapon and then advanced to the backyard.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
WOW, all he had to do was lay down. What a ridiculous response. It's amazing that people pass the blame to everyone but the individual.
Documents from the investigation on the News-Gazette site
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
WOW, all he had to do was lay down. What a ridiculous response. It's amazing that people pass the blame to everyone but the individual.
And which individual in this transaction are you blaming?
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
Ezra (not verified) said: then why did her report not analyze the elements of murder and negligent homicide
Hello?! No murder or negligent homicide to analyze.
The fact that the report spends pages and pages dissing Kiwane Carrington, when his past history really is irrelevant, makes me suspicious of it. ....... So why talk about all this other stuff?
Not dissing, stating facts.
On December 9th, 2009 at 05:40 AM, Toldja So said:
That said, sure, he has a long history. How on earth is that relevant to the snap judgements made during the incident?
Establishing patterns of behavior is very relevant. Considering the large number of law/rule violations in Carrington's short life involving numerous sources (police, school, sister, friends, probation officials) makes the scenario described by responding officers, that he defied orders and resisted, much more plausable. Resistance and disobedience was in keeping with Carringtons established behavior pattern.
The insinuations made regarding gun-powder residue on Carrington's clothing, prints on the gun, and the time lapse between incident and interviews is all merely grasping at straws to deny the stated facts. The adjectives used by those same individuals making the insinuations to describe Carrington (scrawny, shy, innocent, quiet, etc) all may be very true but are irrelevant to his documented behavior. No one is saying the young man was bad to the core but he certainly made some bad choices, one of them prompted a sequence of events that caused his own demise.
In Norbits' statement (which I read last evening in its entirety before the NG took down the link) he answers your question saying that he was trained to keep his finger in the "index position", that is extended along the barrel and not within the trigger guard until ready to fire. He said he did not recall putting his finger within the trigger guard and that bothered him.
Is there any possibility of a mechanical issue with the gun that could affect how the safety worked?
Rietz's summary said that the ISP checked the gun and stated it had no problems. Thus it was a functioning Glock. Pull hard enough on the trigger and it fires.
From reading the summary, while Norbits doesn't state that he in fact did fire the Glock, there is little to no doubt that he was the only one who could have done so, according to his own testimony about where he was, where Carrington was, and how both were oriented at the time the gun fired.
Gun-powder residue on clothing, prints on the gun, and time lapses are all actual observable facts which may be tested and the result stated. (Then everyone can argue over what it all MEANS, of course...)
Speculating (after the fact, of course) that because the kid had a long rap sheet then surely certain alleged actions at the scene of the incident are "much more plausible," on the other hand, is just that - speculation. Not to deny that there's speculation all over the place in this discussion, but adding some actual measurements to the pool can't possibly hurt at this point.
Why NOT test the clothing? If nothing else, it will eliminate one more factor why people will not be satisfied with the investigation, so why not do it?
"Why didn't he just obey the cops?"
Quote from teacher across the street..." If I had a dollar for every minority student who replied...You ain't gonna tell me what to do, I could have retired 10 years ago."
What you call speculation a court of law calls establishing character based on history. Yes, it is speculation. I don't have any issue against testing the clothing. If there's residue will that really settle it for the "po-po" hating faction? If there is not residue will it convict the police officer? Tell me honestly, if you were in that same situation would you remember the number of inches between you and the person who got the bullet? If there is no residue, could it be that Carrington shoved himself away from the officer (who has already stated he was holding or grabbing Carrington by the shoulder) lost his balance and in an attempt to catch himself sqeezed his hand? Yes, speculation. But what else do we have? We have personal history of those involved. Either the a police officer and the Chief of Police lied, or we have a kid with a history of bad decision yet making another one.
"He said he did not recall putting his finger within the trigger guard and that bothered him."
Not as much as it bothered Kiwane Carrington.
What else do we have? We have a shirt sitting in a crime lab somewhere, that's what we have.
Would I remember the number of inches? Quite possibly not, which is why testing available evidence can help find out what happened, independent of human memory which can be very unreliable even when everyone sincerely gives a best effort.
It's possible no one lied at all, but they don't recall things correctly. Or it's possible that in fact, they will find all sorts of residue on the clothing and concretely put the question to rest. But rather than wonder about it, let's do the test.
There are such things as tragic mistakes, too. They don't have to be criminal actions, either. That's what it means to investigate homicide and negligent homicide and all those things and show how they don't apply, leading to no charges filed.
But when such mistakes are uncovered, it can lead to some helpful "perhaps this is how we can prevent it happening next time." It doesn't have to be a stark choice between "a person is evil!!!" and "a person did nothing wrong, behaved optimally and should not even feel any regrets!!!" That goes for all parties, although admittedly one of the parties doesn't have any next time to worry about anymore, at least in this life. Perhaps the environment all of the actors are playing in can be improved, etc.
Not as much as it bothered Kiwane Carrington.
Trust me on this, Kiwane is in much better circumstances that this life was offering him. Anger is part of the grieving process. Vindictivness and and hate will not net resolution. The young man is gone and will remain gone. Would not the energy spent on hating and placing blame on others be truely better spent connecting with kids in similiar situation as Kiwane's? When we teach people that they are victoms rather than responsible for their own decisions, we unjustly make them victoms. Until the "po-po" hating faction is willing to own their share of the responsibly in Kiwane's death nothing will change. More will die or spend what could have been fulfilling, fruitfull lives in prison. My grandfather was a police officer (Chief of Police to be precise), we were taught respect for authority, "yes officer, no officer". Is that too much to ask for a child to be taught respect in order to preserve their own safety?
What you call speculation a court of law calls establishing character based on history.
Gosh, I didn't realize Kiwane Carrington was on trial here.
What I find particularly ironic is that the "Obama is a secret Muslim who wasn't born in the United States and is secretly trying to institute socialism on America ZOMG!" crowd seems to have absolutely no problem dismissing glaring contradictions in this report. Of course it couldn't possibly be any sort of conspiracy to cover up the killing of Kiwane. After all, the government issued a report that says it was an accident! What else do we need?
Here's a question: what would it have taken for Reitz to actually charge Norbits with a crime? Seriously, what level of evidence would she need to break the code over at the courthouse and actually charge a cop with a crime?
Frankly, I have a hard time imagining any level of evidence would force her hand. Maybe a video tape, but remember Rodney King? Even that didn't work in LA. Cops are almost never charged with a crime, regardless of what they do. So sure ... go stand in front of someone, place your hand on their shoulder, and then move your other hand 24 inches away and see if this report makes sense.
Bring a tape measure. I tried it today. This report is ridiculous. But it doesn't matter, and I doubt it ever did.
There are such things as tragic mistakes, too. They don't have to be criminal actions, either. That's what it means to investigate homicide and negligent homicide and all those things and show how they don't apply, leading to no charges filed.
But when such mistakes are uncovered, it can lead to some helpful "perhaps this is how we can prevent it happening next time." It doesn't have to be a stark choice between "a person is evil!!!" and "a person did nothing wrong, behaved optimally and should not even feel any regrets!!!" That goes for all parties, although admittedly one of the parties doesn't have any next time to worry about anymore, at least in this life. Perhaps the environment all of the actors are playing in can be improved, etc.
Strongly agree.
Here's a question: what would it have taken for Reitz to actually charge Norbits with a crime? Seriously, what level of evidence would she need to break the code over at the courthouse and actually charge a cop with a crime?
In the report, she explained what the possible charges could have been, and why she chose not to pursue them. To me, it seemed like a matter of not wanting to press charges when she wasn't likely to win, rather than any secret code prohibiting her from charging a cop.
Gosh, I didn't realize Kiwane Carrington was on trial here.
There was not a trial so obviously Kiwane, rest his soul, was not on one. It was an investigation that interviewed all possilbe witnesses in an effort to determine if there was wrong-doing by Officer Norbitts. If anything, the officer and the entire police department was under investigation. Kiwne's history/actions are relivant facts.
When did we stop being a people responsible for our own decision/actions? This whole nanny-state victomization does not serve us well. Case in point. If we teach our children well these tragedies need not happen.
"Trust me on this, Kiwane is in much better circumstances that this life was offering him."
Awfully nice of you to say that on his behalf. Let's ask him. Oh, sorry, can't do that, as he's been shot dead by the police.
Is there any possibility of a mechanical issue with the gun that could affect how the safety worked?
No, the gun was tested at the State Crime Lab and found to be in proper working order.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
Didn't George Jones sing a song that is very relevant to this? I believe the name of the song is Choices and one of the lines states: "You live and die by the choices you make".
So sure ... go stand in front of someone, place your hand on their shoulder, and then move your other hand 24 inches away and see if this report makes sense.
Bring a tape measure. I tried it today. This report is ridiculous. But it doesn't matter, and I doubt it ever did.
I would expect nothing less from you, Boon. However, I did exactly as you did and measured a conservative 32 inches. I don't know if you were just born with abnormally short arms or it may be possible that you don't have a clue as to how he was standing. Since you don't think like a cop, I'm sure you just faced up square to whoever allowed you to grab your shoulder and measured. Trouble is, that's probably not how it happened. Cops don't stand square to people. It's called standing bladed. It means that you keep your gun side away from the person you are engaging. It's ingrained in most cop's heads from the beginning of training at the academy. It also applies to shooting at close quarters. If I was engaging someone at very close range (I'm right handed), I would extend my left arm and move my right foot back, effectively making my profile much slimmer, reinforcing myself should the person try to tackle me, and keeping my duty weapon as far away from the person as possible . My right hand, which would hold my duty weapon, would be very close to my chest (over my right breast). Do this and I assure you that 18 to 24 inches is a very conservative estimate.
On a different note, most everyone's take on GSR only reinforces my opinion that most people watch way too much CSI.
Assuming that the officer did err by having his finger prematurely on the trigger, does such justify criminal prosecution?
The short answer is no, it did not. Whomever suggested that Officer Norbits be charged with 'negligient homicide' needs to know that there is no such charge in ILCS.
What I find particularly ironic is that the "Obama is a secret Muslim who wasn't born in the United States and is secretly trying to institute socialism on America ZOMG!" crowd seems to have absolutely no problem dismissing glaring contradictions in this report. Of course it couldn't possibly be any sort of conspiracy to cover up the killing of Kiwane. After all, the government issued a report that says it was an accident! What else do we need?
Oh yeah, Boon, one more thing before I go. What about people like me who think the birther's are absolutely bat sh*t crazy, but also think the "ZOMG it's a giant police cover-up conspiracy!" crowd is fast approaching the same realm? I guess that makes me a boring (but sane) middle of the roader who prefers to operate under the rules of calm and rational thought all of the time instead of just some of the time.
I just wondering what the over/under is for the CM to throw the officer under the bus...Read the CM 6 points.. Which one of those would have made the slighest difference in this outcome? None of them. He hasnt made an important decision in 25 yrs and he is not about to make one now.
Question: If Kiwane's friend had pulled out a gun and shot both police officers dead, would people who are saying, "You live and die by the choices you make!" be singing the same tune?
It would be a horrible tragedy--just as this was a horrible tragedy. It's interesting when the blood lust only flows in one direction, though.
Do this and I assure you that 18 to 24 inches is a very conservative estimate.
Unless you account for the trajectory of the bullet described in the report. I quote:
Dr. Denton determined cause of death to be a gunshot wound of the left arm with reentry into the chest, with the direction of the wound to be left to right, front to back, and downwards.
So the gun had to be at least 24 inches to the officer's right of Carrington's left arm. So much for blading. Also, the bullet traveled on a downward trajectory, through the lungs and the heart and lodged behind the liver. That's one hell of an angle. Make it at least 24 inches to the right and probably at shoulder level (if not higher) with a steep angle downward.
Again, it seems clear that there are some pretty major contradictions in this report. But my bigger concern is with the general deference that is repeatedly given to police in this country. There was little doubt in my mind that Reitz would fail to prosecute because SAs almost never prosecute a cop. In my opinion, that is a really serious issue that needs to be addressed. If Kiwane's death can serve as motivation to solve that problem then he will not have died in vain.
When did we stop being a people responsible for our own decision/actions? This whole nanny-state victomization does not serve us well. Case in point. If we teach our children well these tragedies need not happen.
Again, where do you start? Who isn't being held responsible for his actions, Carrington or Norbits? And are you seriously claiming that outrage over the killing of an unarmed teen in this town is akin to "nanny-state victimization?" And now, on top of it all, we're supposed to teach our children to respect the authorities?
Unless you're talk about the president. Then it is fine to smear him to high heaven. Got it.
Yeesh.
Anonymous 7:25, you seem to be the expert on police training, and you claim:
Cops don't stand square to people. It's called standing bladed.
Yet, the report says:
“He reported that he and Carrington were facing each other, that he had his left hand on Carrington's shoulder, and his weapon in his right hand. He reported that he did not recall Carrington trying to reach for his weapon. Officer Norbits reported that he did not recall consciously discharging his weapon.”
So, which is it? Was he facing Carrington or was he bladed?
I think you are filling in information that is not there.
Was he facing Carrington or was he bladed
the two are not mutually exclusive. I face people all the time while standing bladed.
So the gun had to be at least 24 inches to the officer's right of Carrington's left arm. So much for blading. Also, the bullet traveled on a downward trajectory, through the lungs and the heart and lodged behind the liver. That's one hell of an angle. Make it at least 24 inches to the right and probably at shoulder level (if not higher) with a steep angle downward.
And there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll.
Again, it seems clear that there are some pretty major contradictions in this report.
Only in your mind.
Then he should have used the word bladed in his description -- or at least been clearer about his position. Maybe the report should have been clearer.
The point is: I can see why this report is being picked apart. The lack of clarity and inconsistencies are glaring.
The lack of clarity and inconsistencies are glaring
It's only glaring to people who have never conducted an investigation. If you would spend any time at all in that line of work, you would quickly come to realization that is no such thing as a perfectly "consistent" report. It's been proven in studies time and time again. Two people can stand side by side, witness the exact same sequence of events, and come away with two very different accounts of what happened. One person's 18 inches is another person's 3 feet. One person heard 'get on the ground' and the other heard 'go down on your stomach.' One person saw a light skinned black guy, another person saw a hispanic guy. etc...etc...etc....The fact of the matter is that if more than one person was involved, there will be differences in what they retained. In my opinion, you should really start questioning if two people told the exact same account down to the letter, or if two people's accounts are wildly different. You'll drive yourself crazy if you start getting caught up in the insignificant minutiae that have no real bearing on the case.
I went back through the posts to try to figure out how this thread devolved into a discussion about GSR distances. As usual, one comment was made that led to rampant speculation. Just remember that GSR distance testing, like most things, is somewhat subjective. In my opinion, it's unnecessary in this case (unless you're in the "ZOMG police coverup conspiracy!" camp). Here's an interesting link.
http://www.firearmsid.com/A_distanceResults.htm
I still don't understand why motive matters at all. It doesn't really matter how threatened the officer may have felt, etc. The officer shot and killed an unarmed kid. There's not really any way a human being could fail more colossally at their job. There are plenty of lesser ways that we can fail at our jobs without ill motive that are "honest mistakes" that would get us fired in a hot minute.
It doesn't really matter how threatened the officer may have felt, etc.
Wrong
There's not really any way a human being could fail more colossally at their job.
Wrong. It depends upon the circumstances
There are plenty of lesser ways that we can fail at our jobs without ill motive that are "honest mistakes" that would get us fired in a hot minute.
It depends upon the circumstances
Michael Fuerst
When a tragidy like this one happens we hope we can learn something from it. What is happening here in Champaign has been happening in Chicago for many years. I think I might have a pretty unique perspective on this situation having served as the Chairman of the Trnasition Committee of the Interagency Authority on Residential Facilities for Children. (1993-1997) The kids that transition out of the 65 or so Residential Treatment Facilites (like Cunningham Children's Home) are in many ways just like Kewani. One of the findings of the 110 page report that I submitted to Governor Edgar back in 1997 was that unless the young man or woman wanted to change the direction of his life, our limited resources were better spent on those that wanted to change. Over the last twelve years I have spoken to many youngsters who dodge bullets to get to Lincoln Challenge. I always ask the same question, and I always get the same answer on the question of why the young man or woman came. What was missing in their lives was "self discipline" and structure. This is very tough when 5 gernerations of single parent families count on government for their very survival. There is no supervision of these kids and the attitude of some toward the police is not helpful.
When I sat on Rick Winkel's Alternative School Legislative Committee, one my major suggestions was that every one in the Alternative School should have an Alternative Educational Plan with supervisors managing the progress. There is little supervision of the alternative students, no alterntive educational plans, and no outcry about this situation for kids just like Kewani.
The main problem is that there are no structured , safe living arrangements for these children. There are no residential dorms or structured residential living arraangments to speak of among the Community Colleges. By the time that most kids get to the point that Kewani was at the bridge was burned for the military as an option.
I never thought I would say this, but I think we are at the point where young man and woman should have a year of public service whether it is the army or the peace corp. If you drop out of school, you go immediately. The structure learned in that environment is not wasted. If you look at the long term cost of incarceration for kids who were going down the path of Kewani, you will conclude that it is certainly a better option than continuing on our present course.
"When a tragedy like this one happens we hope we can learn something from it."
Here's what I hope we learn from it: don't shoot unarmed teenagers to death and then wonder aloud how the hell your finger got on that dang trigger.
Thanks John for your thought out, reasoned opinion on how to keep this from happening in the future. Unfortunately the very next post is some dolt saying, 'just don't shoot him, duh.'
I don't think that people are saying, "Just don't shoot him, duh!" I would agree with much of what John Maloney said. Youth are perfect learners and when they have been taught negative lessons, the solution is to invite them to an environment where they have access to positive models. Personally, I'm merely arguing with the idea that responsibility is mono-directional. Furthermore, I'd argue that while a large part of the solution is a bouquet of skills being taught to youth so that they can act appropriately, most of the empathic posts on this thread calling for that solution tend to have been rebuffed by people who seem to almost delight in chastising an entire community that they do not see themselves as part of, and in such a way, are almost delighting in the death of a child. "It serves him right, etc." But this is not merely an individual failure (it is), nor a familial failure (it may very well be), it is a community failure and not just on the part of the people who look different from you or I. Ultimately, you have to ask yourself, "Am I more interested in ridding the streets of black/troubled/white/etc. youth and having a justification? Or am I more interested in BOTH keeping people alive and working with them to learn positive lessons?" It's not just the moral stance you take when a child is shot to death, it's more the daily decisions--it's not real profitable in this society to do this work. If the parents don't do it, are you willing to pay for it? Or are you just going to condemn kids to death because they had underskilled parents? Are you just going to throw up your hands and wonder why the black community doesn't do something because they happen to share a skin color with the youth (so much for "color blind")? Working with troubled youth is one of the most rewarding/difficult jobs in the world. Those of us who do so everyday HAVE been punched, had knife pulled on us, or at least been at the scene when shooting occurs. Pulling out a weapon and ending the situation is (thankfully) not an option for us. Will you give us the resources and support to do our jobs effectively or better yet join us? Or will you just pronounce that it's the family/community/child's own fault and frolic in their downfall?
The other point it keep in mind is the underlying truth that police are rarely, if ever, held accountable for their actions. My guess is that most of the commenters on this site haven't experienced racial/class profiling or police brutality. And thank God for that. But there is a segment of our community that knows first hand that a cop can break your civil rights in a heartbeat without any repercussions. This is a reality that shades a lot of the actions of people in this country.
Which is not to say all police are corrupt. On the contrary. I've known and interacted with many a cop in my day, both personally and professionally, and I have found most of them to be hardworking union folks (with those "platinum pensions") who are genuinely trying to make the community a safer place.
But the problem is that there are always cops who seem to be in the wrong profession. They have short fuses, they seem eager to verbally or physically engage a citizen who chooses to not follow their orders (like trying to forcibly make a 15 year old lay down in the mud). Cops who seem to genuinely dislike people, and occasionally step over the line and break the law.
There are no consequences for these people. Write a report? Tell your lawyer? Ask the judge? Come on. The system is loaded against the citizens and in favor of the police. That much is crystal clear.
And that is the real issue here, imo. Julia Reitz is hoping this issue will quietly fade away and people will move on. And she may be right. Maybe people will forget the name Kiwane Carrington and carry on with holidays as always.
But the overriding issue of deference to the police will not die anytime soon, even if everyone goes back to not caring about it anymore.
"I have found most of them to be hardworking union folks (with those "platinum pensions") who are genuinely trying to make the community a safer place. " I think those pensions are also agreed by the State, County,or City the police work for. Have you ever heard of collective bargaining??? or do you think the Cops go in with guns drawn demanding a pension??? If YOU are in a dead end job with no pension...sucks to be you!!!
The other point it keep in mind is the underlying truth that police are rarely, if ever, held accountable for their actions.
This is your opinion, not truth
My guess is that most of the commenters on this site haven't experienced racial/class profiling or police brutality. And thank God for that.
Your first guess which may actually be right. Only TodjaSo and B is for Business are allowed to thank dieties in this forum
But there is a segment of our community that knows first hand that a cop can break your civil rights in a heartbeat without any repercussions. This is a reality that shades a lot of the actions of people in this country.
Your suggestion could be applied only to those who do not have an established history of crimes against property or people, or possession of illegal substances. This would not apply to Carrington.
Which is not to say all police are corrupt.
At least you have made one correct observation
I've known and interacted with many a cop in my day, both personally and professionally, ......
And, of course, some of your best friends are black.
But the problem is that there are always cops who seem to be in the wrong profession. They have short fuses, they seem eager to verbally or physically engage a citizen who chooses to not follow their orders (like trying to forcibly make a 15 year old lay down in the mud). Cops who seem to genuinely dislike people, and occasionally step over the line and break the law.
All professions and occupations have people who should not be there.
Julia Reitz is hoping this issue will quietly fade away and people will move on.
Wrong. Rietz felt there was no reasonable chance for conviction.
But the overriding issue of deference to the police will not die anytime soon, even if everyone goes back to not caring about it anymore.
There will always be abuses when one group is in charge of controlling another. In fact there will always be abuses when a group or individuals have or can gain control of other persons or of assets. The need for divorces will also "not die anytime soon."
illinipunditposter
08:53 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said: If YOU are in a dead end job with no pension...sucks to be you!!!
You seem to consider a pension a civil right, even though many have not "lucked out" to fall into jobs with pensions, and even though there evantually will not be money to pay them. This has occurred in the auto, steel, and other industires--and will eventually happen in many state and local governments.
illinipunditposter
I've had to remove some comments this morning. If you had nothing to add to the discussion, please don't comment.
NG just now reporting that the FBI is now involved in the investigation for Civil Rights violations. Of course some people will not be happy even with that.
I'm happy to hear that. Can I get a second?
We as a community should be trying to improve the situation, and instead, we have calls to prosecute the officers for murder; suggestions that everyone, including the city and the STate police, are involved in some massive cover-up; a total lack of anything resembling personal responsbility on the part of those involved; and now the FBI. If the FBI comes back and says that this was an accident and that no civil rights were violated, will that satisfy people, or will we then hear accusations that the FBI is also engaged in the massive cover up?
The NG article says Finney requested it. Isn't that spesshul? Perhaps he knew it was coming and decided to request it so he could portray himself as having requested it as opposed to having it shoved down his throat.
Perhaps he knew it was coming and decided to request it so he could portray himself as having requested it as opposed to having it shoved down his throat.
Some people are never satisfied.
In a related story, Finney helps little old lady cross the street but only did it to try to sucker her out of her life savings....
ChampDweller I think Anon12:25 just answered your final question.
If Finney did something to help an old lady, you can bet that he was engaging in instrumental behavior as opposed to engaging in a selfless act.
Anyone who has ever been around this guy might understand.
This isn't a full investigation of the incident, only the question of Federal civil rights violations.
"The focus of this investigation by the FBI will relate specifically to federal civil rights violations. The investigation will not review the decision by the State’s Attorney."
However, I expect people will try to pass this off as "look, there was an external investigation, so everything Rietz did was found to be okay," even though her role was specifically excluded from the investigation.
I am unsure if Rietz' or Finney's employment should be terminated in result of the recent poor decision. I'm leaning toward Rietz' being fired.
I am unsure if Rietz' or Finney's employment should be terminated in result of the recent poor decision. I'm leaning toward Rietz' being fired.
Um, Rietz is an elected official.
Some of you would only be happy if the Rev Jackson did the investigation himself.
'
Then of course we would have to look into his finances just to make sure he was on the up and up too just to be fair........
"If you look at the long term cost of incarceration for kids who were going down the path of Kewani, you will conclude that it is certainly a better option than continuing on our present course. "
I'm trying to figure out how, 150 posts into this thread, somebody could butcher Kiwane's name so badly.
Um, Rietz is an elected official.
Don't let silly little things like facts get in the way of a good conspiracy, Wayward.
This isn't a full investigation of the incident, only the question of Federal civil rights violations.
The FBI does not have jurisdiction to investigate crimes arising under state law. It only has jurisdiction to investigate crimes arising under Federal law, as, for example, in the Mississippi Burning cases.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
http://www.danzanryu.com/interlimb.html
The interlimb link, abovem suggests that Norbits was badly trained, or that he disregarded his training. Finney is culpable in both situations - both as the person responsible for deciding how much training officers receive, and as the person who is responsible for detecting and correcting performance issues on the part of his officers.
http://www.danzanryu.com/interlimb.html
Spot on. It's not as fun as the police cover-up conspiracy, but hey.
Anonymous 5:27, that was an interesting link. Thanks for posting.
Involuntary contraction overrides the indexed finger position and forces a person to form a closed fist. When holding a firearm you finger will naturally move to the trigger and squeeze as part of a startle reaction.
Some of you would only be happy if the Rev Jackson did the investigation himself."
Who? I would bet that most of us questioning the police fully understand Rev. Jackson's complexities. I don't want bias from either side, I'd just like a society that wants to support kids who are neglected both by their parents and the greater community.
burglar= bad guy
and the law requires you to do what the police say. if you disagree, you disagree later in civil proceedings, not at that moment. Refusing ANY police order is resisting/obstructing and is illegal. The time to disagree is later with Internal Affairs. That is NOT Anti-american.
Yes you keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to pull the trigger.... However, there is sympathetic reflex response. If your right hand is squeezing something especially if there is some urgency to it, your left hand, although not being assigned a job, is also squeezing. I am sure many of you are trying this right now..... it will not work. It is a reflex, like when the doctor hits you in the knee. If you concentrate on your knee it will not move. It happens.
I'd just like a society that wants to support kids who are neglected both by their parents and the greater community.
Okay, let's take a look down that route. How do define "neglected," and troubled kids without stepping on thier or thier parents/guardians rights?. Remember we have those that claim "we raise our kids different." Could courses in civility or life skills be inserted in the general cirriculum so all are taught the same standards of behavior to avoid discrimination charges? It's sad that it has come to this, but if we truly want to take steps to avoid such tragedies in the future, what are some of your suggestions?
This may require a new thread Gordy.
Well, I know this isn't a great way to start a conversation as telling the other participants that they are ignorant is likely to just turn into a flame war, but I get the impression (and several brave posters were kind enough to admit this earlier in the thread) that many people don't have much conception of what a lot of youth are going through. I'm not talking about "we were a little poor". I'm talking about constant police harassment, constant gang harassment, lack of a curriculum that connnects to your interests, little or no parental support (in fact, in many cases familial abuse), etc.
So there's a huge class of youth that "are we treading on parental rights?" just isn't an issue.
That being said, once we acknowledge that reality, your question of where to draw the line becomes critical--as no parent is perfect. I would argue with our constitution, legal code, etc. we are constantly balancing the personal rights vs. needed societal norms every single day of our country's existence.
But the national debate has become foggy. We should probably start with a list of inalienable rights and see how education factors into ensuring each one even without familial support.
This would improve the political discourse too. Some disagreements are merely personal interpretation of facts that we likely will not resolve with debate. For example, if we differ on whether a fetus is a human being, it's not really worth spending a lot of time debating each other as we are both fighting for a kind of right to life/liberty, and we aren't likely to convince the other anything.
However, something like "right to citizenship" is easier, as we can define what priorities make up a good citizen, avoid recursion and illogic and we are probably going to get to about the same place. I mean I don't think anyone here judges the merits of a person overtly on their skin color or where they popped out of the birth canal.
Why has the News-Gazette taken down its link to the Carrington Report documents?
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
They didn't take them down, they just moved them.
"Dear Mayor Schweighart and Members of the Champaign City Council,
Champaign Police Chief Finney is free to to be on any side of any debate. However, when Finney is on duty as a public police officer, his wearing a U of I chief logo demonstrates a profound disregard and ignorance of issues of race that have confronted the CU community for two decades. Moreover, it rightly raises the question,whether Finney is fit to lead the Champaign Police Department and how his attitudes on race contributed to the killing of Kwame Carrington.
The African American community provided extraordinary leadership and was instrumental in bringing the Illinois mascot issue to its conclusion. The local NAACP led the national NAACP to unanimously vote to end the use of Native Americans as sports mascots. Finney's persistence in wearing the chief logo speaks loudly to his lack of the concerns of all communities for racial equity.
I request that you take all measures needed to inform Chief Finney and all public officers of Champaign of the inappropriateness of this apparel while working in the line of duty. Certainly, they would not dare wear a swastika in their public role and this is no different. Moreover, I request you consider whether someone with such a blatant disregard of racial justice can appropriately lead the Champaign's Police Department.
Thank you for your attention to this. Please keep me informed as to how you will respond.
Sincerely,
Stephen Kaufman
Urbana, IL"
This is really the last straw. The Chief likes the "Chief". Certainly the majority of students will now turn their backs as well. Hell, I heard him yelling ILL-INI once from a roof top. A couple of weeks ago he stood up at a game during half time during the three in one. I think he also drives a Toyota as a squad car, so he is also un-American. Rumor is that he eats meat at least five times a week, apparently he has no sympathy to animals or to vegans either. I DEMAND that all businesses and government agencies across the County stop wearing game day apparel and if allowed that it be approved by our moral manager Stephen Kaufman.
Another Glock AD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VNB7Z40w00
Steve-
That horse is dead. Get over it and then call the U of I and demand that everyone who owns a Chief logo jacket/hat/shirt, deliver them to you for you to destroy and make the world better.
Does anyone know if the District 10 ISP crime scene tech still has his office inside the CPD building?
Does Kaufman realize that the CPD uniforms don't have Chief Illiniwek logos on them?
Folks--this letter supposedly written by Kaufman may or may not be written by him. The reason I raise this question has to do with the fact that the child's name is misspelled, something I doubt that Kaufman would have done.
Pattsi Petrie
I assumed it was a NG LTTE, but it's not on their site. If it's a fake, I'll take it down.
The letter is from:
http://www.ucimc.org/
hmmm, John Maloney thinks that all kids coming out of Cunningham Childrens Home are criminals who get shot by racist cops Don't assume that all kids coming out of residential homes are just going to drop out of society. Some are decent law-abiding citizens trying to earn a living. Just because we came from broken homes and backgrounds does not mean our futures will be the same as our past.
That is definitely the rule but the fact that the gun went off does not necessarily mean that the officer had his finger intentionally on the trigger. It is well documented and there are numerous other instances of unintentional discharges where the finger was not intentionally on the trigger. Clenching the hand into a fist often occurs as a stress reaction. When that hand happens to be wrapped around a pistol and the stress of something like a physical confrontation occurs, the unintentional clenching of the hand into a fist can obviously cause the firearm to discharge.
...if his finger was in the trigger guard, yes. Which is the entire point.
The gun was tested, it was not malfunctioning. The trigger had to be pulled. Whether his finger was "intentionally" on the trigger is a separate question, fact is he pulled it. Intentional or not, the puller bears responsibility for that action. The next question needs to be, how can we prevent this happening again?
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Whether they "meant to" or not.
...if his finger was in the trigger guard, yes. Which is the entire point.
Let's ask officer Norbits.
On Page 18 of his statement he says:
"...[T]his is the part that is really driving me nuts. I mean, I been a cop for 15 years. I've got military experience and in the course of my 15 years I've been in a lot more stressful situations than this and had [my] gun out and that's why, you know, something happened that caused me to -- you know, the gun to fire."
Then on page 22 he says:
"You know, like I said, you've got your Chief of Police standing there saying, 'don't move or I'll shoot you' and in my mind he's seeing something that is, you know, bringing him to that level. Um, we didn't know if there were other people in the house. I'm worried, is there somebody in there with a gun who's gonna, who's gonna come out. Um, and then the fact that they simply weren't complying. I mean, yes, all of those factors definitely played into what happened".
...
"Specifically, I mean, I know we are trained to keep our fingers indexed [the index finger not on the trigger but extended along the barrel] and that was part of, you know, I've been in these situations before. I know that's where I am with it all the time."
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
Here's where Finney being an ___________ comes into the situation:
"You know, like I said, you've got your Chief of Police standing there saying, 'don't move or I'll shoot you' and in my mind he's seeing something that is, you know, bringing him to that level. Um, we didn't know if there were other people in the house. I'm worried, is there somebody in there with a gun who's gonna, who's gonna come out. Um, and then the fact that they simply weren't complying. I mean, yes, all of those factors definitely played into what happened".
If Finney wasn't such a _________, he likely would not have catalyzed Norbits' actions.
If Finney wasn't such a _________, he likely would not have catalyzed Norbits' actions.
This is how Officer Norbits described his arrival at the residence:
Officer Daniel W. Norbits of the Champaign Police Department was dispatched to a burglary in progress call in the 900 block of West Vine Street in Champaign. He arrived approximately 3-4 minutes after the call. He parked at the curb on Vine Street just west of Prospect Avenue. (Daniel W. Norbits Statement Transcript – page 3) Police Chief Finney had already arrived at the scene, had parked and was out of his vehicle and walking north along the east side of the house at 906 West Vine Street. Officer Norbits got out of his car and walked up the driveway to take up a position at the southeast corner of the house. (Norbits Statement – Page 4)
Trooper Lisa Crawley: OK. And then what happened after that?
Daniel W. Norbits: Then I see Chief Finney emerge along the fence and at this point I am on the southwest corner, sorry, southeast corner of the house and all of a sudden I see Chief Finney draw his gun and say, “stop or I will shoot you.”
LC: OK
DN: And at this point, I can’t see around the corner of the house.
LC: OK. So at this point you don’t see anyone except Chief Finney?
DN: Right.
The incident's tone was set by Chief Finney threatening the use of deadly force and it proceeded from that point.
Three Score and Ten Plus One
Keith Hays
Wow. That should the end of Finney. That's horrific.
That should the end of Finney.
At least the end of Finney going out on patrol
There is no basis for criminal charges against Finney or Norbits, but there certainly is a basis for departmental actiona against the the two and civil action against the department and/or city
illinipunditposter
So instead of de-escalating the situation, Finney intentionally escalated it, escalated it so much that even Norbits thought the kid was somehow a threat he couldn't see -- but the only threat was Finney's own mouth.
That is truly terrible news for Finney. That will be very, very hard to defend.
"So instead of de-escalating the situation, Finney intentionally escalated it..."
That's Finney for you.
I had a situation with this guy once. We were at odds, and kind of going at it - not in person, but communicating. I got tired of it and said, ok, I'll drop it because I've got better things to do than to argue with you. Instead of reciprocating, he proudly announced that he was going to not only continue the matter, but involve others. WOW, really? What a psycho.
Ask yourself, what would Andy Griffith do?
Not what Finney did, that's for sure.
Finney's actions were more Roscoe P Coltrain than Andy Griffith.
they are more Barney Fife than anything else.
they are more Barney Fife than anything else
Barney Fife didn't have malice. Finney seems to.
Finney's actions were more Roscoe P Coltrain than Andy Griffith.
Why can't police officers around here strive to be more like the ones on "Reno 911?"
"WOW, really? What a psycho."
Just imagine what happens once the City of Champaign has to get out that Mucho-Many-Dollar-Settlement-Check-Writin' pen.
Is it true that there were no ballistic tests done to trace the bullet in Kiwane to Norbits' gun? No fingerprints were done to confirm that the gun that fired the bullet found in Kiwane was in Norbits' hand?
Is it true that there were no ballistic tests done to trace the bullet in Kiwane to Norbits' gun? No fingerprints were done to confirm that the gun that fired the bullet found in Kiwane was in Norbits' hand?
I don't think there is any question about whose gun it was that fired the bullet, so no real need for ballistic tests to link bullet to gun.
Some here have poo-pooed the idea of gun shot residue tests. But this is a real issue. The results could provide some insiight into how close the gun was to Kiwane when it was fired. The coroner gave his "expert" opinion, but that is pretty subjective, while GSR is less so.
Much, much more importantly and kind of shocking in terms of what seems not to have been done or even discussed so far is whether any residue tests were done on Norbits' hand and, vice versa, on Kiwane's hands. There has been a constant attempt by both CPD, the News-Gazette, and Ms. Rietz to portray Norbits' gun as simply "going off" - as if the gun had a mind of its own. Tests on the hands of those involved and/or near the gun at the time it fired can prove rather conclusively who had possession of the gun when it was fired.
It seems that some people/organizations want to leave that issue ambiguous. That's not only sloppy work, that is substantially less than what the public should expect from public officials. This is ONE of the many issues that the FBI needs to look into. If the victim/shooter situation was the other way around in this case, it's just about a slam dunk this particular test would've been done. CPD and Ms. Rietz would certainly want to prove that the gun was in Kiwane's hand if Norbits was the one who was shot.
so finney set the tone of the situation by yelling the i'll shoot you threat. but for the actions of finney, norbits probably wouldn't have come into it with his guns blazing.
finney may also set the tone around the police hq. this would account for the belligerent stance of the pd with regard to like everything they come in contact with.
why is this guy still around?
Mucho-Many-Dollar-Settlement-Check-Writin' pen.
Do they store that in the same cabinet as the bottle of deed-recordin' whiskey?
they're gonna hafta sell the whisky to pay for the check.
Talking about this with some friends last night, general sense is that this is easily a million-dollar settlement, and that's going to come right out of the general budget. The only real questions is how many millions, and when the check gets written.
I hear the sound of a resume being dusted off.
why is this guy still around?
Because he has an employment contract with the city
""why is this guy still around?
Because he has an employment contract with the city""
WHen does it expire?????
WHen does it expire?????
Why don't you research the question yourself and tell us
illinipunditposter
Who are we talking about Finney or Carter. Finney doesnt have a contract. He is at at will employee and can be canned at anytime....
something the football team should look at./.....
Very interesting Focus 580 yesterday, 14 Dec, 10A on the topic, American Homicide with Randolph Roth, Ph.D., Professor of History, The Ohio State University, as the guest. The reason for posting this information in this thread has to do with Professor Roth's explanation/analysis as to homicide and the design of guns along with the fact that the USA outshines all other countries in this statistic.
Pattsi Petrie
Well gosh! how is it that you and some friends sitting around would have any inkling about settlement amounts in cases like this, or any cases actually? There are so many nuances involved in this sort of thing, that it seems unlikely that a few friends sitting around would be able to unravel all of that with any certainty this soon after a lawsuit was filed. Perhaps the city administration should just give you a call to get the specifics so they can just write that check and avoid a messy legal battle. Also wondering how you know that any settlement will "come right out of the general fund"?
Who needs a dust free resume ?
"how is it that you and some friends sitting around would have any inkling about settlement amounts in cases like this, or any cases actually"
Let's just say that I have my reasons, and I didn't pull my low-seven-figure settlement estimate from a Cracker-Jack box. Your mileage may vary, but if you're honest it won't vary much.
"so finney set the tone of the situation by yelling the i'll shoot you threat."
If you look at CPD policy, or most police policy on use of force, you will notice that a warning should be given if force or deadly force is to be used if tactically possible. It appears that Finney was following policy with the threat of force given the facts of a burglary in progress, three reported burlgars and two failing to stop as they approached him. Every officer has to evaluate his own reason to use force, they can't use anothers threat of force as a reason "just to go in blazing". Neither indicated that they used deadly force and the threat of force is not the use of force.