Police

Minneapolis Cop Finally Charged for Killing Unarmed Woman Who Merely Surprised Him Last Summer

County attorney blames uncooperative police for the delay.

|

Mohomed Noor
Hennepin County Sheriff's Office

Former Minneapolis Police Officer Mohamed Noor has now finally been charged with shooting and killing Justine Damond last July after the woman had called the police to report a possible rape.

Noor faces third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter charges. He has turned himself in and has been booked into jail with a $500,000 bail. He faces a potential prison sentence of 25 years.

Damond's shooting ended up as international news last summer, as she was a dual citizen of the U.S. and Australia. The case symbolized to the world the trigger-happy behavior we've come to see in many American police. The incident took place not long after a jury found a police officer not guilty of manslaughter in the shooting death of Philando Castile, also in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area.

Here's what officials say happened: Damond called 911 to report somebody possibly being raped our assaulted behind her home last July. Noor and his partner, Matthew Harrity, inspected the alley behind her home in their patrol car. They found nothing, and apparently were backing out of the alley when Damond surprised them in their vehicle by possibly thumping on the car on the driver's side. Harrity, who was driving, reacted with surprise, and reached for his gun. But Noor apparently beat him to the punch, reached across, and shot Damond in the abdomen.

Neither men had their body cameras on at time, but both turned them on immediately after the shooting. Here's how County Attorney Mike Freeman described Noor's snap decision to shoot Damond:

Freeman said the investigation of the shooting uncovered no evidence that Noor "encountered, appreciated, investigated or confirmed a threat that justified the decision to use deadly force."

"Instead, officer Noor recklessly and intentionally fired his handgun from the passenger seat, a location at which he would have been less able than officer Harrity to see and hear events on the other side of the squad car," Freeman said.

The shooting showed evidence of "a depraved mind," as the charges are defined, and "culpable negligence," Freeman said, though he acknowledged that proving that to a jury is "a daunting task."

It took so long to charge Noor, Freeman explained, because police refused to cooperate with the investigation. Even though he had previously said he would no longer go through secret grand juries to charge police with crimes because he wanted to improve transparency over the process, he said he had no choice this time because police refused to talk. The union responded that the officers were merely advised of their rights. Something to remember next time a police officer asks you questions.

As Noor prepares for his court appearance, we unfortunately have another questionable police shooting playing out in Sacramento. On Saturday police shot and killed Stephan Clark, 22. Clark was suspected by police of breaking into cars, and officers were responding to a 911 call about it. He fled from police, and when they cornered him, police claim he turned toward them and advanced on them, holding an object in front of him. He was shot 20 times by two police officer. Then it turned out the object he was holding was a cellphone.

The two officers were wearing body cameras and as per city policy enacted in 2016. The footage of the shooting will be eventually released so the public will be able to see the circumstances of Clark's shooting.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

54 responses to “Minneapolis Cop Finally Charged for Killing Unarmed Woman Who Merely Surprised Him Last Summer

  1. Quick, Fist, now’s your chance!

  2. Good thing its called murder rather than mucduc. Arrrggghhh they ready to prosecute this ex-cop.

  3. “…though he acknowledged that proving that to a jury is “a daunting task.”

    Why should it be in this case? I don’t get it.

    “..It took so long to charge Noor, Freeman explained, because police refused to cooperate with the investigation.”

    Naturally.

    1. Because the jury is going to have to sit in a courtroom for probably weeks with a pack of Noor’s buddies staring at them.

      1. Nah, I’m sure they’ll let them go home, so the police can just stare at them and their family.

    2. It is a daunting task because police officers are actually held to a standard of innocent until proven guilty. Unlike the rest of us who have to prove our innocence.

      1. Like Tom Lehrer sang: “when something moves, you shoot!”

  4. Freeman said the investigation of the shooting uncovered no evidence that Noor “encountered, appreciated, investigated or confirmed a threat that justified the decision to use deadly force.”

    Since when is any of that necessary? All one of our brave domestic street warriors for justice has to do is feel scared and spraying some lead is perfectly okay.

  5. “Instead, officer Noor recklessly and intentionally fired his handgun from the passenger seat, …”

    What does it do to your ears firing a gun inside a car?

    1. WHAT?

    2. Depending upon how close the gun was to the driver it could cause permanent hearing damage. At the very least it’s constant ringing for a while and a nasty headache or two.

      1. Heck, the officer who fired is lucky he didn’t hit the driver, his partner. Shooting from the passenger seat across the interior of the car is a really awkward shooting position.

  6. We need to find a way to attract a better class of person to law enforcement.

    Better educated, better trained, with better temperament, better accountability, better judgment, better transparency, better oversight.

    1. “Obviously, the solution for the problem of Muslims in Africa having ten kids is for them to move to Minneapolis where their kids’ can get diversity jobs with guns.” – Steve Sailer

    2. Hmm, maybe we can offer to pay more and increase benefits? That seems to be working well so far.

    3. Stop making them the revenue raising arm of local governments would be a great first step, as would getting rid of victimless crimes.

    4. People like that do indeed become police officers. They are quickly forced out by the depraved sadists who don’t tolerate human beings among their ranks.

    5. “We need to find a way to attract a better class of person to law enforcement.”

      The problem isn’t that it’s hard to attract the right kind of people, the problem is avoiding the wrong people.

      The problem is that any kind of position of authority inherently attracts those with the type of personality prone to abusing any authority they have.

    6. We need to find a way to attract a better class of person to law enforcement.

      We don’t have any problems attracting good people to law enforcement in small town America.

      The problems with bad law enforcement seem to be focused on leftist-run inner cities. And it’s obvious why: why would anybody want to subject themselves to that kind of abuse and that kind of danger?

      1. Is this comment based on your thorough research of the available data? Because it sounds a bit like nonsense that reinforces your existing biases.
        During the civil rights era, horrific acts of violence were routinely conducted by members of law enforcement in small towns that could not accurately be described as liberal. Today, police violence continues – albeit with a less obviously racist tenor – to be perpetrated by police departments in suburban & rural communities. Today’s partisan divide is largely irrelevant to LEO abuses. Both parties currently support hiring more police, giving them more money, expanding a wide variety of criminal offenses. Neither party has an appetite for reforming law enforcement despite minority movements in both parties (libertarians in the right, BLM on the left).
        Bipartisan reform coalitions have failed for a variety of reasons, however the inability for activists to set aside partisan concerns for critical issues is among them. Why show up to a BLM protest & let folks there know that there is a drive on the right to stop state sanctioned murder when you can make a clever insult about “progs” on the internet instead? when bipartisan laws are passed, they are overwhelmingly statist in design & impact – e.g. Opiod & gun “crisis” laws, which together will ensure that the next generation of Americans remains as familiar with jails, prisons & out of control police as this generation.

    7. But it’s you commies that insist on the “affirmative action” and lowering of standards, so that we can hire more “people of color” into these highly stressful jobs.
      Your kind needs to shut up when such things as this occur, because the arguments you make could result in better hiring practices, that focus on merit – something your average affirmative action hire is lacking in.

      1. Your whingeing about affirmative action implies that you think there is a high intellectual or physical standard to become a police officer. I have seen no evidence to corroborate your belief.

  7. Neither men had their body cameras on at time, but both turned them on immediately after the shooting.

    Apparently not the type that continuously records and saves the prior 30 seconds after activating them, I guess.

    1. Even if they were that type, all the officers have to do is wait at least 30 seconds after the shooting to activate the cameras. Immediately after does not mean instantly and they could even by ling about the timing.

  8. Noor faces third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter charges. He has turned himself in and has been booked into jail with a $500,000 bail.

    Noor must be loaded and a huge flight risk for the judge to have arrived at that number for bail.

    1. Noor must be loaded and a huge flight risk for the judge to have arrived at that number for bail.

      It’s possible he could represent a threat to himself and others.

      1. Well, we’re pretty sure he represents a threat to others.

    2. That’s gotta be one scared dude if they’re afraid he’s going to flee . . . . to Somalia.

      1. In all seriousness, that may be the flight risk they’re thinking of.

      2. All the roadz lead to Somalia.

  9. The footage of the shooting will be eventually released so the public will be able to see the circumstances of Clark’s shooting.

    They need to find someone with mad photoshop skills before they release the video.

    1. Sadly, they really don’t.

  10. “Even though he had previously said he would no longer go through secret grand juries to charge police with crimes because he wanted to improve transparency over the process, he said he had no choice this time because police refused to talk.”

    So it’s only cops’ lack of cooperation which forced the prosecutor to respect Noor’s constitutional right to a grand jury?

    Anyway, if secrecy and lack of transparency is the problem, publish grand jury transcripts, and let the grand jury examine evidence submitted by the general public – to make sure the prosecution doesn’t withhold anything.

    Also bear in mind that the grand jury *is* the public, and they represent a defendant’s last chance before trial to have his case reviewed by ordinary citizens.

    And given the prevalence of plea bargains, if a grand jury doesn’t hear a suspect’s case, then he’ll probably never have his case heard by any kind of jury at all.

    1. Also bear in mind that the grand jury *is* the public, and they represent a defendant’s last chance before trial to have his case reviewed by ordinary citizens.
      You’re guaranteed a fair hearing, unless, of course, you are a ham sandwich.

  11. As the Noor prepares for his court appearance

    Racist?

    1. He meant “the Moor.”

  12. Harrity began CPR, with Noor taking over afterward. Paramedics arrived at 11:49 p.m. but Damond died at the scene of a gunshot wound to the abdomen.

    At which point they removed the handcuffs.

  13. Not to worry. The DA will find excuse after excuse to postpone the trial until it is out of the news, and then drop the charges.

  14. He was shot 20 times by two police officer. Then it turned out the object he was holding was a cellphone.

    It might have been a Samsung Note7…

    1. It was a 45 cal Smith & Wesson Samsung….the most powerful cell phone made…

  15. This is not just another “cop gone bad” episode. The police officer in question, was a Muslim immigrant who was hired because of affirmative action.

    1. That shows the wisdom of importing force-initiating MYSTICAL berserker fanatics. Where besides Minnesota do they do that and then ISSUE THEM A LOADED GOVERNMENT GUN?

  16. Hey, nice job adding in an unrelated shooting to ride the coattails of this obviously unjustified one!

    Too bad that one appears (so far, at least) to be a dude actually committing a crime and then confronting the police.

    Other than that they’re totally the same!

  17. The Clark story is incorrect. The cops were looking for a guy breaking into cars, Clark was in his backyard and the cops shot him in the back because he was holding a phone.

  18. Izzit just me or is this guy a photoshopped version of the cretin who shot a bunch of people in Texas? At least in Texas, victims shoot back–ESPECIALLY if the perp is named Mohamed!

  19. The Muslim cop (Noor) of course regards women as lower than dogs. That is the way it is in the Islamic religion. The Libertarians support Islam because of Islam’s emnity toward the Jews. TheLibertarians foolishly think the enemy of my enemy is my friend (even thoughJews aren’t the Libertarians enemy, though Libertarians are generally antisemitic).

    There’s no need to fear. Underzog is here.

  20. Will the prosecution figure a way of blowing the case? One wonders.

  21. Stoned dogs are extra dangerous. Good shoot.

  22. Didn’t the US Supreme Court rule that defenders of the realm may liquidate commoners who make them nervous or threaten them in any way? Don’t tap on their squad car window. “Attempts to get our attention will be met with deadly force.”

    I once had a cop sneak into my place of business, point a gun at my back, and whisper “Freeze” or something like that. I turned around and said “What?” Fortunately, I lived to tell the tale.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.