Article is for subscribers, but yahoo has a version up with ads (if one doesn’t have an adblocker, that is)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/yes-minneapolis-prosecute-ice-shooter-224628104.html

If they conclude that state law has been violated, the question is: What next? Contrary to recent assertions from some federal officials, states can prosecute federal officers for violating state criminal laws, and there is precedent for that.

Although federal officers do have immunity in some circumstances, that protection applies only if their actions were authorized under federal law and“necessary and proper” in fulfilling federal duties. When federal officers violate federal law or act unreasonably when carrying out their duties, they can face state charges.

States have a long history of prosecuting federal officials for allegedly using excessive force on the job. And when federal courts agree that the force may not have been legally justified, they have allowed the state prosecution to proceed.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    103
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    If they conclude that state law has been violated

    I’m not an expert in Minnesota law, but I am pretty sure murder is illegal there.

  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    2 days ago

    Also, from what I saw she was complying with the commands to clear the road.

    Not that brownshirts would realize why that’s a stupid game to play.

    • Null User Object@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m thinking terrorism, but I’ll settle for whatever sticks and makes all of these traitors reevaluate their life choices.

    • Tedesche@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      You can’t charge anyone but the murderer with felony murder charges.

      • y0kai [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule

        The rule of felony murder is a legal doctrine in some common law jurisdictions that broadens the crime of murder: when someone is killed (regardless of intent to kill) in the commission of a dangerous or enumerated crime (called a felony in some jurisdictions), the offender, and also the offender’s accomplices or co-conspirators, may be found guilty of murder.[1]

        • Tedesche@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Okay, I admit that’s an interesting fact I wasn’t aware of. However, based on the Wikipedia article you linked to, I seriously doubt one could expect the charge to hold up against ICE superiors. It might work to charge the other officers that were there when the woman was killed, but I would bet charging anyone absent of the direct event would be deemed too remote.

          • y0kai [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            Case law in the US has at least one example of someone being convicted of felony murder simply for letting another person borrow their car with no other significant connection to the case.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Holle

            In the early morning hours of March 10, 2003, after a night of partying, Holle lent his car to his friend and housemate William Allen Jr.[1] Allen drove three men to the home of Christine Snyder, where they took a safe containing approximately 1 pound (454 g) of marijuana and $425.[3] During the burglary, one of the men, Charles Miller Jr., used a shotgun found in the house to strike and kill Jessica Snyder.[1][3] Holle was about 1.5 miles (2.4 km) away at the time.[1]

            John Oliver has a great segment on how fucked up this law is: https://youtu.be/Y93ljB7sfco

            That said, you’re right in that it is highly unlikely any of the higher-ups will be held responsible.

            • Tedesche@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Nor should they be under this type of charge. I’m sure there are other charges that can be brought against them though.

      • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yes you can and it happens all the time. A getaway driver in a bank robbery gets charged just the same as the guys shooting people inside the bank.

    • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 days ago

      If they don’t there will be a problem.

      There is already going to be a problem I suppose but if they can’t even do the minimum it will be worse

  • neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 days ago

    And when federal courts agree that the force may not have been legally justified, they have allowed the state prosecution to proceed.

    Ah, see, here’s their loophole. They’ll just get the SCOTUS to say that states cant prosecute federal officers.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      They have to claim the force was legally justified. They have to say out loud that it’s ok to walk up to a car just trying to get out of the way, stick your gun through the window against the side of someone’s head and murder them.

      The most horrifying part of that video for me is just how calm everyone is. No one is in danger, no one is at risk, there’s not some “fog of war”, it’s just a masked gunman calmly walking up em to a citizen and straight up murdering them, then calmly walking away.

    • nforminvasion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m just waiting for the “daddy trump is allowed to do everything and anything he wants and no one can stop him” ruling.

      They so clearly want to do it, just tear off the bandaid so we can get this show started. I hate sounding like an accelerationist but this slow fade into full fascism is convincing enough for libs to think were we’re just in a bit of a rough patch, and not that the liberal democracy era of America is over and dead.

      • AlecSadler@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Agreed, like boiling a frog. Rip the bandaid off and let’s get those guillotines out. We’re either going to zero or we’re ending up with heroes.

  • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    Former U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger explained that both the U.S. Attorney in Minneapolis and the Hennepin County Attorney could investigate the case. However, it would have to be determined that the agent’s actions were “unreasonable” before any action can be taken.

    “There is no burden on the federal agent to prove anything,” said Heffelfinger, who was the U.S. Attorney for Minnesota from 1991 to 1993 and from 2001 to 2006. “It’s a criminal case; therefore, the burden of proof is on the prosecutors.”

    https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/ice-in-minnesota/can-a-federal-agent-be-charged-by-the-state/89-9295f921-bdb6-46e9-b14b-9d0ccbb6d318

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well, yeah but that’s always the case. That’s like saying it’s the offense’s job to move the ball down the field.

      They mentioned a Ruby Ridge case where the sniper who killed some people was tried in state court. It was approved by the State (appeals? supreme? not sure) court to go ahead, but even that took a couple of years.

  • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    So Americans still believe cops can go to jail for shooting people? This explains why the law never changes. You can’t fix a problem if you don’t know it exists.

      • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, there was also an office convicted for shooting a guy that was sitting on a couch, in his own apartment, eating ice cream. There are shootings and then there are shootings. Can you find an example when officer was convicted for shooting someone driving a car in his direction?

        • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          You mean you want to state a new misrepresentation then have me research support against it?

          No.

          • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Ok, forget about the car. Take the shooting of Daniel Shaver. There was a body cam footage and he was shot while crawling on his arms and knees on the floor, unarmed. He was shoot because he got confused by conflicting orders shouted a him by two cops and for a second looked behind him. The cop was found not guilty by the jury. Philando Castile was shot when reaching for his documents after he was told by the cop to get his documents - acquitted by the jury. Yes, in some cases when the shooting is absolutely out of this world outrageous the cop will get convicted. If there’s a tiniest sliver of justification (he was holding a sandwich, he reached for something, she moved) it’s pretty much impossible to convict a cop in US. In this case there’s way more than enough to acquit the ICE agent.

      • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Lots of delusion around here recently. People really believe Trump will resign because of Epstein files, AOC will be the next president and all ICE agents will end up in jail.