 |
| David S. Matthews, Administrator of the Division of Criminal Investigation is leading the investigation of the killing of Tony Robinson, 19-years-old |
Update: WISC News: "The Dane County Medical Examiner says 19-year-old Tony Robinson suffered firearm trauma to his head, torso and right arm."
Just had to shoot this young man to death, right? White police shooting young, black men to death, a common occurrence in the United States, provokes outrage but not surprise.
---
Updated: The Wisconsin Attorney General is Republican Brad Schimel, former district attorney of Waukesha County (R-White People) and a dedicated partisan who was elected last year on a campaign devoid of civil rights activists and criminal justice reformists.
Schimel leads the Wisconsin Department of Justice.
During Schimel's predecessor's tenure the DoJ became so deeply immersed in partisan activity any semblance of trust in its objectivity was destroyed.
In the investigation into the police killing of Tony Robinson under 2013 Wisconsin Act 348, Brad Schimel's election changes nothing.
Former attorney general J.B. Van Hollen is gone, replaced by Schimel earlier this year.
No organization headed by a Wisconsin Republican these days, especially the DoJ, brings to Wisconsin citizens cause for trust.
Heading up the investigation into the police killing of Tony Robinson is not a civil rights activist, a turgid UW-Madison law professor, investigators from the Innocence Project, or an investigative counsel like a modern-day John Doar, Bill Dixon or Hillary Clinton.
The man in charge of providing answers to the Robinson family, friends and Wisconsin is: David S. Matthews, Administrator of the Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI).
Matthews was appointed to his current position by Van Hollen in 2012.
The DCI, charged with investigating the killing, is described by Anne E. Schwartz, Director of Communications and Public Affairs of the Wisconsin Department of Justice as a "division of full-time, sworn, professional, veteran law enforcement investigators," in an email.
Veteran law enforcement investigators investigating a killing by a veteran law enforcement officer. The whole point of Act 348 is to have objective, external investigations into police-involved shootings.
Trust is all the Wisconsin people have to go on in this matter, and if truth be the objective, trust in these matters in Wisconsin is for fools.
 |
| Black Lives Matter, in Wisconsin not so much |
It's up to the Dane County District Attorney to decide the cop's fate. The Dane County District Attorney is an African-American Democrat named Ismael R. Ozanne. Mr. Ozanne ran against Brad Schimel for the office of Wisconsin Attorney General in 2014. How does Mr. Ozanne being the ultimate decider of how to proceed with punishment of Officer Kenny fit into the racist conspiracy theory?
ReplyDeleteMr. Smardza,
DeleteWhy would you discuss the ethnicity of D.A. Ozanne? What possible relevancy can you assert to the determination of whether probable cause exists in this matter?
As for the Republican-led state DoJ, I repeat that the Dept has damaged its credibility and trust because of past corrupt action and the fact Wisconsin has the worst record in the nation on incarcerations of blacks (I offer links to two projects of DoJ corruption). 1. http://malcontends.blogspot.com/2008/10/wiscpolitics-recording-shows-van-hollen.html 2. http://malcontends.blogspot.com/2014/10/no-voter-id-ruling-is-bodyshot-to-scott.html .
Even after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked Wisconsin's Voter ID law aimed at obstructing blacks from voting in last November's election, former AG Van Hollen disseminated false information saying, Wisconsin will "have voter ID on election day," a false statement repeated across the state, and a statement that Van Hollen knew to be false, assuming he can read a Supreme Court order—a fair assumption.
A few fact errors. D.A. Ozanne did not run against Schimel. Ozanne ran in the Democratic primary, not the general election.
With respect to your foolish talk of "racist conspiracy theory," this is your invention. Your implying that Mr. Ozanne's action in office is influenced by the color of his skin is ludicrous.
Finally, Mr. Ozanne's office does not determine the "punishment" of Officer Kenny [who is innocent in the eyes of the law and rightfully so, absent a conviciton] but rather whether cause exists to bring charges, a standard that is high and should be high in a Constitutional democracy.