Just months ago the country was shocked by the news that an unarmed woman was killed by police after she called them to her neighborhood to investigate what she suspected to be a sexual assault.
The woman was a native of Australia and engaged to an American man, and living happily in the United States. This good Samaritan, Justine Ruszczyk Damond, heard the cries of someone she thought was a victim and ran outside, still in her pajamas to try and lend aid.
When police arrived, Officer Mohamed Noor shot past his partner, the driver, and killed Damond.
Damond’s shooting has come under additional scrutiny because not only were the officer’s actions completely unwarranted, his background begs the question if there was a deeper motive.
Noor, as one could guess based on his name, is a devout Muslim, an immigrant from Somalia. While officers find themselves in many confusing situations, one relative constant is that women who call in assault charges usually aren’t the assailant, however, Noor shot her, as she stood on the street, before he even got out of his car.
The investigation into this horrible shooting has come to a screeching halt, according to Fox News, and the prosecutor has a few ideas as to why.
The evidence that he would have had access to, has been denied him and Noor is exercising his 5th amendment rights, 100% of the time when it comes to information about the shooting:
“A prosecutor in Minneapolis on Wednesday blasted investigators involved in the probe of the police-officer-involved shooting death of an unarmed Australian woman in July.
Mike Freeman, the Hennepin County attorney, said he doesn’t have enough evidence to charge Somali-born Officer Mohamed Noor, who shot Justine Ruszczyk Damond in an alley behind her home.
Damond had called 911 to report a possible sexual assault. As she approached the squad car, Noor fired from the passenger seat, across his partner, and through the driver’s window.”
The huge issue with him being a Muslim is that it’s well known Muslims will always be loyal to their religion first, before the law and to their brothers before the innocent. While no one is willing to break the politically correct barrier and say this, the question that should be on everyone’s mind is whether Officer Noor felt threatened by Damond, or whether he felt Damond was threatening something else he wanted to protect.
Let’s think about what Damond was doing; she was reporting what she believed to be a sexual assault, something that Muslim men are known to do and overlook or even condone when it’s done by others. Let’s think about it like this; if you’re someone who’s been brainwashed into thinking that these Western women are asking for it, or that the aggressor is probably being falsely accused, it would be pretty easy to justify shooting another, immodestly clad (in her pajamas, remember) Western busybody who was trying to get some “innocent” rapist in trouble for putting a woman in her place.
Is that really what was going through Noor’s head? We have no idea, but it’s something that Islam might have no problem with, if he were to do it in the name of religion. If Noor continues to keep quiet, we might not ever know, but this is for sure a huge risk when we put our safety in the hands of those who are loyal to a violent religion before they’re loyal to the laws of their country.
Because of Noor’s complete silence, along with a lack of promised evidence, prosecutors have no way of finding the truth in this case, and it’s frustrating a lot of people. Here’s more from our source about the roadblocks standing in the way of prosecutors:
“‘I’ve got to have the evidence. And I don’t have it yet. And let me just say, it’s not my fault,’ Freeman said in a video that was posted on Facebook. ‘So if it isn’t my fault, who didn’t do their jobs? Investigators and they don’t work for me. And they haven’t done their job.’
Freeman didn’t name the investigators or their agency, but the state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension is leading the investigation. The BCA turned the case over to Freeman in September. The bureau issued a statement Thursday saying it continues to work with Freeman’s office.
Freeman had previously said he expected to make a charging decision by the end of the year. His office acknowledged the video Thursday and did not dispute its authenticity.
‘We are working diligently on the case to complete the investigation as soon as possible,’ the statement said. ‘Beyond that, we cannot comment at this time.’
Freeman indicated that Noor’s refusal to speak had put prosecutors in a difficult position.
‘I have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, (that) the moment he shot the gun, he feared for his life. And he used force because he thought he was gonna be killed,’ Freeman said. “But I can’t. He won’t answer my questions because he doesn’t have to, OK? We all have Fifth Amendment rights, and I respect that. So I can’t talk to her because she’s gone, and the other cop just gave us some (expletive), OK? So guess what? I gotta figure out angles of the shot, gun residues, reckless-use-of-force experts.”
‘He won’t answer my questions because he doesn’t have to, OK? We all have Fifth Amendment rights, and I respect that.‘”
Minneapolis attorney Bob Bennett, who represents Damond’s relatives in Australia, told MPR he was concerned but not surprised by Freeman’s comments.
‘I hope that the BCA [Bureau of Criminal Apprehension] hasn’t so irretrievably damaged the evidence, or failed to recover evidence that should be reasonably expected to be recovered at the time that the crime occurred,’ Bennett said. ‘And I use the term ‘crime’ pointedly and intentionally.’
Noor’s attorney, Thomas Plunkett, told MPR that he was concerned by Freeman’s remark that having enough evidence to make a charging decision would be ‘the big present I’d like to see under the Christmas tree.’ He also said the job of investigators is to gather evidence, not create it.
‘No lawyer wants their client placed under a Christmas tree as a present to a vocal segment of the community. That said, this case is about an officer that follows procedure and training,” Plunkett said. “This led to the death of a very fine person, which is a horrible tragedy, but not a crime.’”
Is it not a crime because of our laws or the laws that his client ascribes to, i.e. Sharia law? This is a question that every person in this country, officer and citizen should be able to answer correctly if they want to remain free in this country.