Ruling on Cleveland police chase questioned
CLEVELAND — A lawyer for families of men killed in separate 2012 shootings by Cleveland police — including a 137-bullet chase under federal investigation — is questioning a grand jury's role in a recent county prosecutor's ruling.
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty announced that Cleveland Patrolman Roger Jones acted lawfully when he fatally shot 20-year-old Kenneth Smith of Euclid in March 2012.
“Officer Jones did what an officer is trained and expected to do when faced with dangerous criminals firing weapons. He fulfilled his duty,” McGinty wrote in a letter to Cleveland police Chief Calvin Williams that accompanied release of his legal ruling.
Jones “correctly and heroically took action to protect the safety of the citizens of Cleveland,” McGinty said.
Attorney Terry Gilbert represents Smith's family in a wrongful death lawsuit against Jones and the city that could be affected by the ruling.
“To say that he (Jones) was heroic, and that he did a service to the citizens of Cleveland, is insane, based on what we know,” Gilbert told public broadcasting station WVIZ.
Gilbert said a Cuyahoga County grand jury didn't hear from some key witnesses, including the investigator of Smith's shooting and Jones himself. Gilbert said it is unclear whether the panel received charges from McGinty to vote on, which is standard practice.
Cleveland's police department has been dealing with the fallout from a Nov. 29, 2012, chase that involved five dozen cruisers and wove through residential neighborhoods, onto Interstate 90 and ended with gunfire in East Cleveland. Officers fired 137 shots.
Both victims were black, and no weapon was found.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.