webGuinée
Actualité courante
Mort de Amadou Diallo à New York City

Excerpts From Remarks by the District Attorney

New York Times — April 1, 1999

Following are excerpts from the statement by District Attorney Robert T. Johnson after the arraignment of four police officers in the Diallo case:

In the early morning hours of Feb. 4, 19 of 41 bullets fired at Amadou Diallo ripped into his body as he stood blameless, unarmed and defenseless in the vestibule of his building.

Today, after a seven-week investigation, I am announcing that a Bronx grand jury has charged defendants Kenneth Boss, Sean Carroll, Edward McMellon and Richard Murphy in a three-count indictment with the intentional and reckless murder of Mr. Diallo by pistol shots, and the reckless endangerment of those inside the building into which they fired. . . .

Some have asked why, as part of that investigation, my office did not question the four defendants, who are New York City police officers, about what happened to Mr. Diallo.

Implicit in the question is the view that the officers, as public servants, should have to explain their actions.

Of course, police officers have the same constitutional right to remain silent as anyone else, and the same privilege to retain an attorney.

Thus, while my staff actually sought to speak with the officers on the morning of the shooting and thereafter about what occurred, we had no right to compel them to say anything at all.

Similarly, while each had the opportunity to testify before the grand jury and to present an exculpatory version of the facts, the law is clear that no one can be compelled to testify without giving him complete immunity from prosecution.

However, having chosen not to waive immunity and present their versions, these police officers cannot reasonably claim, as some have suggested, that their conduct should automatically be excused merely because they are police officers.

They simply cannot have it both ways.

Regarding the charges, the grand jury indicted the defendants for two counts of murder in the second degree, the highest degree of murder legally applicable under the circumstances.

The first count charges that the defendants, acting together, intentionally killed Mr. Diallo.

This simply means that their conscious purpose at the moment they fired was to cause his death.

Under New York law, it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove, before the grand jury or at trial, that the defendants had any particular motive for the killing, or that they planned or "premeditated" it in any way.

The second count basically charges that, regardless of intent, the defendants recklessly caused Mr. Diallo's death under circumstances demonstrating a depraved indifference to human life.

In a similar vein, the grand jury indicted the defendants for one count of reckless endangerment in the first degree.

This count charges basically that the defendants also demonstrated a depraved indifference to the life of any person inside the building into which they were shooting, and that the shooting recklessly created a grave risk of any such person's death.

If convicted of murder, the defendants face imprisonment for a maximum term of life.

If convicted of reckless endangerment, they face imprisonment for a maximum term of seven years.

I recognize, as others do, that the death of Amadou Diallo has a context larger than the facts of this case.

Feelings of fear and frustration abound.

Troubling questions have been raised, particularly in communities of color but certainly not limited to them, regarding police/community relations, civil liberties and the issue of respect.

Questions have also been raised about public safety.

All of us cherish the reduction in crime, and none of us wants it to go back up.

These questions must be addressed. Certainly we need law and order, but we should not have to sacrifice the freedoms they are designed to protect.

Let us be clear, however, that the indictment filed in this case involves charges against four individuals for killing one unarmed person and jeopardizing others. As District Attorney, that is the case I will prosecute, as fairly, forcefully and effectively as I can, respectful of my obligations to do justice.