It’s been half a year since a member of the Capitol Police Force shot and killed Ashli Babbitt on January 6. And still, the name of the officer who shot her has not been disclosed, nor has the public received any explanation as to why this officer shot an unarmed woman, nor has anyone explained why the shooter was cleared of wrongdoing, as has been reported.
Why not? Why shouldn’t such information be released? It’s true that the Capitol Police Force is controlled by Congress, not by any municipal government. But that shouldn’t matter. Its officers should be just as accountable to the public as members of any police force. They aren’t private contractors. We pay their salaries, just as we pay the members of Congress.
The Babbitt family is seeking answers. Congress has exempted its police force from Freedom of Information Act requests, so the family is suing the D.C. Police “for documents that identify the officer who shot Babbitt … as well as notes and summaries of what the officer said regarding the shooting and the reasons he discharged his weapon.”
The D.C. Police led the investigation into the Babbitt shooting, so it has the documents. A court hearing is set for September 3. Judicial Watch also is suing for the records.
Why should the officer who killed Babbitt be entitled to more secrecy — greater protection from publicity — than, say, Garrett Rolfe who killed Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta or Paul Huynh, Darcy Klund and Jason Schmitt, the three officers who shot Dolal Idd in Minneapolis? In the latter case, the police department made public the personnel files of all three officers.
There are, indeed, standards of conduct that apply, and police officers must be held accountable if they don’t adhere to them. In addition, there must be transparency. It will not do to withhold from the public the officer's identity, an explanation of why he shot and killed Babbitt and why he was cleared of wrongdoing by the force.
FULL STORY