After Days of Demonstrations, the Majority of Protestors’ Demands Remain Unmet
by Guest Contributor MEL BUER
Signs piled up outside of the police headquarters one night three of the four day protest in response to the police killing of Kenneth Jones. Image credit: Adam Ortega
Members of the community and activists from Omaha and Lincoln demonstrated for four days last week after the police killing of Kenneth Jones on November 19th.
The protestors started with three demands: name the officers involved in the shooting, release the unedited body cam footage of the incident, and start an independent review board to investigate the incident and any others with transparency and clarity. To this date only the first demand has been met.
Each night protestors met a line of officers around Omaha Police Headquarters and launched a verbal assault on officers standing on the patio. Protestors did speak with some officers, making moral arguments to the police for the release of the footage. One night, Kenneth Jones’s family joined activists in pleading for the footage to be released.
In a press conference last Monday, Chief of Police Todd Schmaderer focused on the officers’ use of force in the incident, giving a timeline of events leading to the killing of Kenneth Jones. From the time that the traffic stop occurred to the time Jones was fatally shot was 67 seconds.
Chief Schmaderer included selected still shots from bodycam and cruiser footage on the night of the 19th. Information about Kenny’s felony record and the presence of PCP in the car was also included, though officers would not have had this information while conducting the traffic stop that led to the deadly shooting.
By Nebraska state law, all “officer involved shootings”, must go to a grand jury. Thus, citing tainting of the grand jury pool, Chief Schmaderer declined to release the bodycam footage and referred to a revised Nebraska statute (Revised Statute 29-1407.01) that outlines the grand jury process for officer-involved shootings. This statute says in part:
“Law enforcement personnel from the jurisdiction in which the death occurred shall immediately secure the scene, preserve all evidence, and investigate the matter as in any other homicide. The case shall be treated as an open, ongoing matter until all evidence, reports, and other relevant material which has been assembled are transferred to a prosecuting attorney…”
The terminology may be unfamiliar unless you hold a law degree. An “open, ongoing matter” means that the information is not public record. There is no requirement to make the information public, but it is also not explicitly restricted. The law is clear that in a grand jury proceeding, information that could be used as evidence cannot be made public after the grand jury has been called. The statute cited by OPD does not, however, specifically restrict public disclosure of information related to the case before a grand jury prosecutor has been assigned to the case. This is what legal experts call a gray area in the law and in cases like this, it is left up to individuals and groups to interpret the law and then determine how they will proceed.
Knowing this, protestors continue demanding the body cam footage to be released. At Monday night’s protest after the news conference where selected still photos were shared instead of the raw bodycam footage, one demonstrator yelled, “Today wasn’t good enough!” They were referencing what they considered a disappointing response to the public pressure on the part of the police chief.
Protestors marched from the police headquarters into the Old Market aread of Downtown Omaha carrying signs asking simply, “Why OPD”?
Image Credit: Emily Chen-Newton
NOISE submitted an inquiry to Police Chief Todd Schmaderer regarding OPD’s use of Statute 29-1407.01 in this investigation. If their interpretation of the statute restricts the sharing of body cam footage before the Grand Jury convenes, then wouldn’t it also restrict the sharing of selected still photographs, the discovery of PCP in the victim’s clothes, and the victim’s criminal history?
NOISE asked for an explanation of OPD’s interpretation of this Nebraska Statute and how it might allow for the release of the information put forth at the news conference, but not the body cam footage. In an email, Lieutenant Sherie Thomas responded that, “The Chief sufficiently addressed that during the press conference. He explained that releasing the still photographs was his best option to be transparent as possible.”