Tamir Rice: Scientific Analysis Shows Shooting Was Unjustified and Officer Statements Are Inaccurate
- December 5, 2015
Rice Family Releases Additional Expert Reports in Response to Enhanced Video and Officer Statements
On December 4, 2015, the attorneys for Tamir Rice’s mother, sister, and estate administrator released three expert reports analyzing the enhanced video stills, which Prosecutor McGinty’s office released on November 28, 2015, and the statements of Officers Loehmann and Garmback, which the prosecutor released on December 1, 2015. Two of these are supplemental reports by Roger Clark and Jeffrey Noble, whose original reports were provided to the prosecutor on November 27, 2015. The third report is by Dr. Jesse L. Wobrock, who has a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from UCLA and has testified as an expert in biomechanics and kinetics hundreds of times all over the country.
Read Roger Clark’s Supplemental Report here.
Read Jeffrey Noble’s Supplemental Report here.
Read Dr. Jesse L. Wobrock’s Report here.
Read the letter to Prosecutor McGinty enclosing the expert reports here.
Scientific Analysis Demonstrates that the Officers’ Statements Were Misleading or Untruthful
Dr. Wobrock’s report applies the science of biomechanics and kinetics to analyze the enhanced video stills just recently released by the prosecutor.
Based on this scientific analysis, Dr. Wobrock concludes:
- Officer Loehmann shot Tamir Rice within less than 1.0 second of exiting the vehicle.
- The toy gun was not visible to either of the officers prior to the shooting and the video shows that at no point in his encounter with the police did Tamir Rice reach into his waistband.
- Tamir Rice’s hands were in his pockets when he was shot.
- The movement of Tamir Rice’s elbow and shoulder in Frame 123 is Tamir responding to being shot.
Under Clear Supreme Court Law, the Officers must be Cross-Examined or Subject to Contempt
Earlier on December 4, 2015, the Rice family attorneys sent a letter to Prosecutor McGinty explaining that, under well-established law, by reading their self-serving statements to the grand jury this week, the officers waived their Fifth Amendment privilege and are now required to answer questions on cross-examination. They need to be recalled before the grand jury and compelled to answer questions on cross-examination or held in contempt.
Read the letter to Prosecutor McGinty here.
Newsday Reports on ECBAWM Religious Rights Case
- January 22, 2024