we are following some breaking news in a police deadly force case that made nationwide headlines. this afternoon in cleveland officials announced a grand jury returned no indictments after investigating last year s police shooting of a 12-year-old boy. tamir rice had a pellet gun outside of a recreation center, but a dispatcher sent police to the scene without telling them that rice was a juvenile or that his gun may not be real. he was shot and killed seconds after officers arrived. by close examination, especially of what is perhaps the most critical piece of evidence, a very recent enhancement of the surveillance video by an expert laboratory often relied upon by the fbi, it is now indisputable that tamir was drawing his gun from his waist as the police slid toward him and officer loman exited the car. i want to bring in cnn correspondent jean casarez now. this obviously was key this newly enhanced video when it comes to this decision.
events on that traumatic day had unfolded differently. she was broken up and z it s very hard. we explained this was a difficult decision also but that to charge police even a situation which was undeniably tragic as the death of her son, the state must be able to show that the officers acted outside the constitutional boundaries set forth by the supreme court of these united states. sumplly put, given this perfect storm of human error, mistakes and communications by all involved that day, the evidence did not indicate criminal conduct by police. only close examination of critical evidence, a very recent enhancement of the surveillance video by an expert laboratory often relied upon by the fbi is now indisputable that tamir was
traumatic day at the rec center unfolded differently. she was broken up and it s very hard. we explained to her that this was a difficult decision also but that to charge police even in situation what was as undeniably tragic as the death of her son, the state must be able to show that the officers acted outside the constitutional boundaries set forth by the supreme court of these united states. simply put, given this perfect storm of human error, mistakes and miscommunications, by all involved, that day, the evidence did not indicate criminal conduct by police. on close examination, especially of the most critical piece of evidence, a very recent enhancement of the surveillance video by an expert laboratory often relied upon by the fbi, it is now indisputable that tamir
evidence which he said influenced the decision not to file charges. on close examination, especially the most critical piece of evidence, a very recent enhancement of the surveillance video by an expert laboratory often relied upon by the fbi, it is now indisputable that tamir was drawing his gun from his waist as police slid toward him and officer lowman exited the car. it is now indisputable because this has been up for dispute since the beginning. yeah. here is your quick guide. that s not true. it s not indisputable. there s the video. you can enhance it all you want. it is at best murky. you can make the argument when it s murky, tie goes to the officer and this was a gun that did look realistic. you could make that argument. i think the prosecutor there, you know me when there s both
it, i want to play another snippet of what the prosecutor said about what ended up being a major factor in the grand jury s decision. here it is. on close examination, especially of what is perhaps the most critical piece of evidence, a very recent enhancement of the surveillance video by an expert laboratory often relied upon by the fbi, it is now indisputable that tamir was drawing his gun from his waist as the police slid toward him and officer loman exited the car. what s gained by laying out all of the information like this? well, according to the prosecutor, to be fair to him, what he is arguing is providing more information than usual, opening up the process for people to see. indeed, i outloined some of what s unusual and critique it for. he would say the only reason is because he s sharing more of the information. now, again, in fairness and fairness to the officers, we