Unarmed black granddad killed by cop, in shades of Ferguson

Following high-profile officer-related shootings in South Carolina and Missouri, critics are pushing for more transparency into how, when, and why police officers use deadly force against unarmed Americans.

Columbia County (Ga.) Sheriff`s Office/AP/File
Earnest Satterwhite poses for a booking photo, Feb. 18, 2013. Satterwhite was shot and killed in his own driveway by a white police officer in South Carolina, in February.

The case of an unarmed black grandfather shot to death in his own driveway by a white police officer in South Carolina has fueled demands for more transparency into cases where unarmed civilians are killed by police.

Police have confirmed that North Augusta Officer Justin Craven shot and killed Ernest Satterwhite in February, but have refused to release details about their investigation.

The lack of transparency into Mr. Satterwhite’s death and Mr. Craven’s culpability has raised hackles in the black community.

Such tensions have intensified since the Aug. 9 police shooting of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., where unrest still simmers as residents demand the arrest of the officer.

The two incidents cut to a stark fact of US policing: Namely, that a real and sometimes perceived lack of transparency from police fuels distrust – which in turn raises the stakes for officers on the beat.

Indeed, given a recent increase in officers dying in ambush attacks, “I’m afraid it might become a default response for officers to have their guns drawn and maybe react a little more quickly,” says Thomas Aveni, a veteran police officer and executive director of the Police Policy Studies Council in Spofford, N.H.

The handling of the incident involving Craven stands in stark contrast to another case in the state from earlier this month. South Carolina Highway Patrol decided to release video last week that shows state Trooper Sean Groubert, who is white, telling a black motorist to get his license and then shooting him when the motorist reaches into his own car. The trooper was fired and brought up on felony assault charges.

US police shoot and kill an average of 1,000 people a year, 1 in 4 of whom are unarmed, according to data from Mr. Aveni and the FiveThirtyEight blog by Nate Silver. Seventy-nine officers have died so far this year, 35 from gunshots, according to a nonprofit group called the Officer Down Memorial Page.

Detailed information about police shootings is often scant. It’s also exceedingly rare for a police officer to be charged in such a shooting, largely because the US Supreme Court has said officers must be judged by whether their use of force is "objectively reasonable" in the full context of events. And many police departments are hesitant to release piecemeal information because it might taint a jury pool.

It’s also worth noting that grand jury proceedings, in which charges are considered, are characteristically closed-door events.

“[I]t is impossible to easily tell in any given situation, whether the officer was found at fault, whether race or mental health issues were factors, whether the shooting was avoidable or whether innocent bystanders were struck by gunfire,” writes John Monk of The State newspaper in Columbia, S.C.

In the Craven case, prosecutors and police have refused to provide documents requested by the Associated Press and answer questions from the news organization about the details of their investigation. According to AP, prosecutors sought a voluntary manslaughter felony charge against the officer. But a grand jury instead indicted him last month for "using excessive force and failing to follow and use proper procedures" – a misdemeanor.

Craven is now on paid administrative leave from the force.

After Satterwhite pulled into his own driveway at the end of a nine-mile slow-speed chase, witnesses said Craven rushed toward Satterwhite’s car and shot him twice in the chest after he claimed Satterwhite reached for his gun. Satterwhite had a history of refusing to stop for police, but police had no record that Satterwhite had ever been violent.

Black leaders in South Carolina are among those demanding faster and more complete release of information from police. “If there’s nothing to hide, what’s the big deal?” state Rep. Joe Neal (D), who is black, told The State.

“Openness can help," agrees Aveni. But he adds, “What police are concerned about is looking dishonest if they step forward too soon” with information that’s not fully vetted.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Unarmed black granddad killed by cop, in shades of Ferguson
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today