Capitol Police officer who shot Ashli Babbitt formally exonerated

The investigation further determined that Ms. Babbitt was among a mob of people that entered the Capitol building and gained access to a hallway outside “Speaker’s Lobby,” which leads to the Chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives. At the time, the USCP was evacuating Members from the Chamber, which the mob was trying to enter from multiple doorways. USCP officers used furniture to barricade a set of glass doors separating the hallway and Speaker’s Lobby to try and stop the mob from entering the Speaker’s Lobby and the Chamber, and three officers positioned themselves between the doors and the mob. Members of the mob attempted to break through the doors by striking them and breaking the glass with their hands, flagpoles, helmets, and other objects. Eventually, the three USCP officers positioned outside the doors were forced to evacuate. As members of the mob continued to strike the glass doors, Ms. Babbitt attempted to climb through one of the doors where glass was broken out. An officer inside the Speaker’s Lobby fired one round from his service pistol, striking Ms. Babbitt in the left shoulder, causing her to fall back from the doorway and onto the floor. A USCP emergency response team, which had begun making its way into the hallway to try and subdue the mob, administered aid to Ms. Babbitt, who was transported to Washington Hospital Center, where she succumbed to her injuries.

The focus of the criminal investigation was to determine whether federal prosecutors could prove that the officer violated any federal laws, concentrating on the possible application of 18 U.S.C. § 242, a federal criminal civil rights statute. In order to establish a violation of this statute, prosecutors must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the officer acted willfully to deprive Ms. Babbitt of a right protected by the Constitution or other law, here the Fourth Amendment right not to be subjected to an unreasonable seizure. Prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so “willfully,” which the Supreme Court has interpreted to mean that the officer acted with a bad purpose to disregard the law. As this requirement has been interpreted by the courts, evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent required under Section 242.

The investigation revealed no evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully committed a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. Specifically, the investigation revealed no evidence to establish that, at the time the officer fired a single shot at Ms. Babbitt, the officer did not reasonably believe that it was necessary to do so in self-defense or in defense of the Members of Congress and others evacuating the House Chamber. Acknowledging the tragic loss of life and offering condolences to Ms. Babbitt’s family, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and U.S. Department of Justice have therefore closed the investigation into this matter.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/department-justice-closes-investigation-death-ashli-babbitt

She was an insurrectionist forcing her way into a session of Congress. Shooting her was a service to all of us

Joseph Cristofaro:

Not surprised that in this case you're not BlUe LiVeS MaTtEr...

You say that it wasn't justified - and say that there were 'riots' deadlier.

Babbitt tried to break through to enter the hallway where members of Congress were being evacuated. She ignored LE calls to stop which is when the officer who shot her shot a single shot.

In regard to BLM protests, as has been stated repeatedly on this forum, 93% were peaceful. There 220 that were classified "violent demonstrations" were defined as: "including “acts targeting other individuals, property, businesses, other rioting groups or armed actors.” Their definition includes anything from “fighting back against police” to vandalism, property destruction looting, road-blocking using barricades, burning tires or other materials. In cities where protests did turn violent—these demonstrations are “largely confined to specific blocks" by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED) who analyzed the 7,750 BLM demonstrations in al 50 states and DC from May 26 - Aug 22 2020. The toppling of statues was included as "violent incidents."

You cannot compare BLM protests, even the ones that turned into riots, to the attempted insurrection at the Capitol on Jan 6. Jan 6 was an intentional direct attack on a constitutionally protected process IOT deter the certification of the election, as well as attacking or trying to attack members of Congress and threats to kill the VP. BLM protests, again largely peaceful, was a movement demanding an end to systemic racism and police brutality that plagues LE. The protests did not frequently turn violent either. Whereas the main goal of the Jan 6 attack WAS nothing but violence. Also, those most prominent among BLM distanced themselves from those rioters and the provocateurs. They did not align with them. They did not say they were "loving" and "hugging each other" nor say it was akin to a "tour visit." And a lot of the violence that did happen in those 220 violent incidents were generally the result of provoked and unprovoked confrontations with police during city imposed curfews when the peaceful protesters had gone home.

Police shoot unarmed people all the time and even when they are committing no crimes. I don't know why you're trying to compare Babbitt to anything else because there's literally no comparison. At all. But I'm not surprised that you are.