Connect with us

News

No Charges Against Cop Whose Conduct Led to Oscar Grant’s Death

According to the New York Times, O’Malley released a report saying that Pirone, who was removed from the BART police force in 2010, will not be charged because he neither killed Grant nor aided and abetted Johannes Mehserle, who was convicted of manslaughter in a Southern California court in 2010.

Published

on

Oscar Grant Mural at Fruitvale BART station

The family of Oscar Grant was disappointed with the decision by the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office to decline to press charges against the former transit police officer whose conduct led to Grant’s shooting death on New Year’s Day in 2009.

Nancy O’Malley, who had agreed to review the conduct of officer Anthony Pirone in October and perhaps file charges against him, made the announcement on Tuesday morning in response to pressure brought by the Grant family last month.

According to the New York Times, O’Malley released a report saying that Pirone, who was removed from the BART police force in 2010, will not be charged because he neither killed Grant nor aided and abetted Johannes Mehserle, who was convicted of manslaughter in a Southern California court in 2010.

“Although Pirone’s conduct was aggressive, utterly unprofessional, and disgraceful, it did not rise to the mental state required for murder,” O’Malley said in a statement.

It was Pirone who responded to a fight on a BART train carrying passengers from New Year’s Eve celebrations. Bystanders recorded the encounter using their cell phones and witnesses also described Pirone’s encounter with Grant. Pirone pulled Grant from the train violently, struck him for no reason and was heard using racial epithets while kneeling on Grant’s neck as Grant lay face down.

Once Grant was able to place his hands behind his back, Mehserle shot him and claimed the shooting was an accident having intended to use his Taser to restrain an already cooperating Grant who died a few hours later. His death set off mass protests in Oakland.

“In view of everything we have considered — and reconsidered — we conclude that we cannot prove Pirone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” O’Malley said. “We condemn Pirone’s conduct but we cannot charge him with murder or any other crime.”

The family of Oscar Grant had hoped for justice because the report about Pirone had recently been released after nearly 10 years.

That report placed much of the blame for Grant’s death on the “actions of Officer Pirone,” which “started a cascade of events that ultimately led to the shooting of Grant.”

“In view of everything we have considered — and reconsidered — we conclude that we cannot prove Pirone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” O’Malley said. “We condemn Pirone’s conduct but we cannot charge him with murder or any other crime.”

A misdemeanor charge of assault under the color of authority was also ruled out now because the statute of limitations had expired.

Oscar Grant’s mother, Rev. Wanda Johnson, and other family members had hoped for a different outcome, given the revelations of the report. “My son laid on the cold concrete with that Officer Pirone’s knee on his neck,” she said. “My son’s head was smashed against the wall and he was kicked and he was pushed. Pirone still walks around free today.”

BART board members and Oakland City Council members also did not take the news well, condemning O’Malley’s decision and calling upon her to reconsider.

“I want to be clear that Nancy O’Malley has failed, yet again, to do her job,” Simon said at a Tuesday morning news conference. “And that job was to ensure equal justice under the law.”

Simon, Bevan Dufty, Janice Li and Rebecca Saltzman planned to urge the full BART board to file a resolution urging O’Malley to charge Pirone.

“The D.A. could have a change of mind and the BART board should go on record that there cannot be justice until Mr. Pirone is held accountable for his violence and creating the chaos that led to Oscar Grant’s murder,” Dufty said.

District 6 Councilmember Loren Taylor planned to introduce a resolution calling on O’Malley to charge Pirone. It was co-sponsored by City Council President Nikki Fortunato Bas, and councilmembers Carroll Fife and Treva Reid.

Grant’s family will also continue to pressure O’Malley who did agree to a meeting next week.

“We will leave no stone unturned,” said Grant family attorney Charles Bonner. “We will go to the state Attorney General and we will also go to the federal justice department to seek federal criminal prosecution for civil rights violations, and we ultimately will go to the voters if Nancy O’Malley does not do the right thing.”

The Root, New York Times, Bay Area News, Bay City News, Associated Press, KTVU-News and Miami Herald were sources for this report.

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of January 8 – 14, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of January 8 – 14, 2025

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

Supreme Court Decision Confirms Convicted Felon Will Assume Presidency

NNPA NEWSWIRE — In a 5-4 ruling, the court stated that Trump’s concerns could “be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal” and emphasized that the burden of sentencing was “relatively insubstantial” given that Trump will not face prison time. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberal justices in the majority, with four conservative justices dissenting.

Published

on

By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent
@StacyBrownMedia

The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected President-elect Donald Trump’s emergency request to block criminal proceedings in his New York hush money case, ensuring that a sentencing hearing will proceed as scheduled on Friday. The decision makes it official that, on January 20, for the first time in its history, the United States will inaugurate a convicted felon as its president.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court stated that Trump’s concerns could “be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal” and emphasized that the burden of sentencing was “relatively insubstantial” given that Trump will not face prison time. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberal justices in the majority, with four conservative justices dissenting.

Trump was convicted in May for falsifying business records related to a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg argued that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to intervene in a state criminal case, particularly before all appeals in state courts were exhausted.

Trump’s legal team claimed the sentencing process would interfere with his transition to power and argued that evidence introduced during the trial included official actions protected under the Supreme Court’s prior ruling granting former presidents immunity for official conduct. Merchan, the New York judge who presided over the trial, ruled in December that the evidence presented was unrelated to Trump’s duties as president.

Prosecutors dismissed Trump’s objections, stating that the sentencing would take less than an hour and could be attended virtually. They said the public interest in proceeding to sentencing outweighed the President-elect’s claims of undue burden.

Justice Samuel Alito, one of the four dissenting justices, confirmed speaking to Trump by phone on Wednesday. Alito insisted the conversation did not involve the case, though the call drew criticism given his previous refusals to recuse himself from politically sensitive matters.

The sentencing hearing is set for Friday at 9:30 a.m. in Manhattan. As the nation moves closer to an unprecedented inauguration, questions about the implications of a convicted felon assuming the presidency remain.

“No one is above the law,” Bragg said.

Continue Reading

Activism

Barbara Lee Launches Campaign for Mayor of Oakland

“At this critical moment, we must not be a city divided, but a community united,” she Lee. “If elected I will bring my hands-on leadership, new ideas and decades of experience in identifying billions in resources for our great city, so all residents and businesses are stronger and safer and our community has optimism and confidence in Oakland’s future.”

Published

on

By Post Staff

Barbara Lee on Wednesday morning formally announced her candidacy for Mayor in Oakland’s April 15 special election.

“Time and time again, Oaklanders have faced our toughest obstacles by uniting to meet our challenges,” said Lee.

“At this critical moment, we must not be a city divided but a community united,” she said. “If elected, I will bring my hands-on leadership, new ideas, and decades of experience in identifying billions in resources for our great city so all residents and businesses are stronger and safer and our community has optimism and confidence in Oakland’s future.”

“As Mayor, I’ll address our homelessness crisis, prioritize comprehensive public safety and mental health services, and lead with fiscal responsibility to deliver the core City services residents and business owners deserve. Let’s do this – together.”

“I’ve never shied away from a challenge,” said Lee. “I’m always ready to fight for Oakland.”

Watch her campaign video here, which is online at BarbaraLee4Oakland.com

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.