Officer Noor Might Never Answer for the Shooting Death of Justine Damond


Mohammed Noor, a black immigrant police officer, killed a white woman looking for police help and he might never have to answer for it thanks to a loophole in the law and political correctness.

To give a little background, Officer Mohamed Noor, the first Somali-American policeman in the 5th Minnesota police district, shot a white Australian woman named Justine Damond at near-point blank range. It was weeks before she was to marry.

She became a victim after she reported a possible rape in the alleyway beneath her window. She called 9-1-1 and when the officers arrived, she went up to the police car in her pajamas. Within seconds, Noor shot her to death from the passenger seat of the police vehicle.

Shooting from inside the vehicle was a violation.

No one knows why he did it. His partner gave a statement but it wasn’t very enlightening. Allegedly he said she hit the side of the car or they heard a loud noise.

That being said, there might be no justice for the meditation therapist who was killed because of a loophole in the law and because Noor is the first Somali-American in the 5th precinct. The first can be proven, the second can’t, but we know both to be true.

Noor has refused to give a statement and he is allowed to refuse. When internal affairs gets around to interviewing him, he will have to give a statement if he wants to keep his job. However, the statement will not be available to investigators of the killing. Apparently that means there might be no repercussions, although he might be fired. Let’s hope so. This is his fourth violation in three years and there is a lawsuit against him.

The Garrity Warning is law in Minnesota, and it means that public employees under internal investigation are given the option to provide information or face disciplinary action.

“Because you are being required to provide information under the threat of disciplinary action, the information you provide, and any evidence resulting from the information you provide, cannot and will not be used against you in any subsequent criminal proceeding,” the warning reads.

As a result, Noor’s refusal and his subsequent statement will very possibly mean that he will never have to answer for her death in this very strange case. He might be innocent and there might be an explanation, but why won’t he tell us what it is?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments