Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Cause of Capitol Cop’s Death Unclear
Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick died in the aftermath of the rioting at the Capitol on January 6. Shortly thereafter, it was widely reported that Ofc. Sicknick had been murdered by rioters, with the specific claim being that he was hit on the head with a fire extinguisher.
A CNN story last week (here) casts doubt on this narrative. This article is the source of the information and quotes below. It is annoying that the article, in its opening sentence, describes the riot as an “insurrection.”
CNN correctly reports that the Capitol Police released a statement (here) about Ofc. Sicknick’s death on January 7, stating that he had died at approximately 9:30 p.m. on January 7. Note that this is the day after the riot, and more than 24 hours after order had been restored. The police statement stated:
Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots on Wednesday, January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol and was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed. He was taken to a local hospital where he succumbed to his injuries.
The injuries and details were not specified.
The CNN article generally relies on unnamed sources, but states the following (emphasis added):
- “Authorities have reviewed video and photographs that show Sicknick engaging with rioters amid the siege but have yet to identify a moment in which he suffered his fatal injuries, law enforcement officials familiar with the matter said.”
- “To date, little information has been shared publicly about the circumstances of the death of the 13-year veteran of the police force, including any findings from an autopsy that was conducted by DC’s medical examiner.”
So far, this details an absence of evidence, which is somewhat disappointing in the circumstances. But then comes the kicker:
According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true.
One possibility being considered by investigators is that Sicknick became ill after interacting with a chemical irritant like pepper spray or bear spray that was deployed in the crowd. But investigators reviewing video of the officer’s time around the Capitol haven’t been able to confirm that in tape that has been recovered so far, the official said.
The case could also be complicated if Sicknick had a preexisting medical condition. It could not be learned if he did.
This report raises significant concerns for me — especially the indication that the autopsy did not find signs that Ofc. Sicknick sustained any blunt force trauma. Again, these are anonymous sources, so we should have some skepticism. On the other hand, the report runs counter to the Legacy Media narrative on the Capitol riot, and given CNN’s bias against President Trump, I am inclined to find these reports more credible.
CNN’s bias, by the way, is indicated by the repeated use of the word “insurrection” to describe the Capitol riot. Notice that my terminology is not biased, or at least I don’t think that it is. If I were playing the Legacy Media’s game, I would call it a “protest” rather than a “riot.”
This is yet another example of the importance of avoiding a rush to judgment. Media reports, and early reports from police authorities, often turn out to be wrong.
I think that it is important that we not jump to conclusions, either based on initial reports or this more recent report from CNN. It may turn out to be the case that Ofc. Sicknick died as a result of injuries sustained in the riots. But perhaps not. This is why autopsies are important, and careful investigation is important.
Wokeism delenda est.
Published in Policing
Drew,
If you read my Comment more carefully, you will see that
Note that
My apologies. It sounded like you were saying only Jerry was worth listening to, and the other sources that were brought up had to be dismissed because they were on the internet.
I don’t think that Mark ever said that only I am worth listening to.
The sentiment is probably correct, but Mark didn’t say it. :)
Drew,
Thank you very much for clarifying why you wrote as you did. I understand your response now. (And I’m glad that you didn’t find my comment obnoxious. For almost a year it has seemed that the entire world has gone insane. It has made me cranky.)
You’ve only been cranky for a year?! Amateur!
OK, crankier.
Verdict first. Trial later.
I heard somebody suggest today that maybe the reason the D.C. Police will not reveal who the shooter was is because he is a Black Male. If that turns out to be the case, their whole narrative is shot to hell.
I don’t remember that from the video I saw.
Could you see the officer?
Yeah, I thought so. I’ll have to go back and find it again. Unless it’s been scrubbed.
I remember a middle-aged white guy in a suit. It was an aggressive shooting.
This is why it’s important to have access to the autopsy process and the way it’s reported, so you can make sure that the autopsy conforms to the narrative. You need to have some leverage over the people who do it, and over their supervisors.
It depends on how quickly you can force a rush to judgment, though. If you can incite the mob to act quickly enough, and can just suppress the report in the meantime, it doesn’t matter so much what’s found out in the end.
You mean like a “business suit”?!
From P. Byrne’s story, chapter 5. It doesn’t not look like the guy in the suit who shot Babbit.
***
“Interestingly, while the identity of the policeman who shot the unarmed female protester in the throat has been guarded by the media, there are reports that this is he:
This would be a bombshell if true! I didn’t entertain the idea seriously when I first heard it. We’ll have to wait and see. They can’t hide his identity forever.
Yes, it would mean BLM was on both sides of the partition. If that doesn’t sound like a set-up I don’t know what would.