DJ Hrubes Case Reveals a Number of Flaws

   It sometimes seems so impossible to keep up. I open Facebook tonight to learn of a police use of a weapon on a 10-year-old Black child.

   Back in June.

   DJ Hrubes. Police were chasing through the community looking for two suspects. A Woods Cross officer came to the yard where the 10-year-old Hrubes lives. The officer jumped out of the car, aimed the gun at the child, and ordered him to get on the ground.

   The mother rushed out, demanding to know what was going on, pointing out that it was her 10-year-old son. The officer put his weapon away and left, returning later to apologize, earning a hug from the child. 

   There is more than racial profiling to deal with here, more that is wrong than just that. 1.) The officer did not have his body cam going. 3.) Police accounts say they chased the child, whereas witness accounts say there was no such chase. 4.) There is question as to whether County Attorney Troy Rawlings is even considering charges, and whether police are giving him enough information to know if charges should be pressed. 

   Three things:

 First, A law should be passed, making it a crime for a police officer to knowingly give false information. If officers are lying to cover up their actions, that should not be allowed, condoned, or tolerated. If an officer gives wrong information, he or she should follow up with a correction as soon as it is discovered that the initial information was wrong.

 Second,  Such false information should be considered obstruction of justice, and officers who knowingly provide it to protect themselves should be charged with obstruction. If the officer's superiors took any actions, such as asking that the case not have a formal investigation, that, too, should be considered obstruction of justice.

  Third, If the county attorney is not getting enough information from officers to determine if a crime has been committed, he should press charges, anyway, thus not allowing the officers to protect themselves by refusing to give evidence. The case can then be settled in court, where it should be, anyway.  It would seem there is not good reason for the county attorney not determining whether he will prosecute. If the county attorney needs more evidence before filing charges, he should bring in an independent investigator.

   Other things, besides those three, also deserve attention. Was there a reprimand or discipline of the officer for racial profiling? Were all the officers of the Woods Cross police reminded that they need to have their body cams rolling?