" grand jury was empaneled in Queens Supreme Court yesterday to investigate the fatal police shooting of an unarmed groom on his wedding day, sources said.
The 23-member panel will consider a possible indictment of the five cops who fired 50 shots at Sean Bell and two pals as they left a Jamaica strip club on Nov. 25.
But it could be months before there's any movement in the case.
The grand jury, convened for a six-month term, was seated for scheduling purposes but will not begin reviewing evidence for weeks, sources told the Daily News.
And jurors will review evidence for at least a month when they get going, sources said.
"The journey for justice has begun," said lawyer Sanford Rubenstein, who represents Bell's fiancée, Nicole Paultre-Bell, and the two wounded friends, Joseph Guzman and Trent Benefield.
"Still, we've said from the beginning that what we want is the thorough and complete investigation," Rubenstein said.
Even as the panel of Queens residents was being secretly convened in a Kew Gardens courtroom, Bell's family was demanding a quick indictment and calling for a special prosecutor at a vigil in front of Jamaica's 103rd Precinct.
"The fact that the grand jury has been empaneled doesn't change our demand for a special prosecutor," said lawyer Neville Mitchell, who represents Bell's parents and stood with them during what they said will be a 50-day vigil. "We have no faith in [Queens] District Attorney [Richard] Brown."
Brown's office would not comment.
Sources said the special team of prosecutors Brown has assembled has reviewed a mountain of evidence and interviewed more than 40 witnesses, including one of the officers who shot at Bell.
Detective Paul Headley, 35, a nine-year veteran who fired once, was the first to talk to prosecutors last week as a precursor to testifying before the grand jury.
A second officer is tentatively slated to talk with investigators this week, and lawyers for several of the other cops have said their clients intend to testify.
The officers have said they fired because they believed someone in the car with Bell was reaching for a gun. Such a "justification defense" would likely only stave off an indictment if the officers testify, legal experts say."
The 23-member panel will consider a possible indictment of the five cops who fired 50 shots at Sean Bell and two pals as they left a Jamaica strip club on Nov. 25.
But it could be months before there's any movement in the case.
The grand jury, convened for a six-month term, was seated for scheduling purposes but will not begin reviewing evidence for weeks, sources told the Daily News.
And jurors will review evidence for at least a month when they get going, sources said.
"The journey for justice has begun," said lawyer Sanford Rubenstein, who represents Bell's fiancée, Nicole Paultre-Bell, and the two wounded friends, Joseph Guzman and Trent Benefield.
"Still, we've said from the beginning that what we want is the thorough and complete investigation," Rubenstein said.
Even as the panel of Queens residents was being secretly convened in a Kew Gardens courtroom, Bell's family was demanding a quick indictment and calling for a special prosecutor at a vigil in front of Jamaica's 103rd Precinct.
"The fact that the grand jury has been empaneled doesn't change our demand for a special prosecutor," said lawyer Neville Mitchell, who represents Bell's parents and stood with them during what they said will be a 50-day vigil. "We have no faith in [Queens] District Attorney [Richard] Brown."
Brown's office would not comment.
Sources said the special team of prosecutors Brown has assembled has reviewed a mountain of evidence and interviewed more than 40 witnesses, including one of the officers who shot at Bell.
Detective Paul Headley, 35, a nine-year veteran who fired once, was the first to talk to prosecutors last week as a precursor to testifying before the grand jury.
A second officer is tentatively slated to talk with investigators this week, and lawyers for several of the other cops have said their clients intend to testify.
The officers have said they fired because they believed someone in the car with Bell was reaching for a gun. Such a "justification defense" would likely only stave off an indictment if the officers testify, legal experts say."
Nicole Antoinette
.jpg)
1 comment:
I am really interested in this case to see how its actually going to turn out. Something really need to be done about cops and how they handle a situation because they feel as if they can do anything that they want and there are no reprecussion for their actions. They claimed they thought they saw someone reaching for a gun but was that reason enough to fire 50 shots into the car-HELL NO. So the new procedure is shoot first ask questions later?
Post a Comment