It was only because of the intense media focus on the police killings of Tyisha Miller in Riverside, Calif., in 1999 and Amadou Diallo in New York last year, and the threat of mass street demonstrations against police abuse, that President Clinton spoke out against police violence in his administration's waning days. Meanwhile, federal prosecutors say they can't nail more killer cops because they are hamstrung by the lack of funds and staff, victims who are perceived as criminals, the dearth of credible witnesses and the public's inclination to always believe police testimony. They also claim they are pinned in by the almost impossible requirement that they prove an officer had the specific intent to kill or injure a victim in order to get a conviction. These are tough obstacles to overcome. Nor does it help that the Justice Department is in the business of taking on mostly cases it knows it can win.
Many prosecutors are more than happy to take a hands-off attitude toward police misconduct cases.
This is no excuse for federal prosecutors not to at least make the effort to prosecute more officers when there is substantial evidence that excessive force was used. This is the legally and morally correct thing to do. And it sends a powerful message to law enforcement agencies that the federal government will go after lawbreakers, whether they wear a mask or a badge. Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark understood the importance of prosecuting violence-prone cops, even when there is virtually no chance of getting a conviction against them. Clark was right.