Judge throws out murder charge against Michigan officer who struck a fleeing man
There was no evidence that state police Det. Sgt. Brian Keely 'did no more than what was necessary and proper' to catch a man wanted for various crimes, U.S. District Judge Hala Jarbou said Wednesday.
Samuel Sterling, 25, died after he was pinned against a wall at a Burger King in Kentwood in April 2024. At that time, Keely was part of a U.S. Marshal Service group that tries to catch fugitives in western Michigan.
'Sterling was actively attempting to evade arrest, leading multiple officers on an extended chase in a populated area,' the judge said. 'Because Keely and the other officers reasonably believed Sterling was armed, they had good reason to believe that Sterling posed a significant threat to the safety of officers and the public.'
Sterling was on foot. Keely made a reasonable decision to try to block him from entering the Burger King, even if the officer's actions were risky, Jarbou said.
The judge said it is "well settled" that a state can't prosecute a federal officer if the officer acted properly. Keely was charged with second-degree murder.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said the decision was 'nothing short of a miscarriage of justice.'
Keely's attorneys said Sterling, who had past convictions, made things worse by running. There were six warrants out for his arrest, including an allegation of assault against his father and probation violations, the judge said.
'This ruling not only vindicates our client but also sends a strong message in support of those who serve with honor and integrity,' Keely's lawyers said in written statement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
What to know about the Menendez brothers' parole hearings
Lyle and Erik Menendez are scheduled to face separate parole hearings beginning Thursday in California and — depending on the outcomes — could eventually be released from prison nearly 30 years after being convicted of killing their parents. A panel of parole officers will evaluate each of the brothers via videoconference. They'll appear from prison in San Diego. In 1995, a jury convicted both brothers of first-degree murder in the 1989 murders of Jose and Kitty Menendez inside their Los Angeles-area home. The brothers were sentenced to life in prison without parole in 1996. They became eligible for parole after a Los Angeles judge in May reduced their sentences from life in prison without the possibility of parole to 50 years to life, making them immediately eligible for parole under California law because they were under the ages of 26 when they committed their crimes. Who are the Menendez brothers and what did they do? Lyle and Erik Menendez are the sons of Jose and Kitty Menendez. Jose Menendez, a Cuban- American business executive who at one time was an executive at RCA Records, moved his family from Princeton, New Jersey, to California when his sons were teenagers. On Aug. 20, 1989, Lyle Menendez dialed 911 to report the shotgun-killings of their parents inside their home. Both brothers told investigators that the murders were related to the Mafia or had something to do with their father's business dealings. At the time, Erik was 18 and Lyle was 21. With access to the family's wealth, the brothers spent small fortunes on Rolex watches, cars and houses. But two months after the killings, Erik Menendez confessed to his psychologist that he and his brother killed their parents. What were the brothers charged with? They were arrested early the following year and each charged with first-degree murder. The brothers claimed their father had emotionally and sexually abused them since childhood. Prosecutors contended that getting hold of their father's money was the motive behind the couple's killings. The brothers' first trial started in 1993. Their attorneys never disputed the pair killed their parents, but argued that they acted out of self-defense. Their trials resulted in hung juries. In 1995, a jury convicted both brothers of three counts, including first-degree murder, plus lying in-wait and special circumstance allegations. They were sentenced to life in prison without parole in 1996. How did they spend their years in prison? For years after their conviction, the brothers filed petitions for appeals of their cases while in prison. State and federal judges denied the petitions. The brothers have gotten an education, participated in self-help classes and started various support groups for fellow prisoners. They also launched a prison beautification project inspired by the Norwegian approach to incarceration that believes rehabilitation in humane prisons surrounded by nature leads to successful reintegration into society, even for those who have committed terrible crimes. Over the years, the Menendez case continued to fascinate the public and the young, handsome brothers became celebrities of sorts. They became the subjects of true crime shows, including last year's nine-episode crime drama 'Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story' on Netflix. A few weeks after that was aired, then-LA County District Attorney George Gascón announced he was reviewing new evidence in the case. On Oct. 24, 2024, prosecutors said they will petition the court to resentence the brothers. In May 2025, an LA County Superior Court judge granted them a new sentence of 50 years to life, making them immediately eligible for parole. What will the parole board consider? Erik and Lyle Menendez will be evaluated, individually, by a panel of two or three parole hearing officers. Erik's hearing is scheduled Thursday morning. Lyle's will be held Friday. The board will assess whether the brothers pose an 'unreasonable risk of danger to society' if released, considering factors like criminal history, motivation for the crime, signs of remorse, behavior while in prison and plans for the future, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Nearly all of the Menendez family support the brothers' release from prison. Milton Andersen, the brothers' uncle who opposed their release, died from cancer in March. Could one receive parole and not the other? The brothers have separate hearings and will be evaluated independently of each other. Los Angeles trial attorney David Ring has said if one brother was 'a troublemaker' in prison and the other wasn't, it's conceivable that one could stay locked up while the other is freed. But Ring, who's not involved with the Menendez case, said that's unlikely. How soon could they get out? If granted parole, it could be months before the brothers are released from prison. The chief legal counsel has 120 days to review the case. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom then has 30 days to affirm or deny the parole. If he approves it, they could then leave prison. Newsom has not made any statements indicating his position on the case, but said during a May press conference that he has both approved and rejected decisions by the parole board before. Where will they go if released? That's not clear. The brothers' family members, who have spoken out in favor of their release, haven't shared details about where the brothers might live.
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
US attorney will no longer bring felony charges against people for carrying rifles or shotguns in DC
Federal prosecutors in the nation's capital will no longer bring felony charges against people for possessing rifles or shotguns in the District of Columbia, according to a new policy adopted by the leader of the nation's largest U.S. attorney's office. That office will continue to pursue charges when someone is accused of using a shotgun or rifle in a violent crime or has a criminal record that makes it illegal to have a firearm. Local authorities in Washington can prosecute people for illegally possessing unregistered rifles and shotguns. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro said in a statement that the change is based on guidance from the Justice Department and the Office of Solicitor General and conforms with two Supreme Court decisions on gun rights. Pirro, a former Fox News host, has been a vocal critic of local officials' crime-fighting efforts since Trump installed her in office in May. Her policy shift means federal prosecutors will not purse charges under the D.C. law that made it illegal to carry rifles or shotguns, except in limited cases involving permit holders. The change also overlaps with Republican President Donald Trump's declaration of a crime emergency in the city, flooding the streets of Washington with patrols of hundreds of federal agents and National Guard members. The White House says 76 firearms have been seized since the crackdown started this month. The new policy also coves large-capacity magazines, but it does not apply to handguns. 'We will continue to seize all illegal and unlicensed firearms, and to vigorously prosecute all crimes connected with them,' Pirro said, adding that she and Trump "are committed to prosecuting gun crime.' Pirro said a blanket ban on possessing shotguns and rifles violates the Supreme Court's ruling in 2022 that struck down a New York gun law and held that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense. She also pointed to the high court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller striking down the city's ban on handguns in the home.
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Epstein transcripts will not be published, judge rules
Jeffrey Epstein's grand jury transcripts will not be published after a judge shot down a request from the Trump administration. Handing down the ruling at a court in Manhattan on Wednesday, federal Judge Richard Berman said the information contained in the transcripts 'pales in comparison to the Epstein investigative information and materials in the hands of the department of justice (DoJ).' The judge presiding over the case against British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend, also turned down a similar government request recently. The DoJ had informed Judge Berman that the only witness to testify before the Epstein grand jury was an FBI agent who, the judge noted, 'had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay'. The agent testified over two days, on June 18 2019, and July 2 2019. The entire transcript was 70 pages. The rest of the grand jury presentation consisted of a PowerPoint slideshow shown during the June 18 session and a call log shown during the July 2 session, which ended with grand jurors voting to indict Epstein. Both of those will also remain sealed, Judge Berman ruled. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her conviction on sex trafficking charges for helping Epstein sexually abuse girls and young women. She was recently transferred from a prison in Florida to a prison camp in Texas. Epstein died in jail awaiting trial. Maxwell's case has been the subject of heightened public scrutiny since the DoJ said that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision infuriated elements of Mr Trump's base. Since then, administration officials have tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case, including by requesting from courts the unsealing of grand jury transcripts. 'The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein file,' Judge Berman wrote in an apparent reference to the DoJ's refusal to release additional records on its own while simultaneously moving to unseal grand jury transcripts. 'By comparison,' he added, 'the instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the government's possession. The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct.' Maxwell was interviewed at a Florida courthouse in July by deputy attorney general Todd Blanche.
