Woman Killed in Capitol Hill Chase Was Shot Five Times

Autopsy report shows that Miriam Carey was shot from behind, including once in the head.

A view of the scene with a US Capitol Police car (top) and a black Infinity after a shooting on Capitol Hill October 3, 2013 in Washington, DC. Shots were reported as fired near 2nd Street NW and Constitution Avenue on Capitol Hill.
National Journal
April 7, 2014, 5:29 p.m.

Six months after a Con­necti­c­ut wo­man was killed in a hail of po­lice gun­fire on Cap­it­ol Hill, the fed­er­al in­vest­ig­a­tion re­mains un­der wraps, even as new in­form­a­tion has sur­faced show­ing she was shot mul­tiple times from be­hind, in­clud­ing once in the head.

Three of the five shots that hit Miri­am Carey, 34, entered through her back, and an­oth­er struck her up­per left arm, ac­cord­ing to the of­fi­cial re­port of her autopsy, ob­tained by a law­yer for her fam­ily. An ac­com­pa­ny­ing tox­ic­o­logy re­port shows that Carey, a dent­al as­sist­ant, had no drugs or al­co­hol in her sys­tem when she was killed.

How many of the shots were fired as Carey was still lead­ing po­lice in a car chase from the White House on Oct. 3 — with her 14-month-old girl in the rear seat — was not de­tailed. The re­port also does not de­scribe wheth­er any shots were fired after her car came to a stop on Cap­it­ol Hill, nor does it list the se­quence of her wounds.

“It’s been six months now and there’s still noth­ing from [the Justice De­part­ment],” said Eric Sanders, a law­yer for Carey’s fam­ily in New York. “But now we have something.”

Sanders con­tends that law en­force­ment “blew it,” not­ing that the doc­u­ments show Carey was not un­der the in­flu­ence of any sub­stances and ar­guing that she was mov­ing away from the of­ficers at the time she was fatally shot. Law-en­force­ment of­fi­cials have con­sist­ently de­clined to com­ment on the case, cit­ing the on­go­ing in­vest­ig­a­tion and pending lit­ig­a­tion.

Sanders, a former po­lice of­ficer, has already filed a pre­lim­in­ary wrong­ful-death claim against the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment, the Secret Ser­vice, and the U.S. Cap­it­ol Po­lice. Late last week, he pos­ted the autopsy and tox­ic­o­logy doc­u­ments for pub­lic view­ing.

Though the case now moves past its six-month an­niversary, no of­fi­cial re­port fully ex­plain­ing the events of that day has been re­leased from the Justice De­part­ment or oth­er law-en­force­ment agen­cies.

“The in­vest­ig­a­tion is con­tinu­ing. And I really can’t provide an es­tim­ate as to when it is to be con­cluded,” said Wil­li­am Miller, a spokes­man for the U.S. At­tor­ney’s Of­fice, on Monday. He also would not com­ment on wheth­er six months is an un­usu­ally long time for an in­vest­ig­a­tion of this nature.

Lt. Kim­berly Schneider, a spokes­wo­man for the U.S. Cap­it­ol Po­lice, said, “The USCP does not com­ment on pending lit­ig­a­tion and de­clines to com­ment while the in­vest­ig­a­tion is on­go­ing. The USCP of­ficers in­volved are on ad­min­is­trat­ive leave.”

Oth­er law-en­force­ment of­fi­cials did not re­turn calls on Monday. But two House Demo­crats, who have ques­tioned why it is tak­ing so much time for de­tails of the fed­er­al in­vest­ig­a­tion to be an­nounced, said the autopsy in­form­a­tion makes them more con­vinced that the find­ings should be re­leased pub­licly.

Rep. Al­cee Hast­ings of Flor­ida, a former fed­er­al judge, says he con­tin­ues to won­der why the car’s tires were not fired upon to stop the vehicle’s pro­gress. He said that in­vest­ig­at­ors should re­lease what they know, but that “I would be­lieve that the hes­it­ancy of the Justice De­part­ment is pre­dic­ated on the fact they know a civil rights law­suit is com­ing.”

Rep. Raul Gri­jalva of Ari­zona, co­chair of the Con­gres­sion­al Pro­gress­ive Caucus, ad­ded that re­lease of the fed­er­al find­ings “would give us a full pic­ture. Sup­pos­i­tions and jump­ing to con­clu­sions — which nobody wants any­body to do — would be elim­in­ated, and with the whole pic­ture we could draw a real opin­ion of what happened.”

In an in­ter­view Monday, Sanders por­trayed the autopsy find­ings as bol­ster­ing his the­ory that Carey’s shoot­ing was not jus­ti­fied. He said Cap­it­ol Po­lice and oth­er law-en­force­ment of­ficers “pan­icked” and “com­pletely mis­handled” a simple street en­counter that began when Carey re­fused to stop her black In­fin­iti at a vehicle check­point near the White House and made a U-turn.

Sanders said fed­er­al agents and of­ficers from mul­tiple jur­is­dic­tions began to pur­sue her car ag­gress­ively, and that he is con­tinu­ing to press for ac­cess to po­lice ra­dio trans­mis­sions dur­ing the in­cid­ent.

Sanders has yet to ex­plain why Carey was in Wash­ing­ton with her child. But he has pre­vi­ously poin­ted to doc­u­ments, in­clud­ing an ini­tial po­lice af­fi­davit which said that after Carey made her turn, a Secret Ser­vice of­ficer at­temp­ted to block her car with a bi­cycle rack.

Her car pushed over the rack, knock­ing the of­ficer to the ground. It was from that point, after the in­cid­ent at that bar­ri­er at 15th Street and Pennsylvania Av­en­ue, that the chase began, and shots were fired as the car con­tin­ued mov­ing. Carey ul­ti­mately was fatally wounded either right be­fore or right after her car came to a halt near the Cap­it­ol after circ­ling the Gar­field Monu­ment traffic circle. The child, who is now liv­ing with her fath­er, was not wounded, des­pite be­ing in the car’s back­seat dur­ing at least some of the gun­fire.

What We're Following See More »
CRITICS CALL RULE "AN INDIRECT WAY TO DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD"
Trump Blocks Federal Funding to Groups that Make Abortion Referrals
3 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The Trump administration took aim at Planned Parenthood Friday, issuing a rule barring groups that provide abortions or abortion referrals from participating in the $286 million federal family planning program — a move that is expected to direct millions toward faith-based providers."

Source:
SENATE MUST THEN VOTE ON MEASURE WITHIN 18 DAYS
House Expects Tuesday Vote to End National Emergency
6 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The House plans to vote Tuesday on legislation to formally block President Donald Trump’s attempt to circumvent Congress to fund his border wall, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced Friday. The privileged resolution to stop Trump’s emergency declaration — which has 226 co-sponsors, including one Republican — is expected to easily pass the House. It then will be voted in the Senate within 18 days."

Source:
AVOIDS SHUTDOWN WITH A FEW HOURS TO SPARE
Trump Signs Border Deal
1 weeks ago
THE LATEST

"President Trump signed a sweeping spending bill Friday afternoon, averting another partial government shutdown. The action came after Trump had declared a national emergency in a move designed to circumvent Congress and build additional barriers at the southern border, where he said the United States faces 'an invasion of our country.'"

Source:
REDIRECTS $8 BILLION
Trump Declares National Emergency
1 weeks ago
THE DETAILS

"President Donald Trump on Friday declared a state of emergency on the southern border and immediately direct $8 billion to construct or repair as many as 234 miles of a border barrier. The move — which is sure to invite vigorous legal challenges from activists and government officials — comes after Trump failed to get the $5.7 billion he was seeking from lawmakers. Instead, Trump agreed to sign a deal that included just $1.375 for border security."

Source:
COULD SOW DIVISION AMONG REPUBLICANS
House Will Condemn Emergency Declaration
1 weeks ago
THE DETAILS

"House Democrats are gearing up to pass a joint resolution disapproving of President Trump’s emergency declaration to build his U.S.-Mexico border wall, a move that will force Senate Republicans to vote on a contentious issue that divides their party. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Thursday evening in an interview with The Washington Post that the House would take up the resolution in the coming days or weeks. The measure is expected to easily clear the Democratic-led House, and because it would be privileged, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would be forced to put the resolution to a vote that he could lose."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login