Seattle police officer who ran over Indian student Jaahnavi Kandula to not face criminal charges
Washington (PTI): The Seattle police officer who struck and killed Indian student Jaahnavi Kandula while responding to an overdose call, will not face any criminal charges due to lack of "sufficient" evidence, authorities said.
On Wednesday, the King County Prosecutor's Office said they will not move forward with criminal charges against Seattle Police Officer Kevin Dave, FOX13 Seattle reported.
In a statement released Wednesday, the King County Prosecuting Attorney said, "Kandula's death is heartbreaking and impacted communities in King County and across the world."
Kandula, 23, was struck by a police vehicle driven by Officer Dave when she was crossing a street in Seattle on January 23. He was driving 74 mph (more than 119 kmh) on the way to a report of a drug overdose call. Kandula was thrown 100 feet when she was struck by the speeding police patrol vehicle.
In bodycam footage released by the Seattle Police Department, Officer Daniel Auderer laughed about the deadly crash and dismissed any implication Dave might be at fault or that a criminal investigation was necessary.
King County Prosecuting Attorney Leesa Manion said that she believes they lack the evidence to prove a criminal case beyond a reasonable doubt, the report added.
"It is the responsibility of the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office to review all available evidence relating to the case involving Seattle Police Officer Kevin Dave and the January 2023 collision death of Jaahnavi Kandula. After staffing this case with senior deputy prosecuting attorneys and office leadership, I have determined that we lack sufficient evidence under Washington State law to prove a criminal case beyond a reasonable doubt."
The statement also said that the prosecutor's office also finds the comments made by Seattle Police Officer Daniel Auderer, recorded on his body-worn video, "appalling and deeply troubling."
Auderer, who was not involved in the January collision, was captured in the video saying, "But she is dead" and laughing while on the phone.
She was 26 anyway," Auderer said in the video. "She had limited value."
"Officer Auderer's comments were also unprofessional and undermined the public's trust in the Seattle Police Department and law enforcement in general," said Manion.
"As egregious as Officer Auderer's comments are, they do not change the PAO's legal analysis into the conduct of Officer Dave. It is the Office of Police Accountability that bears the responsibility of disciplinary investigation and proceedings relating to Officer Auderer's comment, not the PAO."
Auderer was pulled from patrol in September 2023 and reassigned to a "non-operational position."
Auderer could still be fired after the fallout of his insensitive comments captured on bodycam.
Auderer's chain of command and the Office of Police Accountability (OPA) found he acted unprofessionally. For that, he faces the highest disciplinary range of nearly two weeks suspension up to termination, according to a disciplinary action report.
Before a final disciplinary decision, Auderer will have the chance to meet with Police Chief Adrian Diaz to disagree.
His disciplinary hearing is scheduled for March 4, K5 News reported.
Seattle local media reported that speed was the cause of the collision, as the speed at which Dave was travelling did "not allow (Kandula) or him sufficient time to detect, address and avoid a hazard that presented itself."
Dave was responding to a "priority one" call at the request of the Seattle Fire Department, according to the Seattle Police Department. According to the police report, the officer was responding to a report of a drug overdose.
The officer did not have his siren activated continuously. Instead, the officer "chirped" his siren at the intersection. He did have his emergency lights on, according to a previous statement from the police department.
In a memo to Seattle police, prosecutors wrote there was not enough evidence to prove Dave showed "conscious disregard for others safety."
A drug recognition expert responded to the scene and found no impairment in the officer.
Kandula was a graduate student at Northeastern University at the Seattle campus. The university said in January 2023 that they would award her degree posthumously and present it to her family.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Those hit by SIR deletions may see their other rights diluted: Prashant Bhushan
_vb_00.jpeg)
Kolkata (PTI): Senior Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan expressed alarm over large-scale deletion of names under the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal, saying those affected by it may see their "other rights diluted or withdrawn".
Backing his apprehensions expressed at a press conference here on Sunday, political activist Yogendra Yadav warned that the removal of the names of lakhs of voters through the SIR exercise may extend beyond electoral disenfranchisement and impact other identity-linked rights.
Those excluded from electoral rolls could be the first to face scrutiny in other identification systems, he claimed.
"Today, it is the voters' list. Tomorrow, questions may be raised about the authenticity of identity documents like Aadhaar. Those already struck off the rolls could be the earliest to be affected," Yadav said.
Nearly 91 lakh voters have been deleted from the electoral rolls in West Bengal following the Special Intensive Revision exercise in the state, according to data released by the Election Commission.
The poll panel is yet to officially announce the final voter base for the state after the roll revision process. From the available figures, however, the total deletion in the state at this point, based on the 7.66 crore electors identified at the end of October last year, stands at over 11.85 per cent.
Backing Yadav's concerns, Bhushan alleged the developments indicate a broader attempt at disenfranchisement, while stressing that the right to vote is foundational to all other democratic entitlements.
"If the right to vote is taken away, it opens the door for other rights to be diluted or withdrawn. What we are witnessing is not an isolated exercise but something that could fundamentally alter the relationship between citizens and the state," he said.
The senior advocate further claimed that earlier attempts to reconfigure citizenship frameworks had not yielded the desired outcome, and alternative mechanisms were now being employed.
"Constitutional guarantees cannot be easily amended, but indirect routes appear to be in play to achieve similar ends," he claimed.
Economist Parakala Prabhakar, taking a longer-term view of the matter, said the implications of the revision process could go beyond immediate electoral outcomes and reshape the very nature of citizenship in the country.
"There is a risk that India may gradually be divided into two distinct categories -- those who retain voting rights and those who are effectively excluded. Such a shift would strike at the core of universal adult franchise," he said.
The trio's remarks come ahead of hearings in the Supreme Court, expected early next week, on petitions challenging the SIR of electoral rolls.
Citing data, Yadav questioned the rationale behind the deletions, noting that West Bengal's electoral rolls had earlier shown near parity with its adult population.
He also pointed to "anomalies" in the process, claiming that while other states witnessed an increase in voter numbers between draft and final rolls, West Bengal stood out as an exception.
"This divergence suggests that something unusual has occurred here," Yadav said.
Alleging targeted exclusion, Yadav said that post-verification deletions appeared to have disproportionately affected certain communities.
He cited constituency-level examples to argue that the pattern of removals was not random. "If such disproportionate figures do not indicate targeted action, it is difficult to explain what does," he remarked.
Prabhakar described the upcoming hearing as a crucial moment. "The judiciary now has an opportunity to reaffirm and protect the foundational principles of the Constitution," he said.
_vb_99.jpeg)
_vb_33.jpeg)
_vb_51.jpeg)