Much has been made of the incident that took place at the Kroger at Michigan Ave. and Greenfield on Feb 12.  While many facts may be in dispute, a separate controversy has been raised by members of the community.

That controversy involves when and how public comments are made during what is expected and claimed to be an impartial and ongoing criminal investigation.  

Many contend that the mayor’s office and Dearborn Police should understand that hate crimes are criminal acts motivated by bias or prejudice towards a particular group of people.  

Clearly, they understand what an assault and battery is. These crimes are commonplace and are charged every single day in Wayne County, including dozens per year in Dearborn. 

In discussing various issues surrounding the incident at Kroger, the Arab American News contacted a variety of legal experts to seek clarity and a legal opinion as it relates to police investigations, the appropriateness and content of public comments by city officials and police and prosecutorial discretion.

A general consensus was reached that assault cases are not always easy to prove. However, absent clear and contradictory evidence, if a complaining witness wishes to pursue charges, city and county officials most often file them.

The legal experts we reached out to also advised that inconsistencies in witness accounts as they relate to an assault are not uncommon, but that these inconsistencies should be vetted by a jury.  

In other words, if a complaining witness wishes to pursue assault charges, the matter should be put in front of a jury rather than not be charged at all.  A jury would then determine whose account was more credible and issue a verdict based on that. 

Many public comments made by the city and the Dearborn Police Department had the effect of swaying public opinion against the Arab complainant before the investigation had been concluded. 

Legal experts advised that these comments may have tainted the investigative process because they are conclusive comments on one hand, while the Dearborn Police claimed “the investigation is ongoing” on the other. 

Legal experts were concerned about the first public quotes from Mayor O’Reilly last week, when he indicated that, “we have had two individuals from Taylor that have been interviewed twice.”  The mayor later stated that, “we will bring them back in.” 

Critics of the investigation were also skeptical about the city’s description of “abusive language” and the use of the word “altercation.” A repeated concern about those descriptions is the victim’s contention that the word choice “abusive language” does not properly describe what were in fact racial epithets. Further, to describe a mere “altercation” does not fully convey that it was from the victim’s perspective a criminal assault. 

The mayor’s comments describing the victim raised further skepticism. Specifically, the mayor stated, “the victim was not seriously injured and he did in fact fight back.” The mayor went on to say “the assailants might have gotten the better of it and the victim was not seriously injured.”  These comments appear to disregard critical legal issues.  

First, the fact that a citizen chooses to defend himself against an assault does not take away from his position as having been victimized.  Neither does the fact, as in this case, that he was not permanently injured. Further , The Arab American News discovered through the victim’s legal counsel that he has in fact been injured by suffering a concussion due to blows to his head. He also requires knee surgery.  

Of utmost concern to lawyers and community members is that the mayor and police department appear to be trying to control the narrative of this case in order to influence its outcome.

Below is a breakdown of the city’s official statements into two categories;

Public comments during the Investigation by Dearborn officials:

• The “victim” may have “won the fight” (O’Reilly told The Arab American News on Feb. 18.)

• The “victim” fought back. (O’Reilly told The Arab American News on Feb. 18.)

• The Arab victim “was not seriously injured.” (O’Reilly told The Arab American News on Feb. 18)

• The Arab witness “was on social media.” (City of Dearborn Press Release Feb. 20.) 

• Comments on behalf of city officials that “the elements of a hate crime were not met.” (city of Dearborn Press Release Feb. 20.)

• “Cooler heads could have prevented this.” (Police Chief Ronald Haddad.)

Facts not mentioned by the city and Dearborn Police Department by way of any public or official statement: 

• The complaining witness is 61-years-old, partially disabled and has unequivocally requested assault charges be filed.

• The victim has maintained he was seriously injured. Despite not being bloodied, he has to have knee surgery and has suffered a concussion as a result of blows to his head.

• The two men from Taylor fled the scene after the assault while the victim did not.

• It is misleading for the mayor or the city of Dearborn to make or appear to make factual determinations or conclusions on behalf of the FBI and its investigation.

• Independent witnesses have maintained that they were not interviewed by the Dearborn Police, despite being at the Kroger during the assault.

• City officials didn’t mention the victim’s claims that the two men from Taylor used racial slurs prior to assaulting him. 

Many legal observers, activists and members of the community remain concerned about the public comments made and their impact on the final outcome and disposition of the Kroger incident, based on the framing of the issues and the perceptions accompanying each side.  Community activist are especially concerned that bias existed before the police even began their investigation.

The ADC-Michigan has taken a lead on this incident and TAAN will continue to follow it closely as the impact on the community now and in the future can not be overstated.