Hennepin County Attorney responds to resignation calls over trooper case
MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty responded Tuesday to criticism this week that her office ignored expert opinion when it charged a Minnesota state trooper in a shooting.
In new filings, Trooper Ryan Londregan's defense team accused the Hennepin County Attorney of ignoring early findings from a nationally recognized use-of-force expert.
The expert had opined that Trooper Londregan may have been justified in using force against Ricky Cobb II.
Londregan was charged with murder for shooting Cobb last summer along I-94 in Minneapolis following a traffic stop.
Speaking Tuesday, Mary Moriarty said her office would prosecute the case in the courtroom -- and not in the media.
Minnesota State Trooper shooting trial concerns
Concerns are growing about the decision from Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty’s office to charge Minnesota State Trooper Ryan Londregan following the shooting of Ricky Cobb, after Londregan’s defense has raised concerns about the opinions of a national use of force expert.
"The defense seems to be trying to make their case in the media," said Moriarty. "We are not going to be doing that. Those comments came out from the defense and then, right after that, the Republicans held a press conference. MPPOA also came out on this. So it's clear it was a concerted effort on their part."
In the hours after the filings, Minnesota House Republicans held a news conference calling on Moriarty to resign as Hennepin County Attorney. Moriarty responded to those calls saying she was going to move forward with the case and "we're not going to make this political."
Moriarty did point to statements her office put out after the filings. That statement read in part:
"The defense has selectively quoted a partial sentence of a lengthy document provided to them in the course of the confidential discovery process. The cherry-picked sentence excludes critical facts where the expert acknowledged information he would need to fully analyze the case. Specifically, the expert stated that he did not know the new use of force legal standard in Minnesota or how to interpret it, that he did not have a statement from Trooper Londregan, and that critical details related to Trooper Londregan’s training were missing. Additionally, he did not have the information from the three months of investigation that occurred after this preliminary conversation, including grand jury transcripts detailing the extensive training that Londregan received on how to effectively and safely handle traffic stops involving potential fleeing drivers."