Issues & Insights

Who Shot Ashli Babbitt? And Why Is This A State Secret?

Through the broken glass you can see the still-unidentified U.S. Capitol police offer just after he fires his weapon at Ashli Babbett. (YouTube)

More than six months after the events at the U.S. Capitol that led to the shooting death of protester Ashli Babbitt, the officer who killed her remains a secret as carefully guarded as any in Washington, D.C. Why?

Real Clear Investigations reporter Paul Sperry – who has been trying for months to learn the name of the U.S. Capitol Police officer who pulled the trigger – reported that a name surfaced, inadvertently, at a February House hearing.

Sperry uncovered a transcript and reviewed the C-SPAN video from the hearing. During that inquiry, the House sergeant at arms appears to name the shooter – at least he mentions the officer’s last name in the context of that shooting. Sperry deduced, based on other available information, that he was referring to USCP Lt. Michael L. Byrd.

Sperry said the department hasn’t denied that Byrd was the cop who killed Babbitt, although it did so when another officer’s name started getting bandied about.

Weirdly, Byrd’s name is deleted from the C-SPAN and CNN transcripts of that hearing, but was contained in Congressional Quarterly transcripts, and can be heard on the C-SPAN video.

Why does this matter? The family understandably wants to know, and the public deserves the details about the shooting. Babbitt was not armed at the time, nor was she threatening anyone with physical harm. (She was trying to climb through a broken window.) Despite all the claims of an “armed incursion” into the Capitol building by Trump supporters, there was only one gun fired on that date – the one that killed Babbitt. There’s also the question of whether the officer involved has any history of misconduct.

The identity of Babbitt’s killer matters for reasons even beyond a family’s grief.

As Sperry notes, this saga reveals something else that is also deeply troubling: the fact that the U.S. Capitol Police officers enjoy special protections – courtesy of Congress – that no other police department in the country does, and that likely contributed to its woeful handling of what transpired on Jan. 6.

“Unlike other police forces,” Sperry notes, “USCP does not have to disclose records on police misconduct.” He goes on:

More than 700 complaints were lodged against Capitol Police officers between 2017 and 2019, but brass won’t say what the alleged violations were or how the department resolved them. They also won’t disclose how many complaints are in any individual officer’s file.

While the USCP has an inspector general, he does not make reports public, unlike other agency watchdogs.

The Capitol Police … won’t even reveal how many sworn officers it has on hand.

The USCP also doesn’t have to comply with Freedom Of Information Act requests, in contrast to the Secret Service, which not only has to respond to such inquiries but also publicly releases audits by its inspector general.

So, while the names of police officers involved in shootings are routinely made public across the country, the identity of Ashli Babbitt’s killer remains – officially – shrouded in secrecy for reasons only the USCP can explain.

As if having an unaccountable police force guarding the Capitol isn’t bad enough, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is busy expanding the USCP well beyond the Capitol grounds, to include satellite offices in California and Florida, with more regions planned. Why? The USCP says it’s to provide “for enhanced security for members of Congress outside of the National Capital Region.”

This expanded role is premised, mind you, on the trumped-up claims about the events on Jan. 6 that have been routinely – and falsely – described as an armed insurrection.

So while Congress is busy demanding greater accountability and transparency from state and local police departments – which deal with deadly threats every single day – it’s content to let the Capitol police operate outside public scrutiny.

This is typical of Congress, which seems to delight in exempting itself from the laws it forces on everyone else.

Sperry reports that some lawmakers on the congressional committee that oversees the USCP want to change this. They should. And a good place to start would be to release the information from its investigation into the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt, including the name of the officer involved.

— Written by the I&I Editorial Board

Will You Help Us In The Fight For Free Speech?

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.

Share

I & I Editorial Board

The Issues and Insights Editorial Board has decades of experience in journalism, commentary and public policy.

4 comments

  • “ Babbitt was not armed at the time, nor was she threatening anyone with physical harm. (She was trying to climb through a broken window.) -I&I

    I was watching the capitol shooting live on KMEX, the local Mexican TV station in Los Angeles, which was covering Jan. 6 with a national reporter in the capitol crowd while the major USA networks were still doing their game shows, etc. The reporter spoke English, as that was the language of the people she was talking to and interviewing. The capitol police opened the capitol doors to admit people, including the reporter. A guy with a crowbar was smashing the window at the top of a staircase, and he was being filmed by both the Mexican station and a guy whom the reporter recognized from past encounters as BLM/anti-fa (this was the guy who sold the Babbitt killing footage to CNN et al.; and was cheering on the violence at the scene). Babbitt was standing outside the closed door when she was needlessly shot to death. The capitol cop was identified in some alternative media, which showed him in BLM gear on Facebook posts. So, good reason to keep it secret. The Mexican station also had cell phone footage from people at the capitol showing hotel limo buses escorted by police delivering their backpack-carrying “guests” (and perhaps their hidden crowbars) to the head of the capitol line hours before the shooting. There is further evidence these upscale hotel guests (seasoned street thugs, who developed their crowbar and window smashing skills in “the mostly peaceful” months of urban burning and looting) may have been financed by wealthy Seattle anti-fa supporters. But don’t expect the Pelosi-Adam Schiff/Liz Cheney “bipartisan” truth commission to be “distracted” by this. GOP needs their own commission investigating the Seattle financing of anti-fa/BLM violence and any links to the Babbitt shooting.

    • She was not “climbing through” a broken window. She was simply standing in it.

Subscribe to Issues & Insights via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to I&I and you can receive notifications of new articles in your email. It’s simple, and free.

Join 5,085 other subscribers

We Could Use Your Help

Will you help us fight for honesty in journalism and against the tyranny of the left? Issues & Insights is published by a team of volunteers who believe in free speech and in quality journalism. If you like what you see, leave a donation by clicking on the Tip Jar above. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Ad revenue helps, but your support will truly make a difference. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

%d bloggers like this: