Seems very fishy to me. Or at least, it wouldn't if the reasoning wasn't so lacking.

It has nothing to do with anything inside the department, because they were off duty when it happened?

This sort of thing is looked into further when it's two private citizens.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/2012/02/essex-county-district-attorney-says-probe-into-beverly-officer-shooting-done/jNP2eINhVJ8N6QrRw2RrsK/index.html?comments=all&plckCurrentPage=3

In Response to Why not investigate?:


Well, I would say that someone is trying to hide something.  What, I do not know. 

Perhaps the police read the comments to the article.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/2012/02/essex-county-district-attorney-says-probe-into-beverly-officer-shooting-done/jNP2eINhVJ8N6QrRw2RrsK/index.html?p1=Well_Local_Links

The funny bit is an assault and death were the topic. A kid stealing a bag of chips can easily be passed over given the priorities of law enforcement by the prosecuter.
 An assault with intent to kill usually has a high priority. Remember if a regular citizen uses a shod foot against a police officers shin while being thrown to the ground by the officer, intended or not, it is assault with intent to murder. Unless there is a good video that the cops can't wipe out.
So this prosecuter did not get the memo that an attempt to kill a police officer is a serious offense even if the perp is dead? They seem to investigate this all the time. Oh wait the perp was a cop. THAT makes it ok.
Gotta love the injustice system. Can't this idiot of a non prosecuter get kicked out on his a$$ ? With predjudice against his pension, we should not have to pony up tax money for people who VIOLATE the public trust even fleetingly.

In Response to Re: Why not investigate?:


Oh, of course not.

Virtually unlimited free passes for these folks.