RowVaughn Wells, the mother of Tyre Nichols, responded to the tragic death of her son during an interview over the weekend where she expressed disappointment over the fact that the police officers involved were black.

Five former Memphis Police Department officers were arrested and charged for their alleged involvement in the death of the 29-year-old male, who died earlier this month in a hospital days after a confrontation with police.

Nichols died on January 10, three days after Memphis police pulled him over in a traffic stop, local media reported. Nichols, and the five former police officers charged over his killing, are black.

Authorities stopped Nichols on January 7 for “reckless driving” near Raines Road and Ross Road in Memphis.

Officers Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmit Martin III, Desmond Mills, Jr., and Justin Smith have all been charged with two counts of official misconduct, local media reported, with one count of official oppression, second-degree murder, aggravated assault-act in concert, and two counts of aggravated kidnapping.

“I believe in my heart, that my son was here on assignment from God,” Wells told Al Sharpton on MSNBC’s “Politics Nation”. “He finished his assignment and God took him back home. Even though this tragedy happened to my son, I truly believe that there’s going to be a greater good that comes out of this. And that is what keeps me going and continuing to fight this justice for my son because I’m not going to stop until every person that had anything to do with my son’s death is prosecuted to the fullest of the law.”

“I hate the fact that it was five black men that actually did this to another black man,” she added. “My son probably was their age. They just brought disgrace to themselves. You know, I’m not an evil person. My son is not an evil person. We’re gonna forgive these people. I actually want to pray for their families, because their families didn’t deserve any of this either. They just brought disgrace to everyone.”

WATCH:

Mother of Tyre Nichols: ‘I hate it was five black men that did this.’

pic.twitter.com/tPArnhk6XS

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) January 31, 2023

Wells previously told CNN that those who protest her son’s death should not riot because that is not what her son would have wanted.

“I don’t want us burning up our cities, tearing up the streets, because that’s not what my son stood for,” Wells said. “And if you guys are here for me and Tyre, then you will protest peacefully.”

Years after the start of special counsel John Durham‘s so-called “investigation of the investigators,” Senate Democrats are preparing to add another leg to the Trump-Russia debacle.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL) signaled the onset of a new investigation in response to what his press team claimed was “alleged misconduct” outlined in a New York Times report published last week about Durham’s endeavor.

“These reports about abuses in Special Counsel Durham’s investigation — so outrageous that even his longtime colleagues quit in protest — are but one of many instances where former President Trump and his allies weaponized the Justice Department,” Durbin said in a statement Monday.

“The Justice Department should work on behalf of the American people, not for the personal benefit of any president,” Durbin added. “As we wait for the results of ongoing internal reviews, the Senate Judiciary Committee will do its part and take a hard look at these repeated episodes, and the regulations and policies that enabled them, to ensure such abuses of power cannot happen again.”

In May 2019, shortly after special counsel Robert Mueller released his report, Attorney General William Barr appointed Durham to investigate the origins and conduct of the FBI inquiry into alleged ties between former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia.

Stretching into the Biden administration, Durham’s investigation has been cheered by Trump and his allies as a means to unravel a suspected “Russiagate” plot against the former president, while Democrats and others have criticized it as a politically tainted endeavor meant to discredit Mueller and top officials from the FBI.

Last week’s report by the New York Times gave fuel to Durham’s detractors as it divulged episodes that were said to show how the inquiry “became roiled by internal dissent and ethical disputes,” including the circumstances underlying the departures of multiple prosecutors. The newspaper also claimed Durham once expanded his inquiry to include an investigation into “suspicious financial dealings” tied to Trump, but the report asserted the details are largely unclear and said that aspect of the probe did not result in Durham bringing charges.

The story prompted some skepticism. The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland outlined six reasons why she believes the New York Times “launched a preemptive assault” in anticipation of Durham’s special counsel report. Chuck Ross, an investigative reporter for The Washington Free Beacon, surmised the “flimsy” New York Times story will empower Democrats to give Attorney General Merrick Garland an “excuse to block Durham’s report, or frame it negatively for the media if it’s released.”

So far, Durham has secured one guilty plea: that of former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who was accused of falsifying a document in efforts to renew the authority to conduct FISA surveillance on onetime Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page. Clinesmith was spared prison time and faced a one-year bar suspension. This year, Durham endured setbacks when prosecutions against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann and Igor Danchenko, a key source for British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s anti-Trump dossier, ended in acquittal in Washington, D.C., and Northern Virginia, respectively.

Whenever Durham’s report is complete, Garland has said he would “like as much as possible to be made public,” but he also stressed there will be Privacy Act concerns and classification to consider.