Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.

Claim: The City of New York could not proceed with the case of murder of Eric Garner because the Justice Department was pursuing its prosecution.

Q1: Is there a law that prevents the city of New York making an investigation if there is a federal investigation?
A1: No, because De Blasio also said that it was a mistake for the city to wait for federal prosecutors to finish investigating Garner’s death before the police department began disciplinary proceedings. But there is no rule requiring the NYPD to do so.

Q2: Did other journalists point out that there was no legal requirement for the city of New York to not investigate if there was a federal request?
A2: Yes, because Nolan Hicks of the New York Post tweeted: 'There was nothing that prevented the de Blasio administration legally from bringing the administrative charges against Daniel Pantaleo while waiting on the Justice Department. City Hall says they held off on the Justice Department's behest.'

Q3: Did the federal prosecutors refuse to take the case of murder of Eric Garner because the Justice Department was pursuing their prosecution ?
A3: The NYPD could have started those proceedings years ago. In fact, it did start that process well before the Justice Department closed its civil rights investigation this year with no charges. The NYPD’s delay had a material effect, because it meant more requirements for prosecutors seeking to prove Pantaleo’s culpability.
user
justification: There not exists a law that prevents the city of New York making an investigation if there is a federal investigation.

verdict: 'Refuted'
assistant