REPORT:
Two officers stopped a 25-year-old male for an "investigative stop" in an area known for gang activity. The officers reported that they believed the man to be armed. The officers had both tasers and guns in their possession in the vehicle, but did not bring their tasers for to question the man. The officers reported that when they went to stop the 25-year-old that he did not stop, at such time one of the officers withdrew his gun and pointed it at the 25-year-old. He did reholster his gun but the officers reported that the 25-year-old kept his hands concealed and made "suspicious movements." The officers decided to initiate and arrest and reported that the 25-year-old tackled one of the officers while being handcuffed and attempted to obtain the gun of that officers. As the result of this reported hostility, the officers shot the 25-year-old male a total of three times - once in his back, once in his side, and once in his right arm. These events took place over the course of 13 seconds.
INVESTIGATION:
There were a number of eye witness accounts to the event described. During the investigation, both officers present at the shooting were placed on paid leave until further notice. An autopsy was conducted but kept the results private due to security concerns, which was also utilized for many aspects of the investigations of these events. Three investigations were conducted regarding this shooting. Those conducting investigations include: the Chief Officer of the precinct where the officers worked, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the Inspector General's office.
RESULTS:
In regard to the investigation completed by the Chief Officer, it was determined that both officers were justified in their actions due to the a later disclosed "suspicion of drug possession," and acted accordingly. No further action was taken. In regard to the investigation completed by the Board of Police Commissioners, it was determined that one officer was justified to take action in shooting the 25-year-old male but the other officer present was not. It was determined that the officer that was not justified was in violation of four areas and deferred further action to the Inspector General's office. In regard to the investigation completed by the Inspector General's officer, it was determined that there was not reasonable suspicion enough for the officers to take the actions that they did but also did not decide to pursue further consequences. The Inspector General's office cited uncooperative witnesses and lack of witnesses as a reason for their decision not to take action against the officer that was found to be unjustified in his actions by the Board of Police Commissioners. While no specified details could be released, a public statement was made that disciplinary action would take place and office level for the two officers involved, confirming that both officers retained their employment.DISCLAIMER: The events described are actually the events that occurred resulting in the death of Ezell Ford. He was killed by Sharlton Wampler and Antonio Villegas who did not face any consequences for taking the life of an innocent man.
コメント