A Pitchess motion is where you as the defendant seek to inspect a law enforcement officer’s personnel record for evidence of police misconduct. Defense attorneys typically bring a Pitchess motion when they suspect officers may have acted improperly, such as by filing a false police report or using excessive force.

California Senate Bill 1421 was signed into law in September 2018. This new law makes a Pitchess motion unnecessary for some types of information requests.

Under SB 1421, four types of police records are now open for public inspection. These records pertain to the situations when:

1. An officer shoots his gun at a person;
2. An officer uses force against another person and the result is death or great bodily injury;
3. There is a prior finding that an officer committed a sexual assault; and,
4. An officer commits a dishonest act (such as perjury or filing a false report).

After Senate Bill 1421, Pitchess motions are still relevant if:

• You seek information from an officer’s personnel file; and,
• That information is not authorized for inspection under SB 1421.

Examples of information you may seek that is not covered within SB 1421 may include:

• Records that show that an officer racially profiled; or,
• Records that show that an officer coerced a confession; or
• Records show other prejudicial acts or the falsification of evidence/testimony.

In accordance with Pitchess motions procedures and standards, a Pitchess motion must include:

1. A description of the type of records or information you seek; and,
2. A showing of “good cause” for the records’ release.

If the judge decides that a Pitchess motion shows “good cause” for disclosing an officer’s personnel records, the judge holds a private “in camera” hearing to decide which records are relevant to the case.

1. When can I gain access to police personnel files?

A strong defense to some criminal accusations is to show that a police officer committed misconduct against you. Some forms of misconduct are when officers:

• Use excessive force,
• Racially profile,
• Coerce confessions,
• Lie in a police report, and
• Plant evidence.

In misconduct cases, police records – in particular an officer’s personnel file – are relevant evidence because they allow you to see if the arresting officer in your case committed some type of misconduct in past cases. A showing of any type of pattern of misconduct would be critical to build an effective defense.

Under California law, you can attempt to obtain information from an officer’s personnel file by either:

1. Requesting this information pursuant to SB 1421; or,
2. Filing a Pitchess motion with the court.¹

2. What has been the effect of Senate Bill 1421?

California Senate Bill 1421 does four important things:

1. Makes certain police records open to public inspection;
2. Specifies what types of “records” are eligible for release;
3. Provides instructions on redacting certain information; and,
4. Prohibits disclosure of information in an officer’s personnel file in other cases.

2.1. Types of records open to public inspection

Under SB 1421, there are four types of personnel records that are open to public inspection. These are:

1. Records relating to an incident, or investigation, involving a police officer shooting his gun at a person;
2. A record relating to an incident, or investigation, involving a police officer using force against a person, and the result is death or great bodily injury;
3. Records relating to an incident in which there was a finding that a police officer engaged in sexual assault; and,
4. Records relating to an incident where there was a finding that an officer acted dishonestly.²

As to the fourth category of records, dishonest acts may include:

• Perjury;
• False statements;
• Filing false reports;
• Destroying evidence;
• Falsifying evidence; and,
• Tampering with evidence.³

2.2. Specific “records’ that may be released

In the four scenarios above, SB 1421 authorizes the public inspection of “records” found in a police officer’s, or other law enforcement officer’s, personnel file.

According to the Senate Bill, “records” include such items and information as:

• Investigative reports;
• Photographic, audio and video evidence;
• Transcripts or recordings of interviews;
• Autopsy reports;
• Documents setting forth findings or recommended findings; and,
• Copies of disciplinary records.⁴

2.3. Redacting of information

Senate Bill 1421 states that when authorized records are open for inspection, some information must get redacted, or edited, to protect the identity of certain parties and witnesses.

The information that gets redacted includes:

• Personal information (for example, addresses, telephone numbers, and names of family members);
• Confidential medical or financial information;
• Information prohibited by federal law;
• Information the disclosure of which would create a danger to an officer’s safety; and,
• Information where the public interest served by not disclosing it outweighs the public interest served by disclosing it.⁵

2.4. Disclosure of other records prohibited

Senate Bill 1421 does not provide for the full disclosure of all records within an officer’s personnel file. Public inspection is only available for the four types of records specifically listed in the bill (please see 2.1 above).

The disclosure of any other information from a personnel file is prohibited under the new law, unless allowed under Section 1043 of the Evidence Code.⁶

California Evidence Code 1043 EC applies to information contained within an officer’s personnel file. EC 1043 states that this information is privileged, and thus not obtainable, unless you file – and are successful in bringing – a Pitchess motion.

This means Pitchess motions are still relevant under California law; and, they must get filed to obtain records not authorized under SB 1421.

3. How do you file a Pitchess motion?

California Evidence Code sections 1043 and 1045 outline the process for filing a Pitchess motion. The process includes three important elements:

1. Procedural steps for filing the written motion;
2. A showing of “good cause;” and,
3. An “in camera” hearing.

3.1. Procedural steps

You file a Pitchess motion before the beginning of your criminal jury trial, typically before the preliminary hearing. It must be in writing.⁷

Under Evidence Code 1043 EC, a Pitchess motion must include:

1. Identification of the criminal court case, you, the officer(s) whose records are being sought, and the governmental agency that has custody of the records;
2. A description of the type of records that are being sought;
3. Proof that you have notified the agency that holds the records of the motion and proof of service; and,
4. An affidavit showing “good cause” for the disclosure of the records (this is often written and signed by your criminal defense attorney).⁸

3.2. Showing of “good cause”

A showing of “good cause” exists if the affidavit sets forth both:

1. A specific factual scenario that supports allegations of officer misconduct in your case; and,
2. Reasons why the misconduct would be material to your defense.⁹

Example: Wendell is arrested after an undercover officer claims that Wendell tried to purchase drugs from him. Wendell files a Pitchess motion, and his “good cause” affidavit asserts that Wendell never tried to buy drugs from the officer, and the officer was simply lying.

The affidavit also explains that any information in the officer’s personnel record that would establish a history of dishonesty and filing false reports would be relevant information for Wendell’s case. The court decides that this affidavit is sufficient to show “good cause” for disclosure of the records under Evidence Code 1043 EC.²⁵

For police misconduct to have “materiality” to the pending litigation, there must be:

1. A link between the criminal charges in the case and the defense; and,
2. A showing why the requested information would make a difference to the defense.¹⁰

3.3. “In camera” hearings

If the above procedural requirements are meant, and good cause is shown, then a Pitchess motion moves onto an “in camera” hearing conducted by a judge.

“In camera” means that the hearing is private rather than in open court. The only people that usually attend are:

• The officer whose records are being sought; and,
• Any other people the officer is willing to have present (usually the custodian of records for the police department).¹¹

During the in camera review hearing, the trial court judge evaluates whether or not the information in the officer’s personnel files is relevant to your defense. Only information that the judge determines is relevant will be disclosed to you. The judge does not serve as a trier of fact and consequently does not decide credibility or weigh the evidence.¹²

Records that cannot be disclosed

There are certain types of information that the judge cannot disclose to you (unless the information is exculpatory, which means suggesting that you are innocent). Records that are off-limits include:

1. Information about complaints against the officer(s) that occurred more than five (5) years before the alleged police misconduct in your case,
2. The personal conclusions (as opposed to the disciplinary action) of any other officer investigating a citizen’s complaint against the officer(s), and
3. Facts that are so remote that disclosing them would have little or no practical benefit.¹³

Recipients of Pitchess materials may not reveal them for other purposes than the case at hand. If there is good cause, the court may issue a protective order to keep the information secret.¹⁴

4. What are the possible outcomes of a Pitchess motion?

There are two possible outcomes to a Pitchess motion. These are that the motion is:

1. Granted, and information is disclosed; or,
2. Denied, and information is not disclosed.¹⁵

4.1. Motion granted

If a court grants a Pitchess motion, and the judge finds records relevant to your defense, the records are not typically turned over. Rather, the judge provides you the name and contact information of anyone that previously filed a complaint against the officer.¹⁶

Your attorney then contacts those persons to interview them about the facts and can present them as possible witnesses. However, if the parties are unavailable or not findable, then you can obtain the actual records of an earlier complaint.¹⁷

If the judge orders disclosure of the officer’s personnel records, but the agency that keeps the records refuses to comply with the court’s orders, then the state must dismiss the charges against you.¹⁸

4.2. Motion denied and information not disclosed

If a court denies a Pitchess motion, and you are then convicted of the charges against you, you can appeal the conviction.

In the appeal, you would argue, in part, that your Pitchess motion should not have been denied because you showed “good cause” to gain access to the officer’s personnel file. The appellate court would then determine whether denying the Pitchess motion was an “abuse of discretion.”

If the lower court never conducted an in-camera review on the Pitchess motion, the appellate court can opt to “remand” the case so the lower court can conduct the in-camera hearing. Only when the lower court conducts an in-camera review – and then denies the motion – can an appellate court then reverse the denial.¹⁹

5. Why is it called a Pitchess motion?

Pitchess motions are named after the 1974 California Supreme Court case of Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal. 3d 531.

6. What is a Brady letter?

Prosecutors and police officers may keep a Brady letter (also referred to as a Brady list), which is a list of the names of police with criminal convictions or with past incidents of lying.

Officers placed on a Brady List risk termination or demotion. If they testify in trial, the defense could impeach their credibility.

Additional resources

For more in-depth information, refer to these scholarly articles:

• Pitchess v. Brady: The Need for Legislative Reform of California’s Confidentiality Protection for Peace-Officer Personnel Information – McGeorge Law Review.
• Reconciling Brady and Pitchess: Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs v. Superior Court, and the Future of Brady Lists – San Diego Law Review.
• Good Cop, Bad Cop – Anyone’s Guess: A Review of the Pitchess Motion for Criminal Discovery in the State of California – Whittier Law Review.
• Reevaluating California’s Pitchess Process in Light of the Police Officer Misconduct Problem – Available at SSRN.
• Constructing a Better Estimate of Police Misconduct – PolicyMatters Journal.

Legal References:

HOW TO WIN A PITCHESS MOTION — A PREMIER CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY EXPLAINS

Police misconduct can greatly influence what happens in a criminal case. Learn how the best criminal defense attorneys use Pitchess Motions to obtain information about improper police activity.

HOW TO WIN A PITCHESS MOTION

Getting a Pitchess Motion granted by the judge requires your attorney to understand the law and know how to use evidence to support the motion. Award-winning criminal law attorney Aaron Spolin generally fights Pitchess Motions by taking these steps: (1) utilize specific facts to allege officer misconduct and (2) articulate a logical link between the misconduct and the defense we will use.

Prosecutors might keep a “Brady List,” which is a list of the names of police with criminal convictions or past incidents of lying.

Former Prosecutor Aaron Spolin Explains How to Win a Pitchess Motion

1. Utilize Specific Facts: The best way to win a Pitchess Motion is with specific facts gathered from an independent investigation and through the discovery process. The Pitchess Motion must allege officer misconduct by providing a specific factual scenario establishing a plausible fact-based need for the records. Further, a judge is more likely to grant a Pitchess Motion if the request is narrowly tailored to the potential misconduct or impropriety.
2. Articulate a Logical Link Between the Misconduct and the Defenses: It is not enough to simply state that we believe the evidence would be helpful to your defense. We must articulate a logical link between the misconduct and the defenses we will use.

For example, if we claim that an officer used excessive force when arresting a defendant who is charged with resisting arrest, we should include the police report as an exhibit to the motion to show that there was an altercation during the arrest. We would not seek records of an officer’s sexual harassment since it has nothing to do with the defense. Instead, we would narrowly tailor the request to obtain evidence of similar past wrongdoings by the officer.

Another example may be where a defendant claims that an officer falsified information or planted evidence. A declaration should be filed with the motion stating exactly what the officer did or what evidence was planted. Allegations under oath that a detective fabricated evidence may rise to the level of misconduct to gain access to the personnel file where the credibility of the officer becomes an important question.

A Pitchess Motion should be filed if there is any indication that an officer acted improperly.

WHAT IS A PITCHESS MOTION?

A Pitchess Motion is a legal document requesting the court to allow the defense to inspect a law enforcement officer’s personnel file for evidence of police misconduct. These motions are typically brought during the pre-trial phase when the defense suspects that an officer may have acted improperly.

In the Pitchess Motion process, California is balancing two interests:

1. Protecting the privacy of its employees and maintaining secrecy of government information
2. Complying with mandates of due process and allowing access to records with good cause

Due Process Gives You a Right to This Information

The Constitutional right to due process requires that the prosecution provide the defendant with discovery. Under a court ruling in the case Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), the prosecution must disclose any favorable evidence related to guilt. Discovery includes any evidence related to the case, whether or not the prosecution would ultimately use it for trial.

Some examples of evidence that must be provided to the defendant through the informal discovery process include the following:

• Physical evidence obtained in the investigation
• Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of witnesses
• Written and/or oral statements made by the defendant and any codefendants

Format of Pitchess Motion

A Pitchess Motion must include the following information:

• The time and place the motion will be heard
• The officer’s name
• A description of the information sought
• A statement based on reasonable belief that the government has the records or information sought
• An affidavit or declaration showing materiality
• An affidavit or declaration showing good cause for the disclosure

Good Cause and Materiality

In order to show good cause and materiality, the Pitchess Motion must make a valid claim justifying the discovery of the records being requested. The motion must have a declaration that explains which defense theory will be used and how that theory is tied to the specific facts from the case. It must be shown that the records being sought will aid in this defense.

However, it is important to note that a defendant is not required to disclose their defense strategy to the prosecutor. Thus, these documents can be filed under seal to protect the defendant from disclosing too much to the other side.

What Kind of Evidence Can a Pitchess Motion Be Used For?

Some police records are openly available to the public under California Senate Bill 1421 and do not need to be obtained through Pitchess Motion. For example, an officer’s use of force resulted in great bodily injury or death must be disclosed if requested through the informal discovery process. Also, evidence of dishonest acts by a police officer, such as perjury, must be disclosed. Other records that must be disclosed include when an officer shoots their gun at a person and if there is a prior finding that an officer committed a sexual assault. However, there are narrow exceptions in the records that are available to the public.

Other types of records are protected and cannot be obtained by simply requesting a copy from the police agency. A defendant must file a Pitchess Motion to gain access to other records that might be useful in their defense. Examples include prior complaints and records showing the following:

• Use of excessive force
• Fabricating probable cause
• Racial profiling
• Unlawful traffic stops
• Planting or tampering with evidence
• Sexual harassment
• Coercing confessions

Those records may be contained in investigative reports, photographs, audio and video files, transcripts of interviews, autopsy reports, disciplinary records, and other documents setting forth or recommending findings.

PROCESS FOR BRINGING A PITCHESS MOTION

A Pitchess Motion can be brought at any time after a person is charged with a crime, but before trial. It is a pre-trial motion. There is no set time limit for bringing a Pitchess Motion. However, it should be filed as soon as possible in order to give the defendant enough time to litigate the motion and conduct an adequate investigation if the motion is granted and evidence is obtained. It can even be filed before the preliminary hearing.

What Happens If the Motion Is Granted?

If the court decides the Pitchess Motion meets the requirements, it will grant the motion. If granted, the judge will review the records in private in what is called an in-camera hearing. That means the judge will review the records in their chambers with a representative from the police department, but without the defense attorney or District Attorney. If the judge finds anything relevant, it will then be revealed to the defendant.

Further, if the judge finds that some records are relevant, the judge does not turn over actual records to the defense. Instead, the judge will provide the defendant’s attorney with the names and contact information of potential witnesses, including anyone who has made complaints against an officer. This will allow the attorney to contact those people and gather information.

What Happens If the Pitchess Motion is Denied?

All is not lost if the court denies your Pitchess Motion. If the motion was litigated in a California Superior Court, the issue is then preserved for an appeal. You can request that the Court of Appeal review the Superior Court’s actions and decision in deciding the Pitchess Motion. The Court of Appeal reviews a Superior Court’s denial of the motion for an abuse of discretion.

There are several ways to attack an appeal. Your attorney can argue that the Superior Court abused its discretion by denying the motion and withholding records. Also, the Superior Court’s procedures can be challenged. The Court of Appeal will determine if proper procedures were followed, such as whether the court held a hearing on the motion or improperly denied it without an in camera hearing.

HOW A LAWYER MAKES A DIFFERENCE

Police misconduct can result in evidence that is ultimately used against the defendant to get an unfair outcome. source

PITCHESS MOTIONS IN CALIFORNIA

One widespread defense strategy a good attorney might employ when you’re charged with a crime is to seek to discredit the testimony of the law enforcement officer who arrested you.  This is an especially relevant strategy when the officer is suspected of misconduct, such as using excessive force or filing a false report.

Simply put, a Pitchess motion is a defendant’s request to inspect a law enforcement officer’s personnel file for evidence of misconduct, often part of the pretrial process when they believe the police officer acted improperly.

California Senate Bill 1421 was signed into law in 2018, making a Pitchess motion unnecessary for some types of requests for information because they are open for public inspection.

These open public records include situations when police shoot their weapon at someone, use force that results in great bodily injury or death, a finding they committed a sexual assault, or a dishonest act, such as perjury.

However, Pitchess motions are still necessary if the defendant wants information from an officer’s personnel file and the information was not authorized for inspection under SB 1421.

Some examples of information a defendant typically seeks include records where the officer used racial profiling, prejudicial acts, coerced confessions, or falsifying testimony or evidence. A Pitchess motion must describe the type of records or information they seek and show “good cause” to release the records.

Suppose a judge decides that a Pitchess motion shows “good cause” for disclosing a police officer’s personnel records. In that case, the judge holds a private “in-camera” hearing to determine whether the records are relevant to the case.

One of the most effective tools in implementing this strategy is for your attorney to file a Pitchess motion, a specialized discovery motion in California law where the defendant requests access to the law enforcement officer’s personnel records.

WHAT IS THE ORIGIN OF A PITCHESS MOTION?

The Pitchess motion originated from the landmark California case, Pitchess v. Superior Court, in 1974. In this case, Sheriff Peter J. Pitchess challenged the defendant’s request for complaints filed against the deputies involved in his arrest.

The California Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant, holding that defendants have a right to access a law enforcement officer’s personnel records for information that might impugn the officer’s credibility or demonstrate their propensity for violence.

WHEN AND WHY IS THIS MOTION USED?

As noted, the primary purpose of a Pitchess motion is to uncover potential material that can be used to challenge or impeach the credibility of a police officer, especially in cases where the officer’s conduct is directly relevant to the topic at hand.

This is typically based on their past misconduct. For instance, if a defendant alleges that an officer used excessive force or fabricated evidence, a Pitchess motion can be instrumental in obtaining records that may support these claims.

This motion is particularly significant in the context of police misconduct records because it provides a legal avenue for accessing information that is typically considered privileged and confidential.

This includes details about an officer’s history of misconduct complaints, disciplinary actions, and other relevant behavioral patterns. Such information can be crucial in shaping the defense strategy and potentially influencing the trial’s outcome.

WHAT ARE THE CHANGES IN THE LAW?

As noted, as of 2018, Senate Bill 1421 has implemented essential changes in the law that make certain police records available to the public without the need to file a Pitchess motion. The main provisions of SB 1421 apply to records related to:

• Officer-Involved Shootings and Use of Force: Records relating to incidents where police fired a weapon at someone or when the officer’s use of force resulted in death or great bodily injury are now available to the public.
• Sexual Assault: Records involving sustained findings of sexual assault committed by on-duty law enforcement officers against members of the public are available under this law.
• Dishonesty Related to Criminal Investigations: The law also allows access to records where an officer was found dishonest in reporting, investigating, or prosecuting a crime. This includes perjury, false statements, filing false reports, destruction, falsifying, or concealing of evidence.

While SB 1421 broadens access to certain types of law enforcement records, it doesn’t eliminate the need for Pitchess motions.

Examples of police record information not covered by SB 1421 may include incidents involving racism or racial profiling, coerced confessions, etc. If a certain file or piece of information is unavailable under SB 1421, your attorney may still have to file a Pitchess motion to obtain access. Under SB 14 21, records can include the following:

• Pictures;
• Video and audio evidence;
• Transcripts of any interviews;
• Recording of any interviews;
• Investigation reports;
• Disciplinary records;
• Documents of recommended findings;
• Autopsy reports.

Notably, when authorized records are open for inspection, some information must be redacted or edited to protect certain people, such as witnesses. The information that is usually redacted includes the following:

• Personal info, such as addresses, phone numbers, and names of family members;
• Any information that would place the officer’s safety at risk;
• Any information where the public interest is not served;
• Medical or financial information.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PITCHESS MOTION IS FILED?

A successful Pitchess motion must go through a particular series of steps, as discussed below.

Filing the Motion

The attorney must include the following essential information when filing a Pitchess motion:

• Identifying information (i.e., defendant, court case, officer in question, agency holding the records, etc.);
• A description of the specific records being requested;
• Proof that the relevant agencies have been given notice that the records are needed; and
• Proof of good cause as to why the records are needed. (A judge will NOT grant a Pitchess motion unless good cause is established.)

In-Camera Hearing

Suppose the attorney has presented the motion correctly and proven good cause. In that case, the judge will hold an in-camera hearing (meaning “in private”) with only the police officer in question and anyone the officer wishes to be present.

During this hearing, the judge will review police files to determine which information is relevant to the case. Only information that the judge determines is relevant will be disclosed to the defendant. Off-limits records include the following:

• Complaints against the officer occurring more than five years before the alleged police misconduct;
• Personal conclusions of any other officer investigating a citizen complaint against the officer, and
• Information so insignificant that disclosing it would have little or no practical benefit to the case.

Notably, any Pitchess materials can’t be disclosed for purposes other than the case in question, and the judge could issue a protective order to keep the information private if there is a good cause.

GRANTING OR DENYING THE MOTION

After the in-camera hearing, the Judge will rule whether to grant or deny the Pitchess motion.

If the motion is denied: None of the police records requested will be released. If the motion is granted, remember that the requested files will still not be released to the defense in most cases outright.

Instead, the Judge will provide the name and contact information of the people who filed previous complaints against the officer that generated those files, and your attorney may then interview them to get their testimony. Only if those witnesses are not available to testify will the actual records be released.

If the Pitchess motion is granted and the agency in question refuses to release the officer’s personnel records, the charges will be automatically dismissed.

Prosecutors might keep a “Brady List,” which is a list of the names of police with criminal convictions or past incidents of lying. 

source

Pitchess Motions

A Pitchess motion (from Pitchess v Superior Court, 11 C3d 531 (1974)) is a special type of motion for discovery that requests information from a police officer’s confidential employment file. The need for this motion usually arises when the defendant alleges police misconduct. The type of information generally sought after with the Pitchess motion includes personnel records which show prejudicial acts, falsifying evidence and/or testimony, and the use of excessive force while on the job. To be successful on this motion, defense counsel must be able to establish that this information will pertain to some aspect of the defense.

Based on the Pitchess case, California Evidence Code sections 1043 to 1046 provide avenues to obtain some of the information which is sought by a Pitchess motion. Under these provisions, when defense counsel seeks to obtain officer personnel records they must file a written motion with the court. The written motion must be accompanied by other documents to be valid such as: a notice of the motion, a declaration or affidavit, police report copies detailing the detention and arrest of the defendant, and the proof of service.

The most detailed part of filing a Pitchess motion is the affidavit. Under California Evidence Code section 1043(b)(3), the affidavit must be based on “good cause” by demonstrating sufficient facts which show why such information is necessary and relevant to the issues in the defense’s case. The relevance between the information sought and the specific defense theory must have a strong link to prove such information will be material, and thus establish good cause. The court will determine whether good cause exists at a hearing where the agency holding the record, the district attorney, and the defendant and his/her attorney discuss the matter.

Under California Evidence Code sec. 1045, once the court is satisfied that good cause exists, it must then look at the evidence sought and determine whether it is indeed relevant to the defense’s case.

The court’s analysis is done through an “in camera” hearing, meaning that it is conducted outside of the presence of the jury and counsel. This hearing must be held by the court if the defendant shows that it was possible that the officer engaged is some sort of misconduct. Usually facts are alleged by the defense which shows how officer misconduct could’ve occurred. The defense may establish this by merely providing a different recitation of the factual circumstances, or may deny the facts as presented in the report by law enforcement. Garcia v Superior Court, 42 C4th 63, 72. In this examination, the court does not act as the trier of fact and thus will not determine credibility[1] or weigh evidence. [2]

Where the judge agrees with the defense that the information is relevant, an order is issued to disclose the information. Generally, the court will only mandate the disclosure of the names and contact information for witnesses involved in previous events with the officer. However, there are ways for the defense to get the actual reports of the incidents under certain circumstances, i.e. the witness is not available, the witness doesn’t remember, or refuses to discuss the incident.

Certain information is precluded from disclosure in a Pitchess motion. This includes events that happened too remotely in time, or the conclusions noted by internal affairs officers during the police investigation. Yet some of this information may still be available to the defense if it can show it relates to exculpatory information as provided by the Brady case.[3] Other information that is not disclosable is the personal information of the officer such as his/her place of residence.Hackett v Superior Court, 13 C4th 96 (1993).

Under a central case dealing with Pitchess motions, Alford v Superior Court, 29 C4th 1033 (2003), the court is required to order the recipient of Pitchess materials to not disclose them for any other purpose. Additionally, Alford holds that the district attorney will not automatically get access to the Pitchess documents. Protective orders may be issued to ensure the continued secrecy of the information involved. However, a protective order will only be issued if there is good cause to support it.

California Evidence code 1040(b) generally allows the government (i.e. law enforcement) to exercise a privilege over confidential information for which disclosure is against the public interest. Normally, to achieve the disclosure of such information, one needs to show that the interest to the public outweighs the agency’s need for disclosure. The use of a Pitchess motion can sometimes obtain access to the information even if the privilege is found valid. A law enforcement agency can be subject to discovery sanctions if it does not turn over the information in favor of continuing a claim to privilege. The situation can lead to a dismissal of the prosecution’s criminal complaint where there is no valid claim to privilege and the agency still refuses to provide the info requested.[4]

Whenever the prosecution appeals the allowance of a Pitchess motion, the appellate court will look to see if an abuse of discretion occurred. If the previous court denied the motion without conducting its in camera review, the appellate court can choose to remand the case and require the in camera hearing.[5] A reversal of the denial will only occur where the court has in fact done an in camera hearing and subsequently denied the motion.[6]

Pitchess motions can be used in DUI cases where a defendant believes the officer engaged in some sort of misconduct during the DUI investigation. This often occurs where there was some type of undue aggressiveness by police. A defense attorney will use the Pitchess motion process described above to obtain information about the officer’s past misconduct and inclination to treat suspects in an abusive manner. The Pitchess information can also be used to show past prejudicial acts by the officer, or a pattern of falsifying evidence. If you believe any of these situations occurred in your case, it is important to inform your criminal defense attorney to determine if a Pitchess motion will help your defense.

[1] Warrick v Superior Court, 35 C4th 1011 (2005)
[2] People v Gaines, 46 C4th 172 (2009)
[3] City of Los Angeles v Superior Court, 29 C4th 1 (2002)
[4] Dell M v Superior Court 70 CA3d 782.
[5] People v Gaines 46 C4th 172.
[6] People v Memro 38 C3d 658

source

Discovery And Police Officers: The Pitchess Process

Discovery relating to a peace officer’s job performance or disciplinary actions must follow a unique, statutory process

Under California law, certain information related to peace officers enjoys a conditional privilege. This limited privilege is held by both the peace officer and the agency. (Michael v. Gates (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 737, 744.) So whether you are representing an officer in a personal-injury or employment matter, or suing a law enforcement agency for battery or other civil-rights’ violations, you need to understand what information is privileged and how to get the information you need – or how to protect your client’s right to privacy

To obtain information from officer personnel records, complaint investigations, or disciplinary action against a peace officer, a party must follow a unique, statutory discovery method. Although this discovery vehicle is generally codified at Evidence Code sections 1043 et seq., it is often referred to as Pitchess, for the landmark California Supreme Court case Pitchess v. Superior Court (Echeveria) (1979) 11 Cal.3d 531. This article discusses the development of the Pitchess process and describes what kind of information is conditionally privileged. The article concludes by offering guidance through the Pitchess-motion procedure, which generally consists of a noticed motion setting forth, by counsel’s affidavit, good cause for the court to conduct an in camera review to determine which records are relevant and to be produced.

The development of the Pitchess process

In 1974, the Legislature adopted Penal Code section 832.5.This section requires law-enforcement agencies to establish a procedure for investigating citizen complaints against peace officers. Section 832.5 also requires the agencies to retain records of the original complaint and investigation for at least five years.

That same year, the California Supreme Court decided Pitchess. Cesar Echeveria was charged with battery of certain deputy sheriffs. Echeveria claimed that he acted in self-defense in response to excessive force by the deputies. As part of his defense, Echeveria sought investigations of citizen complaints of excessive force against those same officers. The Pitchess Court permitted Echeveria to obtain the investigations over Sheriff Pitchess’s objections. (Pitchess, supra, 11 Cal.3d at 534.)

The Pitchess decision rocked the law-enforcement world, and record shredding and discovery abuses allegedly followed. (See San Francisco Police Officers’ Assn. v. Sup. Ct. (City & Cty. of San Francisco) (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 183, 189.) To curtail these practices, the Legislature enacted changes to the statutory scheme to balance the right to privacy of the peace officer and the employing agency with the interest of justice. (See City of Azusa v. Sup. Ct. (Madrigal) (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 693, 696-97.) In 1978, Penal Code section 832.5 was amended at the same time Penal Code sections 832.7, 832.8 and Evidence Code section 1043 were added by Senate Bill No. 1436. With these amendments, the Legislature attempted to protect a party’s right to a fair trial and the officer’s privacy interest. (People v. Mooc (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1216, 1227.)

Evidence Code section 1043(a) sets forth the initial Pitchess procedure:

In any case in which discovery or disclosure is sought of peace or custodial officer personnel records or records maintained pursuant to Section 832.5 of the Penal Code or information from those records, the party seeking the discovery or disclosure shall file a written motion with the appropriate court or administrative body upon written notice to the governmental agency which has custody and control of the records. The written notice shall be given at the times prescribed by subdivision (b) of Section 1005 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Upon receipt of the notice the governmental agency served shall immediately notify the individual whose records are sought.

Case law has refined the parameters of this process. Notably, a Pitchess motion trumps general discovery rules in both the civil and criminal context. (Davis v. City of Sacramento (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 393, 400; see also, People v. Sup. Ct. (Gremminger) (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 397, 403 [statutory Pitchess scheme takes precedence over discovery procedures in the Code of Civil Procedure]; Fagan v. Sup. Ct. (People) (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 607, 310 [prosecutor must comply with Pitchess process to disclose Pitchess information of retired peace officer defendant].) So, information protected by the Pitchess privilege is not discoverable under Civil Discovery Act inspection demands. (See Cty. of Los Angeles v. Sup. Ct. (Uhley) (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 1605, 1609; but cf. Dominguez v. Sup. Ct. (City of San Gabriel) (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 6, 11 [finding that the City’s rights under Evidence Code sections 1043 et seq. were not impaired irrespective of how plaintiff’s motion to compel was entitled].)

In fact, the agency with custody or control of the records has no obligation to respond to a Code of Civil Procedure section 2031 request for production of Pitchess information. Moreover, the failure to respond to such a request does not waive any Pitchess objections the agency may have. (Uhley, supra, 219 Cal.App.3d at 1611.) Nor may Pitchess information be disclosed pursuant to a California Public Records Act request. (Hemet v. Sup. Ct. (Press-Enterprise Co.) (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1411, 1422; Cty. of Los Angeles v. Sup. Ct. (Kusar) (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 588, 600.) The privilege applies to both pre-trial discovery and live testimony. (Fletcher v. Sup. Ct. (Oakland Police Dep’t) (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 386, 403.)

Whether the Pitchess process is available in administrative proceedings is uncertain. In Brown v. Valverde (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 1531, the First District Court of Appeal found that the Pitchess process is not available in Department of Motor Vehicle administrative per se hearings. (Id., 183 Cal.App.4th at 1535.) In Riverside County Sheriff’s Department v. Stiglitz (2012) 147 Cal.Rptr.3d 292, however, the Fourth District court of appeal expressly analyzed and “completely” distinguished Brown, supra. The Stiglitz court found that an administrative hearing officer may rule on a Pitchess motion where such discovery is relevant in a Government Code section 3304(b) hearing, which is an administrative appeal of discipline imposed against a public safety officer. (Id., 147 Cal.Rptr. at 308, 313.) On January 16, 2013, the California Supreme Court granted review of the Fourth District’s opinion, depublishing the appellate opinion and leaving the issue uncertain until the case is decided.

As for federal court, the Pitchess process is not binding. (Jackson v. Cty. of Sacramento (E.D.Cal.1997) 175 F.R.D. 653, 654.) The California Pitchess discovery rule requires that the requesting party make showing of materiality, which was specifically rejected in Federal Rule of Evidence 402. (Soto v. City of Concord (N.D.Cal.1995) 162 F.R.D. 603, 609 at n.2.)

Information subject to the Pitchess privilege

Penal Code sections 832.7 and 832.8 provide the foundation for what kind of information related to peace officers is subject to the conditional Pitchess privilege. The information is protected regardless of whether it could be obtained from other sources. (Hackett v. Sup. Ct. (Glin) (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 96, 100.)

Penal Code section 832.7(a) states, in pertinent part:

Peace officer or custodial officer personnel records and records maintained by any state or local agency pursuant to Section 832.5, or information obtained from these records, are confidential and shall not be disclosed in any criminal or civil proceeding except by discovery pursuant to Sections 1043 and 1046 of the Evidence Code. . . .

Penal Code section 832.8 states,

As used in Section 832.7, “personnel records” means any file maintained under that individual’s name by his or her employing agency and containing records relating to any of the following:

(a) Personal data, including marital status, family members, educational and employment history, home addresses, or similar information.

(b) Medical history.

(c) Election of employee benefits.

(d) Employee advancement, appraisal, or discipline.

(e) Complaints, or investigations of complaints, concerning an event or transaction in which he or she participated, or which he or she perceived, and pertaining to the manner in which he or she performed his or her duties.

(f) Any other information the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

“Personal data” does not include the officer’s identity, unless the officer was the subject of a complaint or disciplinary hearing, the employing agency, dates of current employment, or other information relating to the officer’s current job status. (Comm’n on Peace Officer Standards & Training v. Sup. Ct. (Los Angeles Times Commc’ns, LLC) (2007) 42 Cal.4th 278, 294-96, 299.) Nor does personal data include an officer’s salary. (Int’l Fed’n of Prof’l & Technical Eng’rs v. Sup. Ct. (Contra Costa Newspapers, Inc.) (2007) 42 Cal.4th 319, 341.)

The definition of “personnel records” pertaining to “complaints” is expansive and includes many types of documents related to potential or actual disciplinary action against an officer. Such records are not limited to Internal Affairs investigations, but also include Citizen Review Board’s reports. (Davis v. City of San Diego (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 893, 898, 900.) Furthermore, “[u]nsustained complaints are discoverable as well as sustained complaints.” (People v. Zamora (1980) 28 Cal.3d 88, 93, n.1 (citing Saulter v. Muni. Ct. (People) (1977) 75 Cal.App.3d 231, 240; Kelvin L. v. Sup. Ct. (Cabell) (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 823, 829).)

“Personnel records” also encompass disciplinary proceedings against peace officers. (Copley Press, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (Cty. of San Diego) (2006) 39 Cal.4th 1272, 1279.) Disciplinary proceedings and citizen complaints are subject to the Pitchess scheme regardless of “the mechanisms set up by a local jurisdiction to handle such matters . . . .” (Berkeley Police Ass’n v. City of Berkeley (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 385, 401 (citing Copley Press, Inc., supra, 39 Cal.4th at 1294-95); see also San Francisco Police Officers’ Ass’n, supra, 202 Cal.App.3d at 188 (determining that a local rule allowing the complainant access to the hearing officer’s decision or director’s recommendation violates confidentiality provisions).) The Pitchess privilege remains applicable to “personnel records” even after a peace officer leaves her or his employment, so long as the former peace officer was employed as an officer when the conduct being investigated occurred. (Gremminger, supra, 58 Cal.App.4th at 406.)

The agency often argues that any disclosure of information related to complaint investigations should be limited to the names and addresses of witnesses, as typical in criminal cases. In the criminal context, disclosure was limited to names and contact information of witnesses and complainants because the court believed the information was sufficient for the requesting litigant to prepare his or her case. In civil litigation, however, the rationale for this limitation may not apply. The court in Haggarty v. Superior Court (Guindazola) (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 1079, 1090 stated:

The central rationale underlying the rule limiting discovery to witness identifying information is that the actual documents of third-party complaint information often have minimal relevance and constitute a substantial invasion of officer privacy. This reasoning does not apply in this case. As compared with the third-party complaint situation, the information contained in the Internal Affairs report is highly probative. Guindazola has the burden of proving the elements of his claims, and the investigation at issue concerns the very incident that is the subject of the civil claim. Additionally, Haggerty’s reasonable privacy concerns are diminished because he is the defendant in the litigation and the requested internal investigation records concern his actions that are alleged to be wrongful and will be fully litigated at trial. (Ibid.)

Moreover, the criminal-case opinions explicitly hold that if the information disclosed proved inadequate, the requesting party is not precluded from discovering additional information from the personnel files. (See, e.g., Carruthers v. Muni. Ct. (People) (1980) 110 Cal.App.3d 439, 442 [recognizing right to receive additional discovery if initial disclosures prove inadequate]; City of Azusa, supra, 191 Cal.App.3d at 696-97 [noting that disclosure of additional information was proper under Pitchess, supra, where witnesses were unavailable for interviews or could not remember details of events about which they had complained]; Kelvin L., supra, 62 Cal.App.3d at 829 [approving disclosure of witness identification information, but noting that if for any reason that information was inadequate, petitioner could move for further discovery].)

The nuts and bolts of the Pitchess procedure

The Noticed Motion

Evidence Code section 1043 sets forth the requirements of the Pitchess motion, and states,

(b) The motion shall include all of the following:

(1) Identification of the proceeding in which discovery or disclosure is sought, the party seeking discovery or disclosure, the peace or custodial officer whose records are sought, the governmental agency which has custody and control of the records, and the time and place at which the motion for discovery or disclosure shall be heard.

(2) A description of the type of records or information sought.

(3) Affidavits showing good cause for the discovery or disclosure sought, setting forth the materiality thereof to the subject matter involved in the pending litigation and stating upon reasonable belief that the governmental agency identified has the records or information from the records.

(c) No hearing upon a motion for discovery or disclosure shall be held without full compliance with the notice provisions of this section except upon a showing by the moving party of good cause for noncompliance, or upon a waiver of the hearing by the governmental agency identified as having the records.

A party must set forth with “some specificity” the type of information sought. (Warrick v. Sup. Ct. (City of Los Angeles Police Dep’t) (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1011, 1021.) The information requested must demonstrate that the party is not simply going on a fishing expedition. (City of Santa Cruz, supra, 49 Cal.3d at 85.) In City of Santa Cruz v. Municipal Court (Kennedy) (1989) 49 Cal.3d 74, the Court found that “other complaints of excessive force” sufficiently described the type of records sought and met the standard for good cause. (See id., 49 Cal.3d at 90-91.) In addition, if a party is seeking records related to an excessive force claim, the motion must also include the relevant police reports on the circumstances of the force alleged. (See Evid. Code, § 1046.)

The motion should be served on opposing counsel as well as the agency, or agencies, with custody or control of the records requested. (See Evid. Code, § 1043(c).)

The Affidavit(s) Showing Good Cause

The affidavit or declaration demonstrating good cause is the most critical component of the Pitchess motion. Evidence Code section 1043(b)(3) requires a showing of “good cause” by affidavit, which must demonstrate both “materiality” as well as a “reasonable belief” that the government agency has custody and control of the records or information from the records. An affiant need not, however, prove the existence of particular records – the “‘reasonable belief’ . . . may be premised upon a rational inference from known or reasonably assumed facts.” (City of Santa Cruz, supra, 49 Cal.3d at 90 (emphasis in the original).)

“This two-part showing of good cause is a ‘relatively low threshold for discovery.’” (Warrick, supra, 35 Cal.4th at 1019 (citing City of Santa Cruz, supra, 49 Cal.3d at 83); see also People v. Gaines (2009) 46 Cal.4th 172, 182 (accord).) These “‘relatively relaxed standards’ serve to ‘insure the production’ for the trial court review of ‘all potentially relevant documents.’” (Warrick, supra, 35 Cal.4th at 1016 (citing Santa Cruz, supra, at 49 Cal.3d 84).)

“Information is material if it ‘will facilitate the ascertainment of the facts and a fair trial.’” (Haggerty, supra, 117 Cal.App.4th at 1086 (internal citations omitted).) The California Supreme Court articulated four factors by which a party can demonstrate materiality: (1) a logical connection between the information requested and the party’s claims at issue; (2) the information requested is tailored to support the party’s; (3) the requested discovery will support or is likely to lead to information that would support the claims; and (4) the theory under which the information might be admissible at trial. (Warrick, supra, 35 Cal.4th at 1027; see also Gaines, supra, 46 Cal.4th at 182 (accord).) Obtaining information to impeach an officer’s credibility is permitted. (Garden Grove Police Dep’t v. Sup. Ct. (Reimann) (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 430, 433 (review denied).)

Note, however, that the trial court is not tasked with evaluating whether a party’s theories are credible, or whether the party will prevail. The trial court does not weigh or assess the allegations, and does not determine whether they are persuasive. (Warrick, supra, 35 Cal.4th at 1025-1026.) A party is not required to present a credible or believable factual account of, or a motive for, police misconduct. (Uybungco v. Sup. Ct. (San Diego Police Dep’t) (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1043, 1049.) A party must simply present a plausible factual foundation for the discovery requested: a scenario that could or might have occurred. (Warrick, supra, 35 Cal.4th at 1026.)

Importantly, the affidavit for “good cause may be submitted by counsel.” (People v. Memro (1985) 38 Cal.3d 658, 676, overruled on other grounds.) The California Supreme Court expressly allows counsel’s declaration to be made on information and belief – no personal knowledge is required. In fact, “the Legislature expressly considered and rejected a requirement of personal knowledge [for section 1043(b)(3) affidavits].” (City of Santa Cruz, supra, 49 Cal.3d at 88-89 (emphasis in original. Indeed, “counsel need not disclose the source of the information asserted or how it was obtained . . . .” (Garcia v. Sup. Ct. (City of Santa Ana) (2007) 42 Cal.4th 63, 72.) The declaration may be filed under seal if necessary to protect the attorney-client or attorney work product privileges. (Id., 42 Cal.4th at 68.) Submitting a declaration by counsel protects a party from cross-examination on the document.

Thus, the declaration lays out the theory of the case, explaining why the records are essential to the issue. If you are making a Pitchess motion, don’t be coy in the declaration. Lay out the facts, and demonstrate to the court why these records are crucial to your theory of the case. The declaration is your best chance to have a “presence” in chambers while the court is conducting the in camera review to determine which documents the court will order produced. The court generally will not stop the in camera proceedings to question you about why certain documents might be relevant, or request additional briefing on an issue. The declaration is your only opportunity to refute the agency’s objections to relevance in chambers. If you are opposing a Pitchess motion, scrutinize the supporting affidavit for whether the facts averred to adequately support the requested information.

The In Camera Review and Production

The court will conduct in camera review of the documents before ordering any of the records produced. On occasion, the custodian of records for the agency will appear with the relevant documents on the day of the hearing on the Pitchess motion, so the court may proceed with the in camera inspection right away. The court may also schedule the in camera review for a later date.

Upon order of the court, “the custodian of records is obligated to bring to the trial court all ‘potentially relevant’ documents . . . .” (City of Santa Cruz, supra, 49 Cal.3d at 84.)

[I]f the custodian has any doubt whether a particular document is relevant, he or she should present it to the trial court. . . [T]he locus of decision making is to be the trial court, not the . . . . custodian of records. The custodian should be prepared to state in chambers and for the record what other documents (or category of documents) not presented to the court were included in the complete personnel record, and why those were deemed irrelevant or otherwise nonresponsive . . . . The trial court should then make a record of what documents it examined before ruling on the Pitchess motion.

(Mooc, supra, 26 Cal.4th at 1229.)

To make an adequate record of the documents examined, the court may photocopy the records the custodian produced and place them in a confidential file, or the court can make a list of or state for the record the documents examined. (Sisson v. Sup. Ct. (Dumanis) (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 24, 38.) A proper record facilitates any appellate review for abuse of discretion.

To determine which records, if any, will be ordered produced, the court reviews the documents in camera for relevance. To be relevant, the records must contain information which may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. (Gaines, supra, 46 Cal.4th at 182; Warrick, supra, 35 Cal.4th at 1024; Haggerty, supra, 117 Cal.App.4th at 1087.) The information discovered does not have to be ultimately admissible at trial. (Larry E. v. Sup. Ct. (City of Long Beach) (1987) 194 Cal.App.3d 25, 31-32.) The court may also consider whether the information may be obtained from business records, rather than individual personnel records, where the issue concerns the policies or pattern of conduct of the employing agency. (Evid. Code, § 1045(c).)

Despite the permissive standard of relevance, the Evidence Code places certain restrictions on what information can and cannot be disclosed. Evidence Code section 1045(b) enumerates specific exceptions to what information is per se not relevant and cannot be disclosed. Section 1045(b) finds that information that is not relevant includes:

(1) Information consisting of complaints concerning conduct occurring more than five years before the event or transaction that is the subject of the litigation in aid of which discovery or disclosure is sought.

(2) In any criminal proceeding the conclusions of any officer investigating a complaint filed pursuant to Section 832.5 of the Penal Code.

(3) Facts sought to be disclosed that are so remote as to make disclosure of little or no practical benefit.

Furthermore, “[r]ecords of peace officers or custodial officers, . . . including supervisorial officers, who either were not present during the arrest or had no contact with the party seeking disclosure from the time of the arrest until the time of booking, or who were not present at the time the conduct is alleged to have occurred within a jail facility, shall not be subject to disclosure.” (Evid. Code, § 1047.) The court must also consider whether the information may be obtained from business records, rather than individual personnel records, where the issue concerns the policies or pattern of conduct of the employing agency. (Evid. Code, § 1045(c).)

The in camera proceeding may take minutes, days, or even a series of hearings of a course of months. With the budget cuts, be prepared to provide a private court reporter. The transcript will be sealed, and any documents ordered produced will be subject to a protective order. At minimum, the protective order will prohibit the records disclosed or discovery from being used “for any purpose other than a court proceeding pursuant to applicable law.” (Evid. Code, § 1045(e).) The court may also issue a protective order which justice requires to protect the officer or agency from unnecessary annoyance, embarrassment or oppression” upon a showing of good cause pursuant to a motion of the agency or the officer. (Evid. Code, § 1045(d).)

A Pitchess motion is a powerful tool to obtain information from the personnel records of peace officers, including complaint investigations or disciplinary actions by the employing agency. Often, law enforcement agencies have dedicated Pitchess units to respond to – i.e., oppose – Pitchess motions. Understanding how the Pitchess process works will help you make an informed decision on how to best serve your client’s interests, whether you are making a Pitchess motion, or opposing one. source

When and Why Does a Judge Have to Grant a Pitchess Motion?

Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess) has been interpreted in many ways over the years, mostly associated with a criminal defendant’s right to certain discovery of police officer personnel file materials to support a defense to defendant.

The Reader’s Digest Version:  A judge must grant a Pitchess Motion if a defendant shows such information in a police officer’s personnel records concerning police officer misconduct in the past is material to the subject matter of the case against defendant.  The judge’s order, under Pitchess, can only order production of documents stretching five years back, not more.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Nine current or former Northern California police officers were charged Thursday in a federal corruption investigation that found evidence they committed civil rights violations and fraud in an effort to get a pay raise and lied on reports to cover up the use of excessive force, U.S. authorities said.

Ismail J. Ramsey, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California, filed four indictments that outlined charges including wire fraud, deprivation of rights under color of law, conspiracy against rights, and conspiracy to distribute anabolic steroids. Nine police officers and one community service officer are named in the charges, though only two are charged in multiple indictments.

The investigation centered on the departments in Antioch and Pittsburg, two cities in the San Francisco Bay Area. Only three of the officers remain employed by the departments and were not on active duty, officials said.

Arrest warrants were served Thursday in California, Texas and Hawaii, said Robert Tripp, special agent in charge of the FBI’s San Francisco Field Office. One has not yet been arrested, officials said.

Morteza Amiri, Eric Allen Rombough, Patrick Berhan, Samantha Peterson, Brauli Rodriguez Jalapa and Ernesto Juan Mejia-Orozco pleaded not guilty to various charges, and most were released on condition that they posted property bonds, the Bay Area News Group reported.

Rombough appeared in Oakland federal court dressed in ripped clothes, with bloody hands and knees and wearing a shirt that read: “don’t weaken,” the Bay Area News Group reported.

His attorney, Will Edelman, told the judge that there was “absolutely no reason” that his client had to be taken into custody and handcuffed because he would have willingly appeared if ordered.

The defendants could face decades in federal prison if convicted of the charges.

source

Nine current or former Northern California police officers were charged Thursday in a federal corruption investigation that found evidence they committed civil rights violations and fraud in an effort to get a pay raise and lied on reports to cover up the use of excessive force, U.S. authorities said.

Ismail J. Ramsey, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California, filed four indictments that outlined charges including wire fraud, deprivation of rights under color of law, conspiracy against rights, and conspiracy to distribute anabolic steroids. Nine police officers and one community service officer are named in the charges, though only two are charged in multiple indictments.

The investigation centered on the departments in Antioch and Pittsburg, two cities in the San Francisco Bay Area. Only three of the officers remain employed by the departments and were not on active duty, officials said.

Arrest warrants were served Thursday in California, Texas and Hawaii, said Robert Tripp, special agent in charge of the FBI’s San Francisco Field Office. One has not yet been arrested, officials said.

Morteza Amiri, Eric Allen Rombough, Patrick Berhan, Samantha Peterson, Brauli Rodriguez Jalapa and Ernesto Juan Mejia-Orozco pleaded not guilty to various charges, and most were released on condition that they posted property bonds, the Bay Area News Group reported.

Rombough appeared in Oakland federal court dressed in ripped clothes, with bloody hands and knees and wearing a shirt that read: “don’t weaken,” the Bay Area News Group reported.

His attorney, Will Edelman, told the judge that there was “absolutely no reason” that his client had to be taken into custody and handcuffed because he would have willingly appeared if ordered.

The defendants could face decades in federal prison if convicted of the charges.

Tripp said the arrests were the result of a two-year investigation.

“Any breach of the public’s trust is absolutely unacceptable,” Tripp said while discussing charges against Antioch officers that include using their official positions as officers to deprive people of their rights.

Charges against Amiri, Rombough and Devon Christopher Wenger say the three Antioch police officers conspired between February 2019 and March 2022 “to injure, oppress, threaten and intimidate residents of Antioch, California” and later falsified reports about the encounters.

In obscenity-laden text messages, the three men referred to some suspects as “gorillas.” They laughed and joked about harming people who apparently had surrendered or appeared to be asleep by setting Amiri’s police dog on them or Rombough shooting them with a 40mm “less-lethal” projectile launcher, the indictment said.

Prosecutors say from 2019 to 2021, the dog bit 28 people while Rombough used the launcher 11 times in 2020 and 2021.

Amiri posted graphic photos of the dog wounds, and Rombough said he was keeping the projectiles to make a trophy flag, according to the indictment.

In one case, a man suspected of five armed robberies had given up and was lying on the ground when Amiri’s K-9 bit him, the indictment alleged.

In one text, Amiri wrote: “let’s (f-obscenity) some people up next work week.”

In one 2020 text sequence, Amiri says that he confronted a transient he believed had stolen his mail “and dragged him to the back of a car to ‘discuss’ the matter.”

“Lol. Putting a pistol in someone’s mouth and telling them to stop stealing isn’t illegal,” he texted. “It’s an act of public service to prevent further victims of crimes”

“Defendants authored police reports containing false and misleading statements to suggest that the force they used was necessary and justifiable,” the indictment said. “In truth and in fact, and as the Defendants well knew, Defendants willfully used excessive force in numerous incidents, including those identified in this Indictment.”

Police unions did not immediately respond to requests for information on whether the defendants had lawyers who can speak on their behalf. Emails to the Pittsburg and Antioch police departments seeking comment were not immediately returned.

Thousands of incendiary text messages by more than a dozen officers in the Antioch Police Department had previously come to light and led to a federal lawsuit. The texts contained derogatory, racist, homophobic and sexually explicit language. In some of them, the officers bragged about making up evidence and beating up suspects. They freely used racial slurs and made light of the police killing of George Floyd in 2020.

The city of Antioch, with about 115,000 residents 45 miles east of San Francisco, was once predominantly White but has diversified in the last 30 years. Federal and state prosecutors have dropped or dismissed dozens of cases that relied on the impugned officers, and the city now faces a federal civil rights lawsuit over the text messages.

Jalapa, Mejia-Orozco and Amanda Carmella Theodosy/Nash, as well as Antioch community service officer Peterson, were charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and wire fraud surrounding allegations they had other people take and complete online university courses toward a criminal justice degree. The police departments offered reimbursement for college tuition and pay raises for those who graduate college, prosecutors said.

Two Antioch officers, Daniel Harris and Wenger, were charged with several counts related to distributing anabolic steroids.

Another Antioch officer, Timothy Manly Williams, faces charges related to the obstruction of a federal investigation for allegedly using a personal cellphone in 2021 to talk to the target of an FBI wiretap investigation and then made sure the call wasn’t recorded or accurately logged.

“Today is a dark day in our city’s history, as people trusted to uphold the law, allegedly breached that trust and were arrested by the FBI,” Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe said in a statement. “As our city absorbs this tragic news, we must come together as one. Today’s actions are the beginning of the end of a long and arduous process.”

Thorpe is among three Black, progressive members of the five-person council who have said they are committed to holding police accountable.

“To those that have accused me and others of being anti-police for seeking to reform the Antioch Police Department, today’s arrests are demonstrative of the issues that have plagued the Antioch Police Department for decades,” he added. source

The suspected shooter reportedly left his home with two guns and ran to a nearby golf course, where he was killed by responding officers

An off-duty Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputy was shot and killed Tuesday by authorities on a golf course following an alleged domestic violence incident.

Police in Fontana, 50 miles east of Los Angeles, were called to a home in the 16000 block of Colonial Drive just after 3:45 p.m., the Fontana Police Department told Fox News Digital. A caller said her husband had fired a gun inside the home, police said.

The suspected shooter, Alejandro Diaz, 45, left the home with two guns when officers arrived and ran to the Sierra Lakes Golf Club, police said.

“He started shooting. Shooting up everything. Scaring the golfers, shooting at police. It was bad,” witness Myesha Dowe told Fox News Los Angeles.

Officers confronted Diaz, the off-duty deputy, following reports of an armed man near the Sierra Lakes clubhouse and he was shot.

“After giving several verbal commands, a lethal force encounter occurred,” a Fontana police statement said. “Immediately after the shooting, officers, including two technical reserve paramedics, provided advanced life-saving measures while San Bernardino County fire medics arrived and continued medical treatment.”

Diaz was taken to a hospital, where he died. An autopsy is pending. No Fontana police officers were injured.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, which is investigating the shooting. The LASD referred Fox News Digital to a San Bernardino County Sheriff’s news release on the shooting. source

New Haven Chief of Police Karl Jacobson on Tuesday recommended the termination of four officers involved in an incident that left Richard “Randy” Cox paralyzed last June.

Officers Luis Rivera, Jocelyn Lavandier, Oscar Diaz and Ronald Pressley as well as Sgt. Betsy Segui were placed on paid administrative leave in June of 2022. In November, they were charged with reckless endangerment and cruelty to persons; they pleaded not guilty to those charges. Pressley retired from the New Haven Police Department in January and received a pension, despite the charges.

Jacobson recommended the terminations following the conclusion of an internal investigation and hearings for the officers.

Jacobson noted that two other officers involved in the incident – a supervisor and an officer involved in detention – would also be disciplined. Jacobson said the penalty for those officers would be less than 15 days suspension.

“This department has gone through a lot since that incident, this community has gone through a lot,” Jacobson said at a press conference. “And the message to the community is that we … will be transparent and we will be accountable.”

According to Jacobson, New Haven’s Board of Police Commissioners will make the final decision about whether the officers are fired by early May.

Jacobson said that the internal investigation yielded enough information to pursue termination, despite the criminal case being ongoing.

“I think the days of waiting for criminal cases to conclude needs to stop; that’s one of the things the community has asked us to do,” he said.

He added that Segui and Diaz would still be eligible to receive a pension despite the charges and potential termination since their conduct did not violate the “bad boy” clause of their contracts.

In June of 2022, the officers placed Cox in a police van for criminal possession of a firearm and breach of the peace. Cox was seriously injured when the van’s driver stopped abruptly at an intersection to avoid a collision, causing Cox to hit his head on a metal partition. Despite asking for repeated help, the officers did not immediately render aid to Cox. Video footage later showed the officers dragging Cox by his feet to a wheelchair.

Jacobson said his department has implemented training and policy changes since the incident, including adding seat belts to all prisoner vans, training officers on de-escalation and revising department policy on transporting suspects in police vehicles.

“I asked my officers to continue to take each situation under those guidelines and to treat members of this community with respect and dignity, whether they’re an arrestee or complaintant, or whatever the case may be,” Jacobson said.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump said Cox and his family were “encouraged” by the discipline for the four officers. Crump added that Cox is still paralyzed from the chest down because of injuries sustained in the back of the police van.

“These officers were sworn to protect their community, but they inflicted unnecessary and traumatizing harm to Randy, who will pay the price for the rest of his life,” Crump wrote in a statement.

New Haven Mayor Justin Elicker Randy applauded the actions by the police department at a separate press conference on Wednesday.

“When Randy Cox was arrested, he entered a police van able to walk and now he is not able to walk. We need to ensure that this never, ever happens again,” he said. source

Randy Cox, paralyzed following arrest, sues for $100M

“Now the ball is in the city of New Haven’s court,” attorney Ben Crump said.

The man who became paralyzed from the chest down while handcuffed in police custody has filed a federal lawsuit against the city of New Haven and New Haven Police Department officers for $100 million.

According to the lawsuit, Randy Cox, 36, was sitting handcuffed, but otherwise unrestrained, in the back seat of a police van on June 19 when Officer Oscar Diaz abruptly hit the brakes. Former acting police chief Regina Rush-Kittle said in June that this was an evasive maneuver to avoid an accident. Cox was thrown across the back of the van and immediately could not move his body, the lawsuit said.

Cox’s family and his attorneys said the injuries sustained in the vehicle and the alleged neglect from other officers have left him unable to care for himself and leaves him with little opportunity to earn a living for the rest of his life.

“We think that there is no value that can replace the damages and the hurt and the harm and the mental anguish and the torture that he’s endured every day, every hour, every minute, every second, every second of his life,” attorney Ben Crump, who is representing the family, said in a news conference Tuesday afternoon announcing the lawsuit. “We did not have to file this lawsuit to tell you why the city needs to do the right thing.”

Crump said at least $20-30 million is necessary to maintain Cox’s “basic quality of life.”

Video of the incident released by police showed Cox was handcuffed but not secured by a seatbelt in the back of a police van when a sudden stop caused him to fall headfirst into the van wall. Cox had been arrested and charged with criminal possession of a firearm and breach of peace. As of Tuesday, these charges are still active and awaiting a plea.

After he was “violently thrown” across the van, Cox shouted that he was hurt. Oscar Diaz, the officer who the suit alleges negligence; recklessness; excessive force; denial of medical treatment; and failure to provide medical assistance, said he couldn’t pull over immediately, but did so two minutes later, according to the complaint. Diaz then called 911 so an ambulance could meet them at the detention center.

After arriving at the detention center, before the ambulance arrived, Diaz and other officers removed Cox from the back of the transport wagon, the suit said.

At the center, Cox “indicated several times that he could not move and he thinks he broke his neck,” the suit said. Despite Cox’s plea, the suit said the officers attempted to move him and “place him in a wheelchair to be processed and eventually dragged him to a cell by his shoulder while still in handcuffs.”

Body camera footage shows New Haven officers dragging Cox out of the van, moving him into a wheelchair and asking him, “How much did you have to drink?” followed by statements like, “He is perfectly fine.”

Cox’s sister LaToya Boomer said at a press conference on Tuesday that she wonders how her brother, who was readmitted to the hospital Tuesday for bedsores, would have been progressing had he not been moved so much, or at all, after he was thrown from his seat in the van.

“We don’t want any lip service, we want action,” she said. Boomer called for criminal charges to be raised against officers, saying she wants those responsible for her brother’s injuries to be “fired and arrested.”

Doreen Coleman, Cox’s mother, has taken on the role of her son’s primary caregiver son after the incident. She asked officers to hold themselves accountable for their actions. “Own up to it,” she said at the press conference.

The named defendants, officers Diaz, Betsy Segui, Ronald Pressley, Jocelyn Lavandier, and Luis Rivera, are currently on leave, pending the results of a state investigation into their actions, police said.

Segui declined ABC News’ request for comment; Pressley, Lavandier, and Rivera have not responded. Diaz was not able to be reached.

“I’m not gonna say what those officers felt, but it seems like they thought he was intoxicated. So they weren’t taking his claims as legitimate,” New Haven Police Chief Karl Jacobson said in an interview with ABC News on Tuesday. “We as a police department, especially [with] someone in custody, need to take everybody’s claims legitimately, and build that legitimacy with the community.”

New Haven Mayor Justin Elicker told ABC News that, pending the outcome of the investigation, discipline for officers could potentially include being fired. The lawsuit did not come as a surprise for Jacobson and Elicker, who have spoken with Cox’s family, attorneys, and spent time with Cox.

“We are deeply committed to making sure something like this never happens again, and also to ensure that Randy gets justice. And we’ve implemented a lot of different policies, training in the police department to ensure that something like this doesn’t happen again,” Elicker said. “We’ll continue to talk with our attorneys [throughout] this process.”

“What happened to Randy was not right. We’re doing everything possible to ensure that it doesn’t happen to anyone else. And that’s all we can do,” Jacobson said. “We can take the next right step and I feel like we’re doing that to make you know, this such a terrible situation a better situation where, you know, Randy can move on in his life and have what he needs, and we can fix the wrongs in the police department so that this doesn’t happen again.”

The Connecticut State Police are still investigating the incident.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Justice Department said it was closely watching the investigation into the circumstances that left Cox paralyzed.

“All suspects taken into police custody must be afforded timely and appropriate medical care in the event of an emergency,” said U.S. Attorney Vanessa Roberts Avery in a statement in July. “If federal action is warranted, the Justice Department will pursue every available avenue to the full extent of the law.” source

---

All 5 officers charged in Tyre Nichols’ death removed or failed to activate their body-worn cameras.
They were caught by a ‘sky cop’ camera installed to monitor crime hotspots.

• All 5 officers charged in Tyre Nichols’ death failed to capture the entire incident on body cameras.
• 3 of the 5 removed their cameras during the still-active scene, according to new police docs.
• All 5 officers were fired and have since been charged with second-degree murder.

All five Memphis Police officers charged in the fatal beating of Tyre Nichols failed to capture the entire encounter on their body-worn cameras, and three of the five fully removed their body-worn cameras during the still-active scene, according to newly-released police documents obtained by Insider.

Following Nichols’ death, the police department released portions of responding officers’ body-worn camera footage, as well as CCTV video of the encounter. The most thorough accounting of the deadly confrontation, however, came from controversial “sky cop” cameras that are installed throughout Memphis in crime hotspots and have cost the city more than $10 million.

Police documents obtained by Insider on Tuesday paint a picture of repeated missteps by responding officers, one of whom admitted to taking and then sharing a photo of Nichols, bloodied, bruised, and handcuffed on his personal cellphone in the aftermath of the confrontation.

The Tennessee Peace Officers Standards and Training Commission, a state board agency, received the police documents late last month as part of five decertification requests made by the Memphis Police Department for the five officers involved.

Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr., Justin Smith, Demetrius Haley, and Tadarrius Bean were all fired and have since been charged with second-degree murder in Nichols’ death.

On the evening of Jan. 7, Memphis police officers stopped Nichols on suspicion of “reckless driving,” though police officials have since said they haven’t found evidence that Nichols was driving erratically. An initial confrontation between Nichols and several officers ensued as they pulled him out of his vehicle and pushed him to the ground.

A second confrontation occurred after Nichols got up and ran away as an officer tried to Tase him. Body-camera footage showed several officers beating Nichols while he was on the ground.

Nichols died three days after the traffic stop.

Tennessee policy requires officers to activate their body cameras during “all law enforcement encounters and activities.”

But investigators said Martin failed to activate his body-worn camera during the first confrontation with Nichols. “At some point,” he also removed the camera from his duty vest and placed it in an unmarked vehicle, according to the documents.

According to the records, Bean also removed his body-worn camera from his duty vest and put it on the trunk of a squad car during the “active scene” and then walked away from the device while it was still recording in order to have a conversation with his fellow officers about the incident.

Mills’s camera caught the initial interaction with Nichols, officials said, but the officer later removed his duty vest and placed it on the trunk of an unmarked vehicle with the camera still attached.

Both Haley and Smith also failed to capture the encounter with Nichols in its entirety, according to police records.

Six cops in total have been fired as a result of the beating, and seven more officers with the department are facing an internal investigation and possible discipline, the City of Memphis announced Tuesday.

Tyre Nichols – MURDERED BY DIRTY PIGS

ENJOY LIFE AFTER THIS GUILTY OR NOT BY A COURT WONT MATTER YOUR NAMES ARE FINISHED
IF YOU END UP GUILTY ITS ADSEG SINGLE MAN CELL 23 HOUR LOCKDOWN FOR EX-COPS OR MAINLINE AND TORTURED!
IF YOU END UP NOT-GUITLY IN COURT, THE STREETS AND THE BUSINESS WORLD GOT YOU COVERED!

The image from video released on Jan. 27, 2023, by the City of Memphis, shows police officers talking after a brutal attack on Tyre Nichols by five Memphis police officers on Jan. 7, 2023, in Memphis, Tenn. Nichols died on Jan. 10. The five officers have since been fired and charged with second-degree murder and other offenses.

Four of the five former Memphis Police officers who have been charged in the death of Tyre Nichols had previous infractions with the department, according to Memphis police personnel records shared with NPR.

Former officers Demetrius Haley, Desmond Mills, Emmitt Martin, Justin Smith and Tadarrius Bean were fired Jan. 20 and are now being charged with murder. Video of the Jan. 7 incident was released Friday.

Four of those officers — Haley, Martin, Mills and Smith — were reprimanded or suspended earlier for their failure to report when they used physical force, failure to report a domestic dispute, or for damages sustained to their squad cruisers, according to the files from Memphis police. Bean did not have any reprimands or suspensions in the files.

The two discipline cases about the use of force focused on whether the officers filed the required reports about the incidents and did not appear to examine if the officers’ used of force was warranted.

Here is a look at the officers’ records:

Demetrius Haley

Haley started at the department in August 2020. He violated department policy when, in February 2021, he did not fill out a response to resistance form after he grabbed a woman’s arm to handcuff her. The forms must be filled out if an officer uses any part of their body “to compel compliance,” according to the file.

In a hearing regarding the incident, Haley said he misjudged the amount of force needed to warrant filling out the form. His lieutenant said Haley was a “hard-working officer” who “routinely makes good decisions” and “he was sure that this was a limited event.” Haley was given a written reprimand.

In August 2021, Haley crashed into a stop sign while responding to a call about an aggravated assault and was given a traffic ticket. During the hearing about the incident, Haley said that as he was driving to the scene, a call came over the radio that one of the responding officers was holding the suspect at gunpoint and that he sped there “only thinking about the officer’s safety.”

The hearing officer wrote that “Officer Haley took full ownership for the accident and was very humble during the hearing” and the violation was dismissed.

Desmond Mills, Jr.

Mills graduated with a degree in criminal justice from West Virginia State University in 2013 and began at the Memphis Police Department in March 2017.

In March 2019, Mills violated procedure when he dropped his personal digital assistant (PDA) into the street while entering his squad car. The device was then run over by a separate car.

It was Mills’ first infraction, and he immediately reported the incident to his union representative, so he received a written reprimand, according to department records.

Later that month, Mills failed to file a response to resistance form when he used physical force to take a woman down to the ground so she could be handcuffed and arrested. In the hearing in August 2021, Mills said he did not realize his actions necessitated use of the form and was again issued a written reprimand.

Emmitt Martin III

Martin graduated from Bethel University in 2015 with a degree in criminal justice and started at the department in March 2018.

In March 2019, a loaded handgun was found in the rear passenger side of a squad car used by Martin and his partner. Martin said he failed to do a proper pre- and post-shift inspection, and only inspected the car from the outside. During his shift that day, he and his partner conducted two traffic stops, in which the suspects were placed in the backseat where the gun was found. Additionally, the officers did not do inspections after the suspects left the vehicle, as is protocol. Martin was issued a three-day suspension without pay, according to the files.

In September 2020, Martin violated protocol by mishandling a domestic abuse complaint between two sisters, one of whose husband requested a report. Martin did not take the report and said he did not believe one was necessary, reasoning that the parties involved were intoxicated and the man’s wife – the alleged victim of abuse – did not want the report. The responding officers, including Martin, threatened the involved parties that if they had to take a report, both sisters would be arrested, according to department records.

A fellow officer and lieutenant at the disciplinary hearing defended Martin, saying the victim didn’t want a report and Martin is not one to “shirk responsibility.”

“Memphis Police Officers are directed by department policy and state law to make a complete report on the scene of Domestic abuse calls,” the hearing officer wrote. “Officer[s] cannot base their decision to arrest based [on] the victim’s consent or on the perception of the victim’s willingness to cooperate with prosecution.”

Martin was issued a one-day suspension without pay.

In a 2021 performance evaluation, Martin ranked as exceeding expectations in dealing with the public.

“Officer Martin is respectful when dealing with others regardless of their sex, race, age, or rank,” the evaluation stated. “He approaches his calls with a positive attitude and is well received when dealing with the public. He is continually a top leader in arrests and calls, and not one person he has arrested has complained.”

Justin Smith

Smith began at the department in March 2018. In January 2021, he was passing a vehicle and crashed into its rear, causing it to spin and crash into a third vehicle, which had two people inside. All parties were sent to the hospital in non-critical condition.

Smith said the driver of the second vehicle went right and then left into his lane suddenly. He admitted to speeding, but said his memory was somewhat unclear due to his minor head injury from the airbag, according to a summary from the disciplinary hearing.

Smith was issued a citation, suspended for two days without pay and ordered to take remedial driver training.

Tadarrius Bean

Bean started with Memphis police in August 2020. He had no prior infractions from the department on his record.

By Ayana Archie

REMEMBER THESE LONG ASS VIOLENT VIDEOS ARE STILL REDACTED SO YOU KNOW IT WAS EVEN WORSE 

Police-issued body worn camera at an intersection. There is no audio for the first minute.

Someone within the City of Memphis, and I hope it’s the Chief of Police, understands that the murder of Tyre Nichols is not about rogue officers. It’s not about bad apples. It’s about a police culture that encourages brutality and indifference, and if that culture can’t change, the Memphis Police Department has forfeited its right to patrol the streets.

1.

The City of Memphis has released four videos. Everyone will focus on the last three because they capture Mr. Nichols’ murder. But someone in the city made the decision to also release body camera footage (Video 1 above atop article)  from an officer who was present when Memphis police first stopped Mr. Nichols. So far as I know, this officer has not been named, has not been charged, and was not present when Mr. Nichols was beaten to death. But if you wonder whether the murder is connected to a culture within the department, this is the video to watch.

The body camera in this video captures the moments after Mr. Nichols stopped his car. It’s worn by an officer who arrives just as another officer reaches into Mr. Nichols’ car, drags him out and, assisted by a third officer, forces Mr. Nichols to the ground.

At this point, the police apparently know nothing about Mr. Nichols except that he is a Black man who was allegedly driving recklessly. No video yet disclosed by Memphis confirms this allegation and the Chief of Police has said she has seen no evidence to support it. But even assuming it is true, the officers know nothing to suggest that Mr. Nichols was armed or violent. Indeed, in the course of the entire evening, no officer indicates they had ever seen Mr. Nichols before. They don’t even imply that they knew him by reputation. So far as they know, he is simply a young Black male motorist who may have driven recklessly, and nothing more.

Yet there is no way to describe the officers’ behavior except as aggressive, abusive, and belligerent. If anyone wants to know what the warrior mentality looks like on the street, watch this stop. This is how Memphis officers treat Black male motorists about whom they know virtually nothing. Mr. Nichols, whom the police variously describe as “thin” and “slim,” is submissive and frightened as he is surrounded by what looks like three or four much larger Memphis police officers. If you don’t trust any of my adjectives, or if you doubt any of this description, I strongly encourage you to watch the video of the body camera footage (Video 1 above atop article) (These officers were part of a special unit that the Memphis Police Chief has disbanded, to her credit. The question, however, is whether she also changes the cultural mindset that made the officers in that unit behave as they did.)

The officers sprayed a chemical agent in Nichols’ eyes, apparently several times. This agent burns horribly and makes it extremely difficult to see. A person sprayed will reflexively turn their head and try to wipe their eyes, which is exactly what the officers did when the spray got in their own eyes. As they did, Mr. Nichols got up and ran from the scene. As he ran, an officer fired a taser at him and believes that he hit him.

One group of officers chased after Mr. Nichols, even though the ostensible threat—reckless driving—had ended. At least two remained at the scene, apparently because of the chemical agent in their eyes. And as one officer complains that he “can’t see shit,” he sends out his hope for what should happen to Mr. Nichols when his colleagues finally catch him:

“I hope they stomp his ass.”

He says this though he knows his body camera is recording every word he says. It is the sort of unrehearsed, unmediated declaration that throws open a window into a department’s culture. If extralegal violence were unheard of in the Memphis Police Department, if there weren’t a cultural expectation that a person who makes the police look silly has to be “stomped,” this officer wouldn’t have expressed his hope on tape. Tellingly, the other officer at the scene does not react or object to this statement, at least not that we can see or hear.

2. 

Pole camera video contains no audio

Have you ever seen someone beaten to death? Not on television, but in real life. At a certain point, the repeated blows will render the victim utterly helpless. They can’t run away. They can’t cover their face. They can’t protect themselves. Yet they’re still conscious; it’s actually much more difficult to knock someone unconscious than it appears on TV. They can still cry out and make pitiful, ineffectual attempts to escape. They crawl and moan while blows rain down. More kicks to the head or back. More punches to the face.

If you’ve never seen someone beaten to death, now you can.

The second video body camera footage (Video 2 above) is taken from a camera attached to a pole in a residential neighborhood. There is no audio. It provides a largely unobstructed view of Mr. Nichols being beaten to death by the police. It’s horrific.

When the camera picks up the scene, Mr. Nichols is already on the ground, surrounded by four officers. One, and perhaps two officers spray him in his eyes. As Mr. Nichols reflexively tries to wipe his eyes, some officers continue to spray him while others scream, “Give me your hands! Gimme your hands, bro!” As Mr. Nichols turns his body to free a hand to wipe his eyes, the police become more aggressive. At least two officers kick him in the back and head. At this point, a fifth officer arrives and beats Mr. Nichols across the back with his police baton. It’s hard to tell, but Mr. Nichols may also have been tased again during this period.

By this time, Mr. Nichols is badly weakened and defenseless. The officers lift him up and, as he is surrounded by four officers, a fifth punches him viciously in the head and face. Over and over. His head snaps back and drops. No officer tries to intervene or prevent any part of the assault. Three days later, he died in the hospital.

 3.

Police-issued body worn camera video at a second location, a residential neighborhood. There is no audio for the first minute.

In some ways, the last 25 minutes of the second video are as hard to watch as the first five. After they beat Mr. Nichols, the police drop him to the ground. He is handcuffed from behind. After a couple minutes, they drag his limp body along the ground and prop him up against a police car. And for about a quarter of an hour, the police do nothing. No one administers first aid. No one checks his welfare.

By this time, Mr. Nichols is barely conscious. He cannot remain propped against the car. He falls to the left and lolls helplessly. The police grab him and prop him up again. He falls to the right. They prop him up again. More officers arrive. They mill around, talking with each other. Someone places a first aid bag next to Mr. Nichols but for long minutes, no one bothers to open it. A crowd of officers gathers. An officer adjusts his pants and reties his shoes. Finally, an ambulance arrives and takes him away, 22 minutes after the beating ended.

This simply doesn’t happen absent a culture of indifference.

4.

Police-issued body worn camera video at a second location, a residential neighborhood.  There is no audio for the first minute.

The third body camera footage (Video 3 above) and fourth body camera footage (Video 4 above) videos are body camera footage from officers at the scene of the beating. They add detail to the video provided by the pole camera, and because they are footage from body cameras, they include audio. On these videos, you can see Mr. Nichols sprayed repeatedly with the chemical agent and the futile attempts he makes to wipe his eyes. You can hear his groans. You can hear him calling out for his mother, again and again. You can see that he never makes any aggressive movements and that an officer has his arm even as he is shouting for Mr. Nichols to give him his hands.

And when the beating is finally over and Mr. Nichols lay prone, you can see the officers wandering around their police cars, catching their breath and checking their phones. You can hear them recount the details of the chase, both for each other and the officers who arrived after it was all over. You can hear them as they get their story straight. “He was high on something, bro. He was high as a motherfucker.” “He strong, I tell you that. He strong as a motherfucker.” “I opened that car door, he punched me.” “He reached for my gun. He had his hand on my gun.” None of this happened. At least, you can’t see any of it on the videos released by the city.

5. 

If someone asked you what happened in Memphis, what would you say? Would you say that five Memphis police officers have been charged with murder after they killed an unarmed man? That’s an easy and familiar headline: “Police Kill Unarmed Man” Can you file it all away now and move on, reassured by the fact that, thanks to the tapes, these five officers will almost certainly be convicted and sent to prison for a very long time? Is that the story?

Someone in the City of Memphis understands that that’s not the story. The murder of Tyre Nichols came at the end of a long series of culturally-determined decisions and choices involving scores of officers with decades of combined experience. It’s a story about recruitment. About training. About locker room culture. It’s a story about incentives and relationships. It’s about how Memphis police learn to patrol “those” neighborhoods and deal with “those” people, a designation that transcends simple narratives about race. It’s about what it means in Memphis to be a “good cop,” and the stories the good cops tell the new guys about the difference between legal and extralegal justice.

It’s about everything that adds up to the difference between dignity and brutality, and if the City of Memphis and the Memphis Police Department can’t change the culture they’ve created, their officers don’t deserve the badge.

After this essay appeared, the media reported that the Memphis Police Department had suspended the officer whose body camera captured the first video and who expressed the hope that other officers would “stomp” Mr. Nichols. source

DIRTY MURDERS WANNABE POLICE, NOTHING MORE THAN DIRTY PIGS! REAL COPS HAVE INTERITY, HONOR AND RESTRAINT!
HERE IS BODY CAM FULL FOOTAGE HERE ITS LONG AND UNCUT VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED.
PLEASE ITS NOT PLEASANT BUT WE ALL MUST SEE WHAT IS DONE IN THE DARK WILL COME TO LIGHT

Memphis police just released the graphic body cam footage from Tyre Nichols’ brutal arrest — and the video is every bit as disturbing as Tyre’s family and law enforcement have described it.

In the clips, pulled from both body cam and overhead cameras, you see officers swarm Tyre — demanding he get down and give up his hands. Although he’s laying on his side with an officer on top of him, he’s hesitant to lie flat on his stomach.
One officer threatens to deploy his Taser, and after about a minute-long struggle … Tyre gets up to start running, and one of the cops fires his Taser, but he gets away.

About 7 minutes later, they catch up to Tyre in a residential neighborhood, and this is when it gets brutal. While he’s pinned to the ground — reportedly about 100 yards from his family’s home — Tyre repeatedly yells, “Mom!!!”

Then one officer kicks him twice, and another yells, “Watch out, I’mma baton the f**k out you,” and then strikes Tyre twice before they pull him up on his feet.

While 2 officers are holding him with his hands behind his back … another punches Tyre 5 times with a closed fist, sending him back down to his knees again.

Eventually, officers get Tyre handcuffed, put him up against a police cruiser and he writhes in pain for nearly 20 minutes before going limp.

As you know, the 5 Memphis PD officers stopped Tyre on Jan. 7 on suspicion of reckless driving … but from the start, the cops were hyper-aggressive. Even the video does not make it clear why things got violent that quickly.

Once other officers show up to the scene, one of the cops involved in the beating says Tyre attempted to grab for another officer’s gun — causing them to unleash on him.

After the vicious beating … Tyre was rushed to St. Francis Hospital because he was complaining he was short of breath. He was admitted in critical condition, and died in the hospital on January 10.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who’s representing Tyre’s family, reviewed the body cam footage with the family days before it was released, and likened the horrific scene to the beating of Rodney King in 1991.

The 5 Memphis police officers involved in the traffic stop — Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmit Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr., and Justin Smith — have been fired and charged with second-degree murder.

They also face additional charges of official misconduct, official oppression and aggravated kidnapping. Four of the 5 have posted bail and were released as of Friday morning.

Tyre’s cause of death has not been released and the incident is being investigated by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice.

Protests have been expected following this release of the footage … with Memphis Police, Tyre’s family, and even President Biden urging for any demonstrations to remain peaceful. source

WATCH:  Tyre Nichols Protesters Block Freeway Traffic in Memphis

Tyre Nichols’ last words heard on newly released bodycam footage: ‘I’m just trying to get home’

Tyre Nichols called out to his mother several times as officers continued to punch and kick him on Jan. 7

The Memphis Police Department released bodycam footage Friday evening showing Tyre Nichols’ final moments following a traffic stop on Jan. 7 before he was hospitalized and died three days later.

Nichols, a 29-year-old Black father and photographer, repeatedly called out to his mother and told five officers who were severely beating him — former Ofcs. Desmond Mills, Justin Smith, Emmitt Martin, Tadarrius Bean and Demetrius Haley — that he just wanted to make it home safely, the newly released bodycam video shows.

“I’m just trying to go home,” Nichols can be heard telling the officers in the footage, which was released to the public on Jan. 27, nearly three weeks after the incident.

The traffic stop began shortly after 8 p.m. on the night of Jan. 7, as the newly released bodycam video shows officers approaching Nichols’ vehicle and instructing him to get out of it, using profanities.

“Get out slowly,” the officers yelled, as Nichols appeared to remain in the vehicle. The officer’s bodycam does not show if Nichols is removing his seatbelt or otherwise complying with the request.

“Get your a— out of the car,” an officer yells before opening the driver’s door, grabbing Nichols, and removing him from the vehicle.

A Memphis police officer approaches the vehicle of Tyre Nichols on Jan. 7, 2023. (Memphis Police Department)

A Memphis police officer pulling Tyre Nichols out of his vehicle on Jan. 7, 2023. (Memphis Police Department)

Multiple Memphis police officer attempt to remove Tyre Nichols from his vehicle on Jan. 7, 2023. (Memphis Police Department)

“Stop, I didn’t do anything,” said Nichols, who initially appears to resist the officers before following their instructions. “OK, all right, alright, alright, alright, alright,” he echos, following the officers as they escort him toward the rear of the vehicle.

At this time, approximately 8:24 p.m., multiple officers can be seen forcibly grabbing Nichols to comply with their requests.

“Hey, you don’t do that, ok,” Nichols can be heard saying, drawing attention to the ferocity of their detainment.

The interaction swiftly escalates as Nichols continued to point out he believed they were acting out of line.

“Get on the ground,” the officers shout.

“I am on the ground,” Nichols responds.

“Turn around,” they again order.

“Yes, sir,” he responds.

“Turn the f—k around, I will tase you,” a single officer can be heard saying, with the taser seen pointed at Nichols.

“Stop,” Nichols responds calmly, looking directly at the officer.

“Man, get your arm behind your back before I break—” an officer chimes in.

“Ok, stop, I am,” Nichols can be heard saying.

He added: “You guys are really doing a lot right now. I’m just trying to go home.”

The officer shouted back: “Man, if you don’t lay down—”

“I am on the ground,” Nichols interjected, who at this time had at least three officers pinning him.

“Stop, I am not doing anything,” Nichols can be heard pleading as officers continued to grapple with him, per the video.

Memphis police have released video showing a deadly Jan. 7 traffic stop that led to murder charges against four officers. (Memphis Police Department)

A Memphis police officer points a taser directly at Tyre Nichols on Jan. 7, 2023. (Memphis Police Department)

Nichols wrestles to his feet and an officer tases him.

He then removes his jacket or shirt, disconnecting the taser pins, and runs down the street, away from the officers.

Other body cam footage, captured at approximately 8:33 p.m., shows two other officers tackling Nichols at another intersection.

The officers again grapple with the 29-year-old, who can be heard calling out for his mother several times.

The video appears to show Nichols continuing to resist being placed in handcuffs.

The Memphis police officer subsequently beat Nichols with a baton, pepper spray him, and punch and kick him several times.

“Watch out, I’m going to baton the f—k out you,” an officer can be heard shouting at Nichols.

“Give us your hands!” the officers shout while punching him in the face.

Nichols is next seen handcuffed, in a daze, sitting and leaning against the police car.

He was hospitalized that night and succumbed to his injuries just three days later, on Jan. 10, authorities said.

Fox News’ Adam Sabes contributed to this report.

WATCH:  Tyre Nichols Protesters Block Freeway Traffic in Memphis

Tyre Nichols video: Memphis authorities release footage from deadly traffic stop

Tyre Nichols, 29, died three days after Memphis prosecutors say police brutally beat him following a traffic stop

Memphis authorities have released four videos from a Jan. 7 traffic stop that preceded the death of 29-year-old Tyre Nichols, who spent three days in the hospital before succumbing to his injuries, according to authorities.

The first video released shows an officer pulling up to a stop in progress around 8:24 p.m. Police can be heard ordering Nichols to get out of the car, using profanities.

The brutal encounter led to the firing of five Memphis police officers, who now face numerous charges, including murder. And hours after the department released the videos, Shelby County Sheriff Floyd Bonner Jr. announced that he was relieving two deputies of duty and launching an internal investigation of his own.

WATCH: Bodycam video shows Tyre Nichols pulled out of car, Tasered: ‘Get on the ground’

The videos begin after a police stop involving Nichols has already been initiated. An officer arrives to assist.

“I didn’t do anything,” Nichols says, as officers yank him out of the driver’s seat.

He appears calm at first, as they order him to get on the ground. Seated with his back to the car, he looks at police, and says slowly, “Stop.”

WATCH: Pole camera view of Tyre Nichols’ fatal arrest shows Memphis police officers brutally beat, pepper spray and Taser victim

“OK, all right,” he continues, as an officer aims a Taser at him. They repeatedly order him to lay down, then to turn around and to put his hands behind his back.

“You guys are really doing a lot right now,” Nichols says. “I’m just trying to go home.”

He doesn’t appear to respond to the order to lay on his stomach, and is shown on his side when an officer uses what appears to be pepper spray. At that point, Nichols appears to struggle out of the officers’ grip and get to his feet, running off as they discharge a stun gun.

At around 8:26 p.m., according to a timestamp on the video, he pulls off his shirt and takes off running.

WATCH: Bodycam footage shows officers standing over injured Tyre Nichols as he screams for help

By 8:33, two other bodycams show officers tackling Nichols at another intersection. One bodycam appears to fall off, and the screen shows fuzzy darkness for several minutes before an officer picks it up and can be heard saying, “He on something.”

Tyre Nichols can be seen in the aftermath of the struggle, his face swollen and bloody as he sits on the ground in handcuffs, leaning with his back against a car. (Memphis PD)

Another officer’s camera shows him running up as the struggle continues, with two men on top of Nichols, demanding he give them his hands repeatedly.

He can be heard calling out for his mother, but does not appear to allow the officers to place him in cuffs.

WATCH: Memphis police bodycam shows officers brutally beat Tyre Nichols and discussing it afterward

They deploy pepper spray, which then sends one officer reeling, apparently after he became struck with it as well, and he backs off for a few minutes before returning with a baton.

“Watch out, I’ma baton the f— out you,” he says as he returns to the scuffle, with officers still holding Nichols.

For several seconds he repeats “Give us your hands!” Nichols looks limp or in a daze, and another officer can be seen punching him in the face.

Responders with what appear to be medical bags arrive to treat Tyre Nichols. (Memphis Police Department)

The camera above appears to show officers punching, kicking and striking Nichols with a baton multiple times.

By around 8:37, they finally get off of him, and he is shown handcuffed on the ground, writhing. Police pull him over to the side of a car and lean him against it, and around 3 minutes later medics appear to begin treating his injuries.

At around 8:42, two officers among a group in the intersection indicate that Nichols may have tried to grab a gun.

Memphis police have released video showing a deadly Jan. 7 traffic stop that led to murder charges against four officers. (Memphis Police Department)

“We tried to get him to stop,” an officer can be heard saying. “He didn’t stop.”

He claims that he tried the sirens and repeatedly ordered Nichols to stop to no avail. None of the video released Friday includes any actions that indicate why police made the initial stop.

A view from a camera mounted above the intersection where Memphis police caught up with Tyre Nichols, who died three days later. (Memphis Police Department)

“He drove around, swerved like he was gonna hit my car,” the officer says. “Then I’m like God damn like what are we doing? He pulled up to the red light, stopped at the red light. Put his turn signal on. So we jumped out the car, s— went from there.”

In a statement to NewsNation, Blake Ballin, the attorney for former Memphis officer Desmond Mills Jr., said he would review the videos with his client “at the appropriate time.”

“A thorough investigation of all available angles is needed before providing context or comment,” he said.

Betsy Brantner Smith, a retired police sergeant and trainer and the spokesperson for the National Police Association, said the video showed clear violations of proper training.

“Nobody teaches baton strikes above the shoulders, nobody teaches kicks to the head, nobody teaches the denial of medical aid,” she told Fox News Digital. “These men were street fighting, they were not acting as police officers.”

An undated photo of Tyre Nichols. (Berry Accius)

She said the video was “not indicative of the men and women of American law enforcement” and urged Memphis police to review their hiring and training practices.

On Jan. 8, District Attorney General Steve Mulroy requested that the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation conduct an outside investigation into the deadly encounter.

According to TBI, Nichols ran from officers after a traffic stop at Raines and Ross Roads at 8:22 p.m.

This photo provided by the Nichols family shows Tyre Nichols, who had a passion for photography and was described by friends as joyful and lovable. Nichols was just minutes from his home in Memphis, Tenn., on Jan. 7, 2023, when he was pulled over by police and fatally beaten. Five Memphis police officers have since been charged with second-degree murder and other offenses.  (Courtesy of the Nichols family via AP)

Police caught up with him again at Castlegate Lane and Bear Creek Cove, less than a half-mile away, and allegedly beat him for three minutes straight, sending him to the hospital with critical injuries.

Each of them faces more than a half-dozen charges, including second-degree murder, according to the TBI. All five surrendered to state authorities Thursday and later posted bond.

Sheriff Bonner, whose county encompasses the Memphis area also announced that he had relieved two deputies of duty hours after the videos became public.

“Having watched the videotape for the first time tonight, I have concerns about two deputies who appeared on the scene following the physical confrontation between police and Tyre Nichols,” he said in a statement. “I have launched an internal investigation into the conduct of these deputies to determine what occurred and if any policies were violated.”

Nichols was a FedEx worker with a 4-year-old son who enjoyed photography and skateboarding, according to his family’s attorney, Ben Crump.

An undated photo of Tyre Nichols. (Berry Accius)

Officials in Memphis and other big cities around the country are expecting demonstrations following the highly anticipated release of police bodycam video in connection with the case.

Speaking at a vigil Thursday evening, Nichols’ mother RowVaughn Wells urged supporters to protest peacefully.

“When that tape comes out tomorrow, it’s going to be horrific,” she said. “I didn’t see it, but from what I hear it’s going to be horrific.”

Memphis Police Department Officers Demetrius Haley, Tadarrius Bean, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills and Justin Smith were terminated on Jan. 18 for their role in the arrest of deceased Tyre Nichols. (Memphis Police Department)

DIRTY PIG ALERT, THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE HANDED OUT FINALLY JUDGEMENT BY THE COMMUNITY, WITH IMMUNITY FOR THE FINISHER! THESE EVIL MEN RUIN WHAT THE BADGE STANDS FOR

POLICE ARE DEFINETLY NEEDED, POLICE LIKE THIS DO NOT GET THE RESPECT OF THE WORD POLICE, THEY ARE DIRY PIGS AND SHOULD BE HANDED OVER TO THE COMMUNITY IN THE DARK!

Memphis Police Chief Cerelyn Davis called the incident “heinous, reckless and inhumane” but also urged calm.

In an interview with Fox News Friday, shortly before the video’s release, she said she believed it goes beyond recordings of excessive force used against Rodney King in 1991 and George Floyd in 2020.

“I would have to say that this video illustrates images that I’ve never seen in my career before perpetrated by police officers,” she said.

TBI Director David Rausch, who also saw the video before its release, described it as “appalling.”

Tyre Nichols, who died in a hospital on Jan. 10, three days after sustaining injuries during his arrest by police officers, is seen in this undated picture obtained from social media.  (Facebook/Deandre Nichols/via Reuters)

“The actions of these officers were awful, and no one, including law enforcement, is above the law,” Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland said in a video posted to Facebook Thursday. “I assure you we will do everything we can to keep this type of heinous act from happening again.”

By Michael Ruiz | Fox News

WATCH:  Tyre Nichols Protesters Block Freeway Traffic in Memphis

Tyre Nichols’ brother awaits fate of 5 officers involved in beating: ‘I hope they die’

Tyre Nichols’ brother said he hopes the five police officers charged for his murder ‘die’

Tyree Nichols’ brother, Jamal Dupree, said he hopes the five Memphis police officers accused of beating his brother to death during a Jan. 7 traffic stop “die.”

“You want my truth? … I hope they die,” Dupree, who lives in Sacramento, California, told FOX 40.

Memphis Police Department officers initially stopped Nichols, 29, for “reckless driving” on Jan. 7. MPD said in a Jan. 8 press release that after a confrontation ensued, Nichols fled on foot. The five officers who pursued him allegedly beat the 29-year-old to death, violating multiple MPD policies.

Nichols died three days later on Jan. 10 in the hospital.

On Jan. 20, MPD announced the termination of the five officers involved in the incident for violating “multiple department policies, including excessive use of force, duty to intervene, and duty to render aid,” MPD Chief CJ Davis said in a press release at the time. All five were hired between 2017 and 2020.

Deceased Tyree Nichols’ brother, Jamal Dupree, told local news that he hopes the five Memphis police officers accused of beating his brother to death during a Jan. 7 traffic stop “die.” (FOX 40 Sacramento)

The former officers including Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr. and Justin Smith turned themselves in and were each charged with seven counts, including one count of second-degree murder, one count of aggravated assault, one count of official oppression and two counts each of aggravated kidnapping and official misconduct. They had all been released from jail after posting bond as of Friday morning.

“It doesn’t really mean nothing at this time until they’re actually found guilty for the actual charges,” Dupree told FOX 40. “There’s a good chance they can walk free from this.”

Tyre Nichols, a 29-year-old Black man, died three days after being severely beaten by five Memphis Police Department officers during a traffic stop on January 7, 2023. (Scott Olson)

He noted that his brother’s “last words were screaming for” his mother, “and they didn’t care.”

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division also opened an investigation into the incident on Jan. 18.

Nichols was a FedEx worker, a skateboarder, a photographer and a father, according to Crump. (Scott Olson)

“As this is an open investigation, we are not able to provide additional comment or release further information at this time,” U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Tennessee Kevin Ritz said in a statement at the time.

Nichols was a FedEx worker, a skateboarder, a photographer and a father, according to Crump.

“He loved his son. Everything he was trying to do was to better himself as a father for his 4-year-old son,” the civil rights attorney said.

WATCH:  Tyre Nichols Protesters Block Freeway Traffic in Memphis

Tyre Nichols: Memphis police release body cam video of deadly beating

WATCH:  Tyre Nichols Protesters Block Freeway Traffic in Memphis

‘I don’t want us burning up our city’: Tyre Nichols’ mom calls for peaceful protests

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (WREG) — The mother of Tyre Nichols is calling for peaceful protests after the video of her son’s confrontation with Memphis police is released Friday.Nichols’ stepfather said Monday he saw the video of his stepson’s arrest. During a candlelight vigil for Nichols Thursday night in Midtown, his mother Rowvaughn Wells said she hadn’t watched the video but knows it’s horrific.“I want each and every one of you to protest in peace. I don’t want us burning up our city, tearing up the streets because that is not what my son stood for,” said Wells. “If you guys are here for Tyre and me, then you will protest peacefully.”Dozens gathered at Tobey skate park on Avery to remember Nichols and show their support for his family. During a news conference on Monday, family members talked about Nichols skateboarding and shared a video of him doing what he loved.

Nichols’ stepfather said Monday he saw the video of his stepson’s arrest. During a candlelight vigil for Nichols Thursday night in Midtown, his mother Rowvaughn Wells said she hadn’t watched the video but knows it’s horrific.

“I want each and every one of you to protest in peace. I don’t want us burning up our city, tearing up the streets because that is not what my son stood for,” said Wells. “If you guys are here for Tyre and me, then you will protest peacefully.”

Dozens gathered at Tobey skate park on Avery to remember Nichols and show their support for his family. During a news conference on Monday, family members talked about Nichols skateboarding and shared a video of him doing what he loved.

The vigil was held hours after five Memphis police officers were charged with his death.

Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr., and Justin Smith were booked into the Shelby County Jail on charges of second-degree murder, aggravated assault, two counts of aggravated kidnapping, two counts of official misconduct, and official oppression.

The announcement was made Thursday by Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy and later confirmed by Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland. Officials have said they wanted to give Nichols’ family the opportunity to see the video before the public.

Wells said her family is grief-stricken right now, and she is concerned about what could happen in her city.

WATCH:  Tyre Nichols Protesters Block Freeway Traffic in Memphis

https://youtu.be/hQ9Iqz5pJHg

WATCH:  Tyre Nichols Protesters Block Freeway Traffic in Memphis

MEMPHIS, Tenn. – Five fired Memphis police officers were charged Thursday with murder and other crimes in the killing of Tyre Nichols, a Black motorist who died three days after a confrontation with the officers during a traffic stop.

Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy told a news conference that although the officers each played different roles in the killing, “they are all responsible.”

The officers, who are all Black, each face charges of second-degree murder, aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping, official misconduct and official oppression.

Video of the Jan. 7 traffic stop will be released to the public sometime Friday evening, Mulroy said. Nichols’ family and their lawyers say the footage shows officers savagely beating the 29-year-old father and FedEx worker for three minutes.

Both lawyers said they had not seen the video.

“We are in the dark about many things, just like the general public is,” Ballin said.

Second-degree murder is punishable by 15 to 60 years in prison under Tennessee law.

The attorneys for Nichols’ family, Ben Crump and Antonio Romanucci, issued a statement saying that the charges offer “hope as we continue to push for justice for Tyre.”

“This young man lost his life in a particularly disgusting manner that points to the desperate need for change and reform to ensure this violence stops occurring during low-threat procedures, like in this case, a traffic stop,” they wrote.

The Rev. Al Sharpton, who founded and runs the National Action Network and will deliver the eulogy at Nichols’ funeral service next week, called the charges “a necessary step in delivering justice” for Nichols, who was an avid skateboarder and had a 4-year-old son.

“There is no point to putting a body camera on a cop if you aren’t going to hold them accountable when the footage shows them relentlessly beating a man to death,” Sharpton said. “Firings are not enough. Indictments and arrests are not convictions. As we’ve done in the past … we will stand by this family until justice is done.”

At the White House, President Joe Biden said Nichols’ family and the city of Memphis deserve “a swift, full and transparent investigation.”

“Public trust is the foundation of public safety, and there are still too many places in America today where the bonds of trust are frayed or broken,” Biden said in a statement.

The Memphis police chief has called the officers’ actions that night “heinous, reckless and inhumane.”

“This is not just a professional failing. This is a failing of basic humanity toward another individual,” Memphis Police Director Cerelyn “CJ” Davis said in a video statement released late Wednesday on social media.

Davis said the five officers found to be “directly responsible for the physical abuse of Mr. Nichols,” were fired last week, but other officers are still being investigated for violating department policy. In addition, she said “a complete and independent review” will be conducted of the department’s specialized units, without providing further details.

Two fire department workers were also removed from duty over the Nichols’ arrest.

As state and federal investigations continue, Davis promised the police department’s “full and complete cooperation” to determine what contributed to Nichols’ Jan. 10 death.

Mulroy told The Associated Press on Tuesday that local and state investigators wanted to complete as many interviews as possible before releasing the video. The timetable has rankled some activists who expected the video to be released after Nichols’ family and the family’s lawyers viewed it Monday.

Crump said the video showed showed that Nichols was shocked, pepper-sprayed and restrained when he was pulled over for a traffic stop near his home. He was returning home from a suburban park where he had taken photos of the sunset.

Police have said Nichols was stopped for reckless driving and at some point fled from the scene.

The legal team likened the beating to the infamous 1991 police beating of Los Angeles motorist Rodney King.

Relatives have accused the police of causing Nichols to have a heart attack and kidney failure. Authorities have only said Nichols experienced a medical emergency.

When video of the arrest is publicly released, Davis said she expects people in the community to react, but she urged them to do so peacefully.

“None of this is a calling card for inciting violence or destruction on our community or against our citizens,” she said.

One of the officers, Haley, was accused previously of using excessive force. He was named as a defendant in a 2016 federal civil rights lawsuit while employed by the Shelby County Division of Corrections.

The plaintiff, Cordarlrius Sledge, stated that he was in inmate in 2015 when Haley and another corrections officer accused him of flushing contraband. The two officers “hit me in the face with punches,” according to the complaint.

A third officer then slammed his head to the ground, Sledge said. He lost consciousness and woke up in the facility’s medical center.

The claims were ultimately dismissed after a judge ruled that Sledge had failed to file a grievance against the officers within 30 days of the incident.

---

Tyre Nichols: What we know about his death and the Memphis officers charged with murder

MEMPHIS, Tenn. – Five fired Memphis police officers are facing second-degree murder and other charges in the arrest and death of Tyre Nichols, a Black motorist who died three days after a confrontation with the officers during a traffic stop.

The five officers charged are Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Desmond Mills Jr., Emmitt Martin III and Justin Smith.

Here’s what we know about Nichols, his death and what led to criminal charges for the officers involved.

Who was Tyre Nichols?

Tyre Nichols was a 29-year-old father and FedEx worker. He was stopped by police on Jan. 7 for reckless driving while returning home from a suburban park where he’d taken photos of the sunset

Police said in a statement the day after the encounter that “a confrontation occurred” as officers approached the vehicle and Nichols ran; they said officers caught up to him and that “another confrontation occurred” while they were taking him into custody. Police said Nichols complained of shortness of breath and was taken to a hospital, where he died three days later.

Attorney Ben Crump, who has seen video of the encounter, said Memphis police officers beat Nichols for three minutes, treating him like “a human piñata.”

Nichols was described by family as a “good kid” who loved skateboarding, photography and his 4-year-old son.

Nichols’ stepfather, Rodney Wells, told reporters that his stepson had good reason to run from the officers.

“Our son ran because he was scared for his life,” Rodney Wells said. “And when you see the video, you’ll see why he was scared for his life.”

Relatives have accused the police of causing Nichols to have a heart attack and kidney failure. Authorities have only said Nichols experienced a medical emergency.

RowVaughn Wells, Nichols’ mother, said that on the day of the arrest, her son was looking forward to a chicken she was going to cook for dinner that night.

“All my son was trying to do was come home,” said Nichols’ mother, who sobbed during the news conference and told reporters Nichols was less than 80 yards (73 meters) from home when Memphis police officers “murdered him.”

“We’re going to get justice for my son, Tyre, if that’s the last breath I take,” she said.

Who are the Memphis officers charged with murdering Tyre Nichols?

About a week before they were charged with murder, Memphis Police Director Cerelyn “CJ” Davis announced that the five officers involved in the arrest were fired after the police probe determined that they used excessive force or failed to intervene and render aid.

Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Desmond Mills, Jr., Emmitt Martin III and Justin Smith have been charged with second-degree murder, aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping, official misconduct and official oppression.

All five officers are Black, though Crump said that was irrelevant and that Black motorists often are treated differently than Whites regardless of the officers’ race, and that the pain of Nichols’ death “is just the same.”

The Memphis police chief has called the actions of five officers involved in the violent arrest of Nichols “heinous, reckless and inhumane” and urged residents of the predominantly Black city to protest peacefully when video is released.

“This is not just a professional failing. This is a failing of basic humanity toward another individual,” Davis said in a video statement released late Wednesday on social media.

Davis said the five officers found to be “directly responsible for the physical abuse of Mr. Nichols,” were fired last week, but other officers are still being investigated for violating department policy. In addition, she said “a complete and independent review” will be conducted of the department’s specialized units, without providing further details.

As state and federal investigations continue, Davis promised the police department’s “full and complete cooperation” to determine what contributed to Nichols’ death.

The U.S. Justice Department has opened a civil rights investigation into the officers and their actions.

One of the officers, Haley, was accused previously of using excessive force. He was named as a defendant in a 2016 federal civil rights lawsuit while employed by the Shelby County Division of Corrections.

In the complaint, Cordarlrius Sledge stated that he was in inmate in 2015 when Haley and another corrections officer accused him of flushing contraband. The two officers “hit me in the face with punches,” according to the complaint. A third officer then slammed his head to the ground, Sledge said. He lost consciousness, waking up in the facility’s medical center, according to the complaint.

The claims were ultimately dismissed after a judge ruled that Sledge had failed to file a grievance against the officers within 30 days of the incident.

Two fire department workers were also removed from duty over the Nichols’ arrest.

When will the Tyre Nichols video be released?

Police video viewed by the family on Monday showed that Nichols was shocked, pepper sprayed and restrained, Crump said. He said the encounter was reminiscent of the infamous 1991 police beating of Los Angeles motorist Rodney King.

Crump said the video shows the encounter was “violent” and “troublesome on every level.” Romanucci called it “savage” and out of proportion to the alleged offense.

Attorneys said Nichols can be heard on the video crying out for his mother.

Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy initially said releasing the video would risk compromising the investigation, but later officials said the video will be released. Mulroy said the video will be released after 6 p.m. Friday (Jan. 27).

Will there be protests in Memphis?

The city has been on edge about the release of the police footage because of the possibility of unrest.

Nichols’ stepfather asked that if there are protests, that they remain peaceful, saying violence “is not what Tyre wanted and won’t bring him back.”

The city’s police chief said she expects the community to react.

“I expect our citizens to exercise their First Amendment right to protest, to demand actions and results, but we need to ensure our community is safe in this process,” Davis said. “None of this is a calling card for inciting violence or destruction on our community or against our citizens.”

In a statement, President Biden said Nichols’ family deserves a “swift, full, and transparent investigation into his death.”

“As Americans grieve, the Department of Justice conducts its investigation, and state authorities continue their work, I join Tyre’s family in calling for peaceful protest,” he said. “Outrage is understandable, but violence is never acceptable. Violence is destructive and against the law. It has no place in peaceful protests seeking justice.

“Public trust is the foundation of public safety and there are still too many places in America today where the bonds of trust are frayed or broken,” he continued. “Tyre’s death is a painful reminder that we must do more to ensure that our criminal justice system lives up to the promise of fair and impartial justice, equal treatment, and dignity for all.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

source

---

‘A failing of basic humanity’:
How five police officers,
were charged with the ‘heinous’ murder
of Tyre Nichols a father and hard working man

Five Memphis officers have been fired after violating multiple department policies in the death of Tyre Nichols as criminal and civil rights investigations are launched. Gustaf Kilander reports

A 29-year-old father died in hospital several days after he was taken into custody by police during a traffic stop.

Now five officers at the Memphis Police Department have been removed from their posts and jailed on second-degree murder charges. source

---

Tyre Nichols: 5 Fired ex-MPD officers charged with second-degree murder

 

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (WMC) – Five officers involved in the death of Tyre Nichols were taken into custody at 201 Poplar on Thursday morning.

Those former MPD officers are: Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmit Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr. and Justin Smith.

All five are charged with: official misconduct thru unauthorized exercise of official power, official misconduct thru failure to perform a duty imposed by law, official oppression, second-degree murder, aggravated assault – act in concert, aggravated kidnapping causing bodily injury, and aggravated kidnapping while possessing a weapon.

First-degree murder usually falls into one of the following two categories: premeditated, intentional killings and felony murder. Second-degree murder is generally either: an unplanned, intentional killing (reacting in the heat of the moment when angry) or a death caused by a reckless disregard for human life.

Haley and Martin are in jail on a $350,000 bond. Smith, Mills and Bean were booked on a $250,000 bond.

Mills and Smith are now free on bond.

Mills is being represented by attorney Blake Ballin. Martin turned himself in, according to his attorney Bill Massey.

In a press conference Thursday, both attorneys admitted they have not seen the police body camera footage of Nichols’ arrest.

“At this point, we don’t know what proof they have because we have not seen or discovered, and we have not seen the video,” Massey said. “So we are kind of in the blind right now. This process has just started.”

Tyre Nichols, 29, died on January 10, days after a confrontation with police put him in the hospital.

Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy held a press conference at 2 p.m. to provide an update on the investigation. Mulroy was joined by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) and other members of the DA’s office.

“We understand and acknowledge the grief that the friends and family of Tyre Nichols are experiencing right now,” Mulroy said.

Nichols was pulled over by Memphis police in the Hickory Hill area on January 7 for what was originally reported as reckless driving.

“The actions of all of them resulted in the death of Tyre Nichols, and they are all responsible,” Mulroy said.

Mulroy was joined by TBI Director Davi Rausch during Thursday afternoon’s press conference.

“I’ve been policing for more than 30 years. I’ve devoted my life to this profession and I’m grieved — and frankly, I’m sickened, by what we’ve learned through our extensive investigation,” Rausch said. “Let me be clear. What happened here does not, at all, reflect proper policing. This was wrong. This was a crime.”

The five officers were fired following an internal investigation for their involvement, as well as two EMTs with Memphis Fire being relieved of duty pending the results of their own internal investigation.

MPD determined the officers violated multiple policies, including excessive use of force, duty to intervene and duty to render aid.

The United States Department of Justice and FBI announced the opening a civil rights investigation into the death on January 18.

Wednesday night, Memphis Police Chief CJ Davis issued a statement regarding the investigation.

“In light of the horrific circumstances surrounding the death of Tyre Nichols, it is absolutely incumbent upon me, your chief, to address the status of what the Memphis Police Department is doing, has done, and will continue to do in furtherance of finding truth in this tragic loss, ensuring we communicate with honesty and transparency, and that there is absolute accountability for those responsible for Tyre’s death,” Chief Davis said.

Family members and attorneys got the chance to review the police body cam footage Monday before it was publicly released. They also met with Memphis police.

Mulroy said in a statement Thursday that he expects the video to be publicly released sometime after 6 p.m. Friday.

The family retained civil rights attorney Ben Crump and attorney Antonio Romanucci to represent them following Nichols’ death. Crump called the video “appalling, heinous, violent and troublesome.”

Crump said Nichols’ mother was unable to sit through more than a minute of the video. In that first minute, Tyre asked police officers, “What did I do?” Crump said.

Nichols’ funeral will take place at Mississippi Boulevard Christian Church on February 1 at 10:30 a.m.

Church officials say Reverend Al Sharpton will be on hand to deliver a eulogy.

Click here to sign up for our newsletter!

Click here to report a spelling or grammar error. Please include the headline.

Copyright 2023 WMC. All rights reserved.

By Jacob Gallantsource

All five officers fired over the death of Tyre Nichols who died after a ‘violent‘ traffic stop;
have been charged with second degree murder and taken into custody

• FedEx driver Tyre Nichols died on January 10 following a violent altercation with Memphis cops
• A preliminary autopsy showed he suffered ‘extensive bleeding caused by severe beating’
• Each of the five officers involved in the January 7 altercation have now been arrested and charged in connection with Nichols’ death 

Five fired Memphis police officers were charged on Thursday with second-degree murder over the death of Tyre Nichols – who died three days after being beaten during a January 7 traffic stop.

Demetrius Haley, Tadarrius Bean, Desmond Mills, Jr., Emmitt Martin III and Justin Smith, who are all black, are now in custody.

In addition to second degree murder the five were also charged with aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping, official misconduct and official oppression.

On Thursday afternoon DA Steve Mulroy briefed the press, saying his team had moved ‘swiftly, but also fairly’ to review the case that led to the charges against the five officers. He added that the police bodycam footage of the incident will be released sometime after 6pm Central Time on Friday.

Second-degree murder, described by the Memphis District Attorney as a ‘knowing murder,’ is punishable by 15 to 60 years in prison under Tennessee law.

 

This combo of booking images provided by the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office shows, from top row from left, Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, bottom row from left, Desmond Mills, Jr. and Justin Smith. The five former Memphis police officers have been charged with second-degree murder and other crimes in the arrest and death of Tyre Nichols, a Black motorist who died three days after a confrontation with the officers during a traffic stop, records showed Thursday, Jan. 26, 2023

All five former cops were detained on bonds of up to $350,000.

Court records don’t list attorneys for Smith, Bean or Haley. Martin’s lawyer, William Massey, confirmed that his client had turned himself in. He and Mills’ lawyer, Blake Ballin, said they planned to discuss the charges at a news conference later Thursday.

Nichols, a 29-year-old FedEx driver, was pulled over on January 7 by the Memphis police for what was initially reported as reckless driving.

That interaction led to a violent confrontation that put him in the hospital, where he would die three days later (January 10) due to ‘extensive bleeding caused by a severe beating,’ according to preliminary results of an autopsy commissioned by attorneys for his family.

He reportedly suffered cardiac arrest and kidney failure following the allegedly brutal interaction with the officers.

By Sophie Mann source

Tyre Nichols video: Memphis officials condemn five arrested officers’ ‘criminal’ actions – latest

Tyre Nichols, 29, died on 10 January, three days after traffic stop turned into confrontation with officers

The Memphis police chief is calling for calm ahead of the Friday release of bodycam footage from the “heinous, reckless and inhumane” death of Tyre Nichols – as she warned it will reveal how five police officers failed the Black man, his family and their community and showed a “disregard for basic human rights”.

Nichols, 29, was allegedly violenty beaten by five officers during a traffic stop on 7 January. He died three days later in hospital. An independent autopsy released by his family has since revealed he suffered “extensive bleeding” before his death.

Five former Memphis officers have been charged with murder over the violent arrest.

“The world is watching us and we need to show the world what lessons we can learn from this tragedy,” Shelby County district attorney Steven Mulroy said on Thursday, announcing the charges.

“We all want the same thing,” he added. “We want justice for Tyre Nichols.”

KEY POINTS

By Adrian Sainz source

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) – The U.S. Justice Department has opened a civil rights investigation into the arrest of Tyre Nichols, who died days after a confrontation with Memphis Department Police Officers during a traffic stop, officials said Wednesday.

The U.S. attorney’s office released a statement saying the FBI’s field office in Memphis and the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department are investigating the use of force used by police during Nichols’ Jan. 7 arrest.

The arrest and death of Nichols, 29, already has sparked separate investigations by Memphis police and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. Nichols’ family, and protesters who have rallied at a police station and the National Civil Rights Museum, have pushed for the release of police body camera footage and have called for officers to face charges.

RELATED: Georgia trooper stable after being shot, protester killed near controversial ‘Cop City’ police facility site

Relatives have accused police of beating Nichols and causing him to have a heart attack. Authorities have said Nichols, who was Black, experienced a medical emergency.

Nichols was arrested after officers stopped him for reckless driving, police said. There was a confrontation as officers approached the driver, and he ran before he was confronted again by the pursuing officers, who arrested him, authorities said. He complained of shortness of breath and was hospitalized. Officials said a cause of death has not yet been determined.

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, the state’s police agency, said Nichols died Jan. 10. The agency is conducting a use-of-force investigation at the request of Shelby County District Attorney General Steve Mulroy.

Relatives have said that the officers who pulled over Nichols were in an unmarked vehicle and that he experienced cardiac arrest and kidney failure because of a beating by officers.

Memphis Police Director Cerelyn “CJ” Davis said Sunday that the department was serving notice to the officers involved concerning policy violations. The statement did not indicate how many officers were involved.

Davis and Mayor Jim Strickland said Tuesday that video footage of the arrest will be released after the police department’s investigation is completed and the family can review it.

The police department’s internal investigation will be completed by the end of this week, and city leaders are arranging a meeting early next week with the family of Nichols, according to a joint statement from both Strickland and Davis.

RELATED: Man convicted in Ahmaud Arbery murder moved to Georgia medical prison

After initially declining comment on the Justice Department’s investigation, the city of Memphis sent out a statement late Wednesday afternoon saying it will fully cooperate with the federal agencies conducting the probe. Memphis’ police department did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

At a memorial service for Nichols on Tuesday, family and friends remembered him as a joyful, lovable man who worked making boxes at FedEx, enjoyed skateboarding and regularly drank coffee and chatted with friends at Starbucks. Some of those in attendance wore T-shirts that read “Justice for Tyre,” and “Skate in Peace.”

Relatives said Nichols was from California and moved to Memphis about a year ago. He had two brothers and a sister, relatives said.

Nichols’ stepfather, Rodney Wells, said during the service that Nichols’ supporters want the officers involved in the arrest to be charged with first-degree murder.

“We’re not going down without a fight,” Wells said.

Attorneys: Police beat Tyre Nichols for three minutes

“An attorney for the family of a Black man who died at a hospital,
three days after a confrontation with police during a traffic stop,
says video of the encounter shows it was “violent” and “troublesome on every level !”

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) — An attorney for the family of a Black man who died at a hospital three days after a confrontation with police during a traffic stop said Monday that video of the encounter shows it was “violent” and “troublesome on every level.”

Attorney Ben Crump said during a news conference that the footage of Tyre Nichols’ Jan. 7 arrest “is appalling. It is deplorable. It is heinous.”

Crump, who viewed the video along with Nichols’ family and their other lawyers earlier Monday, said it reminded them of the infamous video of the Los Angeles police beating of Rodney King.

“Regrettably, it reminded us of Rodney king video. … And unlike Rodney King, Tyre didn’t survive,” he said.

Another of the family’s attorneys, Antonio Romanucci, said the beating of Nichols lasted three minutes.

“He was a human piñata for those police officers,” said Romanucci.

Crump said the authorities won’t release the video to the public for a week or two, but that it will be released.

Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy issued a statement investigators don’t want the release of the video to the public yet because they don’t want to risk compromising the investigation.

Nichols, a 29-year-old father, FedEx worker and avid skateboarder, died Jan. 10 at a hospital, authorities said.

Memphis Police Department Director Cerelyn “CJ” Davis announced Friday that five officers involved in the arrest were fired after the police probe determined that they used excessive force or failed to intervene and render aid.

Nichols’ family, protesters and activists have called for the video’s release and for the officers to be charged with murder.

The officers have been identified as Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills, Jr. and Justin Smith. All five are Black.

Relatives have accused police of beating Nichols and causing him to have a heart attack. Authorities have only said that Nichols experienced a medical emergency. The U.S. Justice Department has opened a civil rights investigation into the arrest, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is looking into whether excessive force was used.

City and community leaders have expressed concern about the possibility of civil unrest following the video’s release.

State Rep. Antonio Parkinson, a Memphis Democrat, said the predominantly Black city has been on edge since the arrest, which he called “horrific and senseless.”

“The release of the tape may certainly aggravate the feelings of hurt, sorrow and embarrassment that we are all feeling,” Parkinson said. “However, the need for transparency is vitally important in all cases of police involved deaths.”

Van Turner, president of the Memphis chapter of the NAACP, also acknowledged that Memphis appears tense as it waits for the video. But he praised the city and the police department for taking “quick action” in firing the officers.

“We will continue to monitor and support a fair and just resolution to this matter,” Turner said. “We join the call for peaceful protests as we all work towards making sure that proper measures are put in place to prevent this type of incident from occurring in the future.”

Turner also said that the potential for unrest could be higher if the officers who were involved were white.

“If the video is significantly more egregious than what we have seen, then the unrest could still be there,” Turner said.

Nichols was arrested after officers stopped him for reckless driving, police said. In a news release the day after his arrest, the police department said that as officers approached the vehicle, “a confrontation occurred’ and he ran. It said officers caught up to him and that ”another confrontation occurred” while they were taking him into custody. Police said he complained of shortness of breath and was hospitalized.

Officials said a cause of death has not been determined.

Relatives have said the officers who pulled over Nichols were in an unmarked vehicle and that he experienced cardiac arrest and kidney failure from the officers beating him.

Crump and Romanucci issued a statement Friday saying they support the department’s decision to fire the officers.

“This is the first step towards achieving justice for Tyre and his family. They must also be held accountable for robbing this man of his life and his son of a father,” they said.

The attorneys said they “will continue to demand transparency and accountability” and plan to review video footage to seek additional clarity about the circumstances that led to Nichols’ death. The lawyers planned a news conference for later Monday with the family.

As for the timing of the video’s release to the public, Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy said the law “places limits on such video release, and that we have to make sure we do so without compromising our ability to arrive at justice in this case.”

“I ask for your patience as we gather all necessary information so that we don’t compromise the investigation or any possible future prosecution,” Mulroy said in a statement.

The Nichols case is the latest high-profile death case to rattle the city. Since November 2021, Memphis has seen the fatal shooting of rapper Young Dolph in a daytime ambush at a bakery; a crime rampage in which a man has been charged with fatally shooting three people and wounding three others; the killing of a United Methodist Church pastor during a carjacking in her driveway; and the early-morning kidnapping of a jogger whose body was later found near a house.

By ADRIAN SAINZ source Follow Adrian Sainz on Twitter: https://twitter.com/asainz22

‘We will see what they did to Tyre’ | Family asks for patience, recounts ‘horrific’ & ‘appalling’ video of confrontation with MPD

MEMPHIS, Tenn — The Shelby County District Attorney’s office said the release of video footage of the arrest of Tyre Nichols, which led to five Memphis Police officers being fired after Nichols died in the hospital, could come “this week or next.”

Relatives of Tyre Nichols met with city officials Monday morning to view video footage of the Jan. 7 arrest, according to attorney Ben Crump, who is representing the family.

During a news conference at Mt. Olive Cathedral CME Church Monday afternoon, Crump said they would not get into too many details because the investigation was ongoing, but they saw multiple videos.

“We will see what they did to Tyre,” said Crump as he asked activists to be patient for one to two weeks for the video, to allow the family “to get what they want most, which is justice.”

What Tyre’s parents said about the video of his arrest

Rodney Wells, Nichols’ stepfather, asked first if there were any protests, for them to be peaceful. Wells called the video “horrific”, saying, “No father, mother, should have to witness what I saw today.” Wells continued talking of Tyre, saying “my son was a great, great kid. He didn’t deserve what he got. Now what he deserves is justice.” Wells also said justice for them is nothing short of “murder one. Anything less than that we will not accept.”

He said, “Our son ran because he was scared for his life. He wasn’t running because he had drugs he was trying to get a rid or had a gun. I want to get that out there of ‘why did he run?’ He ran because he was trying to get home (safely).”

Nichols’ mother, RowVaughn Wells, said “my son really was a good boy.” She said skateboarding was his passion, and he would want to skate every day. She called him a beautiful soul, and said he didn’t mind being in Memphis after the pandemic because he was “with his mom.” She said Nichols was less than 80 yards away “when they murdered him.” His mom said her son died on Jan. 7, but doctors “pulled the plug” on Jan. 10.

“My son was a wonderful soul. He received a tremendous outpouring of support from FedEx, despite working there for only nine months. Tyre will never walk through that door and say ‘hello parents’ because that’s what he would do. I’ll never hear that again,” said his mother.

“I hate the fact that us as Black people, we out here killing each other. I don’t know why? We have the police killing us? I don’t know why… What happened to the humanity and kindness? What happened to it all?” said RowVaughn Wells. “We are going to get justice for Tyre, if that’s the last breath I take.”

Nichols was “kicked, tased, pepper-sprayed and restrained” in the video

Crump called the video “appalling, deplorable, heinous, violent, and very troublesome on every level.” He said it is “evidence of what happens to Black and Brown people because of simple traffic stops.” He said, “We have to ask America: how would you treat our White brother and sisters in a traffic stop? Then treat our Black and Brown citizens the same way.”

Crump said Chief Davis told them she “was not proud of what they were about to see” in the video. He said “regrettably,” it reminded them of Rodney King video.

He asked the community to keep the family in their prayers, especially Nichols’ mother, who keeps asking, “Why my baby? Why my baby?”

Attorney Antonio Romanucci said Nichols was “defenseless” and a “human piñata” for police officers, and said Nichols was beaten for three minutes. “It was unabashed, nonstop beating. That is what is going to show up in that video,” said Romanucci.

He called the beating “savage.” He said the officers were in unmarked cars, and wanted to know why they are conducting traffic stops. “Let’s call this what it is; this is a racist traffic stop… These police officers knew it in their mind they could get away with this.”

Romanucci said Nichols was defenseless, and was kicked in the video. Crump then said Nichols was tased, pepper-sprayed and restrained as the MPD officers were arresting him.

Romanucci also asked everyone to exercise patience until the video comes out, “then you can be your own judge.”

He said they will move forward with civil litigation and their own investigation. “Not only are we looking for justice, we are looking for changes. We are looking for policy changes,” said Romanucci.

Crump said during the video, Nichols said, “I just wanna go home.” He said in the last words on the video, Nichols called out “mom” three times, while only about 80 yards from his home.

Van Turner spoke during the news conference, and said the question becomes “why does this keep occurring again and again, and what can we do to keep this from happening?”

Turner said they are working to make sure police policy is followed, especially policies put into place after situations like George Floyd’s death.

Following the news conference, Crump and Romanucci issued the following statement: “Today, with the family of Tyre Nichols, we saw with our own eyes the disgusting way in which he lost his life at the hands of Memphis police. Tyre was brutalized by Memphis police, much like how Rodney King was beaten more than thirty years ago –– but unlike Rodney, Tyre lost his life from this violent attack. How are we here again so many years later? These former officers must face the consequences of taking this young man’s life and robbing his family of their loved one –– justice is the only path forward.”

 

What city officials are saying about Tyre Nichols’ death

The Shelby County District Attorney’s Office released this statement after meeting with the family Monday morning: “Earlier today, we met with the family of Tyre Nichols— who have now seen the video. Transparency is a priority for the DA’s Office, and we understand the public’s desire for immediate release. However, it’s important that the release does not compromise the investigation.

We’re working with the TBI and FBI to expedite that investigation and are consulting regularly with the City of Memphis about the video’s release, which we expect will occur this week or next.”

In a statement to social media following the meeting with the family, Memphis Police said “The Memphis Police Department & City Administration met with the family of Tyre Nichols this morning to facilitate the viewing of video recordings.

The Memphis Police Department is fully cooperating with the criminal investigation being conducted by the US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, and the Shelby County District Attorney General’s Office.

‘Transparency remains a priority in this incident, and a premature release could adversely impact the criminal investigation and the judicial process. We are working with the District Attorney’s Office to determine the appropriate time to release the video recordings publicly,’ said Chief Cerelyn Davis.”

Mayor Jim Strickland and MPD Chief Cerelyn “CJ” Davis said previously video of the arrest would be released after the conclusion of an internal police investigation and after Nichols’ family has seen it, but the exact timing wasn’t immediately clear.

Nichols, a 29-year-old father, FedEx worker and avid skateboarder, died Jan. 10, authorities said.

His family, protesters and activists have called for the video’s release and for the officers to be charged with murder. Davis announced Friday that five officers involved in the arrest were fired after the police probe determined that they used excessive force or failed to intervene and render aid.

The officers have been identified as Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills, Jr. and Justin Smith. All five are Black.

Justin Smith, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr, Demetrius Haley, and Tadarrius Bean were fired by Memphis Police Depart for their role in the death of Tyre Nichols

Relatives have accused police of beating Nichols and causing him to have a heart attack. Authorities have only said that Nichols experienced a medical emergency. The U.S. Justice Department has opened a civil rights investigation into the arrest, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is looking into whether excessive force was used.

City and community leaders have expressed concern about the possibility of civil unrest following the video’s release.

State Rep. Antonio Parkinson, a Memphis Democrat, said the predominantly Black city has been on edge since the arrest, which he called “horrific and senseless.”

“The release of the tape may certainly aggravate the feelings of hurt, sorrow and embarrassment that we are all feeling,” Parkinson said. “However, the need for transparency is vitally important in all cases of police involved deaths.”

Van Turner, president of the Memphis chapter of the NAACP, also acknowledged that Memphis appears tense as it waits for the video. But he praised the city and the police department for taking “quick action” in firing the officers.

“We will continue to monitor and support a fair and just resolution to this matter,” Turner said. “We join the call for peaceful protests as we all work towards making sure that proper measures are put in place to prevent this type of incident from occurring in the future.”

Turner also said that the potential for unrest could be higher if the officers who were involved were white.

“If the video is significantly more egregious than what we have seen, then the unrest could still be there,” Turner said.

Nichols was arrested after officers stopped him for reckless driving, according to Memphis Police. In a news release the day after his arrest, the police department said that as officers approached the vehicle, “a confrontation occurred’ and he ran. It said officers caught up to him and that “another confrontation occurred” while they were taking him into custody. Police said he complained of shortness of breath and was hospitalized.

Officials said a cause of death has not been determined.

Relatives have said the officers who pulled over Nichols were in an unmarked vehicle and that he experienced cardiac arrest and kidney failure from the officers beating him.

Credit: WATN

Attorneys Ben Crump and Antonio Romanucci, who represent Nichols’ family, issued a statement Friday saying they support the department’s decision to fire the officers.

“This is the first step towards achieving justice for Tyre and his family. They must also be held accountable for robbing this man of his life and his son of a father,” they said.

The attorneys said they “will continue to demand transparency and accountability” and plan to review video footage to seek additional clarity about the circumstances that led to Nichols’ death.

As for the timing of the video’s release to the public, Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy said the law “places limits on such video release, and that we have to make sure we do so without compromising our ability to arrive at justice in this case.”

“I ask for your patience as we gather all necessary information so that we don’t compromise the investigation or any possible future prosecution,” Mulroy said in a statement.

The Nichols case is the latest high-profile death case to rattle the city. Since November 2021, Memphis has seen the fatal shooting of rapper Young Dolph in a daytime ambush at a bakery; a crime rampage in which a man has been charged with fatally shooting three people and wounding three others; the killing of a United Methodist Church pastor during a carjacking in her driveway; and the early-morning kidnapping of a jogger whose body was later found near a house.

Attorneys: Autopsy shows Tyre Nichols suffered ‘extensive bleeding caused by a severe beating’

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (WREG) — An independent autopsy indicated that Tyre Nichols suffered “extensive bleeding caused by a severe beating”, according to attorneys representing his family.

Nichols died on Jan. 10 after he was involved in a traffic stop that left him critically injured three days earlier. Five Memphis police officers involved in his arrest were fired.

Attorneys Ben Crump and Antonio Romanucci confirmed the findings Tuesday in a statement saying:

“On January 23, 2023, our legal team had its own independent autopsy performed on the body of Tyre Nichols by a highly regarded, nationally renowned forensic pathologist. We can state that preliminary findings indicate Tyre suffered extensive bleeding caused by a severe beating, and that his observed injuries are consistent with what the family and attorneys witnessed on the video of his fatal encounter with police on January 7, 2023. Further details and findings from this independent report will be disclosed at another time.”

The news comes as the Department of Justice, FBI, TBI and district attorney’s office continue their investigation. At the request of the investigating agencies, the video of the incident will be released to the public in one to two weeks.

by: Autumn Scott source

Independent autopsy shows Tyre Nichols ‘suffered extensive bleeding caused by severe beating,’ attorneys say

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (WMC) – Nationally renowned civil rights and personal injury attorneys Ben Crump and Antonio Romanucci have issued a statement on preliminary findings in the independent autopsy of Tyre Nichols, who died after an encounter with Memphis police.

Nichols died on Jan. 10, days after he was involved in a traffic stop conducted by the Memphis Police Department that left him critically injured. Nichols fled the traffic stop scene, and the police began to chase him. Police brutalized him to the point of being unrecognizable.

Attorneys for the family issued the following statement:

“On January 23, 2023, our legal team had its own independent autopsy performed on the body of Tyre Nichols by a highly regarded, nationally renowned forensic pathologist. We can state that preliminary findings indicate Tyre suffered extensive bleeding caused by a severe beating, and that his observed injuries are consistent with what the family and attorneys witnessed on the video of his fatal encounter with police on January 7, 2023. Further details and findings from this independent report will be disclosed at another time.”

source

Police radio traffic holds clues in Tyre Nichols case

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (WREG) — As we wait for the video footage of what happened to be released to the public, police radio traffic holds clues as to what led to the brutal arrest of 29-year-old Tyre Nichols.

You can hear some of the tense moments that ultimately led to Nichols’ death and the firing of five officers. Two Memphis firefighters were also relieved of duty while the investigation is underway.

Memphis Police say they initially pulled Nichols over for reckless driving, around 8:30 the night of January 7 at East Raines and Ross Roads. His family says he was on his way home, and the initial stop was less than half a mile from his house.

“Any other Scorpion car pull over to East Raines and Ross. We have one running on foot,” one officer was heard saying on radio traffic from Broadcastify obtained by WREG.

An officer asks for a perimeter to be set up.

“Run that tag, see the address,” an officer says.

Officers realize Nichols lives close by. It sounds as if some kind of chase has started.

“[Inaudible]… at Ross and Castlegate Lane, he’s fighting at this time.”

What happens over the course of the interactions and confrontations as described by police is sparsely documented on the radio.

“Taser was deployed as well,” one officer said.

Police dispatch from the moments of Tyre Nichols’ confrontation with officers

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — FOX13 News has obtained police dispatch audio from the day investigators said officers had two confrontations with Tyre Nichols, 29.  Here is a transcript of the dispatch audio:

“2933, we have one black male running.”

“2938, you still have eyes on that subject?”

“Any other Scorpion units pull over to east Raines and Ross.”

“Any other scorpion units pull over to east Raines and Ross. We have one running on foot.”

“Run that tag and see its address.”

“Be advised the subject lives at —- Castlegate.”

“Show me at —- and ——-.””At Ross and Castlegate Lane.  He’s fighting at this time.”

“Does the fire department need to come back down to you or are you bringing him back down?”

“Check … they’re on their way now.”

The duration of the police dispatch audio pertaining to the incident involving Nichols goes on for nearly 10 minutes.

Attorneys for the Nichols family said the police confrontation in which they viewed between officers and Tyre Nichols lasted for approximately three minutes.

It’s then assumed Nichols spent seven minutes running from police officers.

Tyre Nichols: Memphis police body cam video of traffic stop is ‘appalling,’ attorney says after review

An attorney described Tyre Nichols as ‘a human pinata’ in body camera footage showing his encounter with Memphis police

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump on Monday described body camera footage showing a Jan. 7 traffic stop involving deceased Tyre Nichols, who died three days after his encounter with Memphis police, as “appalling” and “heinous” after reviewing the video with Nichols’ family.

“It is appalling. It is deplorable. It is heinous. It is violent,” Crump said of the footage, likening it to video of Rodney King, a Black man who was beaten by police in the 1990s.

MPD initially pulled over Nichols, 29, on Jan. 7 around 8:30 p.m. for “reckless driving” near Raines Road and Ross Road in Memphis, according to a press release MPD published on Jan. 8.

A portrait of Tyre Nichols is displayed at a memorial service for him on Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2023 in Memphis, Tenn. Nichols was killed during a traffic stop with Memphis Police on Jan. 7. (AP Photo/Adrian Sainz)

“While attempting to take the suspect into custody, another confrontation occurred; however, the suspect was ultimately apprehended,” MPD said in the press release. “Afterward the suspect complained of having shortness of breath, at which point an ambulance was called to the scene.”

Authorities transported Nichols to St. Francis Hospital in critical condition, and the 28-year-old died three days later on Jan. 10, according to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI), which is investigating the incident.

Nichols’ family believes 28-year-old died as a result of officers’ actions on that day.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump likened police-worn body camera footage of Tyre Nichols to that of Rodney King in the 1990s.

“He was defenseless the entire time. He was a human piñata for those police officers. It was an unadulterated, unabashed beating of this young boy for three minutes. … Not only was it violent. It was savage,” another attorney in Crump’s firm stated during the conference as Nichols’ mother could be heard crying in the background.

Skateboarders skate in front of city hall in remembrance of Tyre Nichols, who died after being beaten by Memphis police officers, five of whom have been fired, in Memphis, Tenn., Monday, Jan. 23, 2023.  (Gerald Herbert)

“He loved his son. Everything he was trying to do was to better himself as a father for his 4-year-old son,” the civil rights attorney said.

On Jan. 20, MPD announced the termination of five police officers involved in the incident for violating “multiple department policies, including excessive use of force, duty to intervene, and duty to render aid,” MPD Chief CJ Davis said in a press release at the time.

The five officers who were fired as a result of violating MPD policies include Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr. and Justin Smith. All five officers were hired between 2017 and 2020.

On Jan. 20, MPD announced the termination of five police officers involved in the incident for violating “multiple department policies, including excessive use of force, duty to intervene, and duty to render aid,” MPD Chief CJ Davis said in a press release at the time. (MPD)

Crump said during Monday’s press conference that the race of the officers involved is not as significant as the race of the victim.

“It is not the race of the police officer that is the determinable factor of the amount of excessive force that is being exerted. It is the race of the citizen,” the civil rights attorney said. “We have to have accountability no matter who tramples on the Constitution of rights for our citizens.”

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division also opened an investigation into the incident on Jan. 18.

“As this is an open investigation, we are not able to provide additional comment or release further information at this time,” U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Tennessee Kevin Ritz said in a statement at the time.

MPD is expected to release the body camera footage in the near future.

By Audrey Conklin | Fox News

Tyre Nichols’ family, lawyer Ben Crump speak after seeing ‘appalling’ footage from arrest

He was taken to St. Francis Hospital in critical condition. Nichols died in the hospital.

Nichols’ family calls video ‘horrific’

Nichols’ father, Rodney Wells, said during a press conference the family wants the officers charged with “murder one.” Wells said he believed his son ran from police because he was afraid for his life.

“What I saw on that video today was horrific. No father or mother should have to see that,” Wells said.

Shelby Co. DA Steve Mulroy weighs in on Tyre Nichols’ death investigation

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — It’s been more than a week — eight days to be exact — since the death of Tyre Nichols, the 29-year-old who Memphis Police said had a confrontation with officers.

Since then, there’s been protests, outcry and now, the federal government is stepping in.

“I want to assure the public that we take this kind of case very seriously, we understand what’s at stake, we understand the public importance of it and we are committed to being as transparent as we can as quickly as we can,” said Mulroy.

The two biggest questions: When will the body camera footage be released? And will his office be the one to prosecute the officers?

“With that in mind, let me just tell you that I originally decided during the campaign and shortly after I took office that when we had officer-involved fatalities, the appropriate course was to get an independent prosecutor. In the first two instances in my tenure, I did precisely that. I went to the TN DA’s conference, a statewide entity, and asked for what’s called a pro-tem appointment of an independent prosecutor, but sadly, because there’s been so many officer-involved fatality cases happening so rapidly, I decided to come up with a different process,” he said.

That different process he’s referring to is to turn to his Justice Review Unit, which was just launched last month.

It consists of Lorna McCluskey and Rob Gowan, two longtime Memphis defense attorneys.

“This is the unit that’s primary responsibility is to look back at our own work in our DA’s office and see if there’s been wrongful convictions or wrongful sentences but I’ve also decided to give them this responsibility as well to make a recommendation based on the TBI investigation in officer involved fatality cases as to whether a prosecution of the involved officers is warranted,” he said.

As for how many officers, Mulroy would not confirm the number of officers or any of the findings from the city investigation, which Mayor Jim Strickland says was completed over the weekend.

But he said once a hearing happens later this week, we can expect to see the video soon after.

“We’re currently thinking that sometime next week might work but we don’t want to guarantee anything because there’s still an ongoing investigation but if all goes well, then something along that timeframe I think is possible,” he said.

Mulroy said there are a handful of reasons why the video has not been released yet.

By Kayla Solomon source

5 officers fired after investigation in death of man

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (WREG) — On Friday, Memphis Police Department announced the five officers involved in the arrest of Tyre Nichols have been fired: Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr., and Justin Smith.

The arrest of Nichols, 29, brought national scrutiny to the department and the city after the incident resulted in the man’s hospitalization and eventual death.

In a statement, MPD wrote:

“The Memphis Police Department has concluded its administrative investigation into the tragic death of Mr. Tyre Nichols. After a thorough review of the circumstances surrounding this incident, we have determined that five MPD officers violated multiple department policies, including excessive use of force, duty to intervene, and duty to render aid.

Earlier today, each officer charged was terminated from the Memphis Police Department. The Memphis Police Department is committed to protecting and defending the rights of every citizen in our city. The egregious nature of this incident is not a reflection of the good work that our officers perform, with integrity, every day.”

Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy provided the following statement:

“We understand there are many questions from the public surrounding the Tyre Nichols case. Additionally, we’re aware of the reasonable requests to release video, which we are committed to doing as swiftly as possible. 

But we must reemphasize the law places limits on such video release, and that we have to make sure we do so without compromising our ability to arrive at justice in this case. Those who know me know I don’t take situations like this lightly and that I believe firmly in transparency. I ask for your patience as we gather all necessary information so that we don’t compromise the investigation or any possible future prosecution.”

What we know about the case

• On Jan. 7, MPD says officers stopped Tyre Nichols for “reckless driving.” Police say as they approached him, a “confrontation” occurred, and he took off running. After a pursuit, officers claim another “confrontation” occurred before taking Nichols into custody.
• Family says the second confrontation happened just yards from where he lived. The incident was also reportedly captured by a SkyCop camera.

• Police say Nichols then complained of “shortness of breath” and was taken to the hospital in critical condition.

• Nichols’ family says the incident made him go into cardiac arrest, left him with a broken neck and he suffered from other medical issues.
• On Jan. 10, he died in the hospital.
  

  Who is Tyre Nichols?

  He leaves behind a 4-year-old son.

  Family says he’s never been in trouble.

  He liked to take pictures and loved to skateboard. Friends wore “Skate in Peace” shirts to his memorial.

  • He was “infectious,” family said. The type of guy that “everywhere he went, he left an impact.” They say he had a “pure soul” and loved helping people.
  • He worked at FedEx. The company released a statement and said, “We are deeply saddened by the tragic loss of our team member.”
    

    Who’s investigating?

    • Shelby County District Attorney General Steve Mulroy immediately asked the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation to conduct an independent investigation into the use of force by Memphis police officers.
    • On Jan. 9, his office sent an email stating they plan “to publish the redacted results on the SCDAG website when the findings are complete.”
    • On Jan. 15, Police Chief C.J. Davis and Mayor Jim Strickland released a joint statement stating the officers involved in the incident have been served notice of “impending administrative action.” Davis also stated she reviewed “various sources of information involving this incident.”
    • On Jan. 16, Nichols’ family retained civil rights attorney Ben Crump. He stated, “all of the available information tells us that this was the tragic and preventable death of a young man deeply beloved by his family and community.” He added, “nobody should die from a simple traffic stop,” and the footage is the “only way to discern the true narrative.”
    • On Jan. 17, the city issued a statement saying the video would be released publicly after the completion of the internal investigation into the actions of the officers and after Nichols’ family has had the opportunity to review it privately. They have not said what type of video from the incident exists, but that they are arranging to meet with Nichols’ family next week.
    • On Jan. 18, United States Attorney Kevin G. Ritz announced the U.S. Attorney’s Office in coordination with the FBI and the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice opened a civil rights investigation into Nichols’ death.

5 Memphis police officers fired in death of Tyre Nichols

Five Memphis police officers who were involved in the arrest of Tyre Nichols – who died three days after a traffic stop earlier this month – have been fired, the department announced Friday.

The five officers were dismissed following an “internal investigation” which determined that they “violated multiple department policies, including excessive force, duty to intervene, and duty to render aid,” Memphis Police Chief C.J. Davis said in a statement.

The five officers were identified by the department as Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr. and Justin Smith.

On Jan. 7, the 29-year-old Nichols, who is Black, was arrested after officers stopped him for reckless driving, police said.

There was a confrontation as officers approached the driver, and he ran before he was confronted again by the pursuing officers, who arrested him, authorities said. He complained of shortness of breath and was hospitalized. Officials said a cause of death has not yet been determined.

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, the state’s police agency, said Nichols died Jan. 10. The agency is conducting a use-of-force investigation at the request of Shelby County District Attorney General Steve Mulroy.

he five officers who were fired are all Black, according to a Memphis Police public information officer.

Federal authorities announced Wednesday they were launching a civil rights investigation into the actions of Memphis police.

Relatives have said that the officers who pulled over Nichols were in an unmarked vehicle and that he experienced cardiac arrest and kidney failure because of a beating by officers.

Davis and Mayor Jim Strickland said Tuesday that video footage of the arrest will be released after the police department’s investigation is completed and the family can review it.

source

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hTGxseMJL4

Sierra Rogers, holding her daughter Khloe Rogers, 1, wipes away tears as she speaks during a memorial service for her friend Tyre Nichols, Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2023, in Memphis, Tenn. (Mark Weber/Daily Memphian via AP)

​