12-18-2003, 04:37 PM
| #1 |
| Guest
Posts: n/a
|  Oklahoma County DA won't file charge in videotaped trooper shooting Oklahoma County DA won't file charge in videotaped trooper shooting OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) _ A highway patrol trooper who shot an uncooperative, intoxicated motorist in the back was a rookie who made a ``split-second mistake,'' but she did not violate the law, Oklahoma County District Attorney Wes Lane said Friday. Lateka Anderson, the first female, black trooper to graduate from the Oklahoma Highway Patrol academy, used excessive force during a June 7 traffic stop, Lane said. But her actions did not warrant a criminal charge because she ``may have avoided a public safety tragedy to innocent bystanders.'' Anderson, 24, shot Justin Lyle Thomas, 21, after he refused to put his hands behind him and tried to get away. She had pulled him over for speeding on Interstate 35 in south Oklahoma City about 1 a.m. and given him a sobriety test. Thomas _ who had a blood-alcohol content of 0.09 percent, above the legal limit _ wobbled as he walked heel-to-toe along the side of the highway. He also had traces of marijuana in his system and a small amount of marijuana was found in his pickup truck after the shooting. A videotape made by a camera in the patrol board shows Anderson screaming and cursing at Thomas to put his hands behind his back. ``You want to be shot?'' she yells. ``I got a gun.'' Instead of facing the patrol car and putting his hands behind his back, Thomas keeps turning toward the trooper and saying, ``I'm not doing anything.'' When he breaks free and heads toward his truck, she fires one shot in his back. As he lies on the ground moaning, ``You shot me,'' Anderson points her gun at him. ``Hands behind your back,'' she shouts. ``I'll shoot you again!'' Thomas finally complies and the trooper uses her radio to report shots fired. Thomas' attorney, Fred Shaeffer, said he was not surprised Lane declined to charge the trooper. ``If you're a cop, you can take your night stick and beat the hell out of someone or shoot them in the back and nothing is going to happen,'' he said. ``They never do anything against the cop _ the cop has got a free rein to do anything. He's the judge and jury in Oklahoma County.'' The district attorney said it was the first time he could remember that a law officer was found to have used excessive force in Oklahoma County. Lane, who has reviewed up to 20 use-of-force cases since he became district attorney two years ago, has not filed charges against a law officer. ``I am convinced Trooper Anderson would have been completely justified to use either her baton or pepper spray or both or some other reasonable nondeadly force the moment Thomas refused to turn around and put his hands behind his back,'' Lane said. Lane said he decided not to file a criminal charge against Anderson because she showed no ``malice of heart'' and could have prevented a tragedy on the highway. ``He was intending and willing to engage the highway patrol and other law enforcement officers in a drunken, high-speed chase that had a very high likelihood of ending in a highway wreck,'' he said. Anderson, a trooper for a year and a half, has been on paid administrative leave since the shooting. She will remain on leave while the Department of Public Safety investigates, Lt. Chris West said. ``Trooper Anderson, although young, has been an outstanding trooper during her short time with the Department of Public Safety,'' Public Safety Commissioner Bob Ricks said. ``When a trooper feels that his or her life is in jeopardy, the decision, which must be made in a split second, is one of the most difficult situations that an officer can possibly face.'' Anderson's attorney, Gary James, said she was justified in using excessive force because Thomas was assaulting her and trying to get away. ``He was also grabbing her, knocking her belt buckle, knocking her into her police vehicle,'' James said. ``This guy was the aggressor. He fought her.'' The bullet went through Thomas' back, stopping when it struck a rib, his attorney said. He spent several days in the hospital, but has recovered. Thomas, who had a drug charge from Cleveland County, was out of jail on an appeal bond at the time of arrest. His bond was revoked after the shooting and he has been in the Cleveland County jail for 35 days, Shaeffer said. Thomas' attorney said they have not discussed a civil case against the state because they are dealing with his criminal charges first. ``Suing the government for money is not his concern,'' Shaeffer said. ``His concern is trying to get something done to get the law enforcement under control. Right now there's no one out there putting a stop to cops beating up citizens and shooting citizens.'' In another case, Lane decided in January not to file criminal charges against two Oklahoma City police officers who hit a man repeatedly with batons during an arrest that was caught on videotape. Lane said the officer did not use excessive force during the arrest of Donald Pete, whose arrest was shown on television news shows across the nation. |
 |
|
12-18-2003, 04:38 PM
| #2 |
| Guest
Posts: n/a
| DA's statement: http://www.daweslane.com/anderson.html Press Statement Review of Shooting Incident Involving Trooper Latika Anderson September 26, 2003 The United States Supreme Court has said that the “reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation.” (Graham v. Connor) This case represents one of the most difficult decisions I have had to make concerning police use-of-force issues. The question before me is whether Trooper Latika Anderson used an excessive degree of force in taking Justin Lyle Thomas into custody. The term “excessive force” is defined by Oklahoma state law as being that “physical force which exceeds the degree of physical force permitted by law or the policies and guidelines of the law enforcement agency”. As applied to this fact situation, the question becomes “when Thomas broke to run away from Trooper Anderson was it an appropriate and reasonable response under the law for her to immediately shoot him?” My answer to that is “NO” – I do not believe that it was an appropriate and reasonable response and from the totality of the circumstances I find that Trooper Anderson did use an excessive degree of force in taking Thomas into custody. The Oklahoma Department of Public Safety use of force guidelines define “deadly force” as “any force that is likely to cause death or serious bodily harm”. Clearly, Trooper Anderson used deadly force under DPS policy and guidelines. Those guidelines further clearly restrict troopers from using deadly force “to effect any misdemeanor arrest, to prevent the escape of a misdemeanant, or to apprehend any person who is fleeing from arrest for a misdemeanor.” Trooper Anderson was attempting to arrest Justin Lyle Thomas for the misdemeanor offense of DUI. Thomas’ response to this attempt was to struggle with her and forcibly resist arrest, also a misdemeanor. It was as Thomas broke to run away from Trooper Anderson that she used deadly force and shot him. Having determined that she did employ an excessive degree of force, the next question that must be answered is “will I now charge her with a crime?” The answer again is “NO”. I have reviewed not only the detailed reports concerning the investigation of this case, but the video tape which captured most of the encounter between Trooper Anderson and Thomas. In my review of the video, it is very clear Justin Lyle Thomas was resisting arrest. Blood testing done later that evening reflected that his Blood Alcohol Content was .09% - legal intoxication - and there was also marijuana in his bloodstream. Clearly, Thomas was intoxicated and Trooper Anderson recognized that fact. The video clearly shows Thomas was uncooperative and struggling with Trooper Anderson’s lawful attempt to take him into custody. After review of the video tape, I am convinced Trooper Anderson would have been completely justified to use either her baton or pepper spray or both or some other reasonable non-deadly force the moment Thomas refused to turn around and put his hands behind his back. Trooper Anderson did not, however, use any of these available options. Instead, from the outset of the confrontation, Trooper Anderson’s attempted method of control on a misdemeanor arrest was to threaten to shoot Thomas. It is significant to note that at the time of this incident, Trooper Anderson had only been a trooper for approximately a year and a half. In other words, this is not a seasoned law enforcement officer dealing with an intoxicated and uncooperative subject. Not only do I believe that an experienced trooper would have deemed it unnecessary to shoot Thomas at that particular point, most importantly I do not believe an experienced law enforcement officer would have used as their sole means of control the raw threat of shooting someone in order to gain their compliance. This is the issue with which I am most troubled. Trooper Anderson appears almost frantic in her numerous threats to shoot Thomas when I believe that a reasonable and experienced officer would have entertained other methods of controlling their subject first including use of force with a baton or pepper spray. Despite all her threats to shoot, Thomas essentially called Trooper Anderson’s bluff and she apparently had no default position other than to carry through with her threat. She skipped any alternative level of force and simply shot him the second he turned from her to run. Whereas this is an inexperienced trooper, a significant reason why I decline to file charges in this matter is because I believe her actions, excessive as they might have been, may have avoided a public safety tragedy to innocent bystanders. Trooper Anderson did not know that Thomas was also a convicted felon out on an appeal bond while he hoped to avoid being sent to prison for 10 years on a drug charge. He also had a small quantity of marijuana in his truck which would have resulted in additional charges being filed against him were he to be arrested. In fact, after this incident his appeal bond was revoked in Cleveland County and he was put back in jail. It is very clear to me that Thomas’ intent was to run and jump back into his truck and attempt to avoid arrest. Certainly in his drunken state and with a controlled dangerous substance in his truck he had to realize that this arrest would result in ending his hopes of avoiding going to prison. I do not think it believable, as Thomas told police, that it was his intent merely to go back to his truck and get his insurance verification card. I believe the facts and circumstances reflect the far more likely scenario that he was intending and willing to engage the highway patrol and other law enforcement officers in a drunken high speed chase that had a very high likelihood of ending in a highway wreck, one in which innocent bystanders could have been hurt or even killed. The bottom line is that Trooper Anderson is a near-rookie who made a split-second tactical error judgment call. There may be some in our community who might proclaim the belief that her conduct reflects at a minimum the misdemeanor crime of “Reckless Conduct with a Firearm”. Under the entire circumstances, however, I do not believe charging her with this or any crime is appropriate. Under the law, in order for her conduct to be found “reckless”, she would have had to exhibit a “conscious disregard for the safety of another person”. I do not believe her conduct reflects such a callous indifference. Trooper Anderson was not a “bad” or “reckless” trooper, she was a “mistaken” and inexperienced one. Trooper Anderson made a split second mistake that any of us could have made. Attempting to send her to jail or prison by filing a criminal charge will not further the interests of justice in this community. I find from a consideration of all the facts and circumstances of this June 7, 2003 incident that there was an absence of criminal intent or reckless conduct on the part of this inexperienced trooper and that there was a strong likelihood that Justin Lyle Thomas would have become a threat to the public safety. For these reasons it would be inappropriate to pursue any criminal action against Trooper Latika Anderson and I therefore decline to do so. C. Wesley Lane II District Attorney |
| |
|
12-18-2003, 04:39 PM
| #3 |
| Guest
Posts: n/a
|  realplayer clip here |
| |
