Last month the Oakland Tribune and KCBS reported that Alameda District Attorney Nancy O’Malley would not press charges against the two police officers involved in the fatal shooting of Derrick Jones last November. Today, the DA’s office released its official report confirming that news.
Here’s a PDF of the full report.
The document lays out the investigative steps taken by an Officer Involved Shooting Team and goes into the sequence of events leading up to the shooting, in which the two officers, Eriberto Perez-Angeles and Omar Daza-Quiroz, responding to a report of domestic violence by a woman on the street, fatally shot Jones after a pursuit. The officers said they thought the unarmed Jones had a gun.
The report also recaps the officers’ statements as well as those of witnesses.
Here is the report’s final analysis and conclusion:
California law permits the use of deadly force in one’s own self defense if reasonably appears to the person claiming the right of self defense that he actually and reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of great bodily injury or death. People v. Williams (1977) 75 Cal. App. 3d. 731. In protecting himself, a person may use all force, that he believes reasonably necessary and which would appear to a reasonable person, in the same or similar circumstances, to be necessary to prevent the injury, that appears to be imminent. This same principle applies when a person reasonably believes that great bodily injury or death is about to be inflicted upon another person to protect that individual from attack.
The killing of a human being at the hands of another is homicide and may be characterized as criminal, excusable or justifiable, depending on the circumstances. A homicide is justifiable if done in self-defense or defense of others, provided the actor actually and reasonably believed they or others were in imminent danger of great bodily injury or death. In protecting their own lives or the lives of others, a person may use all force he believes reasonably
necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily injury.
The OIS Team conducted a separate, albeit parallel, investigation and a thorough review of the facts and circumstances leading to the death of Mr. Derrick Jones. Assistant II District Attorney Richard Klemmer conducted a careful analysis of the law as it pertains to the facts of this case.
It is the conclusion of Assistant II DA Klemmer that there is not sufficient evidence to proceed against either of the two officers involved in this case. It is the conclusion of Assistant II DA Klemmer that there was sufficient basis for the officers to contact and pursue Mr. Jones. Given the nature of the reported crime, it was reasonable for the officers to take precautions for officer’s safety, including commanding Mr. Jones, repeatedly, to remove his hands from his pocket and waistband areas. It was also reasonable for the officers to take chase after Mr. Jones once he lied to them about who he was, and then as he ran from the officers. The officers’ concerns for officer safety were heightened as Mr. Jones refused to stop running and kept his hands in the area of his waistband and front area, in spite of the commands of the officers to show his hands to them. The officers are familiar with the area and in fact, one of the officers had been shot at in the vicinity of this area. When the officers heard what sounded like metal skidding on the concrete, their belief that Mr. Jones was armed was again heightened. Their belief was actual and reasonable based on the circumstances, including the fact that Mr. Jones continued to conceal his hands and keep them in the area of his waistband and front area.
Witnesses corroborate the officers’ recount of events, including that the officers repeatedly and clearly shouted for Mr. Jones to stop running and to show his hands and to remove his hands from his pockets. Officer Daza-Quiroz saw the shiny metal object in Mr. Jones’ hands and yelled to Officer Perez-Angeles that he had something in his hand. Mr. Jones did have a shiny, metal object which turned out to be a scale. Mr. Jones, when he came down from the fence, squared off with the officers while maintaining his hands in his pocket. He did not raise his hands as directed nor did he comply with the officers’ commands to show his hands to them.
In the present case, both officers fired their weapons in the belief that they or their fellow officer was about to be shot by Mr. Derrick Jones, causing death or serious bodily injury. Given the totality of the circumstances as presented and corroborated by civilian witnesses and the physical evidence recovered, it appears that Officer Daza-Quiroz and Officer Perez-Angeles actually and
reasonably believed they were in imminent danger of great bodily injury or death. There is a lack of evidence to support a prosecution against either