Cop who fired 21 shots at Columbus teens could be liable for death and injuries, judge rules
A federal judge has refused to dismiss all the civil rights claims in an excessive force lawsuit against the Columbus city government and the police officer involved in a 2016 car chase and shooting that killed a teenage driver and wounded two passengers.
Judge Clay Land ruled the city and former Officer Allan Brown still could be held liable for claims related to Brown’s firing a second round of shots at the Pontiac G-6 that Christian Redwine wrecked after an extended, early morning chase from Columbus to Phenix City on Nov. 6, 2016.
Brown twice emptied his gun at the car, first firing off 11 rounds, then reloading and firing 10 more.
Shot 11 times, Redwine was dead on the scene of the wreck off Riverchase Drive, and two passengers, Redwine’s cousin Hunter Tillis and their friend Hannah Wuenschel, were wounded.
Brown emptied his sidearm into the Pontiac when Redwine shifted the car into reverse and backed across the road. Two of the initial barrage of 11 shots hit Redwine, killing him, and one bullet wounded Wuenschel in the shoulder.
At that point, Brown had not acted outside the limits of his authority, Land decided.
But in the six seconds between that round of gunfire and the next, Brown reloaded his weapon as the Pontiac came to a stop on the other side of the road, still in reverse, and then he fired 10 more shots at it, claiming he heard the engine rev and feared the driver would try to run him over.
Those shots hit Redwine again, and one bullet wounded Tillis.
At that point, with Redwine likely dead and the Pontiac presenting no imminent threat, Brown no longer was acting within his authority, and both he and the city still had to face claims based on that second fusillade, Land ruled in the lawsuit filed by Tillis, Wuenschel and Nancy Sorrells, Redwine’s grandmother.
The suit claimed Brown and the city violated the youths’ rights under the Fourth and 14th Amendments to the Constitution.
Attorneys representing Brown and the city filed notice Thursday that they are appealing Land’s decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Other claims
Otherwise Land gave the city much of what it asked, when it moved for “summary judgment” declaring Brown violated no one’s constitutional rights during the chase and subsequent shootings.
Brown, who later resigned, has faced no criminal charges in the shootings: A Russell County grand jury reviewing the evidence cleared him of any wrongdoing under Alabama law.
In the civil lawsuit, Land dismissed all claims against Police Chief Ricky Boren, who was sued as Brown’s supervisor, and he threw out other claims against Brown and the city, finding the car chase and the first round of shots were not unreasonable under the circumstances.
For the lawsuit to prevail on claims Brown violated the suspects’ right to due process of law under the 14th Amendment, Brown’s conduct must amount to “deliberate indifference to life and safety” and “shock the conscience,” Land noted.
Neither was evident in the officer’s conduct during the car chase, the judge wrote.
Though Brown violated department police by continuing the chase when it no longer was necessary to capture the suspects, who could have been arrested later, “a mere policy violation, without more, does not establish a substantive due process violation,” Land said, noting no one was injured in the chase or the car crash.
Addressing Brown’s first round of 11 shots, Land concluded the plaintiffs could not prove Brown didn’t reasonably fear for his safety when Redwine shifted to reverse and started backing up, as the teen could have turned in Brown’s direction, whether the officer was directly behind the Pontiac, as he claimed, or to one side.
Court precedent holds that police may use deadly force when an officer reasonably believes a suspect may use a car as a weapon, the judge said.
But by the time Brown reloaded and emptied his gun again, the circumstances had changed.
“The second round of 10 shots is a different story,” Land wrote, adding the courts have held that “the level of force that is reasonable may change during the course of a police encounter.”
Though Brown claimed he fired the second round of shots because he heard the Pontiac’s engine rev, no such noise is recorded on Brown’s body microphone or his police cruiser’s, so “it did not happen,” Land wrote.
The city’s contention that Brown believed Redwine still posed a danger to public safety, because the teen might get back on the road and injure someone, is insufficient justification, Land said: “The case law does not permit deadly force based on sheer speculation. Rather, there must be some real imminent danger.”
Noting the roads on that early Sunday morning were almost empty except for the Pontiac and the police chasing it, Land added that to favor the city on this issue would “immunize officers from liability any time that the speculative possibility of remote danger to some unknown party theoretically arises…. In fact, clearly established law is to the contrary.”
Beyond the alleged federal civil rights violations, those filing the lawsuit also asserted claims under both Alabama and Georgia state law. Land threw out most of those as well, except for the ones stemming from the second round of gunfire.
Land said he found “evidence to support a conclusion that Brown intentionally fired 10 shots into the Pontiac after he should have been able to see that it no longer posed a serious threat of harm,” so Brown still may be liable under state law.
Land’s ruling included an intriguing twist, based on evidence Redwine was killed and Wuenschel was wounded only in Brown’s first salvo. If Redwine was dead by the time Brown fired again, and Wuenschel was not wounded again, then it’s possible under the law that only Tillis still has a cause of action, as the only one injured when Brown acted beyond his authority.
Land said he was not prepared to decide that issue, “given the expedited and restricted nature” of the city’s motion summary judgment.
The next step is for the 11th Circuit to docket the appeal and set a schedule for attorneys to file briefs.
Attorneys for the city remain optimistic.
“We are pleased that the court dismissed all of the claims against Chief Boren and most of the claims against Officer Allan Brown and the city,” they said in a statement. “We have appealed what remains of the case … and are confident that we will be successful in having the entire case dismissed.”