DETROIT — Two police experts for the family of Patrick Lyoya, a Black man killed by a White Grand Rapids police officer last year, have said the officer's conduct violated his training and acceptable police standards, according to affidavits submitted in federal court in a lawsuit against the officer and the city.
In December, Lyoya's family filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Western Michigan seeking $100 million against the City of Grand Rapids and former Grand Rapids police Officer Christopher Schurr, accusing the city and Schurr of multiple civil rights violations, as well as gross negligence and willful misconduct.
The affidavits followed a motion submitted by Schurr's attorneys in February to dismiss the case because of qualified immunity.
Attorneys Ven Johnson and Christopher Desmond said this assertion is both "legally incorrect and grossly premature," especially before any discovery or depositions have been done, Desmond wrote in a motion filed Friday. Johnson was joined by civil rights attorney Ben Crump, former Kent County Commissioner Robert Womack, Patrick's father Peter Lyoya and a translator at a Monday press conference to talk about the expert's affidavits.
Schurr's civil attorney, Joseph Seward, did not immediately respond Monday for comment. Steve Guitar, a spokesperson for the City of Grand Rapids, declined to comment because of the pending case.
Schurr's criminal attorney, Matt Borgula, said Monday he believes Schurr followed his training, as do experts he has found. During the preliminary exam in Kent County, Grand Rapids Police Capt. Chad McKersie testified that Schurr complied with his training and department policies and procedures.
Borgula said he is guessing the Lyoya family's "hand-picked experts" haven't looked at Grand Rapids' policies and procedures.
Lyoya was killed after Schurr pulled him over just after 8 a.m. April 4, 2022, allegedly for his license plate not matching his vehicle. Lyoya family attorneys have said Schurr could not have seen his license plate until he had already done a U-turn to get behind Lyoya, as they were facing each other when Schurr first spotted Lyoya a year ago.
"Resisting arrest doesn't give an officer an absolute constitutional right to use deadly force," Johnson said. (Schurr has) been trained, and he knows he cannot use unnecessary deadly force just because someone resists arrest."
Schurr ordered Lyoya multiple times to get back in his car after Schurr pulled him over, as Lyoya repeatedly asked what he did wrong, according to the body camera footage of the shooting. Schurr grabbed Lyoya, who then twisted out of Schurr's grip and started running away. Schurr chased him and tackled him from behind to the ground, grabbing and deploying his Taser when Lyoya got back to his feet.
Schurr was within arm's reach of Lyoya when he deployed the Taser, because Lyoya grabbed the barrel to try to deflect it away from him, according to the video. Schurr deployed the Taser a second time and Lyoya grabbed the barrel again, according to Johnson's motion.
What experts said
Schurr's body camera deactivated around this point, and the passenger in Lyoya's car took video of the rest of the interaction. As he pinned Lyoya to the ground, Schurr yelled multiple times for Lyoya to drop the Taser. The two experts Johnson hired said there was no indication Lyoya took the Taser from Schurr and it appeared Schurr voluntarily relinquished control of the Taser so he could grab his gun, which he placed at the base of Lyoya's skull before he shot him.
The two experts hired by Lyoya's family's attorneys, police Officers Thomas Tiderington and Ken Katsaris, have a combined 70 to 80 years of police experience, Johnson said Monday. Crump noted police experts generally agree with the officers who kill someone, not the person who was killed.
Tiderington said Schurr had other tactical options, such as physical disengagement, using his baton or chemical spray, so deadly force was unnecessary and excessive.
"Had Schurr followed proper protocols, Lyoya more likely than not would be alive today," Tiderington wrote in his affidavit. "A reasonably prudent officer in Schurr's position would know that shooting Lyoya in the back of the head while he was on the ground face down violated Lyoya's clearly established right to be free from excessive force."
Schurr's legal team has argued Lyoya had his hand on the Taser at one point during the encounter, which could have posed a danger to the officer.
Tiderington and Katsaris, in affidavits submitted in federal court, outlined multiple ways Schurr violated his training and acceptable police standards, including when Schurr:
—Turned around to pursue Lyoya's vehicle without any warranted reason.
—Initiated physical contact with Lyoya and followed Lyoya — not giving proper consideration to the passenger in Lyoya's vehicle, who could have been a threat to him — instead of waiting by his cruiser until backup arrived. Katsaris noted Schurr violated his training when he did not tell dispatch about the passenger in Lyoya's vehicle or that he initiated a foot pursuit.
—Used his Taser without backing away from Lyoya at least 7 feet, which would have significantly increased the effectiveness of the Taser deployment and would have prevented Lyoya from grabbing the Taser. He also was using dual force (the Taser and physical force), Katsaris said, which is improper.
—Did not warn Lyoya or anyone in the surrounding area that he was about to deploy his Taser the first or second time.
Continued to fight with Lyoya for the Taser, which after deploying two cartridges was incapable of incapacitating the officer. It could only cause minor and isolated pain for the officer with the drive-stun mode, which Lyoya likely would not have known how to use, as he had not been trained in the Taser.
—Shot Lyoya, because Schurr did not have a reasonable fear for his life at that time.
Katsaris said if Schurr had followed his training, it's likely he would have incapacitated Lyoya with his Taser, which would have ended the confrontation. This means the rest of his actions should not have occurred.
"It is my opinion that Schurr was less interested in properly using his department-issued tools as he was trained to do and more interested in having constant physical contact with Lyoya," Katsaris wrote. "When Schurr took Lyoya to the ground, he negated any potential weight advantage Lyoya may have had by straddling Lyoya, who was prone, because Schurr had the ability to extricate himself, create distance and barriers, draw his weapon, and verbally command Lyoya to stop resisting."
Katsaris said if Schurr had gone into survival mode, which is in the basic training curriculum for the Michigan Commission of Law Enforcement Standards, and immediately extricated himself from Lyoya, drew his gun and created distance and barriers between him and Lyoya, the shooting likely would not have happened.
What's ahead in lawsuit
When the city failed to fire or meaningfully discipline Schurr for the "numerous gross deviations of his training," as Tiderington wrote, it sent a message to officers that Schurr's conduct was not inappropriate, Tiderington and Katsaris concluded.
The city of Grand Rapids fired Schurr in mid-June after a second-degree murder charge was filed by the Kent County Prosecutor's Office on June 9, 2022. Schurr was fired after waiving his right to a discharge hearing, Grand Rapids City Manager Mark Washington said.
Grand Rapids' Police Department validated Schurr's significant training violations, which indicated a deliberate indifference to Lyoya's constitutional rights and was a substantial factor to why the shooting occurred, Tiderington wrote.
"This conduct by the city epitomizes deliberate indifference and was a substantial factor in why Schurr (sic) excessive force in this instance," Tiderington and Katsaris wrote.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan Judge Paul Maloney will make the final decision on whether to grant Schurr's motion to dismiss the case.
The criminal case, which remains pending in state court, is set for an Oct. 24 jury trial, Johnson said.
Peter Lyoya, through a translator, said at the Monday press conference he and his family were still in pain after Patrick's death. His birthday, Feb. 5, and the anniversary of his death were both painful days of remembrance, he said.
"They keep pushing the case, March, June, October, all of this is because they want the people to forget how Patrick was killed, how my son was shot in the back of the head," Peter Lyoya said. "We (are) asking (for) justice for Patrick. If there's a justice in this country, we are really asking (for) justice for Patrick because we are really hurt."
———
