INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
PUBLIC REPORT OF INVESTIGATION
INVESTIGATION
NUMBER:
OFFICER(S)
INVOLVED:

OFFICER
INJURIES:

LOG# 1004332;U# 07-07

“Officer A” (Chicago Police Officer); Male/Hispanic; 29
years old; On Duty; In Uniform; Year of Appointment –
2003

Contusions, bruises and swelling to ankles; treated and
released from a hospital

SUBJECT(S)
INVOLVED:

“Subject 1”; Male/Hispanic; 27 years old

SUBJECT
INJURIES:

(Deceased) Multiple gunshot wounds

INITIAL
INCIDENT:

Traffic stop

DATE/TIME
OF INCIDENT:

23 Mar 07, 1741 hours

LOCATION:

1218 N. Harding – alley
Beat 2535

Page 1 of 9

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
SUMMARY OF INCIDENT:
On 23 Mar 07 Officer A and Officer B were assigned to a marked squad car,
Traffic Enforcement using the LIDAR detection system. Officer B was driving and using
the LIDAR. Officer A was the passenger. The officers were at the intersection of
Wabansia and Kostner parked northbound on Kostner when a red car sped southbound on
Kostner passing cars and failing to stop at the stop sign. The officers activated the
emergency equipment and made a three-point turn to follow the red car. The officers lost
sight of the car while making the turn and sent out a flash message over the PCAD
System.
The officers observed the red car in the north-south alley between Harding and
Pulaski and again activated their emergency equipment and went south on Pulaski. As
the officers drove south on Pulaski, the subject, now known as Subject 1, was exiting
onto Pulaski from an east-west “t” alley that runs parallel to and north of Division. 1
When Subject 1 apparently observed the squad car, he reversed his car and drove west in
the alley then continued in reverse north into the north-south alley between Pulaski and
Harding. The officers followed Subject 1’s vehicle and stopped their squad car in front
of the vehicle in a southwest position. The squad car was parked approximately three
feet from the Subject 1’s vehicle. Both officers exited the vehicle. Officer A approached
the driver’s side and Officer B the passenger side. Both officers gave verbal commands,
instructing Subject 1 to turn his vehicle off and put his hands where they could be seen.
As Officer A reached the driver’s side of the vehicle, Subject 1 turned the
steering wheel to the right and accelerated the engine. The vehicle, already in reverse,
ran over Officer A’s left foot, pinning him against a metal pole with the bumper of the
vehicle against Officer A’s left leg. Both officers repeatedly yelled at Subject 1 to stop.
Officer A, in fear of receiving further injury, as well as fearing for his life, fired his
weapon several times at Subject 1. Officer A was able to extract himself from this
position once Subject 1’s vehicle rolled back, stopping against the garbage cans.
Officer B radioed in a call of shots fired. Officer A was taken to a hospital and
was treated and released. Subject 1 died on the scene.

1

It was originally thought that Subject 1 held two other aliases; it was later learned that his name was
[Subject 1].

Page 2 of 9

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
INVESTIGATION:

Witness 1 related to the Roundtable panel an account that was consistent with the
Summary of Incident. Witness 1 stated he went on the roof at the back of his apartment
to smoke a cigarette. The roof is over the first floor and is like a platform. It allowed
Witness 1 a clear view of the alley between Pulaski and Harding. Witness 1 observed a
red car facing southbound, stopped in the alley with a marked squad car facing
northbound in front of the red car. Witness 1 observed two male officers exit the squad
car, with one officer walking towards the driver’s side of the red car and the other officer
walking towards the passenger side of the red car. The driver of the red car reversed,
pinning one of the officer’s against the rear yard gate and garbage cans. The officers
were yelling at the driver to stop. Witness 1 stated he thought the driver of the red car
was deaf because the officer’s were yelling over and over again for the driver to stop but
the driver did not. The officer that was pinned by the vehicle shot the driver of the
vehicle. Witness 1 thought the officer was afraid for his life because the driver would not
stop the car. 2
Officer B related to the Roundtable panel an account that was consistent with the
Summary of Incident. Officer B stated that they stopped the squad car approximately
three feet from Subject 1’s car. When Subject 1 accelerated the car in reverse he pinned
Officer A against a pole and garbage cans. Officer B continued yelling at Subject 1 to

2

Attempts to obtain Witness 1’s handwritten statement that he provided to an Assistant State’s Attorney
were met with negative results. The State’s Attorney’s Office was unable to locate the statement.

Page 3 of 9

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
INVESTIGATION (Continued):
stop when he heard the engine rev and continue in reverse. Officer B thought Subject 1
was trying to kill Officer A.
Officer A related to the Roundtable panel an account that was consistent with the
Summary of Incident. Officer A stated that Subject 1’s car ran over his left foot and right
leg, twisting his ankles and pinning him against a metal pole and garbage cans. Officer A
yelled for Subject 1 to stop and after Subject 1 again revved his engine and reversed,
Officer A fired his weapon in order to save his own life.
In a statement to the IPRA on 19 Jun 08 the Involved Member, Officer A
provided an account of the incident that is consistent with the Summary of Incident,
related Department Reports and the account he provided to the Roundtable Panel.
Officer A stated that when Subject 1 reversed the vehicle, he was pinned against a metal
pole, garbage cans and a garage. Officer A stated he gave Subject 1 several verbal
commands to stop and exit his vehicle, all of which were ignored by Subject 1 who gave
no response to Officer A’s commands. Officer A fired eight times at Subject 1 after
Subject 1 ignored his commands to stop and Officer A was in fear for his life. Subject
1’s vehicle was not moved after Officer A fired at him.
Medical records for Officer A, obtained through the Chicago Police Department,
Medical Records Section, indicate Officer A was initially treated for a twisted right
ankle, a medial miniscal tear in the right knee and a contusion on his left foot. Officer A
also received physical therapy due to post traumatic arthritis in his right ankle and the
torn medial minuscus in his right knee. Officer A was prescribed orthotics for his feet

Page 4 of 9

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
INVESTIGATION (Continued):
and continued physical therapy for approximately six months after the incident. Officer
A was given permission by his doctor to return to duty in September 2007.
In a statement to the IPRA on 20 Jun 08 the Involved Member, Officer B
provided an account of the incident that is consistent with the Summary of Incident,
related Department Reports and the account he provided to the Roundtable Panel.
Officer B stated that upon observing Subject 1’s vehicle in the alley they approached in
the squad car and observed Subject 1 put his vehicle in reverse, driving north in the alley,
then stopping.

Approximately three feet from Subject 1’s vehicle, both officers exited

the squad car and approached Subject 1, announcing their office and directing Subject 1
to turn off his vehicle. As Officer A closed in on Subject 1’s car door, Subject 1 hit his
accelerator, causing the car to go in reverse. Officer A was pinned by the front end of
Subject 1’s vehicle against a pole. Officer B yelled for Subject 1 to stop but heard
Subject 1’s engine accelerate again. Officer B felt that Subject 1 was trying to kill
Officer A. At that moment, Officer A fired his weapon at Subject 1, who was inside of
the vehicle.
The report from an Assistant Deputy Superintendent included an account of the
incident that is consistent with the Summary of Incident. In addition, the report indicated
that upon arrival, the ADS observed the subject’s vehicle still running with Subject 1 in
the driver’s seat.
A canvass was conducted however, no other witnesses were located.

Page 5 of 9

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
INVESTIGATION (Continued):
The Ambulance Report for Officer A indicates upon arrival of paramedics Officer
A was suffering from right and left foot pain and had been struck by a motor vehicle.
The Tactical Response Reports (“TRR”) from the involved officers indicate that
Officer A fired his weapon (7) seven times. 3 Officer B did not fire his weapon.
The Case Supplementary Report(s) include accounts of the incident that are
consistent with the Summary of Incident, accounts provided at the Roundtable and
accounts provided to the reporting detectives.
The Office of Emergency Management Communication (“OEMC”) Event Query
related Event Query chronology provides information consistent with the Summary of
Incident. The Event Query further indicated officers called in shots fired by the police
with one subject hit and requested EMS services; (2) two 911 callers called and stated
they heard shots fired behind the Amoco gas station. Attempts to contact the 911 callers
at the phone numbers provided were met with negative results.
The Evidence Technician Photographs and Videotape depicts the location of the
incident; Subject 1’s vehicle; Officer A’s weapon; recovered evidence and injuries
sustained by Subject 1; Officer A; Officer A’s clothing; and Officer A’s feet.
A report from the Illinois State Police Division of Forensic Services (“ISP”) dated
04 Apr 07, reflects that of the fired evidence recovered, six (6) fired bullets were fired
3

Although the TRR Report for Officer A indicated he fired (7) seven times, the recovered evidence,
Department reports and ISP evidence testing indicated he fired (8) eight times. The number of unfired
bullets (8) in Officer A’s weapon at the time it was recovered also indicated he fired (8) eight times.
Officer A’s weapon had a capacity of (16) sixteen rounds, (15) fifteen rounds in the magazine and (1) one
in the chamber.

Page 6 of 9

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
INVESTIGATION (Continued):
from Officer A’s weapon; and two (2) fired bullet jacket fragments were unsuitable for
comparison as the caliber and rifling characteristics could not be determined. The ISP
report also indicates that Officer A’s weapon was examined, found to be in firing
condition and test fired.
An ISP report dated 11 Apr 07 reflects that .3 grams of powder that was submitted
was examined and found to be cocaine.
An ISP report dated 29 Oct 08 reflects that the results of a glass bottle submitted
for latent impressions revealed at least two latent impressions suitable for comparison.
Comparison revealed that one of the suitable latent impressions was matched to Subject
1.
The Report of Postmortem Examination of Subject 1 indicates that there was an
atypical entry wound to the left side of the head involving the ear with a deformed
partially copper jacketed lead bullet recovered from beneath the right of the head; an
atypical penetrating gunshot would to the left chest with a slightly deformed medium
caliber partially copper jacketed lead bullet recovered; an atypical penetrating gunshot
wound to the lateral left shoulder with a medium caliber partially copper jacketed lead
bullet recovered; an atypical penetrating gunshot wound to the posterior left upper arm
with a deformed partially copper jacketed lead bullet recovered; a graze wound to the left
upper back; a graze wound to the medial aspect of the left upper arm; a graze wound to
the anterior aspect of the left forearm; and superficial bruises of the extremities. The
gunshot wounds caused Subject 1’s death. The manner of death was homicide.

Page 7 of 9

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
CONCLUSION AND FINDING:
This investigation found that the use of deadly force by Officer A was in
compliance with Department policy and state statutes. According to the Chicago Police
Department’s General Order No. 02-08-03, III. Department Policy:
A.

“a sworn member is justified in using force likely to cause death or great
bodily harm only when he or she reasonably believes that such force is
necessary:
1.

to prevent death or great bodily harm to the sworn member or to
another person, or;

2.

to prevent an arrest from being defeated by resistance or escape
and the sworn member reasonably believes that the person to be
arrested:
a.

has committed or has attempted to commit a forcible
felony which involved the infliction, threatened infliction,
or threatened use of physical force likely to cause death
or great bodily harm or;

b.

is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon or;

c.

otherwise indicates that he or she will endanger human
life or inflict great bodily harm unless arrested without
delay.”

Officer A’s actions were in accordance with the requirements of the Department’s
deadly force policy. Subject 1 observed a marked police car with lights flashing and
continued trying to evade police by means of his vehicle. Subject 1 then used deadly
force with his vehicle when he struck Officer A’s foot, causing it to become lodged
between Subject 1’s vehicle and a post. Officer A yelled numerous times for Subject 1 to
stop

but

Subject

1

continued

moving

Page 8 of 9

the

vehicle

in

reverse.

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
Log #1004332; U #07-07
CONCLUSION AND FINDING (Continued):
When Officer A fired, he reasonably believed that he was in danger of
death or great bodily harm from Subject 1 and his vehicle. Officer A was stuck between
Subject 1’s car and a metal post and he was in danger of great bodily harm.

Page 9 of 9