INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
LOG #1065039 / U# 13-34
INVESTIGATION
NUMBER:
LOG #1065039 / U #13-34
OFFICER
INVOLVED:

“Officer A” (Chicago Police Sergeant); Male/White; 48 years old;
On- Duty; In Uniform; Year of Appointment – 1991

OFFICER
INJURIES:

None reported.

SUBJECT:

“Subject 1”; Male/Hispanic; 44 years old

SUBJECT
INJURIES:

INITIAL
INCIDENT:
DATE/TIME/
LOCATION OF
INCIDENT:

One gunshot wound to the lower back; transported to Advocate
Illinois Masonic Medical Center in good condition.

Burglary in the vicinity of 6100 W. Belmont Ave.

20 September 2013, 1722 hours. 5611 W. Roscoe Avenue,
Chicago, IL 60634 (alley/street). Beat 1633.

1

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
LOG #1065039 / U# 13-34
SUMMARY OF INCIDENT:
On 20 September 2013, at approximately 1722 hours, Officer B responded to a
call of a burglary in the vicinity of 6100 W. Belmont Avenue, and observed the subject,
now known to be Subject 1, flee the area in a gold vehicle. Officer B initiated a vehicle
pursuit of the suspect and called out the pursuit over OEMC. The involved member,
Officer A, was in the vicinity of Officer B and monitored the OEMC broadcast of the
pursuit. Officer B continued to chase Subject 1 through the south alley of W. Roscoe
Street. Officer A paralleled Subject 1 and Officer B as he drove east on Roscoe Street.
Officer A stopped his vehicle at the south entrance of the alley and observed Subject 1'
vehicle driving toward him. Officer A then exited his vehicle and retrieved his firearm
from his holster. Officer A gave Subject 1 verbal commands to stop his vehicle and exit.
Subject 1 placed his vehicle in reverse, revved the engine and struck the front end of
Officer B's squad car. Subject 1 then placed his vehicle in drive, revved the engine and
drove forward in the direction of Officer A. Officer A, in fear of his life, fired one round
at Subject 1, who veered off and continued driving forward onto Roscoe, striking a
civilian's vehicle. Subject 1’s vehicle appeared to get stuck on the civilian’s vehicle.
Subject 1 reversed his vehicle and drove backwards toward Officer A, who was now on
the driver’s side of his squad car. Officer A fired his weapon a second time at Subject 1,
striking the rear of Subject 1’s vehicle. Subject 1 then fled in his vehicle eastbound on
Roscoe. After a short pursuit, Subject 1 was taken into custody near 3411 N. Lavergne
Avenue by Officer C and Officer B. It was then discovered that Subject 1 had sustained a
gunshot wound to his lower back and was transported to Advocate Illinois Masonic
Medical Center for treatment. Officer A remained at the scene until another unit secured
that scene. Officer A then traveled to 3411 N. Lavergne Avenue and assisted the other
units.

2

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
LOG #1065039 / U# 13-34
INVESTIGATION:
On 21 September 2013, at approximately 1939 hours, at Advocate Illinois
Masonic Medical Center, the subject, Subject 1, was advised of his Miranda rights and
agreed to speak with the detectives. Subject 1 related that he used a knife to open a
window into the residence. The knife then broke and Subject 1 cut himself. Once
Subject 1 entered the apartment, he took a watch and a camera. As he exited the
apartment, Subject 1 was shot by the police at the scene of the burglary. The detectives
confronted Subject 1 that he was not shot at the scene. Subject 1 then related that he no
longer wanted to speak with the detectives and invoked his right to counsel.
Attempts to Contact Subject 1 and his attorney, Attorney A, were unsuccessful.
In a statement to IPRA and to Area North detectives on 21 September 2013,
the witness, Witness 1, provided an account of the incident that is consistent with the
Summary of Incident and related Department reports. Witness 1 related that he was a
passenger in the vehicle driven by his wife, Witness 2, as they headed northbound on
Major Avenue. Witness 1 heard police sirens and then a tan or beige vehicle almost
rammed their vehicle from behind. The unknown vehicle proceeded eastbound in the
south alley of Roscoe Street with a police vehicle in pursuit. Witness 2 then drove north
on Major Avenue and east on Roscoe Street. Witness 1 then observed the unknown
vehicle coming out of the alley and a marked police vehicle stopped in front of the
unknown vehicle. Witness 1 stated that the police vehicle was on an angle to the alley.
A police officer exited the driver’s side of the police vehicle, stood in front of the
unknown vehicle and gave verbal commands to the driver of the unknown vehicle. The
driver of the unknown vehicle stopped and reversed, and then drove the vehicle at the
police officer. Witness 1 heard one gunshot and he and his wife dove under the
dashboard of their vehicle. Witness 1 then heard a vehicle crash and saw the unknown
vehicle trying to maneuver around the squad car. The unknown vehicle then fled
eastbound on Roscoe Street.
In a statement to IPRA and to Area North detectives on 21 September 2013,
the witness, Witness 2, provided an account of the incident that is consistent with the
Summary of Incident and related Department reports. Witness 2 related that she was
driving eastbound on Roscoe Street when she heard a police siren and observed behind
her a marked police vehicle headed eastbound. She pulled to the right of the street next
to the mouth of the alley. Witness 2 heard one gunshot and ducked down inside her
vehicle. Witness 2’s vehicle was then struck by an unknown vehicle on the passenger
side rear fender and her vehicle was pushed into the street. Witness 2 then heard a
second gunshot and observed an unknown vehicle pass her vehicle eastbound on Roscoe
Street. Witness 2 remained on the scene and moved her vehicle east of the incident.
In a statement to IPRA and to Area North detectives on 21 September 2013,
the involved officer, Officer A, provided an account of the incident that is consistent
with the Summary of Incident and related Department reports. Officer A related that he
was assigned to Beat 2510 in a marked police vehicle when he heard a call of a burglary

3

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
LOG #1065039 / U# 13-34
in progress. While monitoring the radio, Officer A heard that Officer B was pursuing the
subject, now known as Subject 1, from the burglary. Officer A activated his emergency
equipment and observed Subject 1’s vehicle turn eastbound in the south alley of Roscoe
Street with Officer B in pursuit. Officer A drove to Roscoe Street and then eastbound to
the mouth of the alley. Officer A stated that an unknown vehicle pulled over and
partially blocked the mouth of the alley. Officer A turned his vehicle into the mouth of
the alley facing southeast when he observed Subject 1’s vehicle turn north in the alley.
Officer A exited his vehicle and stood in front of his vehicle. Subject 1 drove his vehicle
at Officer A and then stopped. Officer A approached Subject 1 to give verbal commands
when Subject 1 reversed his vehicle and rammed it into Officer B’s squad car. Subject 1
then placed his vehicle in drive and drove at Officer A who was standing in front of his
vehicle. Officer A stated that he did not have an avenue of escape and Subject 1’s actions
placed him in fear for his life. The sergeant then discharged his weapon once at Subject
1, striking the driver’s side window. Subject 1 veered and crashed into the unknown
vehicle, causing that vehicle to block Subject 1’s avenue of escape. Subject 1 then drove
his vehicle in reverse at Officer A, who was trapped between Subject 1’s vehicle and his
squad car. In fear for his life, Officer A discharged his firearm a second time at Subject
1. Subject 1 drove forward, striking the unknown vehicle a second time, and headed
eastbound on Roscoe Street. Officer A notified the zone of shots fired by the police and
remained on the scene until assist units arrived and secured the scene. Officer A
proceeded to Lavergne and Roscoe where Subject 1 had been placed into custody by
Officer C and Officer B, and positively identified Subject 1 as the subject who twice tried
to intentionally run him over.
In a statement to IPRA and to Area North detectives on 21 September 2013,
the witness, Officer B, provided an account of the incident that is consistent with the
Summary of Incident and related Department reports. Officer B related that he responded
to call of a burglary and, upon arrival, observed an unknown male standing in front of a
beige/brown SUV. The sergeant sounded his air horn and the unknown male moved out
of the path of the SUV and told the sergeant that the SUV was involved in the burglary.
Officer B activated his emergency equipment and attempted to curb the SUV with
negative results. Officer B pursued the SUV to the south alley of Roscoe Street and then
to the east alley of Central Avenue. As the SUV turned north in the alley, Officer B
observed that Officer A had stopped his squad car in the mouth of the alley. The subject,
now known as Subject 1, stopped his vehicle and Officer A approached the front of
Subject 1’s vehicle. Subject 1 then placed the SUV in reverse and drove into Officer B’s
squad car. Subject 1 then drove forward at Officer A at a high rate of speed. Officer A
discharged his firearm at Subject 1 who veered to the right, striking an unknown vehicle.
Subject 1 placed the SUV again in reverse and drove at Officer A who again discharged
his firearm at Subject 1. Subject 1 then proceeded eastbound on Roscoe Street and
eventually stopped at 3411 N. Lavergne Avenue where he was placed in custody by
Officer B and Officer C.
The police shooting was not captured by any video surveillance systems.
Two canvasses of the location of the incident were met with negative results.

4

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
LOG #1065039 / U# 13-34
Officer A’s Tactical Response Report indicates that he discharged his firearm
two times at Subject 1.
Office of Emergency Communications (OEMC) Event Query showed that the
OEMC dispatcher received a call of a burglary at 6111 W. Belmont Avenue. Beat 2530
responded that he is pursuing the subject and Beat 2510 joined in the pursuit. Beat 2510
reported that shots were fired by the police at 5611 W. Roscoe Street. The subject
continued to flee and was eventually placed into custody in the vicinity of 3404 N.
Lavergne Avenue. An ambulance was requested and the subject was transported to
Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center.
Evidence Technician photographs depict the shooting scene; the subject Subject
1; Subject 1’s vehicle; Officer A’s weapon; and two shell casings.
A Chicago Fire Department EMS Report indicated that Subject 1 was found
lying on the street. Subject 1 had one gunshot wound to the left side of his back at
approximately the middle to lower area. Subject 1 was then transported to the Advocate
Illinois Masonic Medical Center trauma room.
Medical Records for Subject 1 from Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical
Center indicated that Subject 1 was treated for one gunshot wound to his left paraspinal
back. A bullet fragment was found lodged inside Subject 1, without any evidence of
vascular injury. Hospital personnel noted that Subject 1 admitted that he had snorted
heroin that morning.
Crime Scene Processing Reports described Subject 1’s various clothing,
personal items and contraband that were photographed and inventoried. In addition,
Officer A’s blue steel Glock Model 21, .45 semi-autmatic pistol with a 4 and ½ inch
barrel was photographed and inventoried.
A laboratory report from the Illinois State Police, Division of Forensic
Services, dated 21 October 2013, indicated that the laboratory examined Officer A’s
firearm, a Glock Model 21, .45 Auto caliber semiautomatic pistol, serial number
MNT937 (inventoried under # 13007553). The firearm was found to be in firing
condition and test fired. The firearm displayed polygonal rifling characteristics of eight
lands and grooves with a right hand twist. Two Winchester 45 Auto caliber fired
cartridge cases, inventoried under #13007516, were examined and determined to have
been fired from Officer A’s firearm.

5

 INDEPENDENT POLICE REVIEW AUTHORITY
LOG #1065039 / U# 13-34
CONCLUSION AND FINDING:
This investigation found that the use of deadly force by Officer A was in
compliance with Chicago Police Department Policy and Illinois State Statutes. According
to the Chicago Police department General Order 03-02-03, II, A:
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 involves 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 both conditions of CPD’s deadly
force policy. Officer B observed the subject, Subject 1, flee from the scene of a
suspected burglary and began to pursue him. Officer A joined the pursuit and attempted
to prevent Subject 1 from escaping. Officer A, Officer B and the witness, Witness 1,
observed the vehicle driven by the subject, Subject 1, head toward Officer A. Both
Officer A and Officer B stated that Officer A was standing between his squad car and
Subject 1’s vehicle and did not have an avenue of escape. Consequently, Officer A
discharged his firearm once at Subject 1. Subject 1 proceeded to strike Witness 1’s
vehicle with his vehicle and then drove in reverse toward Officer A, who now stood
between his vehicle’s driver side and Subject 1’s vehicle. Officer A again did not have
an avenue of escape and, as a result, discharged his firearm a second time at Subject 1’s
vehicle. Subject 1 continued to flee until he was eventually placed into custody. Based
on the totality of the circumstances, when Officer A fired his weapon, he reasonably
believed that he was in danger of death or great bodily harm from Subject 1 and his
actions were justified.

6