Community activists Wednesday urged District Attorney Jackie Lacey to file criminal charges against an LAPD officer found by the Police Commission to have violated department policy in the fatal shooting of an unarmed, mentally ill black man.
The Los Angeles Police Commission ruled on Tuesday that one officer violated department policy, but another was justified in firing his weapon at Ezell Ford.
In ruling that Officer Sharlton Wampler’s use of deadly force in the death of Ford last August violated Los Angeles Police Department policy, the commission rejected Chief Charlie Beck’s finding that Wampler had adhered to policy.
Lacey “should file criminal charges against Wampler,” community activist Najee Ali said at a news conference outside the District Attorney’s Office in downtown Los Angeles.
“We want justice,” Ali told reporters. “We want Wampler prosecuted — at the very least for assault under color of authority. The community cares about Ezell Ford being shot and killed by the LAPD.”
The commission ruled there was no reason to have detained Ford in the first place and that Wampler badly mishandled the encounter, leading to the fatal confrontation. It said its ruling was based on the “totality” of the circumstances, not just the moment when force was used.
Wampler’s partner, Antonio Villegas, was found to have been much less culpable, with the panel objecting to his initial decision to draw his weapon early in the confrontation but upholding his decision to fire at Ford to protect Wampler.
Craig Lally, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, said the union supports Beck’s findings that both officers involved in the shooting were justified and their actions were in policy.
“Chief Beck’s findings were based on facts presented and his over 40 years of law enforcement,” Lally said in a statement. “Every day, LAPD officers are put directly in harm’s way as they face complex situations, unthinkable dangers and split-second decisions all in an effort to protect the citizens of Los Angeles. On the other hand, we are extremely disappointed in the findings of the Police Commission.”
Lally contended the commission was swayed by protesters and external political influences, “resulting in a determination that was purely political and self-serving. We believe the commission’s decision was irresponsible and reckless and was solely made to avoid civil unrest.”
The five-member commission deliberated behind closed doors for several hours before announcing its decision. In a raucous public meeting beforehand, commissioners heard dozens of people urging that both officers be held accountable for Ford’s death.
Ford, 25, was fatally shot on Aug. 11, 2014, near 65th Street and Broadway. Police said the officers approached Ford for acting suspiciously, and he lunged at one of them and began trying to grab Wampler’s weapon.
Beck and the department’s independent watchdog, Inspector General Alex Bustamante, each concluded in separate reports that the officers were justified in their actions, although Bustamante faulted the tactics used by one of the officers in approaching Ford in the first place.
The Police Commission, which has the final say on whether the officers acted properly, met behind closed doors for more than three hours reviewing the investigations and concluded that some of the officers’ actions were within department policy and some were not.
Beck will ultimately decide what discipline, if any, Wampler will face. The District Attorney’s Office will review the shooting to determine if any criminal charges are warranted.
Ford’s family filed a federal civil rights and wrongful death lawsuit last September against the LAPD, alleging Ford was shot in the back as he lay on the ground.
According to the lawsuit, Wampler and Villegas — who are named plaintiffs — engaged in an unlawful search and seizure of Ford, denied him due process, used excessive force and violated his civil rights.
“No officer goes to work with the intent of using deadly force,” Lally said. “Officers may be compelled to use force when there is an objectively reasonable certainty that there could be injury to themselves or someone else. In the case of Ezell Ford, the only reason one would attempt to take an officer’s weapon is to use it against the officer, his partner or an innocent bystander.”
—City News Service