Austin: Expert who testified in Chauvin case says Christopher Taylor’s use of force not justified

Published: Wed, 11/01/23

Expert who testified in Chauvin case says Christopher Taylor’s use of force not justified

Austin Police Officer Christopher Taylor's murder trial entered week 2 on Monday, Oct. 30, 2023. Taylor is charged with the killing of Michael Romos in 2020.

Austin American-Statesman
Serena Lin, Austin American-Statesman
November 1, 2023

A policing expert who testified in the trial against Derek Chauvin weighed in on Austin police officer Christopher Taylor's use of deadly force.

Throughout the trial, prosecutors have argued that Taylor’s decision to shoot and kill Michael Ramos in April 2020 was unjustified and in defiance of police training.

Jurors also heard from a former police academy instructor, who evaluated the actions of Taylor and other officers who responded to the 911 call that ended in Ramos' death.

Prosecutors are almost finished presenting their evidence and are expected to wrap up on Wednesday.

Policing expert who testified in Derek Chauvin trial says deadly force was not appropriate

Seth Stoughton, a law professor at the University of South Carolina, testified that Taylor's use of deadly force was not in line with "generally accepted police practices."

Stoughton has weighed in on various trials surrounding police use of force, most notably Derek Chauvin's. Chauvin, a former Minneapolis police officer, was convicted in the killing of George Floyd after using his knee to pin Floyd’s neck to the ground for 9 1/2 minutes.

Before Stoughton testified, Taylor's attorneys asked Travis County District Judge Dayna Blazey to prevent any party from mentioning Derek Chauvin or George Floyd.

Defense attorney Doug O'Connell said that any reference to Chauvin or Floyd would be "massively prejudicial” to their client.

Blazey denied the request and allowed prosecutors to mention that Stoughton had testified in the Chauvin case.

Dexter Gilford, head of the Travis County district attorney's Civil Rights Unit, pointed out a particular line from the statement Taylor's lawyers gave to the Special Investigations Unit.

Gilford asked Stoughton to read aloud from Taylor's statement. A portion of it read, “It was very important that Ramos be stopped as soon as the vehicle moved."

Stoughton said that this seemed to "conflate risk and threat."

"It’s not just the vehicle moving that matters. ... It’s where the vehicle is moving," Stoughton said.

Prosecutors have spent a considerable portion of the trial trying to establish that Ramos' vehicle was moving toward his right, away from the officers on the scene. This showed, prosecutors have argued, that Ramos was simply trying to flee the scene.

Stoughton said that when Ramos got into his vehicle and started driving, there was only an "imminent threat of escape" — not of serious bodily injury or death, which is required to justify the use of deadly force.

"To say that there is imminent threat of escape is not to say officers shouldn’t do anything. It’s just to say that the force used should be proportional," Stoughton said. In this case, Stoughton said that deadly force was not proportional.

Defense attorneys are expected to cross-examine Stoughton in court on Wednesday.

Defense pushes back on representations of Special Investigations Unit inquiry into Taylor

Former Special Investigations Unit detective Dan Mireles returned to the witness stand to answer more questions about the investigation he led into Ramos’ death.

During his cross-examination of Mireles on Monday morning, O’Connell addressed several points previously made by prosecutors about the unit. On Friday, Assistant District Attorney Rob Drummond had drawn attention to how suspects who are police officers are treated differently than suspects who are civilians.

Through his questioning, O’Connell argued that the district attorney’s office had ample opportunity to raise complaints about the SIU’s conduct while the investigation into Taylor was still ongoing.

Mireles agreed with O’Connell’s characterization that, during investigations, officers in the SIU remain in “close communication” and “cooperation” with prosecutors.

O’Connell asked Mireles if Friday was the first time he had heard any “criticism” from the district attorney’s office.

“As I recall,” Mireles said.

In court on Monday, defense attorneys and prosecutors argued about the role that the district attorney’s office plays in the SIU’s investigations.

Drummond said that assistant district attorneys just provide officers with “legal advice,” giving them a sense of how an investigation might play out in court.

O’Connell conceded that prosecutors don’t have the power to “direct” police investigations, but he asked Mireles if his interactions with prosecutors had gone beyond the scope of “legal advice.”

Mireles said they had.

Police academy instructor breaks down high-risk traffic stop training

Over the course of Monday and Tuesday, jurors heard from officer Michael Decker, who taught a police academy course on high-risk traffic stops.

Decker described how police are trained to approach a potentially dangerous person who is inside a car. Defense attorneys presented a highlighted version of Decker’s lesson plan on high-risk traffic stops.

Defense attorney Ken Ervin played footage of the police confrontation with Ramos and asked Decker to evaluate how officers behaved during the encounter.

Decker said that the positioning of officers during the response was “OK,” but that they could have been more “transparent” with Ramos.

In the video, Ramos can be heard repeatedly asking officers why they had come. Decker said that officers could have told Ramos that they had received a 911 call indicating that he had a gun.

“Some kind of de-escalation would have helped,” Decker said.

During questioning by Ervin, Decker conceded that there are factors that can make de-escalation “less of a priority,” including the possible presence of a weapon.

State’s witness says Ramos was driving toward the right when he was shot

An expert witness called by prosecutors testified on Tuesday afternoon that Ramos was turning the vehicle and looking toward his right when bullets struck him.

Wilson Hayes, a biomechanical engineer, said that he was able to reconstruct how Ramos was positioned at the moment of the shooting.

“In shooting reconstructions, it is the wounds that tell the story,” Hayes said.

Hayes used Drummond in his demonstration, using a red marker to indicate where bullets would have struck Ramos.

As the first round was fired, Hayes said, Ramos was turning the wheel of his Prius toward his right and looking in his direction of travel. Hayes said the shots were fired in such quick succession that there was no time for Ramos to react.

During his cross-examination, O’Connell pointed out that Hayes had to rely on the work of others in order to produce his analysis.

Hayes held firm, saying, “I’m certainly not afraid to stand behind this.”

2131 N Collins Ste 433-721
Arlington TX 76011
USA

Unsubscribe | Change Subscriber Options