Opinion ID: 74409
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Post-Shooting Activity

Text: 7 Officer Pinckney testified that he saw Sauls doubled over, knew Sauls had been hit, and radioed in I've got one down. Nonetheless, in this summary-judgment posture, Plaintiffs argue, and the inference we must make in Plaintiffs' favor, is that this one referred to Jackson, not Sauls, indicating that Pinckney did not know Sauls had been hit. 8 Pinckney avers that his shots were cover fire for Sauls and that he saw the muzzle of a gun in the doorway near Jackson. Plaintiffs emphasize, however, that no gun or any object resembling a gun was located on Jackson or in the doorway. 7 Following the shooting, Officer Pinckney radioed to report the incident. He did not request back-up and did not report specifically that Officer Sauls had been hit. Instead, Pinckney reported that I got one down, which could have meant Jackson or Sauls. In this summary judgment posture, we must infer it meant Jackson. Also, immediately after the shooting, Lebus, the owner of the Shop, called 911 and stated: Some [expletive deleted] guys came in here and just started popping rounds in. Because Lebus did not identify the shooters as police officers, this circumstantially supports Plaintiffs' testimony that Defendants never identified themselves as police officers. Plaintiff Wimbish, shot in the leg and unarmed, was placed under arrest for aggravated assault and was transferred to the hospital. Plaintiffs' friend Dean, also unarmed, was arrested for aggravated assault. Although arriving at the scene after the shooting was over and the scene was taped off, George Jackson, an African-American male, was taken into custody and questioned. Stearns, a Caucasian male, fired the first shots but was not arrested. No weapons were found on Plaintiffs or anyone in the Shop except Stearns. Subsequently APD's Office of Professional Standards (OPS) investigated the shooting incident and initially recommended charging Officers Sauls and Pinckney with multiple work rule violations, including violations based on the fact that there was not at this time period reasonable suspicion to make a[T]erry stop and frisk. The initial findings also reported that Officers Sauls and Pinckney had not been truthful in their statements to OPS and the Homicide Division. However, OPS's final recommendation was that only Officer Pinckney be charged and only with work rule violation 6.09, Use of Firearms.9 This recommendation was accepted and Officer Pinckney was suspended for five days. The Fulton County District Attorney's Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Georgia Bureau of Investigation investigated the shooting incident, but no criminal charges were filed against any officer. 9 The APD Notice of Final Adverse Action, dated October 7, 1996, states: At approximately 11:00 am on December 7, 1995, even though you were acting in the defense of a fellow officer, you still endangered the lives of innocent persons when you discharged your 9mm toward the front entrance of 441 Marietta Street. 8