Topeka man was shot 34 times by police. Circumstances of his death make trust difficult.

Our civic institutions depend on public trust. On belief.

But sometimes, what police ask us to believe strains credulity, such as officers shooting someone 34 times for holding a wrench. In the aftermath of such shootings, district attorneys rarely hold law enforcement accountable.

Consider the lawsuit filed recently on behalf of Taylor Lowery’s estate. What Lowery’s family experienced won’t boost public trust. LaRonna Lassiter Saunders, a lawyer for the family, said Shawnee County District Attorney Mike Kagay “put out a misleading report on the shooting.”

Kagay said he believed the report generated by his office was a thorough and accurate summary.

“If the given quote is accurate, we believe a reckless allegation would be a more accurate way to characterize her claim,” Kagay said. “As an attorney licensed in Kansas, Ms. Saunders should be aware of the consequences of making false statements, which can lead to criminal, civil and disciplinary ramifications.”

Lassiter Saunders shot back: “If it is indeed accurate, release the video! Threats don’t scare me … misrepresentations to the public do.”

This case involved Topeka police fatally shooting the 33-year-old Lowery on Oct. 13, 2022. Officers shot him 34 times, Lassiter Saunders said.

Lowery got out of the car after reaching a convenience store and rushed to a car where the door stood ajar. He began running around, with officers trying to surround him. The officers were trying to get control of a tense though controlled situation.

When officers with body cameras arrived, Lassiter Saunders said, Lowery had a wrench in his hand. That is contrary to the narrative from authorities who claimed Lowery was armed with a knife.

Not far away, Officer Malcolm Gillum had conducted a traffic stop and heard an “officers needing help” call go out over the radio, so he rushed to the scene. Gillum may have heard gunshots over the radio at some point in the transmission, Lassiter Saunders said.

She said tensions seemed controlled at the scene as officers tried to corral Lowery. So much so, that a detective, who wasn’t wearing a body camera, approached and pushed Lowery, and Lowery dropped the wrench.

Lassiter Saunders said Gillum’s arrival immediately escalated tensions. It was at about the time the detective pushed Lowery that Gillum began firing. The other officers began firing, too. At least two of the officers had not completed training, she said.

Topeka police and the Kansas Bureau of Investigations both issued news releases saying officers fired when Lowery advanced toward them while holding a knife, which isn’t true, according to court documents based on the body camera video.

A couple of things stood out to the lawyer.

First, “a detective pushed him,” Lassiter Saunders said. “No one is going to push him if he’s carrying a knife.”

Second, she said that Lowery never lunged, and other officers did not appear ready to shoot until Gillum arrived.

“Never at any point did he lunge,” Lassiter Saunders said. “In fact, he had his right foot behind him, looking as though he were about to run. The officers were not in, ‘Let’s shoot him,’ mode.”

But Gillum showed up, she said, “and started shooting.”

Gillum now works as a Kansas Highway Patrol officer, she said.

Dan Garrett, director of communications and media relations for the City of Topeka, said all of the involved officers were placed on administrative leave while the Kansas Bureau of Investigation reviewed the incident.

Kagay did not file charges against the officers.

Officials released a 15-page report that included still shots from body cameras, but Lassiter Saunders said the narrative Kagay created for public consumption was misleading.

“The DA slipped up because one of the still shots (from body camera footage) he released actually shows the knife on the ground,” Lassiter Saunders said. “That knife remained on the ground by Officer Gillum’s foot, as he opened fire on Mr. Lowry. The officers knew it was a wrench because after they shot him, they ask if he was still holding the wrench.”

The manipulation she accused Kagay of has less to do with justice and more to do with public relations.

“Kagay and (city attorney Amanda) Stanley seemed to want to block public access because this has the potential to go nationwide on the same level as George Floyd,” she said. “The coverup has been just as egregious as the crime.”

She said when she and Lowery’s daughter’s mother arrived to view the video footage, it appeared to “totally blindside Lieutenant Sturgeon. It was clear he had believed the (police) report. He just kept saying ‘I don’t know,’ ‘I’m just seeing this.’ It was clear he knew he had stepped in it by allowing unfiltered access” to the video.

So, what happened then?

“By the time I brought (her) back to review footage, the city attorney and the Topeka Police Department had made the process harder to view the footage by establishing a $50-an-hour fee, the signing of a certification form, and restricting parts of the video,” Lassiter Saunders said.

Garrett said the city fully complied with KSA 45-254, the statute that allowed for a “reasonable fee for viewings under its provisions.”

The city generally waives this fee for the first viewing in cases of officer-involved shootings, but “reasonable fees” are charged for subsequent viewings, Garrett said via email.

“The city does not redact footage that an individual is entitled to view,” Garrett said.

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Lowery’s juvenile daughter, alleges officers used excessive force, and that the city did not sufficiently train or supervise officers. It also said that the city denied requests for body camera footage and other information, such as witness statements.

“One of my biggest issues is the lack of humanity and valuing of life,” Lassiter Saunders said. “(Lowery) was hit over 30 times. It was traumatizing for me. I just couldn’t believe what I was seeing. … The initial officer appeared to empty his clip … and the others just joined in.”

There were nonlethal means police could have used to gain compliance, she said, including Tasers, clubs or pepper spray.

This doesn’t happen everywhere. Departments protect some communities while they “police” others.

American police can kill with little to no consequence because of an invented legal standard called qualified immunity, a rule created by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1982. It prohibits citizens from suing officers who violate their rights unless an earlier court ruling found that the very same action by officers was unconstitutional.

Qualified immunity fits neatly into our society, where half of the population worships law enforcement and naively believe police don’t lie, cheat or steal despite mountains of evidence.

Worse, we don’t have a national database for reporting police misconduct. State agencies remain stingy with the information each collects — video, files, etc. Consequently, prosecutors charge and convict few police officers.

How big is this issue?

In Chicago, police misconduct settlements between 2011 and 2018 totaled $398 million, according to data compiled by The Chicago Reporter.

Topeka is no Chicago. Still, questions abound. Why do some Kansas police trainees receive weapons before completing training? Why have body cameras if police departments can release footage they believe justifies their actions but bury footage damning to police narratives? Why are police departments asking “policed” communities for trust when they routinely resist earnest, commonsense transparency and accountability measures?

Powerful people and organizations resisting accountability should concern us.

Lassiter Saunders said she wanted Topeka’s chief of police and city manager to add mental health professionals to crisis situations. Police need to collect more data on officer-involved shootings, and that Topeka needs a DA willing to hold police accountable.

She said she’s a Topeka native and can remember hearing about police misconduct, but that she hadn’t seen it as closely as she does now via video.

What she’d most like to see is more integrity. If an officer steps out of line, other officers should hold that officer accountable. Qualified immunity continues to destroy trust in communities that get policed, but not protected.

We need more data, new transparency standards for the release of body cam footage, and more district attorneys willing to hold police accountable when they shoot someone with a wrench 34 times.