AUBURN, WA – A police officer that was involved in a fatal shooting of a suspect back in May of 2019 is now facing second-degree murder charges roughly 15 months after the shooting. So, what exactly changed with regard to the shooting that prompted charges against the officer?
BREAKING: Auburn police Officer Jeff Nelson has been charged with second-degree murder in connection with the fatal shooting death of 27-year-old Jesse Sarey in May 2019. (via @SJGTimes)https://t.co/XwSvwDGk4V
— The Seattle Times (@seattletimes) August 20, 2020
Well, most anybody with common sense would call this a virtue-charge due to the anti-police sentiments becoming mainstream, but we’ll examine the known facts to see if this case holds any water.
So, this case is revolving around the shooting of 26-year-old Jesse Sarey on May 31st of 2019 by Auburn Police Officer Jeff Nelson.
King County Prosecuting Attorney Dan Satterberg announced the charges against Officer Nelson on August 20th, noting that 2018 legislation regarding officer-involved shootings created the base in which Officer Nelson could be charged with murder in the case.
ALERT: Jeff Nelson, Auburn police officer, charged with murder
under new Washington ‘deadly force’ law – Global Pandemic News | #Coronavirus #COVID19 #Protests – https://t.co/xKIH3C6uIN pic.twitter.com/0iLyiihhB1— GlobalPandemic.NET (@GlobalPandemics) August 21, 2020
For the sake of simplicity, Initiative 940 passed in October of 2018, about 7 months before the shooting of Sarey. What this measure brought into effect was removing the “malice clause” from officer-involved shootings not being able to be prosecuted.
In a nutshell, this measure made it far easier to prosecute police officers for shootings that could be deemed unjustified procedurally – even if there was no intent emboldened for the sake of being cruel toward a suspect.
Prior to, an officer had to be proven to have acted beyond the scope of deadly force training and there be probable cause to believe it was a vengeful act.
Auburn police officer Jeff Nelson charged with the murder of Jesse Sarey under new I-940 rules.
“The law now removes the prohibitive element of malice and has created a new standard of what a reasonable officer would do under similar circumstance.” https://t.co/49gE2kfHRD
— Crystal Fincher (@finchfrii) August 20, 2020
According to the DA’s Office, Officer Nelson had encountered Sarey after numerous complaints about a man creating a disturbance outside of Walgreens and there was suspicion as to whether or not Sarey was under the influence of drugs.
Officer Nelson instructed Sarey to leave the area and proceeded to jaywalk across the street. At that point, Officer Nelson approached Sarey again to enact an arrest for disorderly conduct. A physical struggle ensued in which the DA claims that Officer Nelson struck Sarey seven times with his fist.
According to Officer Nelson’s written statement of what happened in May of 2019, Sarey was alleged by the officer to have either grabbed his knife or his gun during the scuffle, which is what led to Officer Nelson firing two rounds into Sarey.
However, other witness testimony slightly refutes the claims of Officer Nelson. While the witness agrees with the gun-touching portion, they also said that they personally had picked up the knife and placed on the hood of a vehicle out of purview of the captured video.
But this witness also stated that they thought the second shot that Officer Nelson fired, which was a shot to the head, wasn’t necessary:
“After the first shot, he was done. I understand being an officer, you just shot somebody and your adrenaline is going and maybe you’re scared or something and you don’t know what’s going to happen so you shoot him. But I don’t know, man, I just don’t know about that one.”
Perhaps one of the most critical elements in this case is the timing between the first shot in the torso and the second shot in the head.
King County prosecutors charged Auburn Police Department Officer Jeff Nelson with murder in the killing of Jesse Sarey. This is the first time prosecutors have charged an officer with murder under changes ushered in by Initiative 940. | via @richsssmithhttps://t.co/2vU4V7arbA
— The Stranger 🗞 (@TheStranger) August 20, 2020
After shooting the suspect in the torso, Officer Nelson’s gun jammed – creating a prompt to utilize a tap-rack to unjam the weapon – which Officer Nelson did. He then fired the second shot into Sarey’s head. The lapsed time between the first and second shot is 3.4 seconds.
Charging documents also allege that Officer Nelson did not render any aid to Sarey after calling in a shots fired call over the radio which, if true, is another violation of I-940 under the portion of having to render aid after an officer-involved shooting.
The Washington State Fraternal Order of Police released a statement. In it, President Marco Monteblanco said:
“Recently, the law has changed under I-940, which the WAFOP was a part of drafting. The purpose of the change was to promote transparency and accountability. We are encouraged that our member will see his day in court, and we are confident that the criminal justice system will do what it was designed to do.”
Just last week, APD settled a lawsuit that awarded $1.25 million for another fatal shooting to the family of a man Officer Nelson shot in the torso and then shot in the head while the suspect was being bitten by a police K9 in 2017.
Now, the shooting in 2017 was heavily defended by the APD back in June of this year, namely because the man shot carjacked a woman at knifepoint and also committed a home invasion when Officer Nelson encountered him.
So, the rationale for settling the lawsuit is also confusing considering the circumstances. Furthermore, Officer Nelson actually received a Medal of Valor for that very same shooting, as mentioned in a GoFundMe campaign in support of the officer’s legal defense.
Now, what is more interesting is how long the DA’s Office claimed to have had this incriminating evidence.
The original investigation conducted by the Port of Seattle Police found the shooting to be justified. However, the according to Prosecuting Attorney Satterberg, the case was handed over to the DA’s Office in November of last year and the video evidence used to determine probable cause has been in it’s current state seen today as of March of this year.
The investigation by “outside experts” is what determined the incident to be unjustified. It was said that Officer Nelson failed to deescalate the situation and should have waited for backup to arrive.
In what universe does it take five months to watch a video only a few minutes long and determine probable cause for an arrest and charges? That alone seems very odd in this case and is worthy of speculation.
This case happens to be the first being prosecuted by way of I-940, so this case in particular will likely become the benchmark when it goes to trial.
Officer Nelson is not jailed, but he was required to hand over his firearm.
_
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.
Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
