Arguments in the four-week trial of a Cleveland police officer charged with voluntary manslaughter concluded today. ideastream’s Nick Castele reports.
The details of the case have been poured over for nearly two-and-a-half years now: A cross-town car chase in 2012 ended with 13 officers firing 137 gunshots, killing Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams. Police believed the pair was armed, but investigators never found a gun.
Prosecutors argued Officer Michael Brelo broke the law when, after Russell’s Chevy Malibu had stopped and most other police gunfire had subsided, he climbed on the hood of the car and shot down through the windshield.
Brelo told investigators Russell and Williams were still moving inside the car, and he thought he was under fire.
Assistant prosecuting attorney Sherrie Royster said it was unreasonable to continue shooting.
“If there is a use of force used, it should have only been used to neutralize them,” Royster said. “You don’t shoot them just because they are moving. Moving is not a reason to kill someone. You don’t eliminate them.”
Both sides have argued over whether it can be proven Brelo fired fatal shots—and whether other officers were shooting in the final seconds of the encounter.
Defense attorney Patrick D’Angelo said Brelo—just like all the other officers who were not charged—was responding to what he believed was a threat to his life.
“What would make him want to shoot through the windshield at another human being?” D’Angelo said. “Could it be that he was being shot at? Could it be that he reasonably perceived that the occupants of the Malibu were shooting at him? That’s what all the other officers perceived.”
Brelo waived his right to a jury, and the case now rests with Judge John O’Donnell. The judge said he’ll return with a verdict at the earliest by the end of next week.