‘Vital’ information left out of fatal-shooting reports

A Mesa police homicide detective testified Wednesday in a former police officer’s murder trial that he became suspicious of fellow officers’ omitting “vital information” from their reports of a fatal shooting of an unarmed Texas man.

Detective Paul Sipe, the lead investigator in the police shooting, was asked by Deputy Maricopa County Attorney Susie Charbel if he saw inconsistencies during his investigation of the Jan. 18, 2016, shooting of Daniel Shaver by former police Officer Philip “Mitch” Brailsford.

“All five reports omitted the same information that was vital to the case,” Sipe said.

Sipe didn’t specifically say what the information was or what the inconsistencies were, but throughout the trial Charbel has noted the officers at the scene didn’t include in their reports that Shaver had cried and begged not to be shot before Brailsford fired five rounds.

Brailsford now is on trial and accused of second-degree murder in that shooting, which prosecutors have alleged was not justified.

READ MORE: Ex-sergeant backs officer’s decision in shooting

Information about Shaver’s pleas moments before he was shot was made public in a supplemental report written by Sipe and released in March 2016.

Brailsford, 26, shot Shaver after responding with other officers to a Mesa La Quinta Inn & Suites where Shaver was staying as part of a work-related trip. Officers responded to reports that a man was seen pointing a gun outside an upper window at the hotel.

Brailsford, along with the five officers who were at the scene, has testified that it appeared Shaver was reaching for a weapon.

“I became very suspicious of all five reports,” Sipe began telling the jury before Brailsford’s defense lawyer immediately jumped from his chair to object.

After talking with the lawyers, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge George Foster instructed the jury to strike part of Sipe’s answer about being suspicious.

Charbel asked the question again.

“All five reports omitted the same information that was vital to the case,” Sipe answered.

Still, Sipe admitted that he didn’t do follow-up interviews to ask the officers why they omitted certain information from their reports. He testified he didn’t follow up with the officers because he thought the reports needed to stand on their own “integrity.”

Defense lawyer Michael Piccarreta tried to object to his answer again, but Foster overruled him and allowed Sipe to answer.

The officers have testified they didn’t purposely omit the facts from their reports that Shaver had sobbed and pleaded with police not to shoot him.

They also said the reports are meant to be summaries of the episode and not verbatim accounts of what happened.

Jurors have seen police body-camera footage of the shooting, which shows Shaver pleading with the officers while on his knees in the hall outside his hotel room.

Brailsford has said he shot Shaver while he was on his knees because Shaver had raised his right hand, appearing to reach for a weapon. Brailsford was the only officer who fired his weapon, a fact prosecutors have emphasized in the trial. Of the six responding officers, three of them had their AR-15s pointed at Shaver.

Police later found that Shaver was unarmed when he was shot but had a pellet gun inside his hotel room, which he kept with him as part of his job as a pest-control worker. Shaver also had a blood-alcohol level of 0.29, nearly four times the legal limit of 0.08.

Shaver, who had two daughters, was in Mesa from Granbury, Texas, working for his father-in-law’s pest-control company.

The trial will continue on Nov. 27.

READ MORE:

Mesa officer rescinds request to change testimony

Mesa police officer wants to change testimony

Mesa officer says fatally shot man was no threat

Witness: Man shot by officer cried for his life

Jury sees body-cam video of Mesa officer shooting man

Read or Share this story: http://azc.cc/2AKDstN