AKRON POLICE DEPARTMENT

Harold K. Stubbs Justice Center

217 South High Street
Akron, Ohio 44308-1682

Stephen L Mylett, Chief of Police

To: Memo to File

From: Stephen Mylett, Chief of Police
Subject: Executive Summary OIS-01
Date: November 28, 2023

On June 27, 2022, at approximately 12:37 am, 8 officers with the Akron Police Department
used deadly force during their interaction with Mr. Jayland Walker following a vehicle
pursuit. Immediately following the officer involved shooting, and in order to ensure a fair,
impartial and transparent investigation, I requested the State of Ohio’s Bureau of Criminal
Investigation to conduct a criminal investigation into the officer involved shooting. BCI
agreed to my request. A Special Prosecutor was assigned to oversee the entire process. The
Attorney General of the State of Ohio supervised the work of BCI and eventually presented
the case to a Special Grand Jury in April 2023. After a comprehensive review of the facts,
circumstances, physical evidence and witness testimony, the Special Grand Jury analyzed the
use of deadly force used by 8 Akron police officers on June 27, 2022. The Special Grand
Jury chose not to authorize any criminal charge. I believe the Special Grand Jury determined
that the involved officers had not violated any laws of the State of Ohio when they
discharged their weapons.

At the conclusion of the Special Grand Jury’s review of the case, I directed the Akron Police
Department’s Office of Professional Standards and Accountability to conduct an internal
investigation of the incident. The focus of that investigation was to determine if any agency
policies or procedures were violated during the tragic event. Under the leadership of unit
commander Lt. Scott Lietke, an investigation was launched immediately following the Grand
Jury's decision. At the conclusion of the investigation, my senior staff and I reviewed Lt.
Lietke's investigation, and I now submit my findings.

The purpose of this document is to render an administrative decision regarding potential

policy violations raised by Lt. Lietke into the conduct of the officers involved in the death of
Mr. Jayland Walker.

The most important and significant question that needs to be answered is whether the
officers’ use of deadly force on June 27, 2022, was in accordance with APD policies. In my
opinion, the use of deadly force was in compliance with the policies of the City of Akron
Police Department. The Special Grand Jury seated on April 17, 2023, found that the
involved officers use of deadly force on June 27, 2022, did not warrant the filing of criminal
charges. I believe this decision was predicated on the use of force being objectively
reasonable based on the facts and evidence presented to them by the Attorney General’s

www.akroncops.org
Fax: (330) 375-2135 Phone: (330) 375-2244
Address all correspondence to the Chief of Police
 AKRON POLICE DEPARTMENT
Harold K. Stubbs Justice Center
217 South High Street
Akron, Ohio 44308-1682

Stephen L Mylett, Chief of Police

Special Prosecutor. APD’s Use of Force Policy tracks the law as set forth by the U. S.
Supreme Court. Since APD Use of Force policies follow the objectively reasonable standard
as established by the U.S. Supreme Court, I reviewed the use of force in light of that standard
which allows the use of deadly force where an officer is in imminent risk of serious bodily
harm or death. I found that the facts and circumstances of this tragic shooting show that the
officers had an objectively reasonable belief that Mr. Walker was armed and by his conduct
presented an imminent risk of serious bodily injury or death to them and/or their fellow
officers. I also believe the Special Grand Jury determined the officers’ use of force was not
excessive when it decided against criminal charges. I find that the officers did not violate
agency policies when they used deadly force on June 27, 2022, at approximately 12:37 am.

During his investigation, Lt. Lietke discovered an officer had added an extension to his
department issued magazine (increased capacity up to 6 additional rounds) the night of the
shooting and further inadvertently had two rounds of “training” ammunition in his magazine.
When questioned about these two discoveries, the officer stated that he was told by other
members of the police department that it was permissible to add an extension to the
magazine in his department issued weapon. That officer fired rounds that evening which did
not include the training ammunition. He stated he would not knowingly violate agency
policies. A review of agency policies and procedures regarding this issue uncovered an
absence of clear language addressing the topic. I find that the officer did not intentionally
violate any policy or procedure when he added an extension to his department issued
magazine. In response to this discovery, the agency conducted a policy review and adjusted
policies where needed. The officer was verbally counseled to pay closer attention when
reloading his magazines after he qualifies with his weapon. It should be noted that the BCI
investigation revealed the added capacity to this officer’s magazine had no bearing on the
outcome of this officer’s actions during this incident as the number of rounds he fired was
well below the magazine’s original capacity.

Additionally, Lt. Lietke identified potential violations of department policies pertaining to

vehicle pursuits. Concerns were raised that two patrol cruisers entered the vehicle pursuit of
Mr. Walker without specific authorization from the on-duty supervisor. Additionally, two
officers in one of those cruisers failed to immediately activate their body cameras in
accordance with the APD pursuit policy. Given the totality of the circumstances at the time
of the pursuit, to include the significant officer and public safety issues present and the
dynamics of the situation, and based on the accounts of the officers involved, I find that no
officer intentionally violated agency policies when they entered the vehicle pursuit nor did
any officer intentionally fail to activate their body worn cameras. In the future, the activation

www.akroncops.org
Fax: (330) 375-2135 Phone: (330) 375-2244
Address all correspondence to the Chief of Police
 AKRON POLICE DEPARTMENT
Harold K. Stubbs Justice Center
217 South High Street
Akron, Ohio 44308-1682

Stephen L Mylett, Chief of Police

of cameras during a vehicle pursuit will be resolved by the adoption of our recently
implemented in-car camera program.

At one point before Mr. Walker exited his vehicle to flee on foot, the driver’s door of the
suspect vehicle opened, and Mr. Walker appeared to be getting ready to exit his vehicle.
Knowing the suspect had used deadly force toward officers during the vehicle pursuit when
he discharged a firearm from his vehicle, an officer made the decision to use his patrol car’s
push bumpers to attempt to close the driver’s door in order to contain the sole occupant of the
suspect vehicle. Based on the totality of the circumstances, and the information known to the
officer at the time of his decision to use his patrol car in such a manner, I find his actions to
be reasonable given the situation.

When Mr. Walker exited his vehicle, and in the course of a foot pursuit, two officers
deployed their Tasers at Mr. Walker in order to take him into custody. Unfortunately, this
effort was unsuccessful. I find both officers use of the Taser was within the policies and
procedures of the Akron Police Department.

Once Mr. Walker discharged his weapon from his vehicle at or in the direction or in the
presence of the pursuing officers, the dynamic of the routine traffic stop dramatically
changed from a routine traffic stop to a significant public safety and officer safety issue. The
situation was very fluid and very dangerous. During this event, officers were very focused on
safely apprehending the armed and violent suspect. This compelled officers to pursue the
suspect to address this public safety issue. As Mr. Walker exited the vehicle, he was wearing
a ski mask, on a warm June night, further causing the officers to fear a more severe crime.
He was given multiple commands to show his hands. Mr. Walker while fleeing on foot,
refusing multiple commands to show his hands, turned towards officers, reached to his
waistband and raised his arm in a shooting posture. This caused officers to believe he was
still armed and intended on firing upon officers. Officers then fired to protect themselves and
their fellow officers. While certainly tragic, after having reviewed the BCI investigation and
Lt. Lieke’s investigation, and the City’s policy, similar to the Special Grand Jury, I find that
that the use of deadly force was objectively reasonable and the officers complied with the use
of force policy. As I already stated, this was a very dynamic, dangerous and fluid event and
all officers were focused on safely apprehending the fleeing suspect and when presented with
a reasonably perceived life-threatening danger, acted to protect themselves and their fellow
officers.

www.akroncops.org
Fax: (330) 375-2135 Phone: (330) 375-2244
Address all correspondence to the Chief of Police