Ezell Ford autopsy report: Four questions that remain unanswered

Autopsy reports show that Ezell Ford, who was killed by police in August, was shot three times, including once in the back, prompting outrage from protesters. The investigation into Ford's death is still ongoing.

Jonathan Alcorn/Reuters
Protesters march to shut down the 110 freeway after the Los Angeles County coroner released an autopsy report on the LAPD's shooting of Ezell Ford in Los Angeles, California, Monday. Mr. Ford, an unarmed, 25-year-old black man slain by Los Angeles police officers in August suffered three gunshot wounds, including one to his back, a long-awaited autopsy report into the killing showed on Monday. Police have said two officers shot Ford on Aug. 11 after he struggled with one of them and tried to grab the officer's holstered gun.

A familiar scene played out in Los Angeles Monday night as small groups of protesters wielding placards reading, “No justice, no peace, no racist police,” spread out over the city. The demonstrations were spurred by the release of the long-awaited autopsy report of an August incident in which police shot and killed an unarmed African-American man.

The protesters shut down one key boulevard and a freeway for a few minutes each before being dispersed by police. They are urging the Los Angeles County district attorney to file criminal charges against the two LA Police Department officers involved in killing Ezell Ford.

“We are angry and we are going to stay angry for a very long time until this is addressed satisfactorily,” says Najee Ali, a well-known black activist and executive director of Project Islamic H.O.P.E. in Los Angeles.

He and other outraged residents are focused on one detail of the autopsy: that Mr. Ford was shot in the back.

“The killing of Ford has been ruled a homicide by the coroner, and the bullet wounds in his back give strong indication that he could not have been resisting the officers,” says Earl Ofari Hutchinson, president of the Urban Policy Roundtable of Los Angeles, one of the leading civil rights leaders in Los Angeles.

But others caution against drawing definitive conclusions from one detail.

“We should let the investigation take place without interference or inference. The autopsy is just one piece of investigative evidence, albeit a significant piece of evidence,” says Tod Burke, associate dean and professor of criminal justice at Radford University in Virginia.

LAPD Chief Charlie Beck said at a press conference that the wounds are consistent with the scenario described by his officers.

“There is nothing in the coroner’s report that is inconsistent with the statements given by the officers,” he said, adding, “The autopsy is a piece of much larger, more detailed investigation.”

Just after 8 p.m. on Aug. 11, Ford, whom his parents have said had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, was walking in South Central Los Angeles. Two officers got out of their car to speak with him. Ford looked at the officers, walked away, and attempted to conceal his hands, according to the LAPD account.

The officers followed Ford to a driveway, where he crouched between a car and a row of bushes, Chief Beck said. As one of the officers reached for him, Ford grabbed the officer and a struggle for the officer's gun began.

The police department delayed making the autopsy report public, claiming that doing so might influence the stories of any witnesses to Ford's shooting. Eventually, LA Mayor Eric Garcetti set a deadline of the end of the year for the report's release.

"I ordered the autopsy's release because transparency is key to the trust between the LAPD and the people they serve," Mayor Garcetti said in a statement Monday.

The report shows Ford was struck with bullets in the right arm, side, and back. There were abrasions on his left side, elbow, and shoulder.

Beck said a continuing investigation could take months. Meanwhile, national observers are weighing in on possible questions.

“One of the fatal wounds, the front to back wound in the flank, seems entirely consistent with a struggle at close range, especially – but not only – if the cop held the gun in his left hand,” says Joel Jacobsen, assistant attorney general for the criminal appeals division in New Mexico.

“The other fatal wound, the back to front one, is very strange. One thing I've learned about muzzle imprints is that they don't necessarily mean the muzzle was touching skin when the shot was fired, because the gun shoots out a lot of gas that can cause the skin to inflate. But if it wasn't a contact wound, it was fired from just millimeters away.” 

He says some of the questions could include:

  • If the flank shot wasn't at close range, then how do police account for one distant shot and one contact wound occurring simultaneously? “If Officer B was holding a gun to Ford's back, what was Officer A even shooting in their direction? That put Officer B in extreme danger,” says Jacobsen.
  • Which fatal shot came first? “After the first, would Ford still have been able to act voluntarily or pose a threat? Not all fatal wounds are immediately incapacitating,” says Jacobsen. 
  • What is the timing of the shots? “If the shots weren't simultaneous, then it could mean that Ford fell onto his face after the flank shot and the back contact wound was a coup de grace,” he said.

But Islamic H.O.P.E.’s Ali says the most burning question of all will likely remain: Why was Ford stopped in the first place?

That question touches on the same vein that has spurred protests in the wake of two other high-profile police shootings of black men in Ferguson, Mo., and Staten Island, N.Y.

Even before the results of Ezell's autopsy were released Monday, tensions had been running high in Los Angeles. On Sunday night, two LAPD officers were shot at in what the LAPD has called an unprovoked attack.

Speculation has been widespread over whether or not the shootings were retaliation against police, such as was stated on social media by the alleged shooter of two Brooklyn policemen in their car a week ago. However, LAPD investigators have suggested that the shots may have been related to other gang activity.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Ezell Ford autopsy report: Four questions that remain unanswered
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today