Mathew Powell, 24

Mathew Powell, a 24-year-old black man, was shot in the head at 671 S. Coronado Place in Los Angeles and died at 6:42 a.m. Jan. 22.

Comments

[Ocie Henderson]

In regards to the LAPD killing of Matthew Jerome Powell this is looking more and more like a modern day lynching. There are too many conflicting and inconsistent reports for this to be a justifiable homicide case. The autopsy report shows Matthew was handcuffed with hands behind his back when he was shot four times in the head. The direction of travel for two shots to the back of the head was front to back. This is a case that needs to be investigated by the FBI or other independent government agencies. No way should LAPD be allowed to investigate itself in this case. And why should it take a year or more for the so called investigation to be completed?Mark my word you heard it here first. The result of the so called investigtion is going to be shooting was within policy and the officers feared for the life of their fellow officers therefore this was a justifiable homicide. All one has to do to see clearly that this was an execution is look at the material I have gathered to show the true facts in this case. But such is not to be because it seems no one of importance is really interested in the LAPD killing of another Black man. I am not a celebrity nor do I have enough clout to get justice in this case. All I have is my promise to Matthew's mother Demika to continue my fight for the truth to be told. Anyone desiring to know the true facts of this case or has the capability of helping the family receive justice please contact me via email. Peace and blessings to all.

[Kimberly Suggs]

I have to agree with Mr. Henderson this isn't right justice needs to be served. Matthew was a sweet and kind young man who wouldn't have acted like they said he did. Those in the wrong need to be found out and let the truth be known so that his family can have so closure. We all miss and love Matthew. His spirit will live on just like his legacy. I pray that the guilty parties will come forth, we will continue to pray for you and may God have mercy on your souls.

[anthony sullivan]

As usual people automatically pull the race card. Powell shot a Police Officer 4 times while he was handcuffed. He continued to try and shot at the same police officer with that 357 revolver he had. He was shot and killed because he was continuing to try and shot a police officer. What you don't think a suspect can retrieve a handgun from his rear waistband and shoot someone while he is in handcuffs?! If you don't then you live in Diney Land. Powell was high on Marijuan and beer. He threatened someone with a knife while in someoneelses home. That is why the police were there. He shot a cop 4 times. LET ME REREAT THAT...4 TIMES befor he was finally taken out. In my book he got what he deserved. It was not a lynching. Go spew you hatred someplace else. You don't have all the information. Yeah Powell was shot in the back of the head. He was also fighting with a police off icer who had been shot 4 times. Powell still had the gun and was trying to shot that cop. Face reality and stop trying to use the race card. It just shows how stupid you are. Where did Powell get the gun and why did he try to kill a cop?

[OCIE]

I have no idea who you are or where you get your information but you are so far from the truth it is scary.How is it that you say Matthew had a 357 revolver and the cops say it was a 38 and they claim they have the weapon in their possession. You claim Powell was fighting with an officer but his hands was cuffed tightly behind his back. How much fighting could he have done.You also lie about what was in his system read coroner's toxicology report no alcohol and nanograms of weed, not even a joint. So you are the one who is spreading lies. If you know anything about this case at all you have to know this was modern day lynching execution style. Four shots to the head from very close range. Boy you are badly in need of a reality check and I am just the person to give it to you. That is if you want the truth. I hope you will post some more of your lies so I can continue to shread your comments to pieces. Try again because you lose this one.

[OCIE]

This is a comment where you have to take heed to the message before you zero in on the messanger. The message is so full of misinformation until you wonder did a misguided child write this. First off how could one not see that this killing is all about race. It was a blatant act of whie supremacy racism that brought about the modern day lynching of Matthew Jerome Powell. I did not play the race card the cops did when they executed Matthew. Where did you get your information about a 357 revolver? Andy Taylor was supposedly shot with a 38 revolver. How does a man with his hands cuffed tightly behind him fight with a cop? Not much of a fight don't you think. If you had read the autopsy toxicology report you would learn that Matthew had the equivalent of a joint in his system and no alcohol at all.
You are the only one that says Powell threaten someone with a knife. Don't you think it's kinda strange that Andy Taylor has never given a statement saying that Matthew Jerome Powell is the one who shot me. Now to talk about the messenger. My four year old grandson can do a better job of writing than whoeve wrote these lies. The grammar and spelling had to come from someone who takes no pride in how they express themself. I tried to overlook it so I could concentrate on what was attempted to be said.
But that was too hard to do so I would suggest the next time that you get a more educated person to post your comment. Just a suggestion player.

[mark]

Ocie, those are some very serious allegations that you are making. This is no small matter. I was wondering why you didn't mention that a police officer had been shot? It was reported that officer Taylor had one bullet in his body and that several more had hit his vest, badge, and service weapon. Who fired these rounds? Mr. Powell? The other officers on the scence? Did officer Taylor shoot himself? Did some other party do it?

This isn't some small matter and I wonder why you completely fail to address this in your initial post.

[Ocie]

Evidently you are not interested in getting all the information I have relative to this case. I specifically ask that anyone interested in learning more about this case contact me and I will send them any and all information that I have about the execution of Matthew Jerome Powell. Look at the last few lines of my original post .If you want to know the police version of what happened I suggest you go to their website or the unions website. If you can't find them post a request on this site and I will put it in a comment for you. In the very first news article that came out the headlines of that article was "Officer Wounded Man Killed" If it is your desire I will walk you through the entire case as presented by the news media. However I am not in agreement with the police released versiion of what they alledge happened in the killing of Matthew Jerome Powell. As to who shot Andy Taylor I don't know nor have information to substantiate what happened to him. All I know is that I can't find a statement anywhere that Andy Taylor states he was shot by Matthew Jerome Powell. I stick to my original comment "there are too many inconsistencies in the released LAPD versions for me to conclude that they are telling the whole truth in the killing of Matthew Jerome Powell. May I suggest you read the coroner's autopsy report for additional information. I will supply you with one if you can't acquire one on your own. Oh by the way I just thought of something are you as equally concerned about the information that the police did not bother to mention? I am an advocate for justice in this case. If I in any way felt the cops were justified in this killing I would say so to you and all the world. Peace and blessing to you if you feel in any way betrayed.

[ocie]

This killing took place 9 months ago and still the homicide investigators have not their work and turned their report over to the DA Investigators. At first they reported this as an open and shut case. Matthew Powell shot and wounde a police officer and other cops responded by killing Powell.On the surface it appeared to be justifiable homicide by the cops.But suddenly there was some in interest shown in this killing. Some members of the public started to ask some questions and now nine months later the investigation is supposedly still going on. The LAPD has given no information whatever about the killing other than the initial news releases. Now that the Coroner's Report cast some suspicsion on the cops version of what happened there is no farther comments from the LAPD. What exactly happened in the killing of Matthew Jerome Powell?l

[mathew's brother]

After reading all that you are all writing about my baby brother, I am very appalled .For starters this was a vary talented and caring young man who had a bright future ahead of him. And I am so tired of everyone acting like they know what really happened .fact is that my baby brother was slain in cold blood; furthermore they are trying to make him out to be some cold blooded killer. That’s far from the truth. So I think before you decide to throw stones & point fingers imagine that this person’s name you’re slandering was someone dear to your heart. See Mathew was someone who went to the great state of CA. to get afresh start to a new life as hip hop/R&B artist. He always said if he could get out of North Carolina he just might have a chance to fulfill his goal. So he wasn't just some gun toughting thug who opened fire on police in my opinion I don't think there ever was a gun in my bother's possession but rather he was reaching for his cell phone witch turned tragic for him and my family. See I’ve known him all his life &he was a very passive person who didn't like conflict or violence but of course no one cares about the real Mathew J. Powel. but rather yall care about how much of a debate topic this story is, but this is more than a debate this a real case of wrongful death because there’s been no attempt by the LAPD to update me and my family in order for us to receive a day of justice but rather an old fashion case of good'ol just-us instead. So please stop using my brother as a debate topic and help us to receive our day in court to find out what really happened & finally help my baby brother receive justice & allow him to finally rest in peace.

Signed: A GREAVING BROTHER

[Ocie]

I read the headlines on an L A Times article and it seemed overly familiar. The title read "Santa Ana police refuse to explain officers use of force" this is pretty much the same tactics being used in the response to inquiries into the killing of Matthew Jerome Powell. Matthew was killed by officers and this killing has not been answered in any form as of this date. It seems that the DA has not received any information pertaining to this killing. The same questions are being asked in this killing what was the danger to the lives of the officers. It seems one of their own was wounded and Matthew Powell was gunned down as being the culprit who wounded a twelve year veteran training officer. The question is being raised, if the officer was already wounded by Powell what was the necessity in initiating his killing? No one has answered as to the justtification or need for the killing of Matthew Jerome Powell. Could it be that there is hope that if nothing is said maybe just maybe no one will concern themselves with this police killing of a handcuffed prisoner of the Rampart Div LAPD officers. This killing sort of makes you say HUMMMM

[LAPD OFFICER]

Ocie,
I was at the scene of suspect Powell's justifiable killing. Officer Taylor did tell the officers there that Powell did shoot him. Powell shot him four times with a .357 cal revolver and then tried to shoot at Taylor again. His gun was a .357 revolver loaded with . 38 cal ammunition. I assume you don't know much about weapons, but a .357 can shoot a .38 cal slug. Also a handcuffed suspect can retrieve a handgun that is hiding in a rear waistband, and that is exactly what happened. If you don't think it could of happened, then you need to ask yourself," how did officer Taylor get shot then"? Do you think he shot himself and then killed Suspect Powell? That would be rediculous. I was there. Powell shot Taylor 4 TIMES! He continued to try to shot Officer Taylor, so Suspect Powell was justifiably killed. Powell got what he deserved.
The lesson is, dont try to kill a cop. Because if you try, that cop just might want to live more than the scumb bag criminal trying to kill him. A good cop protecting his life by killing a suspect who has just shot him and who is trying to continue to kill that cop, is not called a LYNCHING. Officer Taylor is a good outstanding citizen who has been serving this country since he was 18 years old. Military and as a Police Officer. What has Powell ever done? Powell was a Hollywood drug dealer/user who gambled that he could try to kill a cop. Well poor Powell lost. Let that be a lesson to suspects who would try that on other cops. Powell was not a very talented or bright young man. The two other males that were at the scene with him stated Powell supplied them with marijuana and had done so many times. He also had 3 arrest warrants from another state worth about $30,000 dollars. One of the other males at the scene was a Porolee. (nice friend) He left his home state to become some hip hop artised? He wasn't doing a very good job at it, selling dope to people and carrying around a gun. Or is that what would be Hip hop artised do?

The shooting investigation has been over for months. Officer Taylor and the actions of the other officers were found to be justifiable. The D/A concurred. The officers did answer to the justification as to why they killed Suspect Powell. Powell shot officer Taylor 4 times and he was continueing to try to shoot and kill officer Taylor. The LAPD along with the DA concluded that since Powell was continually trying to shoot and kill Officer Taylor, that the officers at scene were justified in killing Powell to save Officer Taylor's life.
Officer Taylor testified to a shooting board that Powell shot him 4 times and was attempting to shot him repeatedly. LAPD officers don't have to stand out on the street and talk to reporters as to what happened. The Mayor and the LAPD aren't saying HMMMM. What they are saying is suspect Powell left Officer Taylor and the other Officers at scene no other choice but to kill Powell in order to stop him from shooting and killing Officer Taylor.
The coroners report that i have read did stated Powell had a high blood alcohol level and had marijuana in his system. The 2 females and two other males at scene stated they had been drinking beer and smoking marijuan with Powell.
So the Powell you knew is not the same person we delt with.
The facts of the case are simple. Powell shot and attempted to kill Officer Taylor and he was killed for doing so. Some south end lawyer (lyer) got the attention of Powell's mother and is trying to sue the department. Officer Taylor had one gunshot wound that went through his right chest and out the back. Another round hit his badge while two others his his vest and gun. There was no other person at the scene who could of shot Officer Taylor. I wounder if Powells finger prints were on the gun and if gunshot residue was on his hands. I bet you OCIE they were. There wa no conspiracy and no lynching.
Take it from someone who was there, and not from some south end lawyer activist who can get his fact right.
Thank you LAPD FOR WHAT YOU DO AND THANK GOD OFFICER TAYLOR IS ALIVE AND WELL.

[Steven]

Thank GOD for Police Officers like Officer Taylor! I am glad that it was this piece of garbage, Powell, that was killed and not Officer Taylor or the poor little girls that he was supplying marijuana and beer too! Sounds to me like Powell's family should have raised him better, then he would not have turned into such a murderous crimminal! Thank you LAPD for protecting us from these idiots and again I am glad that Officer taylor is ok and that the bad guy got what he deserved! I perish to think what this criminal would have done to me or my family had we ever crossed paths, if he would shoot a Police Officer?! This city and world are better off without this predator in it! And SHAME on you Ocie, you race baiting opportunist! SHAME ON YOU! And again thank you Officer Taylor for doing your job even in the face of death, and with garbage like Ocie out there spewing off at the mouth!

[Ed O'Shea]

Hello all that are interested in this scumbags death! ALL Officers were found to be IN POLICY, and the shooting JUSTIFIED! Below you will find the Board Of Police Commission's link of the result of the investigation (mostly VERY liberal members and critical of Police) decision. As to the disingenuous assertions of Ocie, and Powells brother, they are without merit and down right pathetic and transparent! Looking for a money gram, or a big cash pay out is all these two "Johnny come latelty's" are looking for! All on the backs of the good citizens of Los Angeles, like the ones who called the Police in the first place when Mr. Powell threatened them with physical harm! A great Police Officers life was almost taken from us and fortunately he is a Warrior and was able to fight back and fight hard until his back up arrived in the hallway to neutralize this killer! But don't take my word for it, read below and read the FACTS! Not some lame race-baiting rhetoric from an ambulance chasing, race-baiting leach like Ocie Henderson! Or the blathering, obviously transparent agenda of a brother who wasn't there when this suspect was perfecting his criminal ways, but all of the sudden is a pillar of what's wrong and right when he eye's a pay out! These two make me sick, and should, if they had a modicum of morality, or reality for that matter, be disgusted in Mr. Powells behavior in the final moments of his pathetic life!
I guess the only time some of the naysayers think a Police Officer is a Hero is when he is killed in the line of duty?! Only then is he a Hero, but when he fights back and kills a suspect like Powell, then he is a murderer, and it's a "lynching", absolutely pathetic! And as for the oblivious comments of Kimberly Suggs, you Mam are a living in oblivion! The only guilty parties here are Mr. Powell and the rest of you facilitators! As for the guilty parties being brought to justice? At least one was brought to justice on the floor of that hallway! He attempted to MURDER a Police Officer!!!!! Are you saying that you condone that type of activity, is that what your saying??? If so you and your ilk are living in oblivion, so please stay there so you do not infect the rest of the world with your ignorance!
I will digress and ask all intalectually honest people to scroll down and read the findings of the Los Angeles BOPC. Thank you for reading and thank you to the Police Officers that saved Andy while he was fighting for his life with this Murderer, and we are Glad you're OK Andy!

To all my fellow Warriors!

Stay Safe!
Ed O'Shea

Cut and past the following link, then scroll down to 01/22/07 Rampart Officer Involved Shoting # 008-07. http://lapdonline.org/police_commission/content_basic_view/9167

[Robert C. J.Parry]

I'm wondering why there is no mention here that the Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners (a not very cop-friendly bunch) ruled that Matthew Powell attempted to kill officer Taylor and that his death at the hands of the LAPD was indeed reasonable and justified.

In fact, it was a unanimous vote!

I know of at least one other person who has attempted to post a comment to that effect. One must wonder why it never got up.

[anthony sullivan]

This is a good article and anyone can see the attched Police Commission report. They foung officer Taylor and his fellow partners to be in policy with there force on SUSPECT POWELL.

Good Thing The BOPC Didn't Look At Discourteous Language - or - Cops shoot themselves for cover stories, don't they?
To understand how incredibly separated from reality the politically driven Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners is, one look no further than their latest review of an officer-involved shooting.

Distributed yesterday on the LAPD web site, this report, regards the January 22, 2007 shooting of Officer Andy Taylor.

The long-story short of this event is that Officer Taylor was shot four times at point-blank range by a suspect who was handcuffed and already searched. Taylor barely survived, saved literally by his badge, which deflected a round suspect Mathew Powell fired into his chest.

The report is bizzarre on its face, even to those of us fully familiar with the stilted "Officer A, Subject 1" language that is a by-product of certain police officer protection laws. But, for a real trip down the LAPD Rabbit Hole, flip over to page 11 and read this gem of antiseptic, ivory tower analysis (Officer C is Taylor, Suspect 3 is Powell):

Following the removal of Subject 3 from the apartment, Officer C guarded Subject 3 in the hallway. Officer C sat Subject 3 up into a seated position, with Subject 3’s back against the north hallway wall, opposite the doorway to the apartment. Officer C then observed Subject 3 raising his right knee and begin to rise up from the ground by pushing up with his right leg. Officer C placed his hands on Subject 3’s upper torso in an attempt to push him back to a seated position. Simultaneously, Subject 3 rotated his body in a counterclockwise direction, bringing his hands to his right side while holding a handgun. Subject 3 then fired two rounds at Officer C, knocking him rearward. Officer C regained his
footing, crouched down and grabbed Subject 3’s wrists with both hands. Unable to gain control of Subject 3’s handgun, the struggle continued westbound down the hallway. As Subject 3 raised himself off the floor, Officer C tackled him to the ground in a prone position with Officer C landing on top of him. Subject 3 canted his body onto his left side, extended his arms to the right side of his body, attempting to point the handgun at Officer C. Officer C attempted to force Subject 3’s torso onto the floor with his bodyweight while fighting for control of the handgun.

The BOPC found Officer C’s non-lethal use of force to be in policy.

That's right, the BOPC devoted all of that space to finding Taylor acted appropriately in tackling a man who was in the process of shooting him. It's a good thing the BOPC didn't consider the possibility that Taylor spoke to the scum ball in a disrespectful manner after being capped four times. They might still be writing for another month if that were under review.

There's your consent decree at work, Angelenos. A cop gets shot four times and hours of effort go into analyzing if the officer was "in-policy" in tackling him. Glad to know we have that much trust in the LAPD hiring process.

The rest of the report, however, is revealing in other respects.

At the end of the incident narrative sit a series of facts that do not appear in most (if any) other force incident reviews. These include statements that Powell's hands were tested for gunshot residue, his gun was tested for finger prints and hisDNA was also found on the gun. Also included were details about the actions of fire fighters and paramedics ho responded to the scene.

What was this all about? Well, if you read the Times Homicide Blog you will find a lengthy discussion i the comments in which Powell's famly asserts he was wrongly killed for a variety of vacuous reasons. Normally, this would be of no concern to logical folks.

Unfortunately, the BOPC is neither normal, nor logical. (Remember, this is the same body whose newest member declared "diveristy" to be the department's greatest challenge the day a cop was nearly killed - quite possibly because of said body's most controversial policy).

Nope, Commissioner John Mack, who never met a cop he actually liked, took up the cause of the wanna-be cop-killer Mathew Powell. He demanded updates on this particular case outside of the normal reporting cycle.

It's obvious, I suppose. Andy Taylor OBVIOUSLY shot himself four times with a random gun, just to make the killing of a random suspect look good. I mean, nobody actually kills cops. That's just an excuse to cover up murder and oppression of well intended thieves and drug dealers. Isn't that right, Mr. Mack.

Are you paying attention, Mr. Mayor?

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND
FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING 008-07
Division Date Duty-On (X) Off () Uniform-Yes (X) No ()

Rampart 01/22/2007
Officer(s) Involved in Use of Force
Officer A
Officer B
Officer E
Length of Service
6 years, 7 months
1 year, 10 months
10 years, 7 months
Reason for Police Contact

Officers A and B responded to a report of an assault with a deadly weapon. After
talking to witnesses about the incident, Officer A requested additional units.
Officers C and D, along with Officer E, responded to assist. The officers
contacted Subjects 1, 2, and 3 inside an apartment. Subject 3 became
combative and the officers subdued and handcuffed him. After he was
handcuffed and partially searched, Subject 3 was moved into the common
hallway. Officer C guarded Subject 3. While still handcuffed, Subject 3 produced
a handgun and shot Officer C. Officers A, B and E responded to assist Officer C.
Officers A, B and E shot Subject 3.

Subject Deceased (X) Wounded () Non-Hit ()

Subject 3: Male, 24 years.

Board of Police Commissioners' Review

This is a brief summary designed only to enumerate salient points regarding this
Categorical Use of Force incident and does not reflect the entirety of the
extensive investigation by the Los Angeles Police Department (Department) or
the deliberations by the Board of Police Commissioners (BOPC). In evaluating
this matter, the BOPC considered the following: the complete Force Investigation
Division investigation (including all of the transcribed statements of witnesses,
pertinent Subject criminal history, and addenda items); the relevant Training
Evaluation and Management System materials of the involved officers; the Use
of Force Review Board recommendations; the report and recommendations of
The BOPC of Police; and the report and recommendations of the Inspector
General. The Los Angeles Police Department Command Staff presented the
matter to the Commission and made itself available for any inquiries by the
Commission. The following incident was adjudicated by the BOPC on
December 4, 2007.

1


Incident Summary

On January 21, 2007, Witnesses A, B, C and D (father, mother, and two teenage
daughters, respectively) were living in an apartment in Los Angeles.

Witnesses A and B drove Witness C to a local high school to visit her friends.
They dropped Witness C off and drove back to their apartment.

Subject 1 and Subject 2 contacted Witness C as she loitered in the vicinity of the
high school and asked her about purchasing some marijuana. Subjects 1 and 2
had been in the area since noon, panhandling and smoking marijuana.

As the trio walked down the street they encountered Subject 3. Subject 1 and
Subject 3 were passing acquaintances. On this evening, Subjects 1 and 2
purchased marijuana from Subject 3. The group, which now included Subject 3,
walked to a liquor store and Subject 3 bought them some beer. Subjects 1, 2
and 3 smoked marijuana and drank beer, while Witness C consumed only beer.

Witness C called Witness B and asked if it would be permissible to bring
Subjects 1, 2 and 3 home for a short visit. Witness C was told it was permissible
to bring the three of them with her; however, only for a short visit. Witness C and
the three subjects traveled to Witness C’s apartment complex.

Witness A was asleep when Witness C and her companions arrived. Subjects 1,
2 and 3 were introduced to Witnesses B and D. Witness C, and Subjects 1, 2
and 3 entered Witness C’s bedroom, closing the door behind them.

For the next several hours, Witness C, and Subjects 1, 2 and 3 drank beer,
listened to music, and chatted on the Internet. Subjects 1, 2, and 3 also smoked
marijuana. From time-to-time, these four were joined by Witness D.

Witness C then informed Witness B that Subjects 1, 2 and 3 wanted to spend the
night. Witness B reluctantly agreed to letting them stay; however, she warned
Witness C they would need to keep the noise down.

A short time later, Witness B entered Witness Cs bedroom and told Subject 1
that he and his friends had to leave the apartment. Subject 1 shouted profanities
at Witness B and told her they would not leave.

Because of Subject 1’s aggressive behavior, Witness B was in fear for her and
her family’s safety. Witness B woke Witness A, and together they walked to a
payphone in order to call the police for assistance.

Posing as a concerned neighbor, Witness B contacted the Los Angeles Police
Department (LAPD) Metropolitan Communications Dispatch Center (CD) 911
Emergency. She advised the Emergency Board Operator that three men, one of
whom was armed with a knife, were in her neighbor’s apartment and were

2


threatening the female occupant. According to Witness B, her deception was
designed to protect her family.

CD initiated a broadcast of a possible assault with a deadly weapon (ADW) in
progress.

Officers A and B monitored the broadcast and responded to the location.

When Officers A and B arrived at the front of the apartment complex, Witnesses
A and B met them. Witness B revealed her initial deception to the officers and
informed them that it was her family that actually needed police assistance.

Officer A decided to request and wait for an additional unit prior to dealing with
the subjects inside the apartment.

Officers C, D, and E acknowledged the call and drove to Officers’ A and B
location to provide assistance.

Officer A briefed Officers C, D and E in the courtyard of the apartment complex.
The officers formulated a tactical plan to contact the subjects, detain them, and
determine if a crime had occurred.

Witnesses A and B accompanied the officers to the second floor landing of their
apartment building. The witnesses provided a key to their apartment to Officer B.
The witnesses were directed to stay behind a fire door located at the north end of
the north/south hallway.

The officers found the north-facing door to the apartment closed, but unlocked.
The officers opened the door, announced their presence, stating, “Los Angeles
Police Department,” and entered the cramped apartment.

Note: The apartment was small, with one bedroom and one
bathroom. The living room served as an additional bedroom. Two
mattresses had been placed on the living room floor in order to
provide sleeping accommodations for Witnesses A, B and D.

Officers A, B, C and E moved down the hallway towards the bedroom while
Officer D remained in the living room with Witnesses C and D. As the four
officers walked down the hallway they saw the bedroom door was closed.
Directly across from the bedroom was the bathroom. The bathroom door was
open and the room was dark. Officer B unholstered his pistol, and holding his
flashlight and pistol, searched the bathroom, ensuring there were no subjects
inside.

After his search, Officer B advised the other officers there were no subjects in the
bathroom. Officer C knocked on the closed bedroom door. After a few seconds
passed, Subject 3 opened the bedroom door.

3


The subjects were moved down the hallway towards the living room area.
Subject 3 was turned over to Officer A. Subject 3’s hands were clasped behind
his head and gripped by Officer A. As Officer A attempted to search Subject 3,
Subject 3 began to struggle. Officer A simultaneously grabbed the back of
Subject 3’s shirt with his left hand and Subject 3’s right arm with his right hand
and forced him to the ground in a prone position, with Officer A landing on top of
Subject 3. Subject 3 thrashed his body from side to side and raised his upper
body off the ground by pushing himself in an upward direction with both hands.
Officer A punched Subject 3 one time on the right side of his face, at which time
Subject 3’s upper body collapsed to the floor. As Officers C and D approached,
they observed Subject 3 kicking with both legs as Officer A was lying on top of
him. In an attempt to restrain Subject 3, Officer D wrapped both arms around
Subject 3’s legs and placed his bodyweight on them. Officer C applied firm grips
to Subject 3’s left arm and without resistance, moved it to the small of his back.
Subject 3 was then handcuffed without further incident.

Officer B handcuffed Subject 1 and Officer E handcuffed Subject 2. Witnesses C
and D were not handcuffed and remained seated in the living room area.

Officer D was told by Officer A to search Subject 3. As Officer A held Subject 3’s
handcuffed hands, Officer D conducted a partial search of Subject 3, from the
waist down. Officer D removed a folding knife from Subject 3’s trouser pocket.
Because Subject 3 was lying prone on the floor, Officer D conducted a partial
search of Subject 3’s crotch area and a very limited search of Subject 3’s upper
torso.

As this search by Officer D unfolded, Subject 3 verbally challenged and swore at
the officers in the apartment. As Subject 3 continued to verbalize, Officer D
removed a large amount of currency from Subject 3’s trouser pocket. At this
point Officer A made a decision to remove Subject 3 from the apartment in order
to prevent Subject 3’s behavior from agitating Subject’s 1 and 2, and to establish
better control of the situation.

Officer A told Officer C he was going to move Subject 3 into the outside hallway
so Subject 3 would no longer be able to agitate the other occupants of the
apartment. Officer C agreed with this strategy and accompanied Officer A and
Subject 3 into the hallway.

Note: The officers’ search of Subject 3 had not been completed
when Subject 3 was moved to the hallway.

Officers A and C placed Subject 3 facedown in the east/west hallway, east of the
apartment doorway, with Subject 3’s head facing in an easterly direction. Prior to
leaving the apartment, Officer A directed Officer D to assist with searching and
interviewing the remaining occupants of the apartment.

4


The door to the apartment remained partially open and Officer E could see
Subject 3 and Officer A in the hallway from his position inside the apartment.

Officer A informed Officer C that he believed Subject 3 had attempted to either
retrieve or conceal a weapon inside the apartment during the struggle and he
(Officer A) was going back inside to search.

Officer C stayed with Subject 3 in the east/west hallway, and the door to the
apartment remained partially open. Officer C sat Subject 3 up and placed him in
a seated position opposite the apartment doorway. When in the seated position,
Subject 3’s back was against the north hallway wall and his legs were straight out
in front of him.

Note: Subject 3, who was 5 feet 8 inches tall, and weighed 132
pounds, was wearing a long sleeved, hooded sweatshirt (size 2 XL)
that had pockets on either side of the zipper line. Beneath his
sweatshirt, Subject 3 was wearing a long sleeved tee-shirt.

Subject 3 spoke to Officer C as Subject 3 sat in the hallway. Officer C was
standing directly in front of Subject 3. Suddenly, Subject 3 brought his right knee
up and began to rise off the ground by pushing up with his right leg. Officer C
stepped towards Subject 3 with the intent of placing his hands on Subject 3 and
keeping him from getting to his feet. Subject 3 rotated his body in a counter
clockwise direction and brought his handcuffed hands to the right side of his
body. Officer C saw that Subject 3 was holding a handgun in his right hand.

Note: Subject 3 was in possession of a .357 Magnum six-shot

revolver with a 2” barrel. The revolver was loaded with .357

cartridges.

As he lunged towards Subject 3, Officer C believed he heard two gunshots. He
recalled feeling an impact in his stomach area and his upper right chest.

Officer C grabbed Subject 3’s right wrist with his left hand, simultaneously
reaching for his own holstered pistol. As Officer C and Subject 3 struggled, they
fell towards Officer C’s left side. When Officer C gripped his holstered pistol, he
immediately realized that one of the initial gunshots had damaged the pistol’s
handle.

The struggle reached the north/south hallway that led to the stairwell.
Officer C, believing his own pistol was inoperable, released his grip and placed
both of his hands on Subject 3’s wrists.

Both Officer C and Subject 3 fell into the north/south hallway, with Subject
3
falling onto his back and Officer C landing on top of him. Subject 3 fired one
additional round at Officer C and stated, “You’re going to die, you’re dead.
”

5


The officers and occupants inside the apartment heard the gunshots in the
hallway. Officers A, B, D and E unholstered their pistols.

Note: In order to ensure the safety of Subject 1 and Subject 2,
Officer E moved them to the rear bedroom.

Prior to exiting the apartment, Officer E told Officer D to guard Subjects 1, and 2
and Witnesses C and D. Officer B moved to the doorway of the apartment and
looked left and right into the hallway. He did not observe Officer C or Subject 3,
but heard a struggle coming from the north/south hallway. Officer B, followed by
Officers A and E, moved to the intersection of the east/west, north/south hallway.
Officer B carefully maneuvered around the corner, followed by Officers A and E.
Officer C could hear the other officers coming to his aid and he shouted to them,
“Shoot him. He’s got a gun. Shoot him.”

Officers A and B noted Subject 3’s body was canted onto his left side, his arms
still handcuffed behind his back and extended to the right side of his body, while
pointing a handgun at Officer C. Officer B, in immediate defense of Officer C’s
life, approached and fired two shots to Subject 3’s head. Simultaneously, Officer
A approached and fired one shot to the back of Subject 3’s head.

Officer E observed Officer C and Subject 3 wrestling for control of a handgun and
heard Officer C yell that Subject 3 had shot him. In immediate defense of Officer
C’s life, Officer E approached and fired one shot to Subject 3’s head.

Note: Subject 3 sustained four gunshot wounds to the head and
was fatally injured.

Note: Officer C sustained a through-and-through gunshot wound
to his upper right torso. A second round fired by Subject 3 struck
Officer C in the lower right panel of his ballistic vest. This round
resulted in an abrasion to Officer C’s lower right abdomen. A third
round fired by Subject 3 ricocheted off Officer C’s badge. Either the
second round fired by Subject 3, or an additional round, struck
Officer C’s holstered pistol and disabled it.

After the last shot was fired and the revolver dropped out of Subject 3’s hands,
Officer C fell back into a seated position and yelled, “I’m shot, I’m shot.” Officer A
kicked the revolver away from where Subject 3 was lying and Officers B and E
moved Officer C to a seated position in the east/west hallway. Officer A put out a
help call, “Shots fired, officer down.”

Officers A, B and E saw that Officer C was struck by gunfire and immediately
took life saving measures. Officer E exited the building and obtained a trauma kit
from responding units. Officer E propped open the security doors so that medical
personnel and responding officers could enter the building.

6


From inside the apartment, Officer D heard the gunshots and decided to move
Subject 1 and Subject 2 from the bedroom into the living room with Witnesses C
and D in order to maintain better control of the four.

Officer A, who had holstered his pistol, returned to the apartment to assist Officer
D with the subjects. As Officer A entered the apartment, he saw that Subject 1
was trying to get to his feet. Because of what had transpired with Subject 3,
Officer A perceived an elevated threat from the handcuffed Subject 1. In order to
overcome Subject 1’s efforts to rise, Officer A kicked at Subject 1’s chest/chin
area in order to prevent him from doing so.

A rescue ambulance (RA) staffed by Firefighters A and B, responded to the
scene and immediately assessed Subject 3 as deceased. The firefighters were
directed to Officer C, where they began to administer emergency medical
treatment. Officer C was subsequently transported to a hospital, where he was
treated for his injuries.

An additional RA, staffed by Firefighters C and D, later responded and completed
an Emergency Medical Service Report documenting the assessment made by
Firefighters A and B that Subject 3 was deceased.

Note: An examination of Subject 3’s pistol revealed the cylinder
contained five discharged cartridges and one live cartridge with a
primer strike.

Note: A Gunshot Residue (GSR) Test conducted on Subject 3’s
hands revealed the presence of many highly specific particles of
GSR on both hands. This test result indicates that Subject 3 may
have discharged a firearm, had his hands otherwise in an
environment of GSR, or received these particles from an
environment source.

Note: A Combined Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) analysis
performed on Subject 3’s revolver revealed there was a mixture of
multiple individuals’ DNA on the revolver, including Subject 3’s.

Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners' Findings

The BOPC reviews each Categorical Use of Force incident based upon the
totality of the circumstances, namely all of the facts, evidence, statements and all
other pertinent material relating to the particular incident. In every case, the
BOPC makes specific findings in three areas: Tactics of the involved officer(s);
Drawing/Exhibiting/Holstering of a weapon by any involved officer(s); and the
Use of Force by any involved officer(s). All incidents are evaluated to identify
areas where involved officers can benefit from a tactical debriefing to improve
their response to future tactical situations. This is an effort to ensure that all

7


officers benefit from the critical analysis that is applied to each incident as it is
reviewed by various levels within the Department and by the BOPC. Based on
the BOPC’s review of the instant case, the BOPC unanimously adopted the
following findings.

A. Tactics
The BOPC found Officers A, C and D’s tactics to warrant formal training.

The BOPC found Officers B and E’s tactics to warrant divisional training.

B. Drawing and Exhibiting
The BOPC found Officers A, B, D and E’s drawing to be in policy.

C. Non-Lethal Use of Force
The BOPC found Officers A, C and D’s non-lethal use of force to be in policy.

D. Lethal Use of Force
The BOPC found Officers A, B, and E’s lethal use of force to be in policy.

Basis for Findings

A. Tactics
There were several instances of prudent decision-making and sound tactics
during the initial stages of the officers’ investigation of the ADW call. Officers A
and B arrived at the location, interviewed Witness B and, after an assessment of
the situation, an additional unit was appropriately requested. Officers C ,D and E
responded to the request. Officer A disseminated the information he obtained
and a tactical plan was devised to contact and detain the subjects. Witnesses A
and B provided a key for the apartment to the officers. The officers then
proceeded to the second floor of the apartment building. At the front door to the
apartment, Officers A and B positioned themselves on the east side of the door,
while Officers C, D and E lined up on the west side of the door. The unlocked
door was pushed open and Officer B appropriately announced their presence as
they passed the threshold of the apartment.

There were also instances of tactical shortcomings. Prior to entering the
apartment, obtaining a location layout from Witnesses A and B would have better
facilitated the clearing process. Once the officers entered the location, they
encountered Witnesses C and D in the living room area, one of whom indicated
the subjects were in a rear bedroom. Officer D was directed to monitor the
females and the remaining officers proceeded down a hallway to the east side of
the apartment. Officer B entered a bathroom located directly across from the

8


bedroom, and after ensuring it was unoccupied, holstered his service pistol and
remained just inside the bathroom doorway. Officers A, C and E positioned
themselves in the aforementioned order, adjacent to the closed bedroom door
and prepared to make contact with the subjects. Once the subjects were located
in the bedroom, the roles of the entry team were not clearly delineated, as there
was no officer providing cover when the bedroom door opened and the subjects
exited.

Subject 1 and Subject 2 were handcuffed without incident; however, Subject 3
turned and ran toward the living room area and a non-categorical use of force
occurred.

Once Subject 3 was handcuffed and lying in a prone position, Officer A directed
Officer D (a probationary officer with seven days of field experience) to initiate a
search of Subject 3. During the search, Subject 3 verbally challenged and swore
at the officers, and failed to comply with their commands. Officer D’s search of
Subject 3’s waistband, legs, groin and the front pockets of his sweatshirt resulted
in the recovery of a folding knife and a large sum of United States currency. In
order to prevent Subject 3’s behavior from agitating Subjects 1 and 2, and to
establish better control of the situation, Officer A brought Subject 3 to a standing
position and, along with Officer C, escorted Subject 3 out the front door and into
the hallway of the apartment building. Officer D had not completed his search of
Subject 3 when Officer A intervened and moved Subject 3. Officer C, Officer D’s
training officer, had witnessed Officer D’s partial search of Subject 3. Officer A,
who ultimately made the decision to remove Subject 3 from the apartment before
Officer D had finished his search, also witnessed the search. As such, Officers
A, C and D should each have been aware that the search of Subject 3 was
incomplete when he was moved from the apartment to the hallway.

The BOPC noted that, having moved Subject 3 to the hallway, Officers A, C and
D did not ensure that the search of Subject 3 was completed. Additionally, the
search did not adhere to the sequence as trained by the Department.1

After escorting Subject 3 into the hallway, Officer A returned to the apartment,
leaving Officer C alone in the hallway with Subject 3. It would have been
tactically superior for the door to have been propped open, or for two officers to
have been assigned to guard Subject 3.

After gunfire erupted in the hallway, Officer B moved to the doorway of the
apartment and looked left and right into the hallway. He did not observe Officer
C or Subject 3, but heard a struggle coming from the north/south hallway. Officer
B, followed by Officers A and E, moved to the intersection of the east/west,
north/south hallway. Officer B carefully maneuvered around the corner, followed
by Officers A and E.

1 Department training dictates that a search of a subject should take the following sequence:
lower back area, rear waistband, rear pockets, chest and stomach area, groin area, legs and feet.

9


When Officers A, B and E exited the apartment, they left Officer D alone with the
two additional subjects as well as the two females. This could have caused
Officer D to have been outnumbered, had the two subjects become
uncooperative. Additionally, Officer D momentarily stood in the doorway with his
back facing the subjects. Although it is understandable that Officer D was
concerned about the welfare of his fellow officers, his primary assignment at the
time was maintaining control of the two subjects inside the apartment.

Officers A, B, and E noted that Officer C was struck by gunfire and immediately
took life saving measures. Officers A and B removed Officer C’s shirt and vest
and applied direct pressure to his wounds until personnel from the Los Angeles
Fire Department arrived at scene. Simultaneously, Officer E exited the
apartment building and obtained a Department issued trauma kit from responding
personnel. In addition, Officer E had the presence of mind to establish and
maintain an ingress and egress route to ensure the timely response of medical
personnel, by propping security doors open and appropriately posting officers.

The BOPC noted that Officer C displayed maturity and extreme courage as he
attempted to disarm Subject 3 after sustaining a life threatening injury. Officer
C’s critical decision-making and self-discipline allowed him to survive and he is to
be commended for his response to this threat.

The BOPC found the tactical shortcomings noted relative to the performance of
Officers A, C, and D, and most notably their failure to complete the search of
Subject 3 once he was moved to the hallway, to warrant formal training.

The BOPC found Officers B and E’s tactics to warrant divisional training.

Drawing and Exhibiting

The BOPC noted that Officer B responded to a radio call of an ADW in progress.
Upon his arrival, he was informed that three males, one possibly armed with a
knife, were refusing to leave the witnesses’ apartment. As Officer B entered the
apartment, he drew his service pistol. The search progressed through the living
room and down a hallway. Officer B entered a bathroom and after ensuring it
was unoccupied, holstered his service pistol.

As Officers A, B, D and E were conducting their preliminary investigation inside
the apartment, they heard gunshots emanating from the hallway and
subsequently drew their service pistols.

The BOPC determined that Officers A, B, D and E had sufficient information to
believe the incident had escalated to the point where deadly force may become
necessary.

The BOPC found Officers A, B, D and E’s drawing to be in policy.

10


Non-Lethal Use of Force

The BOPC noted that as Officer A held onto Subject 3’s hands, which were
clasped behind his head, preparing to facilitate the handcuffing process, Subject
3 broke free and ran toward the living room area. Officer A simultaneously
grabbed the back of Subject 3’s shirt with his left hand and Subject 3’s right arm
with his right hand and forced him to the ground in a prone position, with Officer
A landing on top of him. Subject 3 thrashed his body from side to side and raised
his upper body off the ground by pushing himself in an upward direction with both
hands. Officer A punched Subject 3 one time on the right side of his face, at
which time Subject 1’s upper body collapsed to the floor. As Officers C and D
approached, they observed Subject 3 kicking with both legs as Officer A was
lying on top of him. In an attempt to restrain Subject 3, Officer D wrapped both
arms around his legs and placed his bodyweight on them. Officer C applied firm
grips to Subject 3’s left arm. Subject 3 was then handcuffed without further
incident.

The BOPC found Officers A, C and D’s non-lethal use of force to be in policy.

Following the removal of Subject 3 from the apartment, Officer C guarded
Subject 3 in the hallway. Officer C sat Subject 3 up into a seated position, with
Subject 3’s back against the north hallway wall, opposite the doorway to the
apartment. Officer C then observed Subject 3 raising his right knee and begin to
rise up from the ground by pushing up with his right leg. Officer C placed his
hands on Subject 3’s upper torso in an attempt to push him back to a seated
position. Simultaneously, Subject 3 rotated his body in a counterclockwise
direction, bringing his hands to his right side while holding a handgun. Subject 3
then fired two rounds at Officer C, knocking him rearward. Officer C regained his
footing, crouched down and grabbed Subject 3’s wrists with both hands. Unable
to gain control of Subject 3’s handgun, the struggle continued westbound down
the hallway. As Subject 3 raised himself off the floor, Officer C tackled him to the
ground in a prone position with Officer C landing on top of him. Subject 3 canted
his body onto his left side, extended his arms to the right side of his body,
attempting to point the handgun at Officer C. Officer C attempted to force
Subject 3’s torso onto the floor with his bodyweight while fighting for control of
the handgun.

The BOPC found Officer C’s non-lethal use of force to be in policy.

After the Officer Involved Shooting (OIS), Officer A returned to the apartment to
assist Officer D. As Officer A entered the apartment, he observed Subject 1
attempting to push himself off the floor and into a standing position. Officer A
delivered a front kick to Subject 1’s chest/chin area and he subsequently
returned to a seated position. While this level of force is not typically warranted
when dealing with a handcuffed subject, the BOPC determined that based on the
totality of the circumstances, the force utilized by Officer A was appropriate as he

11


faced a need to immediately control Subject 1. Given that Subject 1’s associate,
Subject 3, had just shot an officer while similarly restrained, it was reasonable for
Officer A to perceive an elevated level of threat from the handcuffed Subject 1 as
he rose up. The BOPC determined that it was reasonable that Officer A utilized
this level of force.

The BOPC found Officer A’s non-lethal use of force to be in policy.

Lethal Use of Force

The BOPC noted that after hearing shots fired, Officers A, B, and E exited the
front door of the apartment and observed Subject 3 in a prone position with
Officer C lying on top of him. Officers A and B noted Subject 3’s body was
canted onto his left side, his arms still handcuffed behind his back and extended
to the right side of his body, while pointing a handgun at Officer C. Officer B, in
immediate defense of Officer C’s life, approached and fired two shots to Subject
3’s head. Simultaneously, Officer A approached and fired one shot to the back of
Subject 3’s head.

Officer E observed Officer C and Subject 3 wrestling for control of a handgun and
heard Officer C yell that Subject 3 had shot him. In immediate defense of Officer
C’s life, Officer E approached and fired one shot to Subject 3’s head.

The BOPC determined that Officers A, B and E reasonably believed that the
subject presented an immediate threat of serious bodily injury or death.

The BOPC found Officers A, B and E’s use of lethal force to be in policy.

12



[OCIE]

I wish all you who co-signed the results of the FORCE Investigation would give me just ONE GOOD REASON why anyone especially myself should believe ANYTHING fellow officers have to say about their brothers in-arms. ALL I AM ASKING FOR IS ONE GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE THIS REPORT.

[OCIE]

I would like to take the time to say thank you to all the individuals who,took the time to write a comment relative to the modern day lynching of Matthew Jerome Powell. I was very pleased to see so many comments and the time you spent in regurgitating misinformation.

Each of you stated your opinion and belief and that is what makes this country what it is. We are afforded that opportunity. To be castigated and berated by such a select group I accept as an honor. In closing I would like to say to Anthony Sullivan, Robert C.J. Parry,Ed O'Shea, Steven and LAPD Officer when this is over and a real and unbiased investigation reaches its conclusion. Please would each of you post your comment and tell me how CROW taste.

[Lady still Mourning]

All of you who believe everything the police say about Matthew are the ones living in Disney Land. These reports are all as different as night and day. If you have not read them all then keep your dirty mouths out of it. There is a cover up in the midst of this murder and it will be brought into the light. If it was so cut and dry then why did it take almost a whole year for a police report? Why was the family not directly contacted by the LAPD if they knew they were so "justified"? It makes my stomach turn to hear the ignorant words of you judgemental bastards talking about my love. And if you all are so smart, learn how to spell your ignorant testimonies correctly. The police can't even spell the word "artist". That's who your faith lies in. My Matthew had more tallent in his pinky finger than any of you combined. He was a beautiful person with a heart of gold and would never have tried to kill anyone unless his life was in danger first. I know you LAPD officers are known for your gentleness and understanding. It seems strange to me that you rushed so graciously to the rescue of some crackhead girls but had no regaurd for the men you could've just as easily booked and taken to the station. And Why then was there only one gunshot reported by the first paramedic that reached the scene, then later three more? Did the paramedic supposedly shoot Matthew the last three times? None of these reports coincide. The extra time was taken to ensure that the report to their superiors covered their unjustifiable use of lethal force. The truth will be known. My God is righteous and just. He will avenge His son and may He have mercy on the children of these murderous police. I pray that they will find peace in God and repent for the wrong and the pain that they have caused so many innocent people. I pray for everyone that lives in LA everyday and hope that they are safe from these power hungry, hate filled authority figures. Good will overcome. God Bless all of you.

[Shelly]

To Mr. Powells mother, I feel for you loosing a child in such a violent manner. But I am disgusted in your choice of blame! I think Ocie is filling your misguided heart with hate! Your child chose to attempt too MURDER a Police Officer, and your anger is with the officers who defended themselves, and the officer who was almost killed by your son? Talk about Alice in Wonderland! What is wrong with you? Your misplaced anger is all that any law abiding citizen or caring parent (both of which I am) need to know about how your son could have gone so horribly wrong! His morale compass was clearly backwards and you have much to be sad about. One thing you can be sad about is how your teachings of this young man could have made him think it was "justified" to give booze and marijuana to young teenage girls, and threaten their Mother with a knife when confronted about said illegal activity? How could you be so obtuse? As for the LAPD, they are being scrutinized by every angle, and if there were a modicum of blame to be placed on them, it would be plashed all over every news paper out here. The Los Angeles Times is very watchful of the LAPD and we would hear about any attempted cover up, that is a fact! I feel horrible for the Officers that were involved in this ordeal. #1, for the Officer that was almost killed! #2 for the Officers of whom your son left NO choice but for them to have to shoot him! That must be quite the burden on them. As for your English literary comment about the spelling of "Artist" perhaps it was a typo, kind of like your spelling of regaurd "regard", or use of "men" to man?! Ease up and free your hateful soul, is not becoming of a lady! Your son was a bad person, evident by his choice of departure of this world. If you raise a gun to the lawful authority, you will die by the lawful authority! And shame on you for speaking such hateful words about people who are addicted to drugs! You have shown your true colors and that is clearly and demonstrably how your deceased son learned his lack of value for human life. I truly hope you seek help from a professional physiologist, these are tough times for you and you need the proper help. Ocie is not that proper help, he will just continue to feed your mind with hate. I also hope and pray that your other son, who has also commented in an earlier post, has learned from his brothers lack of civilized behavior! Merry Christmas and have a safe new year to all, and specifically the police officers that protect us all from people like Mr. Powell. And unlike Mrs.Powell, I pray for your children as well! Perhaps if Mrs.Powell had taken a more hands on roll in her sons raising he might have turned out a better person, instead of a drug dealer with delusions of grandeur in the Hip Hop world! Peace!

[OCIE]

I am intrigued by persons who make statements based on their uninformed opinions with no substance. I am still waiting for someone to give me one good reason why I should believe the police and their reports of innocence in the execution of Matthew Jerome Powell. Does anyone for one moment think the reports are going to show or say that this was indeed a modern day lynching? Most people refuse to believe that the cops are even capable of doing anything wrong let alone make up a story about murdering a person.
I ask you shelly what proof do you have that Matthew gave booze and marijuana to young teenage girls. I see you said nothing about the parents of these girls who, it is said, are guilty of nothing less than contributing to the delinuency of minors. Oh by the way shelley the report said Matthew was drinking beer and smoking pot most of that day but the Coroner's Toxicology report for alcohol and ethynol was negative and the amount of marijuana was 3.2ng/ml. Who is lying shelly? Oh and by the way if the cops only shot Matthew four times in the head how come there was several shell casing placards in both hallways. Remember the weapon Mr Powell is reported to have used was a revolver that did not eject casings. I could go on pointing out inconsistencies to you but what good would it do your mind is and was already made up that the cops could do no wrong.
If Rampart cops were not already guilty of lying why is the Consent Decree in force. I'll bet you a free dinner that if there was an independent federal investigation into this killing they would not pass that either.
May I suggest to all that you not overlook the obvious. The TRUTH shelly that is all I am seeking THE TRUTH.

[Marcus]

Ocie,
how would you know where shell casings were located in the hallways, you were not there. Why should we believe your version of what happened? You were not there. I have an informed opinion, and know first hand of what happened. You don't! I know where all the shell casings where in that hallway, and they were all around Powells body. 4 total, thats it. So it would seem that you are misinformed and have no clue as to what happened. I WAS THERE, I SAW THE EVIDENCE FIRST HAND. I don't ever recall giving you access to the scene. As far as i know only Police personell were at the scene and you are not police. So again you would have no clue as to what the scene looked like. As far as the coroners report, what fabricated made up copy do you have. Or were you in the coroners office for the examination of the dead body. I saw first hand the report and it showed amounts of alcohol and beer. That is the copy the Board Of Police Commissions has and again it shows Powell had been drinking beer and smoking Marijuana. What fairly land report do you have? I interviewed all wits at the scene. The two girls stated Powell bought beer for them and sold marijuana to them. They also stated he was drinking beer and smoking marijuana. You have no first hand knowledge of what happened and had no access to any of the investigation, yet you claim to know so much. Well i'll tell you you know nothing. You are using Powells mother to further what ever warped cause you are serving. You don't represent the truth because you are telling lies and have no clue as to what happened. You still haven't addressed the issue of Powell shooting a cop 4 times. Why not? I think it's because you can't. Officer Taylor has the wounds to prove it. The ballistics from Powells gun prove it was his gun that shot officer Taylor. His finger prints were on the gun and he had gun powder residue on his right and left hands. Why don't you address that? You wont because it will prove it is the reason Powell was killed. He tried to shoot Cop and a very good one in fact. If your version was true 4 copswould have been releaved from duty and the police commission would of had an independant investigation. But that is not the case. The investigation is over. The whole thing is over. Good won over evil.

[Ed O'Shea]

What hapened to my entry?

[Demika]

I am amazed at the attitudes of all of these commrnts being made about my son. I am a good mother and have always been one to my son, Matthew. I am a responsible citizen as well, and I really don't appreciate the words that are comming out of some of your mouths at all. Matthew was a loving and respected ypung man, as well as a Honor roll student in school. He has a few problems as a young man, but nothing as horrible as all of you are saying. Matthew isn't here to defend himself and this is what I am here for. If this shooting was in policy as the police are claiming then why have the stories changed so much, and not one of them is the same. Can someone tell me this. I was told a complete diffiferent one as to what happened that morning that my son was so brutally murdered. I bet that you are not aware that these cops beat my son up severly enough that his face had to be sewed up and had to be repaired to be able to let Family and close friends say and give their final respects to my son. If my son was such a violent person then why were there so many people at the funeral that the chapel couldn't hold everyone, and also if he was such a bad boy as all of you claim then why did I have so many teachers, and all the respected adults attend my sons funeral, can you tell me this. Matthew has never given any law enforcment officer any kind of trouble at all in his whole adult life, if anything he has always been respectful to them as he met them anywhere. Matthew was a decent human being and doesn't deserve this ugly comments that all of you are makin so if you would, until you know all the facts don't comment about him anymore unless you have something good to say. The one thing that has always hurt the most is that the officers messed up my baby's face that I couldn't even kiss him or touch him before he buried, and this is really bad. I have to go nad visit withmy child at a grave instead at his home, and I will never be able to ever hear his beautiful voice sing his music except on his tapes that he made. I want to know if any of you know what it like to not be able to put up any pictures of you child up and look at them without breaking down everytime, and to know that I will never get to see him get married or have a child of his own as his brothers have. I need for all of you to think about what I have wriiten before you make another comment about any of this at all please. Thank You and may God Bless all of you and keep your children safe from the same thing happenning to you. I wish kind of pain on anyone ever. This is the type that never goes away, and you might say it gets easier as time goes, but let me tell you it doesn't, it gets worse as day by day goes by you. Grieving mother for her son Matthew

[Ed O'Shea]

Your son was shot in the head several times! That is why his head was sewn shut, AFTER the autopsy. See Officer Taylor was on top oof Matthew fighting for his life after being shot FOUR times by your son! His head was the only target the Officers had, hence the massive trauma to it, and hence the necessity to have it sewn shut!

As for him being such a pillar of society, here are a few FACTS! He had a FELONY warrant out of NC for sales of narcotics, hardly a thing I would call, law abiding! Then he SHOT a POLICE OFFICER FOUR TIMES!!!!!!! Can you possibly even attempt to rationally explain those criminal actions! You and Ocie seem to be devoid of any rational thought! I feel horrible for you as a parent, but the facts are that your son, no matter how loved he was, was a drug dealer with a very bad morale compass, who tried to murder a Police Officer! That, my father used to say, Is all I need too know about him! If your Matthew would try and kill a Police Officer, it is better that he is not on this earth to kill someone else's son or daughter! Every action has an equal or greater reaction! Matthew should have known that! And for such a kind and gentle person, as you described him, why did he laugh after shooting Officer Taylor FOUR times and state, and I quote your son "Ha ha I F-ing killed you!" Now this blog is a very good and powerful format, but if all we are going to write are pleasantries and slander on the Police then we are all missing the huge burden Matthew put on the Officers that were forced to have to shoot him and the huge effect Matthew's actions put on Officer Taylor and his family! Officer Taylor's wife was almost widowed by Matthew and his son's father almost taken from him! Don't YOU Mrs. Powell think that is something worth discussing? Or is it all about you and ocie vilifying the Police for protecting the public and, God forbid, themselves? You NEED to check your morale compass ASAP!

Also the gun was STOLEN from not too far away from where Matthew lived in NC! Funny how that FACT is left out of ocie's diatribe! Interesting coincidence! I guess the LAPD flew out to NC, broke into a mans home and stole it, or did they steal it first then find a poor unsuspecting Mtthew and shoot him just because he happens to be from NC? Interesting quandry those pesky little questions place Matthew and his supporters in!

Unbelievable, and we wonder why this world is all jacked up! People FAIL to take responsibility and consistently look to place the blame for they, or their families actions, on the backs of others! All this pain that "Matthew" caused, what a shame, but it was caused by HIM!

[FirePrincess]

We have not forgotten! Vengence is the Lord's. Matthew is dearly missed and will always be in our hearts and memories. We patiently await the turn to see his murders face to face. The truth will be heard eventually.