Minneapolis Star Tribune
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- The internal investigation by Minneapolis police into the shooting of plainclothes officer Duy Ngo by an unknown man then another officer lacked several key elements, according to a four-page memo obtained by the Star Tribune.
The memo said the investigation lacked a thorough neighborhood canvass and detailed questioning of Ngo. Also glass fragments seen on top of Ngo’s vehicle were seen, then lost. The scene wasn’t secured until all the spent ammunition was found.
Sources told the newspaper that questions over how the memo was handled drove Chief Bill McManus to suspend three top-ranking officers Thursday. The state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension is investigating an allegation that McManus said had criminal overtones.
At issue is whether the memo was ordered quashed or destroyed.
The three officers placed on paid leave are the ones who wrote and received the June 16 memo. It was written by Lt. Mike Carlson, addressed to Deputy Chief Lucy Gerold and copied to Capt. Mike Martin.
Carlson’s lawyer, Jim Michels, said the memo shows the department was interested in making sure things were done properly. The memo lists six “areas of concern” that spell out evidence that was either not collected or mishandled.
For example, it said that when the bullet-resistant vest that Ngo was wearing was brought in for testing, crime lab personnel removed items from the pockets without documenting what they took and from where.
The memo also said four bullets that missed Ngo exited his vehicle through a bottom area of the front passenger door. The scene should have been secured until a thorough search could have been done to find the expended rounds, the memo said. One of the expended bullets was found three days later.
“No element of this suggests inappropriate conduct or a cover up,” Michels said. “There was no criminal conduct by anyone employed in the department.”
Gerold wrote in a statement last week that McManus told her he had heard she ordered the memo destroyed, and she believes that is why she was put on leave. She has emphatically denied destroying the memo.
David Lillehaug, Gerold’s attorney, said: “Deputy Chief Gerold can’t comment on the memo because it describes a pending investigation. When all the facts come out, it will be crystal clear that, as usual, she conducted herself with the utmost integrity.”
Police union President Sgt. John Delmonico said he has not seen the memo. But he was told that it was shared last summer with the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office when the Police Department presented its case to determine if criminal charges needed to be filed.
The County Attorney’s Office declined to file charges against officer Charles Storlie, who shot Ngo on Feb. 25, 2003. In addition, the Police Department’s internal affairs unit determined that nobody involved in the investigation should be disciplined, Delmonico said.
Before Storlie shot Ngo, Ngo was approached by an unidentified man while he was assigned to the Minnesota Gang Strike Force and doing plainclothes surveillance in south Minneapolis. The man shot Ngo but the bullets did not penetrate his protective vest and Ngo gave chase. But he collapsed in pain and radioed for help.
Storlie arrived and mistakenly shot Ngo, believing he was the suspect, according to police accounts. Storlie released two quick bursts from his MP-5, hitting Ngo six times. Investigators are still pursuing leads about who initially confronted Ngo.
On June 9, seven days before the memo was written, Ngo filed a federal lawsuit, claiming Storlie violated his civil rights by improperly using deadly force. Also named as defendants are Storlie’s unidentified supervisors and the city.
The memo noted that glass-type fragments were found on top of Ngo’s vehicle. They were recovered and then lost. “It would be important to know exactly what the material was as it should not have been on top of the vehicle because there is no logical explanation for this,” the memo said.
In regard to the bullet-resistant vest Ngo was wearing, the memo said “leaving the vest and objects within would have aided in explaining the unusual pattern injury Ngo had on his abdomen.”
The memo’s final section raises 14 points surrounding Ngo’s actions or questions that should have been posed to him during interviews. The questions ranged from broad to specific, including, “When Ngo saw a person approaching him in a dark alley from behind, why did Ngo not ready himself with one of his three guns?”
Other questions that should have been asked included exactly how did Ngo grab the suspect’s gun and how did the struggle take place and whether Ngo had any injuries to his hands. The memo also said subpoenas should have been issued for Ngo’s work and personal cell phones and his pager.
An immediate canvass of the neighborhood could have yielded evidence about where the shooter came from or residents might have provided information about the sound of the shot groupings, the memo said.
Shortly after the memo was completed, it was discussed by Carlson, Gerold, Martin and former Police Chief Robert Olson. Carlson was asked to try to correct any problems with the investigation and Martin was to track the case with the County Attorney’s Office.
Michels questioned whether McManus conducted a thorough review before putting the three officers on leave.
Olson and attorney Jon Hopeman, who is representing Martin, declined to comment.
Minneapolis police spokesman Ron Reier said on Monday that McManus had no comment on the memo or the suspensions.