VALLEJO — The city released officer body camera footage Tuesday showing the final moments of a police chase that ended with five Vallejo officers shooting a man 41 times, killing him.
The 42-second clip, obtained through a records request, became publicly releasable after it was played in open court during a coroner’s inquest hearing, according to free speech experts. Before the March hearing, Vallejo police had denied a records request from this newspaper asking for footage from the shooting.
The video shows the tail-end of the August 2017 police chase involving 45-year-old Benicia resident Jeffrey Barboa, who police say was wanted in connection with an armed robbery in El Cerrito. Barboa is seen exiting his car carrying a large knife and slowly walking toward officers, who have their guns drawn and are yelling commands. The footage ends just before the first shots are fired.
Police identified Officers Stephanie McDonough, Jake Estrada, David McLaughlin, Zach Jacobsen and Matt Komoda as having fired at Barboa. In March, the Contra Costa County coroner held an inquest hearing on Barboa’s death, where a jury ruled 8-4 that Barboa’s death was a suicide.
Two officers testified at the inquest hearing that Barboa was screaming, “Kill me,” as he walked toward police.
“It’s a difficult and tragic event all around,” said Vallejo police Capt. Lee Horton. “We agree with the findings of the coroner’s inquest that it was suicide via gunshot.”
Contra Costa is one of a handful of California counties to conduct coroner’s inquest hearings to review in-custody and deaths involving officers. During the hearings, which are held in open court, a jury is asked to choose four manners of death: suicide, accident, natural causes or at the hands of another, not by accident. The rulings carry no civil nor criminal liability, and the hearings are held to give the public a chance to learn the facts of fatalities where officers are involved.
First Amendment Coalition Executive Director David Snyder said once the body camera footage was played in open court, it “became part of the public record,” and that the police should release it.
“It is necessarily part of the record,” Snyder said. “A police department, at least under the First Amendment, can’t take away the public’s right to access the records once they have already been made public. … These records are of particular importance because they deal with police use of force, and officers’ very extraordinary power to use deadly force.”
When this newspaper asked the sheriff’s office to retain body camera footage from coroner’s inquest hearing as a court record, a sheriff’s lieutenant declined. He cited a state law that says “any books, records, documents, or other things under the control of a law enforcement agency” subpoenaed for an inquest hearing “shall not themselves be made a part of the record in any coroner’s inquest without the written consent of the law enforcement agency.” He suggested requesting the footage from the involved agencies.
“The sheriff is following the statute. … They don’t appear to be acting in bad faith here,” Snyder said. “What I’m saying is, the First Amendment makes that non-tenable. Something that is already public can’t be taken out of public view at the discretion of a law enforcement agency, even if the statute says that.”
Days after the Aug. 3 shooting, this newspaper filed a public records act request for body camera footage from the incident. Vallejo police denied it, citing a California law that makes “records of complaints to, or investigations conducted by, or records of intelligence information or security procedures of,” any police agency exempt from public disclosure.
Then, last week, this newspaper filed a second request under the state public records act, asking only for the footage that was played during the coroner’s inquest hearing. This time, Vallejo police released the footage.
There have been several instances over the past few years where Bay Area police body-camera video or images were publicly released following an investigation into police shootings, including fatal ones by police in Santa Clara and at San Jose State University.
Oakland police have selectively released body-camera footage in high-profile shootings in the past as well. Earlier this year, Mountain View police released body-camera footage from its officers’ interaction with Nasim Aghdam the night before she went on a shooting rampage at YouTube headquarters in San Bruno.
What many of those instances have in common is they were initiated by law enforcement in the spirit of exonerating police actions in controversial encounters, and garnered criticism of exercising transparency only when it suits them.
Otherwise, many agencies do not make footage public unless it is subpoenaed for a civil matter, such as an excessive-force lawsuit, as was the case in a warrantless home entry by Santa Clara police that led to a multi-million dollar settlement from that city.
A forensic examiner counted 41 gunshot wounds on Barboa’s body; 37 direct hits, and four graze wounds. Methamphetamine was found in Barboa’s system.
Before the shooting, Barboa led Vallejo officers on a high-speed chase out of the city, across the Carquinez Bridge and around Richmond, ultimately crashing on Interstate 80. In six months before his death, Barboa had 14 separate contacts with police and was a suspect in nearly a dozens crimes around California, including one day earlier where he sped away from police and escaped.
A request for body camera footage that was played during a June coroner’s inquest hearing into the death of Terry Amons, in Pittsburg, is still pending. Officials say they anticipate the city will “make available records responsive” to the request by July 20.
