Transcripts For SFGTV American Indian Heritage Month 20240711

Good afternoon. We are here this afternoon for a virtual town hall meeting with an officerinvolved shooting that occurred on november 17, 2020, on the 800 block of Market Street in the city and county of San Francisco. Before i move forward id like to announce to our viewing and listening audience that we have sign Language Interpretation Services here this afternoon to assist persons who are deaf or hardofhearing. Also this town hall is being translated in spanish and cantonese for members of the community who speak those languages. And in this presentation you will see and hear details of an officerinvolved shooting incident that resulted in lifethreatening injuries to mr. We recognize the impact on the members of our community at large. With that said, to any of our viewers or members of the community who are experiencing trauma from this incident or from the information or the images presented here during this town hall you can contact the San Francisco department of Public Health crisis line at 4 sa9703800 for trauma services. With that said, here is what we hope to accomplish today. First and foremost tonight is about transparency. It is our intention to release the known facts involved in the incident in a nonjudgmental way and id like to emphasize that this is an Ongoing Investigation and as such that there are some facts that we cannot release today because we either do not have the answers at this point and or the release of certain information is prohibited by law or could compromise this investigation. Next there was Body Worn Camera foot anage thafootage be that c. And with those not familiar, our department general order 10. 11 states the following in part it is the goal of the San Francisco Police Department to released aboutworn camera foot recordings to the greatest extent possible unless disclosure would, a, endanger the safety of a witness or another person involved in the investigation. B, jeopardize the successful completion of an investigation. Or, c, violate the local, state and or federal laws, including but not limited to the right of privacy. Those three standards determine whether it is appropriate to release the bodyworn footage. We have determined that it is appropriate to released aboutworn camera footage of this incident this afternoon. I would like to remind everyone that Video Evidence is only a portion of the evidence to look at on an officerinvolved shooting. While video recordings or any other recording device provide an objective record of the recorded event, it is understood that video recordings provide a limited perspective. In fact, there are many other factors to consider, including witness statements, physical evidence, forensic analysis, to name a few. We are releasing the Video Evidence at this stage of the investigation for transparency and not in an effort to make final conclusions. Although transparency has been the mantra of our officerinvolved shooting investigations for several years now, this level of transparency is consistent with the recently passed california transparency legislation, senate bill 1421. All of the information that we are releasing in this town hall, including the video footage, will be posted on the sfpd website at sanfranciscopolice. Org, and the directives mandate that we release the name of the officer or the officers involved in an officerinvolved shooting within 10 days of the incident unless there are safety concerns. In this case we have conducted a Safety Assessment and we have not discovered any safety concerns. Therefore, the names of the officers will be released later in this presentation by commander Robert Osullivan. Next i would like to explain the investigative processes for officerinvolved shootings. San francisco has a multiagency response to officerinvolved shootings and each agencies investigations is independent. First, immediately after an officerinvolved shooting occurs, representatives from the San Francisco Police Departments Investigative Services detail, the District Attorneys Office and the independent investigations bureau, also known as iib, and the department of Police Accountability also known as d. P. A. , are all notified. All notified agencies send the appropriate representatives to respond to the scene to conduct their respective independent investigations. As far as the investigative process goes, there are five investigative processes. First, the sfpd investigative detail is the unit responsible for investigating the underlying criminal activity that led up to the officerinvolved shooting. In this case the underlying criminal activity involved allegations of an arson, brandishing a knife and potentially an assault with a Deadly Weapon a knife which you will hear about shortly. The second investigative process is the sfpd internal Affairs Division. Internal Affairs Division is responsible for conducting an administrative investigation to determine the officers involved if the officers involved met the standards and the requirement of sfpd quality. And the investigations run parallel, but each has a distinct focus and each maintains an internal firewall to comply with the legal standards and requirements. The third investigative process is that of the District Attorneys Office. And the i. I. B. Is involved from the onset of the investigation to determine the legality of the officer involved shooting and based on their independent investigation and review, the District Attorney of the county of San Francisco will make the final decision as to whether the officers actions complied with the laws of the state of california. The fourth investigative process is the investigation of the department of Police Accountability, d. P. A. The d. P. A. Is mandated by ballot measure d of june 2016 to investigate all San Francisco Police Department incidents in which an sfpd officer discharges a weapon within the course and scope of their duties and that discharge results in injury to or death of the subject. The fifth process is that of the medical examiners office. The medical examiner has the Ongoing Investigation as well as custody of and the collection of evidence from a deceased person if an officerinvolved shooting results in a fatality. The medical examiner also has the responsibility to conduct an autopsy to determine cause of death and report the findings. In this incident, although mr. Estrada obtained lifethreatening injuries there was no loss of life, so, therefore, no investigation was initiated by the medical examiner. Next commander Robert Osullivan will discuss the facts that you will see shortly from Video Evidence. Well then hear any comments that you have. Also id like to point out that we take Community Feedback very seriously and based on feedback from our prior officer involved town halls we will also take questions and answer those questions which we can answer today. I would like to point out again that this town hall is not meant to arrive at conclusions individualing this investigation, so we will not be able to answer questions regarding investigative conclusions today. We will allocate one hour for Public Comments and questions. And scheduled to conclude this town hall at 6 00 p. M. Thank you very much for listening today. And now commander Robert Osullivan. Thank you. Good afternoon. The information provided today regarding these events is based on the preliminary review of bodworn camera and surveillance video, initial statements and interviews and evidence processed to this point. The officerinvolved shooting or o. I. S. That was on november 2020, was preceded by two events. The suspect committed an arson of an inhabited dwelling. The second in which mr. Estrada had an armed confrontation with a knife. Both was in the Tenderloin Police district of San Francisco. The incident involving the knife occurred in close proximity to the officer involved shooting in location and time. The precise chronology of these events is the focus of ongoings haves. As these investigations unfold we expect to learn more details. The following, however, summarizes the events understood as of today, tuesday, november 24th, 2020. On tuesday, november 17th at approximately 3 46 p. M. , the San Francisco department of Emergency Management also known as d. E. M. Had a fire on the 400 block of ellis street. While on the second floor of the building, an individual identified as witness one, smelled gasoline emanating from one of the apartments. Witness one advised a second individual, witness two, and the two responded to the apartment to inquire about the odor. Both witnesses made contact with the resident of the apartment who was later identified as antonio estrada. Mr. Estrada opened the door and ran out of the apartment, holding a frying pan in his left hand and a screwdriver in his right hand. As mr. Estrada held the frying pan in his hand, one of the witnesses noticed that the cooking surface of the pan was on fire. Once outside his apartment, mr. Estrada poured gasoline from a red gas can on to the hallway floor. Mr. Estrada then bent down and dropped an unknown object on to the floor at which time the gasoline ignited in flames. Mr. Estrada then left the building. The San Francisco Fire Department arrived on scene and extinguished the fire. The officers from tenderloin station also arrived at the scene to investigate the circumstances of the fire as did the members of the San Francisco Fire Department, the San Francisco Police Department, and the arson task force. The officers located the red gas can on the hallway floor in front of mr. Estradas open apartment door. Officers observed that the inside of the apartment was charred and they smelled the distinct odor of gasoline coming from the room. Officers reviewed building Surveillance Footage of the second floor hallway and observed a large explosion erupt from the area of mr. Estradas apartment. The squall of the fire that emerged from the area of mr. Estradas apartment covered the entire view of the surveillance camera as you will observe in the footage that well show shortly. A third individual, witness three, showed the officers a photo of mr. Estrada that witness three had captured on a cellphone. In the photo, mr. Estrada is wearing a gray longsleeved shirt, black adidas pants with three stripes on the side and brake shoes and holding a frying pan in his left hand. Officers searched the area for mr. Estrada and were unable to locate him at the time. At 5 09 p. M. , approximately one hour and 25 minutes after the arson was first reported, the department of Emergency Management received multiple 911 calls regarding male subjects fighting in the area of market and 5th streets. One of the subjects was reported to have a large knife and carrying a frying pan. Callers described the subject to them as a latino or mixedrace male wearing a gray sweater and black pants with white stripes on the side. A witness who was standing outside of 865 Market Street at the time of the fight recorded cellphone video of the incident. The video shows the following mr. Estrada was standing on Market Street near the powell street cable car turnaround holding a large knife i in his right hand and a frying pan in his left hand. Mr. Estrada held the knife in an overhanded or stabbing grip. Unknown males appeared to surround mr. Estrada in the middle of the street. One of the unknown males had a closed umbrella and another unknown male had what appeared to be a camping chair. And both were swinging the respective objects at mr. Estrada. Mr. Estrada took a fighting stance position and swung the frying pan and the knife at the males. Mr. Estrada repeatedly raised the knife above his head and made stabbing motions towards the male with the umbrella and the pale with the camping chair. At one point the unknown male with the umbrella is seen running away from mr. Estrada who chases the man while making multiple downward stabbing attempts from behind. It is unclear from this video if the unknown males were seeking to disarm mr. Estrada or if they were all mutually engaged in an altercation. At approximately 5 10 p. M. , officers arrived on the 800 block of Market Street and encountered mr. Estrada in front of 835 Market Street. That the time the officers were unaware of mr. Estradas involvement in the arson. The first officer was equipped with a 12gauge extended range impact weapon, also known as an eriw that has less lethal bean bag projectiles. The second officer was equipped with his departmentissued firearm. Mr. Estrada was armed with a knife in his right hand and a frying pan in his left hand. The officers ordered mr. Estrada to drop the knife, however, he refused to comply with multiple commands. Mr. Estrada repeatedly raised the knife above his head in a stabbing motion. The officers continued to order mr. Estrada to, quote, drop the knife and he responded fu. Mr. Estrada then stepped on the sidewalk and started walking eastbound while brandishing the knife above his head in a stabbing motion. The first officer deployed his ieaw at mr. Estrada which had no effect on him. And he ran at the officer with the knife in his right hand and the frying pan at his left hand. The second officer then discharged his firearm at mr. Estrada. Mr. Estrada fell to the sidewalk and dropped the frying pan but did not drop the knife. The second officer immediately broadcast that he had been involved in a shooting and requested medical assistance for mr. Estradas injuries. Two tenderloin officers, officers three and four, arrived on the scene as the first and the second officers engaged mr. Estrada. The third officer was equipped with another less lethal weapon, a. 40millimeter extended range impact weapon. This weapon has less lethal foam baton projectiles. The fourth officer was equipped with a departmentissued firearm. Mr. Estrada, while lying on the sidewalk and holding a knife in his right hand, retrieved the fly frying pan and attempted to stand up. The officers ordered mr. Estrada several times to drop the knife and stay down on the ground. Mr. Estrada did not comply and attempted to stand while saying no, fu. The first and third officers deployed the respective eriws at mr. Estrada as he was rising to his feet. The less lethal projectiles were ghean ineffective as he did not drop the knife or the frying pan and succeeded in standing upright. The fourth officer deployed his firearm at mr. Estrada. Mr. Estrada again dropped to the sidewalk but did not drop the knife. He broadcast that he was involved in a shooting and they were giving the suspect verbal commands but that mr. Estrada was noncompliant. Officers continued giving multiple commands to mr. Estrada to drop the knife and to stay down. Mr. Estrada, however, did not comply and rose to his knees. Still holding the knife in his right hand and the frying pan in his left hand, the officers deployed a less lethal super sock bean bag projectiles and foam baton projectiles at mr. Estrada but they continued to be ineffective. As mr. Estrada was on his knees and not complying to drop the knife, the officers used the sabre red o. C. , a brand of pepper spray at mr. Estrada. Mr. Estrada did not drop the knife or the frying pan. Mr. Estrada still kneeling dropped the frying pan and hunched over while still clutching the knife in his right hand. The officers continued giving him commands to drop the knife. Officers then utilized a patrol vehicle and positioned it between themselves and mr. Estrada. As officers were positioning the patrol vehicle, mr. Estrada straightened his upper body and again raised the knife to his shoulder level. A less lethal projectile was deployed at mr. Estrada which was ineffective as he did not drop the knife. Mr. Estrada then laid down on his left side while he clutched the knife in his right hand when which he periodically brought to his head and shoulder level. Mr. Estrada was given demands to drop the knife. A foam projectile was deployed at mr. Estrada but he did not drop the knife. The San Francisco Sheriffs Department lieutenant who was on duty nearby at the time heard the incident on his radio. He and another Sheriffs Department deputy responded to the scene. Once on scene, the lieutenant and the sfpd officers assembled a team to approach mr. Estrada from the rear. From westbound Market Street on the sidewalk. And sfpd supervisor authorized the s. D. Lieutenant to use his taser. One officer was designated to give mr. Estrada commands. The officer announced all personnel on scene that the sheriffs lieutenant was in possession of a taser. The officers equipped with Ballistic Shields and eriws and firearms, together with the sheriffs lieutenant equipped with a taser, approached mr. Estrada whose back was facing them. Mr. Estrada was laying on his left side and clutching the knife in his right hand. At 5 29 p. M. , approximately eight minutes after the incident began, the Sheriffs Department de the sheriffs lieutenant deployed the taser at mr. Estrada who then dropped the knife. This allowed the sfpd officers to restrain mr. Estrada and to provide him first aid. Officers placed two tourniquets and an inclusive dressing on mry the San Francisco Fire Department medics. Additional information it was determined that mr. Estrada was struck by gunfire and less lethal projectiles. Mr. Estrada was provided medical aid at the scene and transported to a local hospital. He was hospitalized with lifethreatening injuries. Evidence evidence was located at the arson and officerinvolved shooting scenes. Evidence recovered included the suspects knife, frying pan and screwdriver. Five bullet casings and 11 less lethal projectiles were also recovered from the scene. Video video was recovered from multiple sources, including the following Body Worn Cameras and privately owned surveillance cameras, smartphones and muni video. Additional video is being sought by investigators. Witneswitnesses witnesses ofh the arson involved shooting have been identified. Additional witnesses are sought by investigators. The suspect the suspect has been identified as antonio estrada, date of birth may 28,1994. Mr. Estrada was arrested for the following violations 245 [c] with the california penal code assault with a Deadly Weapon. And the california penal code, exhibition of a Deadly Weapon. 148 [a] [1] of the penal code, resisting or obstructing a peace officer. 451 [b] of arson of a structure. And lastly, 453, [a] of the california penal code, possession of a flammable substance with intent to set fire to any structure. Involved members the members involved in this officerinvolved shooting are officer Joseph Toomey and officer ryan johnson. In accordance with the department policy, all members are placed on paid administrative lead. The independent Investigation Bureau as i. I. B. , of the San Francisco District Attorneys Office is conducting a criminal investigation of the officerinvolved shooting. The San Francisco Police Department Investigative Services detail is conducting an investigation of crimes an to te shooting. And the department of Police Accountability are conducting administrative investigations. The San Francisco Fire Department, San Francisco Police Department, arson task force, is investigating the arson on the 400 block of ellis street. Were now going to transition to the multimedia phase of our presentation. Todays presentation is provided in a multimedia format. In an effort to provide a transparent and comprehensive perspective of this incident the sfpd will provide 911 calls, Police Dispatch audio, bodyworn camera video, bystander smartphone video, still photos and Crime Scene Investigation photos, maps and related visual aids. During the course of this incident, approximately 85 bodyworn camera videos were generated by responding officers. Multiple sources of video and audio exist totaling hundreds of hours of footage. Our presentation today consists of relevant known video and audio at this time. But it is not intended to provide all photos, videos or testimonial information related to this investigation. We will now have a presentation of this incident using these sources. The majority are in a raw form and are shown as provided to sfpd by bystanders and witnesses. At select points to increase the transparency for the viewers the weapons of the officer and the suspect have been enhanced to allow for bankrupt perspective f this incident. Note that this presentation and the enhanced video and the raw video are all available on the sfpd website following this town hall event. Prior to the beginning of each segment of audio and video, well provide a brief description to orient the viewer to time, place, and location of the content about to be shown. We will now play the two 911 calls related to the arson. As noted in the earlier description, this series of incidents began for two calls of service in the 400 block of ellis street at 3 tim at 3 38 p. This audio is provided to the sfpd from the San Francisco department of Emergency Management, commonly referred to as d. E. M