District Attorney says no charges for officers involved in shooting

Wisconsin Statute § 175.47 requires that, in the event of the death of an individual that results directly from “an action or an omission” of a law enforcement officer, the ensuing investigation must be conducted by an investigative team from an independent law enforcement agency. The Department of Justice (DOJ) Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) served as that independent agency following the incident at Mount Horeb Middle School May 1. DOJ/DCI provided a complete report to the prosecutor for review.

District Attorney Ismael Ozanne’s Office concluded shortly after noon on Monday, August 12 that there is no potential criminal court liability for Village of Mount Horeb police officers involved in the fatal shooting that occurred outside Mount Horeb Middle School on May 1.

The incident, in which a local middle school student brought a pellet rifle to the school and pointed it at officers before being shot and killed, was at the center of a day during which thousands of local citizens, including students, teachers, parents and greater community members, worked to grapple with panic, uncertainty, and ultimately the death of a young community member. While some questions will never be fully answered, the statement issued by Ozanne sheds light on much of what happened that day.

Over the past three months, the District Attorney received briefings from investigators, inspected the shooting scene, reviewed investigative reports, diagrams, photographs and video evidence. Just minutes after Ozanne’s announcement Monday, the Wisconsin Department of Justice’s Division of Criminal Investigation released a vast library of documents, including a 1,602-page investigative report, a 12-page cover letter, and 41 digital records including videos and photos collected after the shooting, including both body camera and squad camera footage. The documents also include detailed diagrams, information about the weather, warrants, and pages of interviews with people who knew the student or were there that day. One teacher described him as “quirky” but said he appeared to interact well with his peers.

On May 1 and in the ensuing days, wild rumors and conjecture about the incident spread rapidly on social media. According to the statement issued by Ozanne as well as the case file, here is what actually happened: On May 1, just after 11 a.m., a 911 caller indicated they saw a person walking past their home wearing a backpack and carrying a gun. Dispatch informed Mount Horeb officers that a person with a gun was seen by the tennis courts near the tree line, which is east of the middle school. A Mount Horeb police officer was in his squad driving through the parking lot behind the high school heading towards E. Garfield St. in the direction of the middle school. As the officer approached E. Garfield St. he saw a large number of students sprinting from a door at the middle school toward the baseball field. These students “were not smiling or goofing around, but instead appeared to be in fear and running for their lives.” The report said the officer saw that the children were “in pure fear and running for their lives.”

As the officer exited the parking lot turning right onto E. Garfield Street he observed an individual, with what appeared to be a rifle, pulling on a door of the middle school. The officer indicated the subject was wearing an oversized green jacket and tattered pants. The subject appeared to be an adolescent but the officer couldn’t tell at the time if the subject was male or female. The subject had what appeared to be a black rifle with a synthetic stock, black barrel. The officer feared the subject would get into the middle school and harm students inside. The officer stopped his squad facing eastbound on E. Garfield Street and exited with his rifle. At this time the officer was approximately 40 to 50 yards from the subject and was standing on the driver’s side of the squad. The officer immediately began to yell commands to the subject to drop the rifle and to move away from the school.

The subject did not comply with the demands to drop the rifle and instead turned to pull on the door of the school again.

The subject then began to walk toward the officer. The officer moved toward the back of the squad. At this time the subject had the rifle across his body. As the subject continued toward the officer he pointed the rifle toward the officer. The officer continued to give commands to the subject to not point the rifle at him and to put the rifle down. As the subject got closer, the officer could tell he was a male. The subject pointed the rifle at the officer’s face. The officer said he believed he was going to die and would never see his children again. The officer continued to move around the squad for cover as the subject continued to move toward the officer. The officer fired one to two shots at the subject from about 20 yards away. The subject moved and the officer tried to keep the squad between them. The subject continued to not follow commands. The officer saw two squads with lights activated to the west on E. Garfield St. The officer believed shots were fired by other officers or the subject. The officer heard shots fired and then the subject flinched, appearing to have been hit in the back or on the side.

The subject then fell. The subject got up and moved around the squad and pointed the rifle at the officer. Shots were fired and the subject fell again near the curb on the north side of E. Garfield St. While the subject was on his back he had the rifle across him and appeared to attempt to bring the rifle up when the officer heard additional shots, and fired his rifle at the subject on the ground. Officers approached the subject, removed the rifle from his body, and handcuffs were placed on the subject. The rifle had “Ruger” written on the stock. It was later determined the subject’s rifle was a Ruger air rifle.

The subject was identified as a juvenile with the initials DSCH, date of birth: 12-22-09.

“Firearms are dangerous weapons and pose a grave danger of bodily harm and/or death to an individual. Under these circumstances the air rifle DSCH possessed appeared to be a real firearm and the action of pointing it directly at law enforcement while advancing toward law enforcement was perceived to be a direct threat to the life of an officer,” said Ozanne. “Responding to that threat with deadly force is permitted under the law.”

Read the full, final report in this week's edition of the Mail.