Prosecutor: No retrial for ex-cop Christopher Schurr in shooting death of Patrick Lyoya
GRAND RAPIDS — A west Michigan prosecutor has decided not to retry former Grand Rapids Police Officer Christopher Schurr in the 2022 shooting death of Patrick Lyoya, a 26-year-old Congolese immigrant, after a mistrial was declared earlier this month on a second degree murder charge.
Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker announced May 22, after reviewing the case, he was not convinced he could obtain a conviction from a jury had the case proceeded to another trial.
"There is nothing factually I believe I could do differently which could impact the case for a different outcome," Becker said in a prepared statement provided to the media.
Becker said Schurr will not be tried on any other or lesser charges. Schurr's case will be dismissed.
Schurr, 34, was originally charged with one count of second-degree murder stemming from the April 2022 shooting of Lyoya. Schurr shot Lyoya in the back of the head after tackling him after Lyoya tried to flee a traffic stop in southeast Grand Rapids.
Ven Johnson, an attorney representing the Lyoya family in a separate, civil case against Schurr, said the family expressed deep disappointment at Becker's decision.
'The Lyoya family has not only lost Patrick, but now the hope that former officer Christopher Schurr will ever be held criminally accountable for taking Patrick's life," Johnson said in a statement. "With today's decision, what was once a pause in justice has now become a permanent reality. This is not a verdict nor the outcome the Lyoya family sought."
Schurr's lead defense attorney, Matt Borgula of Grand Rapids, did not immediately reply to a message seeking comment.
Robert Womack, a Kent County commissioner who has called for policing policy changes, said the Lyoya family 'is definitely broken by the decision.'
'They were very, very hurt, and still trying to understand the American justice system,' Womack told reporters following Becker's announcement. 'They don't see any excuse ... for the person who shot their son in the back of the head to be walking free, but we're going to continue to work with them on the healing process.'
Becker originally charged Schurr in June 2022, leading to the former officer's dismissal from the Grand Rapids Police Department.
Schurr's attorneys had argued the former officer was acting in self defense, after Lyoya attempted to grab Schurr's Taser during the physical struggle that ensued after Schurr chased Lyoya. Prosecutors had argued Schurr used excessive force.
Earlier this month, a Kent County jury deliberated for close to 20 hours before telling Circuit Judge Christina Mims they were unable to reach a verdict, prompting Mims to declare a mistrial May 8. Jurors heard about five-and-a-half days of argument and testimony in the trial. The jury was able to see footage of the shooting played numerous times, and from different angles, from the moment Schurr exited his patrol car to the moments after he shot Lyoya. Jurors also heard from a series of witnesses, the bulk of whom were qualified as policing experts, but also from eyewitnesses, investigators, police officers who responded to the scene of the shooting and Schurr himself.
Becker told reporters that the jury was split 10-2, with the majority of jurors favoring acquittal. He said he had no second thoughts about the decision to charge Schurr.
"I put the best case I could forward when I tried this case," Becker said. "I did the best I could. I did everything I could. The jury couldn't reach a verdict. I still stand by the decision."
Much of the testimony focused on the Taser — defense lawyers argued Lyoya had gained possession of it from Schurr. Once Schurr believed Lyoya had control of the Taser, he was within his rights to use deadly force and shoot Lyoya, policing experts called by the defense testified. The prosecution focused large parts of its case around Schurr's training with the Grand Rapids Police Department (GRPD), where he had joined as a recruit in 2015. Policing expert witnesses called by the prosecution said Schurr acted improperly by chasing Lyoya on foot after he tried to flee the traffic stop.
After the mistrial was declared, some protestors in Grand Rapids called on Becker to retry the case. Demonstrators were planning on gathering to protest Becker's decision on May 22, according to social media posts.
Lyoya's death, and the subsequent release of footage of the shooting to the public, sparked protests in Grand Rapids in 2022, when demonstrators called for increased police accountability. After the shooting, the Grand Rapids Police Department instituted policies including de-escalation training and emphasizing the sanctity of life.
This story is developing.
Contact Arpan Lobo: alobo@freepress.com
This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Prosecutor: No retrial for ex-police officer Schurr in death of Lyoya
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
32 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Photos: Supporters celebrated Milford teen's release from ICE custody
A Milford High School student's hand is painted with Marcelo Gomes Da Silva's number during their Division 1 second-round playoff game against Taunton on Tuesday. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Milford volleyball players stand for the national anthem before the start of their Division 1 second-round playoff game against Taunton. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Milford's Paullo Mota prays against the volleyball net at the conclusion of their Division 1 second-round playoff game against Taunton on Tuesday. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff A Milford High School student holds a cutout of Marcelo Gomes Da Silva during their Division 1 second-round playoff game against Taunton on Tuesday. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Marcelo Gomes Da Silva's mother poses for a photo in her son's bedroom in Milford. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Students weep outside Milford High School after walking out of school to protest the detention of Marcelo Gomes Da Silva on Monday. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Students embrace outside of Milford High School after walking out of school to protest the detention of Marcelo Gomes Da Silva on Monday. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff People hold American flags as they protested outside of the Town Hall in Milford. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Milford High School graduates protest outside the Town Hall a day after Marcelo Gomes Da Silva, 18, was detained by ICE on his way to volleyball practice. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff A graduate holds his cap which reads, 'No Human Is Illegal' during a protest outside Town Hall. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff A tear runs down the cheek of an 11-year-old cousin of Marcelo Gomes Da Silva as he and other community members protested outside the Milford Town Hall. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Family members of Marcelo Gomes Da Silva, who was detained by ICE on his way to volleyball practice, break down in tears during a protest held for Marcelo outside of Town Hall in Milford on Sunday. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff Graduates embrace as they protest outside the Town Hall a day after Marcelo Gomes Da Silva was detained by ICE. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff .image { margin-top: 100px; } .image figcaption { display: block; max-width: 750px; margin-right: auto; margin-left: auto; font-size: 18px; caption-side: bottom; line-height: 1.5; }
Vox
an hour ago
- Vox
Why the Supreme Court just handed a big victory to gun manufacturers
is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. He received a JD from Duke University and is the author of two books on the Supreme Court. Weapons seized from members of the gang Los Zetas are displayed by police during a presentation to the press, in Mexico City. Luis Acosta/AFP via Getty Images The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion on Thursday that shuts down a lawsuit brought by the nation of Mexico against US gun companies. In Smith & Wesson v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, Mexico sued seven American gun manufacturers, claiming that their products are often sold to gun traffickers who then provide these guns to Mexican drug cartels. The Mexican government claims that up to 90 percent of guns recovered at crime scenes in Mexico come from the United States. SCOTUS, Explained Get the latest developments on the US Supreme Court from senior correspondent Ian Millhiser. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Unfortunately for Mexico, however, a 2005 law known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) gives American gunmakers broad immunity from lawsuits seeking to hold them liable for harms 'caused by the misuse of firearms by third parties, including criminals.' PLCAA does contain some exemptions to this general rule. As Justice Elena Kagan explains in the Court's Smith & Wesson opinion, a gunmaker can be held liable for 'aiding and abetting someone else's firearms offense.' Mexico claims that the gunmakers aided and abetted illegal sales to cartels by 'supply[ing] firearms to retail dealers whom they know illegally sell to Mexican gun traffickers.' Mexico also faults the companies for allowing bulk sales of guns, which can enable illegal sales, and for practices such as designing guns that appeal to Mexican culture. One such gun, for example, features an image of the Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata, along with a quote from Zapata: 'It is better to die standing than to live on your knees.' But Kagan's opinion concludes that the mere fact that US gun companies likely knew that some of their guns were being resold in the illegal market, much less that some of their guns are designed to appeal to Mexicans, is not enough to overcome PLCAA. As Kagan explains, this conclusion largely flows from the Court's fairly recent decision in Twitter v. Taamneh (2023). Twitter concerned an attack by the terrorist group ISIS that killed 39 people at a nightclub in Istanbul, including a man with American relatives. Those relatives sued several social media companies in US court, claiming that the companies aided and abetted the Istanbul attack by allowing ISIS to post content which promotes ISIS's ideology and that attempts to recruit people to the terrorist organization's cause. But Twitter warned against a legal regime where 'ordinary merchants could become liable for any misuse of their goods and services, no matter how attenuated their relationship with the wrongdoer.' As a general rule, someone who provides a good or service to all comers is not legally responsible if a bad actor uses their product for a wicked purpose. If Ford sells a truck to a man who intentionally uses it to run over and kill his wife, Ford normally will not be responsible for this homicide. And so Kagan concludes that it's not enough for Mexico to show that gunmakers could have taken additional steps to prevent their products from winding up in the hands of drug cartels. Instead, 'the merchant becomes liable only if, beyond providing the good on the open market, he takes steps to 'promote' the resulting crime and 'make it his own.'' Of course, one thing that distinguishes Smith & Wesson from Twitter is that social media platforms are not weapons whose entire purpose is to injure people. If PLCAA did not exist, Mexico might have argued that the gun companies' decision to make and sell an inherently dangerous product should make them liable for the consequences of selling such a product.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
CCP loyalist should be sent to Gitmo after arrest for alleged pathogen smuggling, says China expert
Gatestone Institute senior fellow Gordon Chang is warning of a lurking agroterrorism threat as Chinese nationals stand accused of smuggling a dangerous crop-killing fungus into the U.S. "This has been going on for at least a half decade, because in 2020, Americans in all 50 states received from China unsolicited seeds, and that's an attempt to plant these invasive species," Chang said Thursday. "This has to stop." Chang argued that no bail should be offered to 33-year-old Communist Party loyalist and University of Michigan post-doctoral research fellow Yunqing Jian, one of the suspects who allegedly smuggled the pathogen. The FBI alleges that Jian and her 34-year-old boyfriend, Zunyong Liu, plotted the pathogen's transport in what many suspect was an effort to cripple the American food supply. "She should be sent to Guantanamo," Chang insisted. "But the point here is that we shouldn't be talking to a regime that is actively taking our country down. This is not just the fungus, this is fentanyl, this is COVID, this is all the rest of it." According to an arrest affidavit, Jian first brought Fusarium graminearum, described as a "potential agroterrorism weapon" in scientific literature, to the U.S. in August 2022. A transcribed WeChat conversation between Jian and Liu shows Liu instructing Jian on how to smuggle the fungus, according to the affidavit. According to the Department of Justice, fusarium graminearum creates "head blight," a disease of wheat, barley, maize and rice, and "is responsible for billions of dollars in economic losses worldwide each year." The pathogen is also toxic to humans. Chang accused U.S. universities of "making a lot of money from China" through students, contributions and other methods, as he explained the rationale for a suspected enemy being on American soil. "That's why we have these very disturbing ties between American institutions of higher learning and China, and we need to break that, because obviously the dangers are there, as we see with this fungus case." The University of Michigan released a statement regarding the incident on Wednesday. "As one of the world's leading public research institutions, the University of Michigan is dedicated to advancing knowledge, solving challenging problems and improving nearly every facet of the human experience. Our research enterprise across all three campuses is united in this commitment to serving the people of Michigan and the world," the school said. "We strongly condemn any actions that seek to cause harm, threaten national security or undermine the university's critical public mission. It is important to note that the university has received no funding from the Chinese government in relation to research conducted by the accused individuals. We have and will continue to cooperate with federal law enforcement in its ongoing investigation and prosecution."
