Man fatally shot by police in Coon Rapids identified as 65-year-old
Authorities have identified the man fatally shot by police in Coon Rapids this week as Robert Davis, 65.
The Midwest Medical Examiner's Office confirmed that Davis, of Coon Rapids, died from a single gunshot wound that was fired by a Coon Rapids police officer responding to a domestic incident in the city on Wednesday.
The officer who shot him has been identified as Timothy Morin, who has seven years of law enforcement experience. Three others officers at the scene were Steve Minion and Michael Blair, who fired "less lethal launchers," and Emily Giese, who fired a Taser.
According to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, Davis was armed with a folding-utility knife and moving towards Officer Morin when he opened fire.
Officers had received a 911 domestic call on the 300 block of 111th Avenue Northwest just after noon, with the caller a woman – Davis's long-term partner – who said that Davis had cut her with a knife and was still inside the home.
When the officers arrived, the BCA says the "tried to make verbal contact with Davis from the entryway of the home." The woman victim and another man escaped the home while the officers negotiated with Davis for up to an hour.
"He was still armed with the knife while officers continued communicating with him to drop the weapon and told him that he was under arrest," the BCA says.
Minion fired the less-lethal rounds at Davis, who moved further into the home. Officers continued to tell him to drop the knife, with Blair then firing a less-lethal round.
Per the BCA: "Davis moved toward Officer Morin, who fired his department-issued handgun, striking Davis. Officer Giese deployed her Taser at which point Davis was taken into custody.
"Officers provided life-saving care, but Davis later died at the hospital."
The injured woman suffered a knife wound to the hand and was treated and released.
The officers were wearing body cameras during the incident, which remains under investigation. The findings of the BCA will be then sent to the Anoka County Attorney's Office for review.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Ex-Yale student released from immigration jail; U.S. judges limit ICE arrest authority in CT courts
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents released Afghan refugee Saifullah Khan on bond Friday evening, nearly a month after they immobilized him with Taser fire and detained him as he and his wife left an immigration hearing in Hartford's federal building. In a related development, Connecticut's U.S. District Court judges issued an order less than a month after Khan's arrest limiting the authority of federal immigration agents to make arrests and detain people in buildings that house the state's three federal courts. Khan, who was born in a Pakistani refugee camp after his family was forced by the Taliban to flee Afghanistan, came to the United States to study at Yale University. He has applied for asylum and the application had been pending for nine years when he was detained on May 9. Witnesses said plain clothes ICE agents confronted Khan without identifying themselves as he left an immigration hearing. When he tried to return to the courtroom to seek assistance from the judge, he was hit seven times with Tasers and required medical attention. Immigration Judge Theodore Doolittle tried to intervene in the arrest, but was not allowed to do so by immigration agents, the witnesses said. The arrest took place on the sixth floor of a secure Ribicoff Federal Building on Main Street. Khan was held at immigration detention centers in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania since his arrest — including the three days since Tuesday when an immigration judge in Massachusetts issued an order releasing him on a $7,500 bond. During a brief conversation after his release in Pennsylvania Friday night, as he was driven to a meeting with family members, Khan said he has not been given an explanation as to what led to his arrest, why he was not immediately allowed to post a court-ordered bond and why he ultimately was released. Immigration authorities did not respond to questions about the case. 'While I was hospitalized, they told me: 'We were in hot pursuit. We were going to get you. You shouldn't have run,'' Khan said. 'I was at court,' he said. 'I am law abiding. I was presenting myself to the judge. Even if it is a final order for removal, I am very grateful for the time I have been in the United States. I have been here for 14 years. I am very lucky to have spent so much time here and been given the opportunity to assimilate. And I would like to have that opportunity and privilege in the future as well. I would love to be an American citizen. I would love to be able to call myself an American.' Khan's arrest followed his decision to sue in an effort to compel a decision on his asylum application after years of what his lawyers characterized as government inaction. The suit names senior Trump administration figures, including Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. Within weeks of naming Noem and the others, Khan received a notice that ICE had begun proceedings to deport him and he was ordered to appear at the hearing, after which he was detained. He has no criminal record, but was accused by a Yale classmate of sexually assaulting her after a date in 2015. He was acquitted of all charges after a trial in criminal court. When Yale expelled him in spite of the acquittal, he sued the school for defamation and related rights violations. The suit is pending. The order Thursday by the federal judges concerning arrests in federal court buildings prevents immigration agents from making arrests and detaining people in areas of the buildings occupied by the federal courts and restricts authority to do so to the U.S. Marshal Service. In Hartford's Ribicoff Federal Building, which is larger than federal court buildings in New Haven and Bridgeport and houses federal agencies other than the courts on upper floors, Department of Homeland Security agents can continue to make arrests on non-judicial floors, according to the order. The order appears to be limited to judicial areas of the Ribicoff building because of questions about whether the security authority of the federal judiciary extends to areas of federal buildings that house operations of executive branch agencies, such as Homeland Security and its subsidiary agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Immigration courts are not part of the federal judiciary, but are operated by executive branch appointees for the purpose of adjudicating immigration questions. Increasingly aggressive efforts by federal immigration authorities to arrest non citizens — including decisions to target courts for enforcement efforts — has led to concerns about safety and other issues among some court administrators. The federal judiciary said its order limiting arrest authority in Connecticut's U.S. District Court is based on a commitment to ensure 'the orderly conduct of court proceedings and the safety of litigants, witnesses, attorneys, the public, and court personnel.' Similar questions are being analyzed by officials working in the state judiciary, which has a far greater case volume than the federal courts. Among other things, there have been discussions in both court systems about whether immigration agents should be allowed to enter courtrooms while proceedings are underway in order to detain suspected non-citizens. Among other things, prosecutors warn that such detentions could lead eventually to dismissal of charges against criminal defendants who have been the subject of protracted criminal investigation and prosecution. The federal court order makes certain exceptions, including for circumstances in which suspects turn themselves in for arrest and agents transport people arrested elsewhere to court.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Charges to be dismissed in St. Paul sexual assault case
A sexual assault case against a 50-year-old accused of raping a man in St. Paul he met on a dating app is being dismissed due to a lack of evidence, according to the Ramsey County Attorney's Office. The charges against John Henry McCaster allege he sexually assaulted a man at a home in the Payne-Phalen neighborhood on New Year's Eve 2023 after the two met on the Grindr app. He told police McCaster had insisted that he drink a 'blue drink' and after doing so 'began to feel drunk,' then passed out and awoke naked, the charges say. Police had already arrested McCaster about two hours before the man called police on Dec. 31, 2023. He was picked up in Vadnais Heights on suspicion of drug possession (methamphetamine) and possessing a gun (he was prohibited after having been convicted of a crime of violence) and later charged with both offenses. McCaster was found with the man's driver's license and debit card and other items at that time. McCaster later told investigators they had consensual sex. Police carried out a search warrant at the East Side home and found blue liquid in a pitcher, which was sent to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension for testing. On Wednesday, McCaster pleaded guilty to the gun charge. As part of a plea agreement, the sexual assault case will be dismissed at his sentencing 'given a lack of evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, including the remaining liquid that the (man) drank testing negative for any controlled substances,' Dennis Gerhardstein, Ramsey County Attorney's Office spokesman, said in a Friday statement. The man who reported the assault agreed with the settlement, Gerhardstein said. McCaster's attorney did not respond to a request for comment Friday. McCaster faces a mandatory five-year prison sentence on the gun charge. Sentencing is scheduled for Sept. 15. Maplewood shooting: St. Paul man fired on car while kids cowered nearby, charges say Sean 'Diddy' Combs' lawyers say ex-assistant's social media posts undercut her rape allegation Bloodhounds hunting 'Devil in the Ozarks' fugitive are seen as key part of manhunt Wedding photographer sentenced for surreptitiously recording bride changing clothes Derrick Thompson's trial begins in deaths of 5 women
USA Today
2 days ago
- USA Today
New UFC antitrust lawsuit alleges all fighters harmed by 'UFC's scheme' to control MMA
New UFC antitrust lawsuit alleges all fighters harmed by 'UFC's scheme' to control MMA Phil Davis, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, said he's "proud to stand up for professional MMA fighters to unlock the UFC's stranglehold on the entire sport." The UFC is facing a new antitrust class-action lawsuit that argues the promotion's monosopsony powers financially harm all professional MMA fighters – not just those under contract with the UFC – and calls for an end to "the UFC's scheme." Berger Montague, the lawfirm that secured a $375 million settlement against the UFC in February, filed the lawsuit Thursday in the U.S. District Court of Nevada, with former UFC and current PFL fighter Phil Davis named as the plaintiff. Zuffa LLC, TKO Group Holdings, which owns the UFC, and Endeavor Group Holdings are listed as the defendants. Unlike the Le v. Zuffa lawsuit that was settled in February, the Davis lawsuit seeks to be certified with all-non UFC fighters represented and does not seek monetary damages. In a written statement, Berger Montague said it seeks an injunction to prevent the UFC "from continuing its allegedly illegal scheme" and aims to "create conditions for free and fair competition among professional MMA promotions which, in turn, would bolster their careers and pay of professional MMA fighters across the sport." "I am proud to stand up for professional MMA fighters to unlock the UFC's stranglehold on the entire sport," Davis said in a statement. According to the lawsuit, "the UFC's scheme impairs professional MMA promotions like PFL in their ability to attract a critical mass of top-level MMA fighters necessary to compete with the UFC at the top tier of the sport of professional MMA, and otherwise substanstially forecloses competition in the markets relevant to this case. The UFC's scheme further restrains top-level fighters such as Mr. Davis from applying their trade by preventing these fighters from competing for titles in a free and unfettered market. As a result of the UFC's scheme, rival MMA promotions have been foreclosed and, as a result, would-be top-level MMA fighters at PFL and other non-UFC MMA promotions have had their careers impaired and their pay suppressed below the compensation that would prevail in a more competitive market." The lawsuit seeks to eliminate an array of restrictive clauses from UFC contracts and requests that fighters have the ability to terminate their contracts without penalty after one year. "The suit alleges that the UFC impairs the ability of would-be UFC competitors to attract a critical mass of top-level MMA fighters necessary to compete with the UFC at the top tier of the sport," Eric Cramer, lead attorney for Berger Montague, said in a statement. "We intend to prove that the UFC engaged in a predatory scheme to undermine would-be competitors to the UFC, which the suit claims had the effect of maintaining and enhancing the UFC's dominance, and thereby impairing the careers and pay not just of the UFC's own fighters, but also of professional MMA fighters like Mr. Davis competing for MMA promotions across the MMA industry." The Le v. Zuffa case covered UFC fighters who competed between 2010 to 2017. While that was still unfolding another lawsuit, Johnson v. Zuffa, representing fighters from 2017 to present day was filed and is still ongoing. The Davis lawsuit comes on the heels of another filed by former UFC light heavyweight Misha Cirkunov to represent fighters who have signed the most recent and restrictive UFC contracts.
