Jersey City Police Shooting – Public Statement

Jersey City Police Shooting – Public Statement


JERSEY CITY POLICE SHOOTING – PUBLIC STATEMENT

On June 20, 2016, a Jersey City Police Department Officer was involved in a non-fatal police shooting at 264 Lembeck Avenue in Jersey City, New Jersey. In Accordance with New Jersey Attorney General Law Enforcement Directive 2006-05 and the July 28, 2015 Attorney General Supplemental Law Enforcement Directive Regarding Uniform Statewide Procedures and Best Practices for Conducting Police Use of Force Investigations (collectively “Attorney General’s Directive” or the “Directive”) this matter was fully investigated and reviewed by the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office (“HCPO”). The investigation was conducted after completion of a comprehensive conflict inquiry which ensured that there were no actual or potential conflicts of interest by the HCPO Office personnel. The investigation consisted of a review of witness statements, radio transmissions, and the collection of physical evidence recovered at the scene.

All relevant and credible evidence gathered during the investigation was examined. Based on the undisputed facts reached during the investigation, the HCPO has determined that there were no material facts in dispute and the Officer’s use of force was justified under the law, therefore, the HCPO presentation to a Grand Jury was not warranted. The following is a summary of events supported by the evidence gathered during the investigation.

On June 20, 2016, at approximately 11:03 pm, Jersey City Police Officers were dispatched to a second floor apartment at 264 Lembeck Avenue on a call of a male attempting to kill his mother. Officers were further advised that the male was possibly carrying a knife. The Officer dispatch was based on a 9-1-1 call by Ms. Kristen Ulfsparre stating that her son, Christopher Matthew (hereinafter “Matthew”), was intoxicated and possibly armed with a knife. During the call, Matthew told the operator that he was going to kill his mother.   Jersey City Police Officers then responded to the scene.  All of the Officers were in full uniform.  Upon the Officers’ arrival, Ms. Kristen Ulfsparre exited the house and stated that her son, Matthew was upstairs in his bedroom in possession of a knife.  Ms. Ulfsparre further stated that Matthew wanted to hurt himself.

The Officers entered the residence and cleared the bottom floor. Subsequently, the Jersey City Police Officer involved in the shooting (hereinafter, “Police Officer 1”) and another Police Officer (hereinafter “Police Officer 2”) slowly proceeded up the stairs. Within seconds, Matthew emerged at the top of the stairs with his hands behind his back.  Upon being ordered by Police Officer 1 to show his hands, Matthew displayed a sharp twelve inch tactical knife in his right hand.  Police Officer 1 ordered Matthew to drop the knife.  Matthew did not comply and began to walk to down the stairs. Police Officers 1 and 2 retreated to the bottom of the stairs and all of the Officers drew their firearms.

Matthew stopped approximately four steps from the bottom. At that point, Police Officers 1 and 2 were positioned in a small landing in front of the stairs with a door located directly behind them.  Matthew was approximately six to eight feet away from Police Officers 1 and 2, who were on the small landing.  Two Officers were also positioned inside of a living room located to the left of Officer 1, and one Officer was positioned in the kitchen, to the right of Officer 2.  Two additional Officers were positioned  directly outside of the door.

All Officers continued to order Matthew to drop the knife. Matthew repeatedly ignored the Officers’ commands and while waiving around the knife, and made statements such as, “what are you going to do, shoot me?” and “bring it.”  Officer 2 then proceeded to strike Matthew multiple times in the wrist area with his expandable baton in an unsuccessful attempt to disarm the Matthew.  Matthew then raised the knife over his head and took a step forward, closing the distance between the Officers to approximately three to four feet.  At that time, Police Officer 1 discharged his firearm three times.  Two of the shots struck  Matthew.  One of the shots struck Matthew’s left forearm and leg.  Matthew dropped to the ground and was handcuffed.  At that time, in addition to the knife brandished by Matthew, a folding knife was discovered in his waistband.  Matthew was subsequently moved to the outside of the house and Officers rendered aid.  Emergency Medical Services were immediately contacted and responded shortly thereafter.  Matthew and several officers, including Police Officer 1, were subsequently transported to the Jersey City Medical Center.

Following the discharge, additional Jersey City Police Units responded and secured the scene. The Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office (“HCPO”) Shooting Response Team was also notified and responded to the scene.  Ms. Ulfsparre was transported to HCPO Headquarters to be interviewed.  Additionally, HCPO Crime Scene Detectives began canvassing the scene for physical evidence.  During the canvass, two .45 caliber shell casings were discovered outside the apartment door and one .45 caliber shell casing discovered on the kitchen floor. All shell casings were located in the immediate vicinity of Police Officer 1’s location at the time of the discharge. Additionally, Police Officer 1’s service firearm, three magazines, and thirty-seven live .45 caliber rounds were turned over to HCPO.  In addition to ballistics evidence, a large tactical knife and a small folding knife were recovered in front of the stairs, as well as multiple samurai swords discovered in Matthew’s bedroom.  Photographs of all the physical evidence and of the scene were taken.

HCPO investigators also recovered and reviewed all of the police radio transmissions and 9-1-1 calls related to this case, which corroborated the physical evidence. A ballistics examination determined that the spent shell casings were fired by Police Officer 1’s weapon.

On August 8, 2016, Christopher Matthew pleaded guilty to a downgraded charge of simple assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(a)(3), charging him with attempting to put another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury by physical menace.  During his plea allocution, Matthew admitted to lunging at police officers while holding a knife over his head.

After a thorough review of all the evidence, the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office has concluded that the Police Officer 1’s use of force was justified under the Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy and the applicable law. The undisputed facts show that Police Officer 1 gave multiple verbal commands telling Matthew to drop the knife. The Police Officer was in full uniform, clearly displaying his legal authority. Matthew did not drop the knife but instead walked towards Police Officer 1. Matthew then came down the stairs, raised the knife above his head and closed the distance between the Officers to three to four feet. Even after being struck with a baton, Matthew did not drop the knife.  Accordingly, the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office determined that the Police Officer’s fear of death or serious bodily injury was reasonable.  Pursuant to the Attorney General’s Use of Force Policy and N.J.S. 2C:3-4, an officer is permitted to use deadly force when the officer reasonably believes such action is immediately necessary to protect the officer from imminent death or serious bodily harm.  Based on the above circumstances, the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office concluded that Police Officer 1 reasonably believed such force was immediately necessary to protect himself and others from an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death.

The results of this investigation and the legal conclusions reached were reviewed by the Attorney General’s Office. The Attorney General’s Office agreed with the HCPO’s conclusion that the use of deadly force was legally justified and that there were no material facts in dispute that require presentation of this matter to the Grand Jury.