GRAND RAPIDS — The events surrounding the death of Patrick Lyoya, a 26-year-old Congolese immigrant, are not in dispute. Lyoya was fatally shot in the back of the head by a Michigan police officer while pinned to the ground, which resulted in the officer being charged with second-degree murder. The central issue being tried this week is whether the officer’s use of deadly force was justified.
During the fourth day of trial, high-ranking officers from Grand Rapids defended Christopher Schurr’s actions, emphasizing his need to use his firearm after Lyoya managed to gain control over his Taser. Schurr faces the possibility of life imprisonment if found guilty.
“We don’t have to wait for someone to harm us to act,” explained Capt. Chad McKersie, a Taser specialist with the Grand Rapids department. In April 2022, Schurr stopped Lyoya for a traffic issue in Grand Rapids, approximately 150 miles west of Detroit. Video evidence shows the struggle between Schurr and Lyoya over the Taser, with Schurr repeatedly telling Lyoya to stop resisting and release the weapon.
As Lyoya lay face down with Schurr on top, the officer drew his firearm and shot Lyoya in the back of the head. McKersie informed the jury that Lyoya had full control of Schurr’s Taser, a device designed to immobilize an aggressor with electrically charged probes. McKersie noted the possibility that Lyoya could have used the Taser in a painful “drive stun” mode even after its cartridges were depleted.
Prosecutor Chris Becker questioned McKersie, asking for a policy that corroborates the use of deadly force when an officer’s Taser is taken. McKersie stated it’s about evaluating the total circumstances, pointing out Schurr’s fatigue and Lyoya’s continued resistance during their more-than-two-minute confrontation.
Jason Gady, another officer, and firearms instructor, defended Schurr’s actions, asserting the shooting was within reason and that training advises against firing warning shots or aiming for limbs during a deadly threat scenario. Following the incident, Schurr, aged 34, was dismissed by city officials on Chief Eric Winstrom’s recommendation after the prosecutor’s and police’s investigation of the case.
Police spokesperson Jennifer Kalczuk refrained from commenting on testimonies supporting Schurr, citing the ongoing trial. The proceedings are set to continue on Friday. Earlier, a representative from Axon, the Taser’s manufacturer, testified that Schurr’s device had been fired twice but apparently failed to hit Lyoya. Defense lawyers argued Schurr faced significant risk if Lyoya employed the Taser in “drive stun” mode.
Lyoya’s death spurred demands for police reform and has drawn protesters from both sides to the Kent County courthouse. Retired educators Mary and Frank Hillyard expressed their support for Lyoya with signs calling for justice.
“I know many in law enforcement and appreciate their efforts, but actions like these are unacceptable,” Frank Hillyard commented.
The prosecution concluded their case on Wednesday, having presented eyewitnesses and use-of-force experts. Seth Stoughton, a law professor and ex-police officer, testified that deadly force is justified only under a palpable threat of death or significant harm to an officer, which he believed was not present in this case.
Stoughton remarked that Schurr had an opportunity to warn Lyoya about the potential for being shot, which might have eased the situation. Nicholas Bloomfield, another expert, labeled the shooting as “unreasonable, excessive, and not aligned with accepted police norms.”
Bloomfield observed the video depicted Lyoya evading Schurr rather than attempting aggression, and that Schurr should have recognized the Taser was ineffective in incapacitating him, as both electric cartridges had been discharged. “While Lyoya did wrest control of the officer’s Taser,” Bloomfield testified, “there was no evident aggression from Lyoya.”