DeKalb Judge: Officer Who Shot Naked Man Not Entitled to Immunity
Robert Olsen faces charges including felony murder in the March 2015 death of 27-year-old Anthony Hill, whose family has said he was a U.S. Air Force veteran who struggled with mental health problems.
August 20, 2018 at 01:57 PM
4 minute read
A judge has ruled that a white former Atlanta-area police officer who fatally shot an unarmed, naked, mentally ill black veteran isn't entitled to immunity based on self-defense.
Lawyers for Robert Olsen had argued he had the right to act in self-defense and that the charges against him should be dropped. Olsen faces charges including felony murder in the March 2015 death of 27-year-old Anthony Hill, whose family has said he was a U.S. Air Force veteran who struggled with mental health problems.
Olsen was a DeKalb County police officer and was responding to a call about a naked man behaving erratically outside a suburban apartment complex when he fatally shot Hill.
DeKalb County Superior Court Judge J.P. Boulee held a pretrial hearing in May that included testimony from Olsen, witnesses to the shooting, use-of-force experts and other police officers.
Boulee wrote in an order Tuesday that Olsen didn't show he had reason to believe deadly force was needed to prevent death or serious injury to himself or someone else. The judge cited concerns about Olsen's credibility and conflicting testimony.
Defense attorney Don Samuel did not immediately respond to an email Thursday seeking comment on the judge's order.
Olsen and others testified during the hearing in May that, when Olsen arrived at the apartment complex, Hill was crouching naked in the roadway and jumped up and ran toward the officer's patrol car. Olsen said he drew his gun as he got out of his car and yelled at Hill to stop before shooting him.
Prosecutors called Officer Lyn Anderson, the second officer to arrive on the scene. He testified that Olsen told him when he arrived that Hill ran at him and “started pounding on him.” Olsen testified that he didn't recall that conversation.
Olsen “claims that he does not remember this conversation despite seemingly remembering all other details of the shooting,” Boulee wrote.
Boulee wrote that Olsen testified he didn't know Hill was unarmed, but the judge noted that a maintenance supervisor who witnessed the shooting testified that Hill was unarmed and none of the dispatches Olsen received before arriving on the scene indicate that Hill was armed.
A successful self-defense claim would require Olsen to show that it was reasonable for him to believe that Hill was about to kill or gravely injure him or another person. But there was no evidence that Olsen believed Hill was going to kill him and no witness testified that they believed Hill could have killed Olsen, Boulee wrote.
“Any belief by Defendant that Hill was about to kill him and that deadly force was necessary to prevent the killing was not reasonable,” the judge wrote.
Boulee also noted that “although Hill was muscular and athletically built,” Olsen still had about 5 inches and 40 pounds on him and was “trained as a police officer in soft hands and hard hands techniques.”
“Importantly, Hill did not have any weapons and did not make any verbal threats towards Defendant,” Boulee wrote.
In a separate order, the judge also rejected arguments by the defense that the felony murder charges against him should be dismissed because the felony murder statute is “unconstitutionally vague.”
In addition to felony murder charges, Olsen also faces charges of aggravated assault, making a false statement and violation of oath by a public officer. No trial date has been set.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGeorgia Appeals Court Cancels Hearing in Election Interference Case Against Trump
3 minute readJustice Department Says Fulton County Jail Conditions Violate Detainee Rights
6 minute readSupreme Court Rejects Push to Move Georgia Case Against Ex-Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows
3 minute read3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250