Officer Involved: Presley Eze
New Mexico's Patrick Lyoya case
Very few things in law enforcement occur in a vacuum. Almost nothing is a “one off”. Successful policies and tactics utilized in one municipality can be employed to achieve positive outcomes in other agencies. Criminals learn from other criminals. Police leaders also learn from other police leaders. This is why agencies share information and a library of “best practices” is established and updated.
But the issue at the core of this case is one that law enforcement leaders (and their prosecutor counterparts) have refused to address. So a fog of confusion exists around this very predictable and unavoidable issue.
Should a police officer classify a Taser as a deadly threat - if an offender attempts to use it against them?
What Happened
Presley Eze (37) was a traveling nurse from Connecticut who was in Las Cruces, NM for a job. On August 2, 2022 while in this southwestern town Mr. Eze was accused of shoplifting beer from a Chevron gas station. An employee called police and Officer Lunsford of the Las Cruces police department responded.1
Upon arrival on scene, Officer Lunsford made contact with Mr. Eze - who was still at the gas station - sitting in a vehicle. During the initial contact Mr. Eze concealed his identity and gave Officer Lunsford false information.
At that point Officer Lunsford informed Mr. Eze that his information had “not come back” and gave him an order to exit the vehicle. Mr. Eze refused and actively resisted.
Officer Lunsford then utilized the lowest level of force possible and grabbed Mr. Eze’s arm in an effort to escort him from the vehicle. Mr. Eze, however, continued to fight with Officer Lunsford and the two men (as well as a second police officer) ended up on the ground).
Mr. Eze was over and on top of the second officer and Officer Lunsford was attempting to gain control of Mr. Eze from behind him. During the struggle the second officer’s Taser fell out and onto the ground. Mr. Eze grabbed the Taser and held it. Officer Lunsford (who was still behind Mr. Eze) then fired one shot - striking him in the back of his head - killing him.
Charges
Officer Lunsford was charged last week with voluntary manslaughter. The charges were not filed by the local District Attorney but by the Soros-funded Attorney General Raul Torrez.
During a press conference AG Torrez made some odd comments:
Torrez stated that Mr. Eze “made contact with” the Taser.
To clarify - Mr. Eze grabbed the Taser. The term “made contact with” makes it seem as though his hand merely touched the weapon - maybe even unintentionally.
When in reality Mr. Eze grabbed the Taser and held then gripped the handle - as if to fire.
Torrez stated, “During the ongoing struggle Eze placed his hand on the second officer’s taser though it was not cycled or deployed against either officer”
I guess, from the comfortable and safe Office of the Attorney General - that means Mr. Eze wasn’t a threat.
The idea that an officer would be required to wait until a Taser is pointed at them - in order to be able to respond is laughable and dishonest.
The trigger of a Taser can be pulled in 1/4 of a second. Perhaps, Mr. Torrez can react that quickly, but I promise, no human police officer can.
Las Cruces NM police dept
Analysis
Lawful Objective
There was a lawful objective to detain Mr. Eze - as Officer Lunsford had reasonable suspicion that a crime (shoplifting) had been committed.
Since Officer Lunsford did not immediately have Mr. Eze exit the vehicle and place him into handcuffs - it appears that Officer Lunsford was only going to issue Mr. Eze a citation.
Concealing
Instead of providing his information, taking his citation, and learning an important lesson about stealing - Mr. Eze decided to conceal his identity. This additional criminal offense unnecessarily escalated an otherwise low-level, routine police interaction. When a suspect of a crime gives police false personal information - the officer has nearly zero choice but to place the individual in handcuffs.
Often when a suspect conceals their identity it is because they have a warrant or are on probation/parole. A reasonable officer would think that no reasonable person would lie to police about their name in order to avoid an inexpensive, misdemeanor ticket.
Empty Hand: Control
The first application of force utilized by Officer Lunsford was an empty hand tactic. Essentially, he grabbed Mr. Eze’s arm in an effort to escort him out of the vehicle and into handcuffs. This is literally the lowest level of force that Officer Lunsford could have utilized. Had Mr. Eze cooperated, stepped out of the vehicle, and allowed Officer Lunsford to place him in handcuffs - that would have been the end of the utilization of force by police officers.
The use of force by police officers is almost entirely dictated by the actions of others. If a suspect cooperates - police have no lawful reason to utilize force and (especially when body cams are rolling) there is great incentive for police officers to behave within the law and in accordance to department policy.
Active Resistance
Mr. Eze actively resisted arrested and refused to exit the vehicle. Officer Lunsford (and his backup officer) were able to pull Mr. Eze out of the car and the three men toppled to the ground.
Mr. Eze was over and on top of the other officer. Officer Lunsford was behind Mr. Eze - still trying to control his arms in an effort to get him into handcuffs. At any point during this struggle - if Mr. Eze had complied, it would have been over.
Taser Taser Taser
The second officer lost control of his Taser and it ended up on the ground. Mr. Eze then grabbed the Taser and gripped the handle.
It was at this point that Officer Lunsford perceived a deadly threat and utilized deadly force.
Deadly Force
Officer Lunsford fired one shot at the back of Mr. Eze’s head - killing him.
The use of a firearm by law enforcement officers is only lawful in deadly force situations. An officer must reasonably believe that they (or someone else) is in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death. Absent that - police officers should not utilize deadly force.
Therefore, it is not relevant where Officer Lunsford shot Mr. Eze.
What is relevant is why he fired at Mr. Eze.
If the threat posed allowed deadly force to be utilized - it does not matter where the gunshot landed.
The Question remains…
Should a police officer view a Taser, if utilized against them, as a deadly threat?
Yes. They should. The answer is simple. If an offender deploys a Taser at an officer - the 5 second shock is not what will kill or injure. The fact that the officer would be incapacitated for 5, 10, or 20 seconds - while the offender would have free range to take the officer’s gun or smash in their head with a rock - is the danger.
The uneducated opposing view goes something like this:
An officer tried to legally arrest a person and that individual resisted arrest, overpowered the officer, stole a weapon from the officer, and used it against the officer. And that officer is expected to trust that this offender is not going to kill them while they lay completely defenseless under the power of the Taser.
There is zero police training or “best practices” that would require this of an officer. If I am wrong - cite the evidence in the comment section.
The frustrating thing is that police officers are trained by state to classify the use of a Taser against them as a deadly threat. Then when an officer follows that training - that same state prosecutes them.
Final Thoughts
Police officers are good at following directions. Train them how to do something or how to respond to a situation and they will. And that is what I am asking for. How are police officers expected to respond when an offender takes their Taser and there is a reasonable belief that they will use it against them?
This exact scenario occurred in Atlanta with Officer Rolfe, in Michigan with Officer Schurr, and now in New Mexico with Officer Lunsford and we still do not have an answer from police leaders, use of force experts, prosecutors, or courts - on how else a police officer should respond to this threat.
As criminals become more brazen and grifters like Ben Crump encourage young men to run from and fight with cops - more police officers will find themselves staring down the blast doors of fifty thousand volts.
I honestly believe that Officer Lunsford was faced with a deadly threat and that he responded appropriately with deadly force. The charges should be immediately dropped.
Perhaps police unions and law enforcement advocates have to do a better job in explaining why a Taser poses a deadly threat. We should also aggressively force those training and prosecuting police officers to explain what they want cops to do in these inevitable encounters. If they provide no answer - it is because police are already responding in a reasonable and lawful manner. And anyone with even a little police education or experience knows it.
The entire police body camera video has not been released. This article was written with the benefit of only viewing the video provided to the public at this time.
Very well presented argument/article. I am going to use this topic as a training.
This is an excellent article! I agree 100% that a taser should be considered a deadly weapon against any Law Enforcement Officer. The taser can be used to incapacitate the Officer, thus taking his duty weapon to use against him or any citizen. The Officer has a duty to stop that threat!!!