Officer Involved: Sonya Massey
she threw the pot
Civil Rights attorney Ben Crump called this case the, “worst police shooting” that he has ever seen.
This case is controversial and even reasonable people cannot agree on the basic facts.
The Call
On July 6, 2024 deputies with the Sangamon County, Illinois Sheriff’s Office were dispatched to a residence in reference to a possible prowler. The caller (Sonya Massey (36)) reported that there was possibly someone lurking near her home.
Deputy Sean Grayson and his partner arrived on scene and checked the perimeter of the residence and did not find any suspicious persons. The deputies then made contact with Ms. Massey to inform her of their findings.
Typically calls like this end here and the officers would go on to the next call. However, that did not happen in this case and deputies wound up inside of her residence. This is where things go downhill - fast.
In the home
There were two things that occurred during the initial discussion with Ms. Massey that led deputies down this path:
Mental health concerns.
A vehicle on the property that had some damage.
During the initial discussion (on the porch) it was clear to the deputies that something was not “right” with Ms. Massey. Deputy Grayson asked if she was, “Doing alright mentally?”
Another exchange went like this,
“I’m trying to get help, y’all.” (Ms. Massey)
“What do you need help with?” (Deputy Grayson)
“Please god. Please god. I don’t know what to do.” (Ms. Massey).
She also informed deputies that there was a car parked in her driveway that had been “dropped off” and that it had some damage.
Deputies entered the home and were in the process of taking a report about the damaged vehicle.
“I rebuke you…”
While deputies were collecting information for the police report the backup deputy noticed that there was a pot of boiling water on the stove and that it was close to overflowing.
The deputy mentioned this to Ms. Massey and she immediately started walking towards the stove. The deputy joked, “We don’t need a fire while we are here.”
As Ms. Massey walked to the stove she did not just simply turn off the burner but held the pot of boiling water and walked towards Deputy Grayson/towards the sink. There was a counter in between Deputy Grayson and Ms. Massey. Deputy Grayson then took a step back and Ms. Massey asked what he was doing. He responded, “walking away from your hot steaming water.”
Ms. Massey then stated, “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus.” She said that twice.
The Use of Force
Deputy Grayson then gave the following force warning, “You better fucking not! I swear to god I’ll shoot you right in your fucking face!”.
Deputy Grayson then unholstered his firearm and pointed it at Ms. Massey.
I know what you are thinking - that escalated quickly
Deputy Grayson yelled, “Drop the fucking pot!” twice.
Ms. Massey grabbed oven mitts and quickly crouched down. She then popped back up briefly and grabbed the pot and slunk back into a crouching position.
Deputy Grayson then moved around the counter (I believe so that he could see what she was doing).
Ms. Massey then raised the pot and started a throwing motion towards Deputy Grayson.
Deputy Grayson then fired three rounds - fatally striking Ms. Massey.
Around the same time that the shots were fired the body cam depicts water coming at the feet of the deputy.
Just after the OIS Deputy Grayson stated, “I am not taking boiling water to the head” and “She came at me with boiling water.”
Body Cam
The backup deputy had his body camera on the entire time.
Deputy Grayson did not have his body camera activated - until after the OIS. Therefore, 30 seconds of video only is captured on his camera (the OIS is included here). The audio kicks in at the moment that he pressed the “on” button. This is a common feature of Axon body cams. Each video file recorded contains 30 seconds of (extra) video - from before the officer turned the camera on.
(Body cam video - both deputies)
The Boiling Water
There is a lot of disagreement on whether or not Ms. Massey threw the pot of boiling water at the deputy.
Some say that she did. Others maintain that not only did she not throw the pot - but that the pot was on the counter and never in her hand at the time of the OIS.
This is a relevant fact for the force investigation, the criminal investigation, for the possible defense of Deputy Grayson, and for public commentary on OIS.
Part of the problem is that there is a viral zoomed-in video circulating (from Deputy Grayson’s body cam) that cuts off when Ms. Massey first crouches down - before she grabbed the pot. This video has been viewed millions of times and was even played on the CBS National news. The video makes it seem as though the OIS occurs right at this moment - with the pot visible on the counter. In reality - the OIS occurs a couple seconds later.
However, it is clear that Ms. Massey did grab the pot and start to throw it at Deputy Grayson - just prior to the OIS.
This should not be controversial. This is an objective fact of this case.
The Stove
There has been a lot of criticism of the deputies for allowing Ms. Massey to approach the stove to turn off the burner and that criticism is unfounded - here’s why.
Ms. Massey was not a suspect of a crime. The deputies were helping her with a police report and a few minutes before this she stated to them, “I love ya’ll”.
There was no reason that Ms. Massey should not have been trusted to turn off a stove burner in her own home.
If she was the suspect of a crime - then, of course, the kitchen is the last place that police officers should allow someone to walk freely (due to the availability of weapons).
The Rebuke!
“I rebuke you in the name of Jesus!” is a f*cking weird thing to say. And, I do not necessarily think that I would have perceived it as a threat - but, Deputy Grayson clearly did.
We can only assume that his reaction was due to both her comment and her walking towards him (and the sink) with the pot of boiling water. But, he has not made an official statement - this is a guess.
De-Escalation
There is no law that requires police officers to de-escalate situations. But, it is typically included in training and installed within department policy. Also, it is good practice.
Even if police officers lack official Crisis Intervention Training - the basic concepts of slowing things down, negotiating, giving clear/calm commands, using time and distance to reduce the liklihood of a serious use of force - should be a requirement in the lowest level of police certification.
There was zero de-escalation by Deputy Grayson and I will consider that as part of my analysis.
Legal Standard
The basic legal standard is that police officers can utilize deadly force if they (or someone else) is in imminent danger of death or great bodily injury (GBI).
The Threat
So, the question is - could a pot a boiling water cause death or GBI?
Yes.
Of course.
Did Ms. Massey threaten the deputy with it?
Yes.
But any threat could have been decreased substantially by the deputy creating distance and using the barrier - instead of closing the distance and moving to the side of the barrier.
Analysis
Policy
I do not know the use of force policy for the Sangamon County Illinois Sheriff’s Department, but if Deputy Grayson were employed by most police agencies - there would be enough violations of policy to terminate the deputy after this OIS.
Civil
The standard found in Graham v. Connor states that use of force by police officers must be “objectively reasonable” with the information that the officer knew at the time. No 20/20 hindsight is allowed.
Given a totality of the circumstances - I do not believe that this OIS was objectively reasonable. But, in all honestly, it is close.
For example, if Sonya Massey had thrown the pot of boiling water at Deputy Grayson from a standing position - this OIS would be objectively reasonable. Or, if she threw it immediately - giving the deputy no opportunity to create distance/de-escalate.
But, she was a small woman who threw the pot of water from a crouching position and she was behind a barrier (the counter). How far could she have really throw it? Deputy Grayson put himself in more danger by moving around the counter. If he was in such fear of this "threat” - then why did he move closer to it? That is not a reasonable action. And we are inching towards “officer induced jeopardy” here.
Legal
Deputy Grayson has been charged with 1st degree murder. That is a gross overreach.
If anything, Deputy Grayson should be charged with the Illinois version of “negligent homicide”.
A Kim Potter-type charge.
Any criminal charges that are filed against Deputy Grayson should acknowledge that Sonya Massey put Deputy Grayson in an awful position by threatening and then throwing the pot of boiling water at him.
Deputy Grayson did not react reasonably to the threat, but - there was a threat.
Other Options
20/20 hindsight should not be part of a legal analysis, but it should absolutely be included in any after-action force review.
If police leaders and trainers want police officers to react differently in certain situations - we need to find out why the officer reacted the way he/she did and figure out how to change that behavior in the future.
This is my opinion on how police officers should react in a similar future situation.
The person is not a suspect of a crime.
The person is home alone.
The person has some mental health issues.
The person makes a veiled or obvious threat to police officers with a pot of water, baseball bat, knife, etc… (anything but a firearm).
There is some some distance between the officer and the person, also a barrier (counter), and the officer has a clear path to an exit (front door).
The best option is for police officers is to create distance and exit the residence. Call for backup, request a supervisor, de-escalate the situation by utilizing time and distance.
There is no logical reason for an officer to “stand their ground” in a scenario like this.
Final Thoughts
Cases like this highlight the importance of having honest discussions about controversial police incidents.
It is possible that both Sonya Massey and Deputy Grayson contributed to this tragic outcome.
Placing all of the blame on one individual and completely absolving the other is not helpful or honest.
But, police officers must realize that their actions will be scrutinized more than regular citizens. And police leaders should ensure that the men and women that they send out on the street and into dangerous and unpredictable situations - are trained and prepared for whatever is thrown at them.
Well articulated piece sir. I disagree slightly that he should be charged at all though. He likely violated enough policy to be fired, but I don't think anything he did would be a crime.
He warned her not to try to harm him with the boiling water (can easily cause GBH) and when she tried to, he shot her in the face like he warned her he would if she threw it.
He might be an asshole, he might have used better tactics, he also probably should have rendered aid, but all those don't mean in that moment it was a bad shoot. She presented a deadly threat, and he dealt with a deadly threat.
I like the piece. I think you're a little conclusory in the analysis (for instance, you say if he'd been employed by most agencies he'd have been terminated for multiple policy violations. I agree. I just think it could have been expanded on, especially for people with no police background).
I agree that if a person isn't a suspect, they typically aren't restricted from moving about. even still, as a practice I tended to redirect folks subtly or in this instance if I was assist I'd probably have said "I'll get that for you dear, you keep working with Deputy Grayson." it's not a command. and I wouldn't fight her to keep her out, but subtle and typically you can persuade people or redirect them away from things. I've used the same tactic to shuffle witnesses away from violent scenes without them melting down or fighting bc they have to see.
personally, I think this is 80% on the agency at least. it seems a bad hire, was followed by insufficient training, and if he was off FTI, I would bet my last dollar people had voiced concerns to supervisors.