JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — The State Attorney’s Office is defending its decision to clear the officers involved in the controversial arrest of William McNeil Jr. of criminal charges.
The newly released 10-page memo shines a light on the rationale behind State Attorney’s Office decision not to pursue charges against Officer Donald Bowers, whose blows to the face of William McNeil Jr. during a now-infamous February traffic stop captured national attention and criticism.
>>> STREAM ACTION NEWS JAX LIVE <<<
Criminal defense attorney Chris Carson, who is not affiliated with case, argued one of the biggest revelations in the new memo is that McNeil had been observed leaving a home being actively monitored for narcotics activities leading up to the stop.
Up until now, the only justification given for the stop was a seatbelt and headlight infraction.
“And frankly it may explain on some level the reason why it kind of went like it did because it certainly casts it in a different light as opposed to this is just a complete random individual driving down the road who they just happened to stop for no headlights. It definitely gives some context,” Carson said.
The memo blames McNeil for escalating the situation, claiming he refused 12 lawful commands from law enforcement.
RELATED: William McNeil Jr.’s SUV spotted at home under surveillance for drugs before traffic stop, SAO says
“The criminal justice system provides many avenues for citizens to challenge the actions of police officers; however, physical resistance is not one of them,” State Attorney Melissa Nelson said in an emailed statement. “It is vital for everyone’s safety to comply with commands at the roadside and save the legal battle for the courtroom.”
When addressing the first hit to McNeil’s face while he was still seated in the driver’s seat, the State Attorney’s Office agreed with Bowers’ characterization of the strike as a “distraction technique” not intended to cause physical harm.
The State Attorney’s Office noted Bowers was trained to use the distraction strike and he used it in a manner consistent with his training.
RELATED:Jacksonville Sheriff releases officer body-cam video from viral traffic stop video
On the punch to McNeil’s jaw, the State Attorney’s Office justified the use of force writing, “McNeil used physical force to actively resist his arrest contrary to Florida law. Officer Bowers met McNeil’s resistance with a fist strike.”
Carson noted it’s not uncommon for the State Attorney’s Office to defer to the discretion of the officer, especially in a case dealing with a non-compliant suspect.
“Was everything done ideally here? I don’t know that it was. You know, personally if I were an officer in that spot, may have done things a little bit differently, but I’ll be honest it’s kind of easy to play Monday morning quarterback in these situations,” Carson said. ”That’s quite a bit different from a circumstance where an officer doesn’t know who this individual is, doesn’t know what they’re capable of and at the end of the day I mean, they’re humans. They have to make judgement calls based on whatever information they have available to them at the time. It’s the nature of the interaction.”
RELATED: First hit to man’s face by JSO officer omitted in all police reports related to controversial arrest
While the new memo addresses quite a bit of the controversy surrounding the force used on McNeil, there are some key things it seems to skip over.
In his reports, Bowers claimed he punched McNeil because he was reaching for a knife, which was later found on his car floor.
The State Attorney’s Office memo does mention McNeil’s hands were moving before he was struck. Later, after he was removed from the car, officers discovered the knife on the floor board. One officer asked Bowers, “You saw that knife, right” and Bowers answered, “That’s what he kept reaching for.”
However, video released by JSO and McNeil does not show McNeil reaching down toward the knife.
RELATED: Man in viral Jacksonville traffic stop video hires high-profile attorneys
Carson suggested the initial justification given for the punch was questionable to begin with.
But he suggested the State Attorney’s Office likely ignored the discrepancy because it determined McNeil was resisting as officers as they were trying to get him on the ground based on the video evidence.
“The forms in which resistance can take can be very minor. Literally just kind of like stepping back, stepping away, arguably not following commands, those themselves can qualify as a form of resisting,” said Carson.
RELATED: William McNeil Jr. legal team: State Attorney never interviewed him during investigation of officers
The memo does address the fact the first blow wasn’t mentioned in any of Bower’s reports.
The State Attorney’s Office deemed Bowers’ claim he considered the blow to be a tool rather than a use of force credible.
But Carson found that explanation questionable.
RELATED: Family of Jacksonville man arrested in viral traffic stop rally against JSO
He suggested at the very least, the hit should have been mentioned on the use of force report.
“I think it probably is on some level hard to argue that is not force. I mean, it kind of is apparent that it is,” Carson said.
Perhaps the biggest question left unaddressed is why the State Attorney’s Office did not interview McNeil during its review.
[DOWNLOAD: Free Action News Jax app for alerts as news breaks]
The memo simply states “The SAO did not interview McNeil” and references public appearances and comments he and his attorneys made following the release of McNeil’s cell phone video.
Carson said it seems the State Attorney’s Office felt between the video of the incident and the interviews with the officers, there was no need to talk to McNeil.
“If the analysis was very clear cut legally speaking, it just may have never gotten to the point where it was necessary because there aren’t really any gaps that need to be filled in. I mean, that is realistically something that could happen,” Carson said.
[SIGN UP: Action News Jax Daily Headlines Newsletter]
McNeil’s lawyers responded to the memo claiming it represents an effort to justify the officers’ actions after the fact.
“It only further illustrates why use of force cases involving the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office need to be conducted by an independent agency that is not beholden to either the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office or the State’s Attorney,” McNeil’s attorneys said in a joint statement.
McNeil’s legal team also said they plan to call on the Department of Justice to investigate the incident.
Click here to download the free Action News Jax news and weather apps, click here to download the Action News Jax Now app for your smart TV and click here to stream Action News Jax live.
