
According to the Portland Police Bureau (PPB), Quanice Hayes died because he had a gun.
âThere was no doubt in my mind he had a gun,â PPB Officer Andrew Hearst told a Multnomah County grand jury in March of 2017. A month earlier, Hearst had fired three bullets at Hayes, leaving the 17-year-old African American dead. âI believed that he was going to pull that gun on us. And to defend myself and my coworkers, I knew I needed to fire my weapon.''
Now, nearly two years after Hayesâ death, a group of independent investigators say this reason alone wasnât enough to justify a police officerâs use of lethal force.
According to an investigative report released Friday morning by the Office of Independent Review (OIR) Group, the four PPB officers who intercepted Hayesâafter he committed a series of small-scale robberies while using a fake gunâshould have better coordinated the orders they were yelling at Hayes, better protected themselves from anticipated gunfire, and slowed down their entire response to better calculate their actions.
OIRâs analysts found that PPB did not calculate these crucial factorsâwhich could have greatly changed the outcome of the early morning encounterâinto their follow-up review of the incident.
âInstead,â the report concludes, â[PPB] reached the fatalistic conclusion that Mr. Hayesâ actions drove the outcome.â
The report is clear: PPBâs process of reviewing fatal officer shootings does not adequately take into account potential officer errors in scenarios where it is assumed a civilian has a weapon
On February 9, 2017, Hayes was stopped by police in an alcove between a Northeast Portland house and a detached garage after a number of people called police reporting theft by a man with a gun who matched Hayesâ description.
Hoping to take Hayes into custody, officers directed him to exit the alcoveâbut, as OIRâs consultants note, there was little order to the process. According to the officersâ grand jury testimony, Hayes was told to âkeep his hands upâ and âcrawl forward,â but cops later recalled Hayes telling them that he couldnât do both at the same time. Multiple officers appeared to be yelling contradictory orders at Hayes.
âThe statements from different witness officers painted a⊠confusing picture, with varying accounts of who was giving commands and when,â the OIR report reads.
Thatâs when Hayes reached down the front of his jeansâwhich officers say had been saggingâand Hearst shot Hayes three times with a semiautomatic rifle.
Only after Hearst shot Hayes did officers see a fake gun next to his body.
"[PPB] reached the fatalistic conclusion that Mr. Hayesâ actions drove the outcome.â
The consultants note that the confusion leading up to Hayesâ death underscores a âvery significant issue.â
âIf officers on scene have differing views of what the subject is supposed to be doing in order to demonstrate compliance, officers may develop different impressions of the subjectâs level of cooperation and have correspondingly different reactions,â reads the OIR report. âAnd if the subject is confused about officersâ expectations, that creates another obvious set of problems.â
The PPB officers could have better coordinated their commands by simply âslowing the situation down,â note the consultants. This could have meant placing a cop car between the officers and Hayes, or instructing officers to retrieve and deploy bulletproof shields from the carâtwo tactics that would have âremoved them from a vulnerable situation where they felt constrained to use deadly force.â
The report acknowledges that, at the time, officers had been chasing Hayes for several hours, and were probably eager to get him into custody. That may have rushed the officersâ decision-making processes.
âUpon discovering Mr. Hayes crouched in the alcove, officers almost immediately began giving him commands to crawl out,â the consultants write. âAn alternative would have been to hold Mr. Hayes at gunpoint in the alcove while conferring with each other about a plan for taking him into custody.â
"It is imperative, consistent with the Bureauâs de-escalation policy, to conduct a more exacting review.â
The PPB review process that followed the 2017 shooting âdid not sufficiently address these critical issues,â the OIR Group concludes. âIt is imperative, consistent with the Bureauâs de-escalation policy, to conduct a more exacting review.â
The OIR report isnât limited to Hayesâ deathâit includes analysis on nine incidents over the past five years in which a Portland police officer shot a member of the public, and it offers no fewer than 40 recommendations for PPB to consider based on how the bureau handled and responded to each shooting. But the 132-page report pays particular attention to Hayesâ case, due to the considerable, long-lasting impact that the police shooting of a Black teen left on the Portland community.
The report acknowledges Portlandâs history of racial inequality and displacement among its African American population.
âThat long history of injustice understandably frames the public analysis of cases like the Hayes shooting,â the report reads. âThis deep-seated distrust undermines confidence in⊠findings that excuse officers while providing neither consolation nor satisfaction to frustrated observers.â
The consultants leave PPB with a piece of advice: Donât brush off valid criticisms of police shootings that leave African American Portlanders dead.
âPerhaps the best response police agencies can provide is to endeavor to build a reservoir of goodwill through honest dialogue, receptivity to feedback, [and] transparency,â the report reads.
"This deep-seated distrust undermines confidence in⊠findings that excuse officers while providing neither consolation nor satisfaction to frustrated observers."
The OIRâs recommendation couldnât come at a more critical time.
Next week, Portland City Council will reconsider the 2017 firing of PPB officer who made a deeply racist remark after hearing public outcry related to Hayesâ death.
According to his termination letter, which was first made public Wednesday, Sergeant Gregg Lewis was fired after making a âjokeâ during a Central Precinct roll call that ended with the remark, âIf you come across a Black person, just shoot them.â
Several of the 16 other officers present at roll call laughed nervously, the letter states. No one attempted to correct him. Lewis made this statement three days after Hayesâ was fatally shot by PPB Officer Andrew Hearst.
Now, with the the PPBâs union, the Portland Police Association (PPA), using the stateâs arbitration system to legally challenge Lewisâ termination, the city is considering a settlement agreement that would erase Lewisâ termination, allowing him to retire with $100,000 worth of backpay. While Mayor Ted Wheeler acknowledges itâs an imperfect solution, he says the cost of losing an arbitration hearing against PPAâwhich could result in Lewis returning to PPBâis too high.
"If it was up to me, Iâd say let's go to arbitration, letâs fight the good fight. Because even if we lose it, we send a very strong message that this is not acceptable.â
âIf this goes to arbitration, weâre still going to pay the same amount⊠or maybe even more,â Wheeler said during a Wednesday city council hearing. âBut what we lose in the arbitration process is that we make certain once and for all that this person will never work at PPB again.â
Commissioner Jo An Hardesty, however, isnât satisfied.
At the Wednesday meeting, Hardesty said the two options presented by the city attorney âshow that we are working within a broken system.â
âIf it was up to me, Iâd say let's go to arbitration, letâs fight the good fight,â said Hardesty, âbecause even if we lose it, we send a very strong message that this is not acceptable.â
Itâs a message echoed in the pages of the OIR report.
In analyzing the response to Hayesâ death, consultants note that rebuilding trust between Portlandâs Black community and the police will require âdemonstrable willingness to evolve and improve.â
âSuch efforts cannot preclude the possibility of future controversial incidents,â it continues. âThey can, however, enhance confidence in the legitimacy and appropriateness of the Bureauâs responsesâboth systemically and in terms of individual accountability.â