Man who died after being tased by Pittsburgh police pleaded for medical help but got none, report says

Jim Rogers reportedly asked for help at least 13 times as he sat in the back of a Pittsburgh police vehicle after being stunned with a taser eight times on Oct. 13.

For 17 minutes, Rogers banged his head off the seat and repeated, “‘I need a hospital, I can’t breathe, get a medic, help me,’” according to an executive summary of an internal police investigation report obtained by the Tribune-Review.

Yet, during the 17-minute span, two Pittsburgh emergency medical technicians at the scene never tended to Rogers, despite his pleas for help and officers on the scene acknowledging he needed assistance, the report said. Instead, the EMTs decontaminated police officers who had gotten Rogers’ blood on them.

Rogers, a 54-year-old Black man, who was homeless at the time of the incident, died the next day at a Pittsburgh hospital. Results of an autopsy have not been released.

“The (Pittsburgh police Critical Incident Review Board) has determined that this critical incident resulted from a series of compounding performance failures by (Pittsburgh police) personnel,” the report said.

It has been more than two months since the Bloomfield incident, and neither the city nor the Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office has announced any findings from their reviews — either the internal police review or the criminal investigation.

Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. said last week he was still waiting for the medical examiner’s office to release the cause and manner of death before making any decisions on whether charges should be filed against any of the officers involved.

Mayor Bill Peduto said last week that he planned to have any discipline of officers involved meted out before he leaves office in early January.

“It is an absolute tragedy that Jim Rogers lost his life while in Pittsburgh Police custody - a failure of a system that should have protected his life. This critical incident included multiple failures,” Peduto said in a written statement Tuesday evening. “Today’s announcement around pending disciplinary action and policy changes is a starting point. We must continue to make reforms in policing and within society to do what we can to make sure this never happens again and that Mr. Rogers’ family receives the justice they deserve.”

In a news release issued Tuesday afternoon, city police officials said that eight officers, including two supervisors, violated department policies and will face varying levels of discipline in accordance with the FOP collective bargaining agreement. A third supervisor retired last week.

“Jim Rogers will serve as a sober reminder of the tremendous responsibility all officers bear when they wear the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police badge,” said Police Chief Scott Schubert. “Every resident and visitor to the City of Pittsburgh is owed the highest standard of care when they are in the custody of Pittsburgh Police. In the case of Jim Rogers, we failed our fellow citizen. The disciplinary measures and procedural changes we are announcing today are intended to ensure a tragedy such as this never occurs again in the City of Pittsburgh.”

According to the department, immediately following the Rogers’ incident, all Pittsburgh police officers were required to complete a Taser refresher course followed by an exam — as well as annual, mandatory taser recertification.

In addition, the department will require its officers to become fully certified Emergency Medical Responders.

The 15-page executive summary of the report focused on violations related to use of force, a failure of supervision and a lack of recognition or action for Rogers’ medical distress.

The executive summary, part of a 367-page final report dated Dec. 16, was distributed to Pittsburgh police and city administrators last week.

It does not specifically identify what types of discipline should be meted out to the officers involved but does recommend policy and training changes.

A group that includes Rogers’ family and supporters called Justice for Jim Rogers tweeted its reaction to the report:

“To the City of Pittsburgh and their police bureau. We don’t want your ‘procedural changes.’ We don’t want your vague ‘disciplinary measures,’ the specifics of which you will not even disclose. We don’t want an ‘apology’ from police Chief Schubert.

“We demand justice for Jim Rogers.”

The tweet was later deleted.

TO THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH AND THEIR POLICE BUREAU: We don’t want your “procedural changes.” We don’t want your vague “disciplinary measures,” the specifics of which you will not even disclose. We don’t want an “apology” from police Chief Schubert. WE DEMAND JUSTICE FOR JIM ROGERS https://t.co/subWOYDBGe

— Justice for Jim Rogers (@Justice4JimJim) December 22, 2021

Lead officer’s actions questioned

Pittsburgh police were called to Harriet Street in Bloomfield on the morning of Oct. 13 after a person reported that a bike had been taken from their neighbor’s front yard.

According to the report, Officer Keith Edmonds, who is also Black, was dispatched to the scene with a description of the possible suspect.

Edmonds saw a man matching that description walking on the sidewalk and, after approaching him, Rogers was immediately compliant and placed his hands in the air, the report said. Edmonds then asked a series of questions but failed to listen to Rogers’ answers and did not allow him to respond, the report said, at one point telling Rogers to “be quiet” immediately after asking a question.

Edmonds then did a pat-down of Rogers, even though the board found it was not warranted, the report said.

“At this point in the encounter, Rogers does not appear aggressive but compliant and does not appear to pose any threat to Officer Edmonds,” the report said.

As Edmonds conducted the pat-down, the report said, he radioed that no additional backup was needed.

The report said Edmonds then took Rogers’ wallet from his front left pocket, and a struggle ensued “causing Edmonds to view Rogers’ behavior as an act of aggression. Up to this point, Officer Edmonds has given a series of rapid, conflicting commands to Rogers concerning producing his identification.”

At that point, the report said, Edmonds tried to get control of Rogers with an arm bar and ordered him to put his hands behind his back.

“Rogers could be heard saying, ‘I’m listening, sir,’” the report said.

The report said Edmonds does not appear to try to handcuff Rogers. Instead, he removed his taser and told Rogers he would be tased. Edmonds used the taser to deliver two, one-second drive stuns directly into Rogers’ back 18 seconds apart, the report said.

Edmonds then decided to allow Rogers to get up, and Rogers tried to run away when he got to his feet, the report said. It was then that Edmonds deployed his taser probes, again hitting Rogers in the back, according to the report. Within 46 seconds, he deployed the probes and re-energized them three additional times, the report said.

Edmonds then deployed the second set of probes and re-energized the taser three additional times, all within 56 seconds, the report said.

All of the electrical shocks — at least 10 total, and eight that Rogers was affected by — were deployed within three minutes and 15 seconds.

It was then that Officers Gregory Boss and Patrick Desaro arrived on scene and handcuffed Rogers, the report said.

According to the use of force section of the report, Edmonds’ decision to drive-stun Rogers was “questionable.”

The board said Edmonds’ “poor tactics and decision-making skills escalated rather than de-escalated this incident. Officer Edmonds created the jeopardy in which he found himself.”

The report said Edmonds could not articulate during his interview with the board in what situation a taser should be deployed. While the training academy teaches officers it should be deployed in defense of themselves and others, as well as during flight or resistance from a serious offense, Edmonds said that it is to be used for “non-compliance.”

The board found no evidence that Rogers posed a threat to Edmonds or anyone else. The board, the report said, questioned Edmonds’ initial use of the taser, as well as its prolonged use.

In addition, the board found that the frisk Edmonds conducted was done in a “haphazard, tactically unsound way.”

The report found that Edmonds violated a number of Pittsburgh police policies, including use of force, warrantless search and seizure, standards of conduct and handling of prisoner.

Michael Machen, an attorney who represents Edmonds, said he had no comment on the report.

Lack of supervision

The report is heavily critical of the three supervisors who responded to the incident, comparing them to bystanders.

“The second catastrophic failure in this incident was poor and ineffective supervision,” the report said.

According to the summary, Lt. Matthew Gauntner, Sgt. Colby Neidig and Sgt. Carol Ehlinger arrived after Rogers had been handcuffed.

Gauntner, who retired earlier this month, and Neidig arrived at the scene later because they had gone to a uniform store in Lawrenceville that morning, the report said.

“The pairing of these supervisors was not done out of a vehicle of necessity, nor was it done to monitor performance. Instead, it was done because Lt. Gauntner and Sgt. Neidig were friends, and it was Lt. Gauntner’s last day in the zone prior to transfer,” the report said.

The report found that after Gauntner arrived, he checked on Edmonds, but failed to process the information he was provided or ask follow-up questions. Although he asked Edmonds a series of questions about the taser deployment, Gauntner failed to understand how it was used on Rogers, the report said.

When Gauntner learned there was blood on Edmonds, he called medics to come to the scene to decontaminate the officers, but failed to learn where the blood came from or how badly Rogers was bleeding, the board said.

During his interview with the board, the report said Gauntner admitted that he did not give any direction to either Sgts. Neidig or Ehlinger.

“Lt. Gauntner does not assume the role of incident commander. Lt. Gauntner fails to delegate on-scene roles and fails to effectively use the personnel at the scene,” the report said.

He told interviewers that the officers on scene that day were experienced and needed little direction, the report said.

“Lt. Gauntner becomes overly focused on obtaining the medics to wash the blood from the officers’ arms and never shares any information with … medic dispatch or the EMTs that arrive that a taser had been deployed on Rogers.”

During his interview with the board, Gauntner said he was unaware Rogers was in any medical distress.

But the report said Gauntner had received information on scene that Rogers needed to go to the hospital, that he’d been tased multiple times, that he had a bloody nose and that he was screaming from inside the police car.

He also failed to assign someone to monitor Rogers, to check on why he was yelling or have him evaluated by EMTs already on the scene.

“Once in our custody, Rogers was owed a duty of care to ensure that he was not suffering some medical emergency,” the report said.

The board found that Gauntner violated policies for standards of conduct, handling of prisoners, use of force and radio communications.

The report also found fault with Neidig and Ehlinger, who it said “acted more like bystanders than supervisors.”

Both of them told the board in their interviews that they were given no direction by Gauntner, and they did not give any direction to the officers on the scene, the board wrote.

Neidig engaged with Rogers for 90 seconds while Rogers sat in the police car. Twice, Neidig told Rogers to “take a breath” and added “that we have medics coming to check you out,” the report said.

That never happened, and Neidig never sought out medical treatment for Rogers.

Ehlinger arrived on scene after about 15 minutes and did little, the report said. During her interview, she said that “when the lieutenant is working, I defer to the lieutenant. I don’t try to make decisions.”

“Sgt. Ehlinger said she could not hear Rogers scream and moan from the car due to ‘too much rock and roll.’ Sgt. Ehlinger stated that her ‘hearing isn’t what it should be, and I’m too vain to get hearing aids.’”

The board suggested she undergo a fitness for duty examination.

Attorney Patrick Thomassey, who represents Ehlinger, said when she arrived at the scene that day, there were a lot of officers there, and a lot of confusion.

He accompanied her to her interview with the board.

“I thought it went fairly well. She wasn’t in charge, so I’m not sure what she should have done.”

Charles Porter, who represents Neidig, said he couldn’t comment without seeing the report.

Tina Miller, who represents Gauntner, did not return a message seeking comment.

Poor medical response

The report identifies five additional officers at the scene that day who were aware, or should have been aware, that Rogers needed medical treatment.

According to the board, Officer Neyib Velazquez had the most prolonged contact with Rogers, and was in close contact with him for about 17 minutes.

During that time, the report said, Velazquez heard Rogers say on at least 13 separate occasions, according to body camera footage, “’I need a hospital, I can’t breathe, get a medic, help me.’”

Velazquez told the board during his interview that he believed Rogers was in medical distress and needed to be treated. He told Rogers multiple times that medics were on the way, but never sought them out.

“Velazquez did not tell anyone or approach the medics himself to get Rogers’ medical attention,” the report said. “Officer Velazquez stated that he rolled the window down, and he believed that other officers on the scene could hear Rogers ask for help and yell, “‘I can’t breathe.’”

Stephen Colafella, who represents Velazquez, did not comment when reached.

The two officers who transported Rogers to the hospital were Boss and Desaro. According to the report, they left for UPMC Mercy at 10:56 a.m. Rogers was in the back seat, which could be seen through a rear-facing camera. The report said the footage showed:

• At 10:57, Rogers asked for help and Desaro told him they were taking him to the hospital.
• At 11 a.m., Rogers slumped over for two minutes. Boss checked on him, asking if he was OK, and Rogers said “yes.”
• At 11:04, Rogers can be seen in the camera footage lifting himself up, rocking back and forth and then slumping against the driver’s side door. He remained that way until they reached the hospital at 11:13.
• Boss said then that it appeared that Rogers was sleeping, but two minutes later, he was found to be unresponsive. CPR was started at 11:15.

“Officer Desaro and Officer Boss both told the (review board) that they did not believe that Rogers was in any medical distress and therefore felt no urgency in expediting the transport to the hospital.”

However, the board said the in-car footage showed Rogers had extended labored breathing, difficulty stringing words together and a dazed look on his face.

Lee Rothman, who represents Desaro, said his client was the driver when Rogers was transported and had to concentrate on the roads.

“He’s in control of the automobile,” Rothman said. “His ability to view camera footage is not the same as the passenger.”

During the drive, Rothman said, there were traffic lights and construction, and his client was speeding to get to the hospital. He said the report does not reflect that “as the driver, you are limited in your ability to observe.”

Robert Del Greco, who represents Boss, did not immediately comment.

The report identified two other officers who interacted with Rogers in the car, Officer Jeffrey Dean and Paul Froehlich. The report said Dean was found to have violated the standard of conduct policy, handling of prisoners and use of force; while Froehlich was found to have violated those, as well as the body-worn camera policy.

Policy changes

In a news release issued Tuesday afternoon, the department said that following the completion of the Critical Incident Review Board report, additional recommendations were made for policy changes, including:

• Any use-of-force incident will require the presence of a supervisor to complete a medical assessment and request appropriate personnel.
• Any incident involving the deployment of a taser will require emergency medical services personnel to assess the patient.
• Pittsburgh police personnel will be retrained in accordance with what they are taught in the training academy with regard to duty to intervene.
• Pittsburgh police will streamline its organizational review of use-of-force by both appropriate command staff and the training academy to expeditiously ensure policy compliance.