###

Press release from the District Attorney’s Office:

DA Stacey Eads has completed her review of the investigation regarding the November 26, 2023, Eureka Police Department (EPD) Officer-involved shooting of 31-year-old Matthew Robert Williams. A Humboldt County Critical Incident Response Team, with members from the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office, Eureka Police Department, Arcata Police Department, Fortuna Police Department, Cal Poly Humboldt Police Department, Humboldt County Sheriff’s Department, and California Highway Patrol conducted the investigation. Additionally, the Humboldt County Coroner’s Office contributed to the investigation.

The following summarizes the facts derived from the investigation, as well as applicable law and legal conclusions of the District Attorney regarding this incident.

Factual Summary

On November 26, 2023, at approximately 09:35 in the morning, Eureka Police Officer Ryan Swanson was patrolling Old Town Eureka in a marked police vehicle when he observed a red, two door Honda Civic travelling eastbound on 2nd Street with expired registration. Officer Swanson activated the overhead lights on his patrol vehicle and made a traffic stop on the Honda. The driver pulled the Honda over to the right side of the road near the intersection of 2nd and M Streets. Just as the Honda came to a stop, with Officer Swanson’s patrol vehicle behind, a man, later identified as 31-year-old Matthew Robert Williams, jumps out from the passenger side door of the Honda and flees on foot in the direction of a trail alongside the Carson Mansion, which leads to the rear of the main Humboldt County Library. As soon as the Honda’s driver mentioned she was being pulled over, Williams said to the vehicle occupants “I gotta run” and when the Honda pulled over, according to an occupant Williams “ran like hell.”

Initially, Officer Swanson was the only officer at the location with the Honda. However, Eureka Police Officer Jeremy Sollom, having just completed his response to an unrelated police matter in the area, drove his marked patrol vehicle westbound on 2nd Street. Officer Sollom sees Officer Swanson making a traffic stop on the Honda and pulls his patrol vehicle behind Officer Swanson’s car. Just as Officer Sollom steps out of his car he hears Officer Swanson yell out that someone is running. Officer Swanson is heard on his body worn camera footage at timestamp 09:35:57 exclaim “Go, go! He’s fleeing!” Officer Sollom sees Williams dressed in a gray hooded sweatshirt running on a trail that leads to the back of the library. Officer Sollom gets back into his patrol car and drives over to access the area behind the library where he knows the trail used by Williams leads.

As Officer Sollom drives down 2nd Street, leading to where the trail travels behind the library, he sees Williams running directly towards him. At this point Officer Sollom has a brief opportunity to look at Williams’ face, however he does not recognize him. Williams quickly changes direction and runs towards the children’s playground located next to the library. Officer Sollom, dressed in officer attire adorned with Eureka Police Department patches, exits his patrol car and yells verbal commands at Williams to stop running, including “Police canine, get on the ground, get on the ground, my dog will bite you.” Williams continues to flee from Officer Sollom.

Officer Sollom pursues Williams to a metal fence, which Williams attempts to climb. However, before Williams gets over the fence, Officer Sollom grabs and pulls Williams off the fence and places him face down on the ground. As Officer Sollom works to gain control of Williams’ left arm, Williams physically resists continuously moving his right arm and hand to push himself to a standing position. Additionally, Williams moves his right arm and hand around his torso area, which is outside of Officer Sollom’s line of vision. In his continued effort to gain Williams’ compliance, Officer Sollom strikes Williams in the chest multiple times with his knee. During the struggle, Officer Sollom announced being in a “physical” interaction over the police radio.

As he had not yet overcome Williams’ resistance, Officer Sollom modifies his control technique by allowing Williams to stand to his feet so he can push Williams against the adjacent metal fence and overcome his physical resistance. Officer Sollom’s body worn camera, which took time to power on and activate from when Officer Sollom turned it on, begins to audio and video record at this point in the encounter, with footage timestamped at 09:37:12. Officer Sollom directs Williams to “get on the ground” and to “stop reaching.” Officer Sollom sees Eureka Police Department Officer Nicholas Jones running to his location.

Officer Jones runs up and sees a firearm in Williams’ right hand. Officer Jones yells out “Gun!” multiple times. Officer Sollom sees the pistol in Williams’ right hand. Officer Sollom’s body worn camera footage captures an image of a handgun in Williams’ right hand at timestamp 09:37:16. Officer Sollom appears very close to Williams as he continues to attempt to gain control of his movements. Next, Officer Sollom sees, and hears, Williams grab and cycle his firearm’s slide causing a live round to be ejected from the chamber of Wiliams’s firearm. Body worn footage depicts a handgun held in both of Williams’ hands at timestamp 09:37:18. The live round falls onto the ground, and another live round cycles into the chamber of Williams’ firearm. Williams then turns his body and reaches with the gun back towards Officer Sollom.

Simultaneously, Officer Jones, who has his duty pistol drawn, steps closer towards Williams. In a single frame, body worn camera footage timestamped at 09:37:19 depicts Williams with both hands on a firearm and Officer Jones with his duty pistol pointed at Williams.

Officer Sollom, who believes Williams is going to shoot him, turns back to his right and away from Williams. At timestamp 09:37:20, Officer Sollom’s body worn camera footage depicts him pivot and then draw his firearm from his holster.

Officer Jones fires a single gunshot at Williams, which is heard on the body worn camera footage at timestamp 09:37:20. Immediately after the shot is fired, Officer Jones falls backwards. As Officer Jones falls to the ground, he hears shots being fired, shots which he believes are being fired by Williams. Officer Jones fears for Officer Sollom’s life.

When Officer Sollom hears Officer Jones shoot at Williams, he believes Williams just tried to shoot him. At 09:37:21 Officer Sollom’s firearm is visibly placed in his right hand, and he points his handgun at Williams. Officer Sollom begins to discharge his firearm. Simultaneously, Officer Sollom begins to fall backwards.

Officer Sollom believed the initial rounds he shot did not strike Williams, and as he fell to the ground, he was unable to see Williams’ hands and handgun. Additionally, Officer Sollom felt a sharp pain moving up his right side after he hit the ground. In that moment, the source of his own pain, the cause of his and Officer Jones’ fall were unknown to Officer Sollom. He feared he and Officer Jones had been shot. Officer Sollom believed in that moment he must stop Williams from killing Officer Jones or himself. Officer Sollom fired a succession of shots for approximately 5 seconds with the last gunshot heard at body worn camera footage timestamp 09:37:26. Body worn camera footage timestamped at 09:37:26 depicts Officer Sollom push himself up off the ground following the last shot fired. Officer Jones, as seen on body worn camera footage at 09:37:27, proceeds to stand up as well.

Williams is observed lying in a supine position on the ground with his handgun on the ground to his right. Officer Sollom is depicted on body worn camera footage at timestamp 09:37:35, reaching down and grabbing Williams’ pistol and moving it away from Williams. Officers Sollom and Jones place Williams in handcuffs and begin to render medical aid to Williams.

At body worn camera footage timestamp 09:37:42, Officer Jones is heard advising his body worn camera was malfunctioning. (During the subsequent investigation, multiple attempts were made to retrieve data/video from Officer Jones’ body worn camera, however, they were unsuccessful. The device repeatedly displayed an error message. The body worn camera was forwarded to the device’s manufacturer, however, per the manufacturer the camera was prevented from capturing video during the relevant timeframe as it “experienced an internal processing error.”)

Eureka Police Officer Joseph Couch arrives on scene seconds following the shooting and promptly begins to assist the officers administering medical aid to Williams. Officer Sollom uses trauma shears to remove Williams’ sweatshirt, which reveals a tan, empty firearm holster worn on Williams’ chest between his sweatshirt and t-shirt. In order to perform CPR, the holster was removed. At 9:39:58, officers began administering CPR with Officer Couch giving Williams chest compressions and Officer Sollom giving breaths to Williams. At 9:43:00 Humboldt Bay Fire Department personnel took over life resuscitation efforts and utilized a defibrillator. Officer Couch also administered chest compressions again for just over 30 seconds. Soon thereafter, fire personnel pronounced Williams deceased at the scene.

While emergency personnel rendered assistance to Williams, Officer Couch located and photographed Williams’ firearm on the ground. Due to the close proximity of the firearm to emergency personnel and potential danger, Officer Couch moved Williams’ pistol and rendered it safe. When he removed the magazine from Williams’ firearm, he observed it contained live rounds. Additionally, when he locked the slide to the rear of the handgun a single live round fell out of the chamber of the pistol. Officer Couch placed the firearm, magazine and live round on a nearby rock.

The firearm Williams was armed with was a PMG P80 pistol. The pistol had a 17-round magazine and a TLR-8G Streamlight attached. There was no serial number on the pistol. Thirteen (13) rounds of live ammunition were removed from the P80 pistol and associated magazine, with one (1) round from the chamber and twelve (12) rounds in the magazine. Nine (9) of the rounds were Blazer 9mm Luger and four (4) of the rounds were Winchester 9mm Luger ammunition.

In addition to the live rounds found within the chamber and magazine of the pistol, a single live round of Blazer 9mm Luger ammunition was recovered from the scene beneath the metal fence. Additionally, Williams’ Samsung Galaxy smartphone, a torch-style lighter, and a plastic baggy containing 43.08 grams (GFW) of fentanyl, were located on the ground near the metal fencing where the physical struggle between Williams and Officer Sollom occurred. Inside the right front pocket of Williams’ pants, one key and key fab, a small plastic baggy containing a white crystalline substance, as well as $6,300 in cash were located.

At the time of the incident, Officer Sollom had seven (7) years of experience as a peace officer. He carried a Glock Model 45, 9mm handgun for which he was qualified and authorized to carry on duty by the Eureka Police Department. The magazine to his handgun was a standard issue Glock magazine with a Taran Tactical 2 round magazine extension, which allowed up to nineteen (19) live rounds to be held in the magazine. Following the shooting incident, Officer Sollom’s Glock held a single live round in the chamber and five (5) rounds in the magazine. Officer Sollom had two additional magazines with Taran Tactical 2 round magazine extensions in his duty vest magazine pouches, each containing eighteen (18) live rounds. The brand of the 9 mm caliber ammunition was Federal, Hollow Point, with a silver casing.

At the time of the incident, Officer Jones had approximately twenty-two (22) years of law enforcement experience. Prior to joining EPD, Officer Jones served as a correctional deputy with the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office, as well as a deputy probation officer with the Humboldt County Probation Department. In addition to his experience carrying a firearm throughout most of his law enforcement career, Officer Jones was a firearms instructor. The duty weapon he carried at the time of the incident was a Glock Model 47, 9mm, issued to him by the Eureka Police Department. Following the shooting incident, a single live round was in the chamber of Officer Jones’ Glock Model 47. The attached magazine had a capacity of seventeen (17) rounds, and after the shooting there were sixteen (16) live 9 mm rounds in the magazine. As with Officer Sollom, the brand of the 9 mm caliber ammunition was Federal, Hollow Point, with a silver casing.

Twelve (12) F.C. 9mm Luger casings, consistent with ammunition used by the involved officers, were recovered from the scene.

On December 2, 2023, an autopsy performed by Forensic Pathologist James N. Olson, MD, revealed Williams was struck by eleven (11) bullets. The cause of Williams’ death was determined to be multiple gunshot wounds to his head, thorax, abdomen and upper extremities. The manner of death was determined to be homicide.

A toxicology analysis of a sample of Williams’ blood was conducted by Central Valley Toxicology. The drug screen detected the presence of Fentanyl, at 90 ng/mL, and Methamphetamine, at 1.0 mg/L, in Williams’ blood.

The Law

Under California law, an officer is justified in using deadly force when they reasonably believe, based on the totality of the circumstances, that such force is necessary to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person. Moreover, officers need not retreat or desist from their efforts due to resistance or threatened resistance.

Pursuant to Penal Code section 196, homicide committed by peace officers is justified when the peace officer’s use of force complies with Penal Code section 835a. Thus, the most pertinent law in this situation is Penal Code section 835a, which states the following:

(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(1) That the authority to use physical force, conferred on peace officers by this section, is a serious responsibility that shall be exercised judiciously and with respect for human rights and dignity and for the sanctity of every human life. The Legislature further finds and declares that every person has a right to be free from excessive use of force by officers acting under color of law.

(2) As set forth below, it is the intent of the Legislature that peace officers use deadly force only, when necessary in defense of human life. In determining whether deadly force is necessary, officers shall evaluate each situation in light of the particular circumstances of each case and shall use other available resources and techniques if reasonably safe and feasible to an objectively reasonable officer.

(3) That the decision by a peace officer to use force shall be evaluated carefully and thoroughly, in a manner that reflects the gravity of that authority and the serious consequences of the use of force by peace officers, in order to ensure that officers use force consistent with law and agency policies.

(4) That the decision by a peace officer to use force shall be evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable officer in the same situation, based on the totality of the circumstances known to or perceived by the officer at the time, rather than with the benefit of hindsight, and that the totality of the circumstances shall account for occasions when officers may be forced to make quick judgments about using force.

(5) That individuals with physical, mental health, developmental, or intellectual disabilities are significantly more likely to experience greater levels of physical force during police interactions, as their disability may affect their ability to understand or comply with commands from peace officers. It is estimated that individuals with disabilities are involved in between one-third and one-half of all fatal encounters with law enforcement.

(b) Any peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use objectively reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance.

(c)

(1) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a peace officer is justified in using deadly force upon another person only when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of the circumstances, that such force is necessary for either of the following reasons:

(A) To defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to another person.

(B) To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended. Where feasible, a peace officer shall, prior to the use of force, make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as a peace officer and to warn that deadly force may be used, unless the officer has objectively reasonable grounds to believe the person is aware of those facts.

(2) A peace officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger that person poses to themselves, if an objectively reasonable officer would believe the person does not pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or to another person.

(d) A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not retreat or desist from their efforts by reason of the resistance or threatened resistance of the person being arrested. A peace officer shall not be deemed an aggressor or lose the right to self-defense by the use of objectively reasonable force in compliance with subdivisions (b) and (c) to effect the arrest or to prevent escape or to overcome resistance. For the purposes of this subdivision, “retreat” does not mean tactical repositioning or other de-escalation tactics.

(e) For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) “Deadly force” means any use of force that creates a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury, including, but not limited to, the discharge of a firearm.

(2) A threat of death or serious bodily injury is “imminent” when, based on the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable officer in the same situation would believe that a person has the present ability, opportunity, and apparent intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or another person. An imminent harm is not merely a fear of future harm, no matter how great the fear and no matter how great the likelihood of the harm, but is one that, from appearances, must be instantly confronted and addressed.

(3) “Totality of the circumstances” means all facts known to the peace officer at the time, including the conduct of the officer and the subject leading up to the use of deadly force.

Legal Analysis

On November 26, 2023, when Officers Jones and Sollom discharged their firearms at Williams they justifiably used deadly force. The use of deadly force was legally justified because the officers were confronted by a situation where they reasonably believed the use of deadly force was necessary to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury, a threat posed by Williams, armed with a loaded firearm, to the officers.

From the first moment of Williams’ encounter with law enforcement, Williams fled, thereby demonstrating his refusal to comply with lawful orders of peace officers. When the Honda was pulled over, Williams, said “I gotta run”, and as the civilian witness described, he “ran like hell.” Then, when Officer Sollom attempted to apprehend him, Williams physically struggled and resisted, repeatedly failing to comply with any orders. Moreover, Williams continuously reached with his hand despite repeated orders to stop reaching. Officer Sollom had probable cause to arrest Williams for a violation of Penal Code section 148(a), resisting, delaying or obstructing a peace officer. Likewise, based upon the escalating use of physical force and violence by Williams in his resistance and deterrence of Officer Sollom, a peace officer lawfully engaged in the performance of his duties, probable cause to arrest for Penal Code section 69, a felony, was present.

Officer Sollom modified his physical control techniques to overcome Williams’ resistance by allowing Williams to stand. Close in time, however, rather than comply, Williams reached up into his sweatshirt with his right hand and drew his concealed firearm from his chest holster. He then loaded a live round into the chamber and directed the gun towards Officer Sollom. Clearly, Williams presented an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officers.

The dire situation unfolded very rapidly. Under the totality of the circumstances, Officers Sollom and Jones reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was necessary to defend themselves against Williams who demonstrated the present ability, opportunity, and apparent intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officers. Therefore, the officers were legally justified in using deadly force to defend themselves against the imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury Williams posed to the officers.

Conclusion

The District Attorney has concluded the shooting was legally justified, in that the officers’ actions complied with California Penal Code Section 835a. The District Attorney has notified Mr. Williams’ family of her decision.