Richmond Police Protest Reforms to Public Communications After Police Shootings

At least a dozen police officers protested a Richmond City Council meeting on Tuesday, calling for the reinstatement of two officers involved in a fatal shooting last month and demanding more staffing and higher wages.

Officers Nicholas Remick and Colton Stocking have been on administrative leave following the Aug. 4 shooting of 27-year-old Angel Montaño, a father and reserve officer with the U.S. Marines. Montaño was armed with a knife and threatening to kill members of his family during a mental health crisis at his family’s home when police shot and killed him.

The meeting came to a head after an officer accused the city of delaying the officers’ return after the department’s psych evaluations cleared them both, and they remained in good standing.

“That is not policy, it’s politics, and every officer at the Richmond Police Department sees that,” Officer George McGloughlin said. “If you can do your jobs, follow the law and still be sidelined for political reasons, then no officer in this city is safe from unfair treatment.”

The Contra Costa County District Attorney’s investigation into Montaño’s killing is ongoing, and the officers have not been officially cleared of charges. Remick was also involved in the fatal shooting of 51-year-old Jose Mendez-Rios in February.

Following McGloughlin’s comment, the meeting was disrupted by a group of people yelling out demands for the officers to face more penalties and chanting “jail killer cops.”

Mayor Eduardo Martinez asked the counter-protestors for decorum. “If we cannot act civilly, we need to leave,” he said.

“I don’t know how we can behave civilly when the police department is willing to shoot someone … that has mental health problems,” an unidentified attendee said.

Martinez then called for a five-minute recess to de-escalate the meeting.

Officials also discussed a proposal to change the city’s protocols around communicating with the public about “critical incidents,” defined as police shootings or uses of force leading to great bodily injury or death.

The proposal would require the city manager, instead of police, to issue a press release within 24 hours of a critical incident with a statement, explanation and timeline of the investigation process and access to trauma-informed mental health services for families and witnesses. Currently, the Richmond Police Department does not have a timeframe under which it must respond publicly.

Councilmember Sue Wilson, one of the proposal’s authors, told KQED that Richmond’s policy is not unlike other cities but could still be improved.

“We’ve had families of people who have been affected by officer-involved shootings come to the meetings and repeatedly say, ‘We don’t understand what’s going on,’” she said. “As a way to sort of remedy that, I am proposing that we hold ourselves to a higher communication standard.”

Members of the Richmond Police Officers Association pushed back against the proposal, criticizing Wilson and Councilmember Claudia Jimenez, who co-introduced the initiative, for undermining the department by questioning its integrity.

“You need to respect the process, what our subject matter experts do and how they do it,” said Sgt. Ben Therriault, president of the police union. “You’re playing politics. You’re not actually doing any governance.”

The city would also be required to release unedited body camera footage, unless redactions are needed to protect privacy. A California law passed in 2018 mandates police departments to release body camera footage within 45 days of a critical incident, but often these videos are heavily edited by private contractors hired by the department.

“They edit it to have a particular narrative attached, usually one that exonerates the police officer,” Wilson said. “They seem to be encouraging the viewer to draw certain conclusions that I don’t think is fair for any city worker to be leading people towards.”

Police Chief Bisa French said the department provides context for the videos to prevent misinformation and edits to help viewers identify what’s important in the video.

“We take great care to ensure that the releases are fair, transparent and comply with California law,” French said. “At the same time, the individuals in the video also have privacy considerations that we must consider.”

Montaño’s friends and relatives who attended the meeting urged the council to approve the proposal.

“You are listening to your constituents when we ask you to pass these types of proposals,” said Jesus Pedraza, a childhood friend of Montaño. “We’re scared of the police, but we want to bridge that gap.”

The council didn’t get enough votes to extend their meeting and finish voting on the proposal. They will revisit it at next week’s meeting.