Affidavit of James J. Fyfe

    •D

Diu niD T]

1909 K street NW 
Suite 400
Washington DC 20006 
Phone (202) 833-1460

. 1 "h >-«rvv^

/AX.



June 23, 1980

1909 K Street MW 
Suite -too
W astiing ton DC 20006 
Phone (202) 333-1-160

Francis W. Sargent 
Chairm an of the Soars

Patrick V Murohy 
“ resident

Clerk of the Court 
J. Franklin Reid 
United States District Court 
Western Division 
950 Federal Building 
Memphis, Tennessee 38103

Dear Sir;

I am submitting the following affidavit on behalf of the 
plaintiff in Garner v . Memphis, Civil # C-75-1 45.

Could you please include it with the papers for that case?

Thank you very much.

Si ncerely,

James J. Fyfe

JJF:wtp

Enclosure



r"

3T'h T'£3 TRi:

ivESTER^r'jr ■p V -n T" ’T -I 7 O'-T

-■ D o o -

V .
?OEI'

p ' a
Ro. C-/3-J--t0

11)0 7 a

^  0 '-N .

?.A )

':.\ YORK)

JYMES J. FYFS, Rh.Y., ceinc !.l'/ 3V/crr,y C0pc303 ana sa.\;'3 ;

— T c* ri '• . 1 ^  Cl J- 'c; o

1 71 a:i 0 5 3 00 j-at.0 proaa; o o -

C '-7 o• C 5  o r  ?  ■ J. -O i. r  O -A l - 1. 2. L IT 3  /

iavit on bahalf cf Claa^taa Garna 

2 , I '.vas a -V2 7ber o

Loia.

-a T q 1 ■■ nr

f ^

the

eeo. vears W L  * ”''i2 rao-h or L leuL'anar.o '.a

1 979. DuriP-9 7̂ ' fcenura with the Mew Rori< oioy
r V- Q e h a p. e

Polio a Depari-

, I 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 0 0

Brooklo-n, Queen
r 7 =1

70 n o ;

■ -'-n' nutoe

■̂3 ""5'a a._sc OR n 0 0 o :. L Gv; o
> .ti Q •■’ ' £ti o n CJ ; ' ̂ 3 '

Jn Lt ; ._OGi
osau.

■0 Develoouent Prograu; Pireo-or
p-.p:sa-7 Y pro^eot.

leoano. -

■ .' r:, a ^ulto-ueaia oooear7 3 p  -r ; - ; a  >■

788



101.C a iTj ■ D'-
; as ' . _ _^

Df New York. _cu ■ •' n 1
1 P V i -T? - ‘n ; N’T] “  n -5

'-* -r» -Ti o

^  ,v‘ p  ^  ■'

.' 1  ̂V i. o - .

 ̂US" ice

; f \' 3 v7
5 ̂ V- ẑ i ,::i

Albeev ar.d e'eY-D. decree 
Yn ̂ v/er e ' e-,- Q- New York ae

-n jd_ .j -A. o ;

c, a V’ 8 Ci a -L a
ac --̂ ._oar.y,
ellov/ships and cranes fc 5 r ’ ' 1 r* -ri

the Na> Yo: 
orofassor c

a rcunc T n Oil O
"D '.1 d. j a r a \ W: » n c ̂ ri o - a.

if police science at u onn j ay Coi.^a re or

j us r.! J a. d_ »-/1 ' 7̂ r-' Cl Cj — k ,
o • 1 w r o 'c e a c o c ̂ s

2k2^ in;
* 4.-:̂ "  oe a,_ .V

'  r ' r*>

. i  ‘A' 4 : .. / e v !

i c
;::i—

po._ ice ore icers a iscna
^0 i^cide'^ts are enumerated cv vear in Sxdid 

My doctoral dissartatioa was awarded the Anerican Society 
Public Adruin ist rat ioa ‘ s Annual A>;ard to National!

o : i k.n r ‘k* ■ 1 r ■ O' *1 Criminal Juscice Ydministration in 1979

d. . »0. '/ rj. ,V - d. ~x -
-.V n 1 c n. n a ■ / e ?io C’ e a r■'r=> 3 1 n er.enr. n l

7 -n ■' '̂3.

and Dalinouencv -no o ;

a r. n r untant on
menu or uuscu 
of Justira

oolica deadly 

, -Civil Righc:

Angeles Tinas. j. have s-ervad a.s
no 0 -rs. p Q t s Uni ts d S t c 1 3 s Deo a r t
-■ 1. V 1 s 1 c n r n i c 3 Cl Scares D e o a .r c me n c

lustire Gonmunity Ralations Service; Unreea St 

Rights Cctnmiss ion; Chicago Caw Enfcrcenent Studg- 

the Police Foundation. Also, I hava lacr.rrad on 

of daadlv force at universities -and professional

r r r c t Q 3 p P 3 U nit e d

Y rT4a"]or conclusion O j. ac/ resea.rcn anc

L; c

p e n

; 1 A"' i rD ; ■H * > ts •

’> I .■t; y*; ■

0 V' p p i=i -o /Y 0 . p p 1 0 r\ 0 -

■2 c o p. c e r n. for 11 f e

or : ..... j — 1

U S '



A rp.a ■ :s 1 on

iDor one nc

nc

: . 1 z:: o  _ ,.

-zi >'> ,T2 n ̂ \ 7

■nv oiaaso

10

aim IS n ; :an oa,<3

or increase law anfc: 
;av .

cc nv' researcn. rs c:'
: action in the foi

' o 'T, -O ~ o — — d —

D O L ic e  ac

,3 ^  ri ^  ' r

) o j_ 1 c L e 3 V-' - r c  n 1 n  ^  ^  j- j  c l :. i

to aporenera

_ 'w' . I - ,c _ ,

— c ̂ 1 jc — o Cl 1n c i d e n c e  o r  o c l i c

— 3

ii'v'es and safec/ or p;

— T -r '  r> ; p  V

nr

cioes nor

-- cr P ,

• J3 ••" Cl

■;1 -

PiY > q  ^  P p  n

>=> I i /  pp r 0 C cl r I V 0 3̂ / 3.'~ 0 '"i 0 V

IL. A major conclusion 

citizens are disprcpcrtiona 
use of deadly force.

12 . I have examined data provided b'y 

:onnection with th

tn:

r un a rn

a n c  POJ_rce or ceadi'/

uiu oor.

30. Those data conce 

in Mem.ohis, Tennessee

Legal De f ens'0
rn cr

1
' ro0 1

o a n i- n.g i
ĉ a tia 1to ;

. .;C i -L. 1

Maw York Citv duri.ng the vears 1971-19/5. That comparison shows
volicwinc

a)
discharged firearms 

is 71 percent h '
1 0 n n  ̂- c „ , „ „ ,, ̂ -i -i , ̂

inual rat 

(33.45 shoot in

at which Memphis police officers

per 1000 officers arniuall'',/)

her than that of Mew York City (19.50 per

b) '/i 0 n nnoosur0  ̂ O —

o r - a c i O L t o t e  pc..:. C5 .. . 's-/ W -

IP P ••
m  0 n o 'c 0 0 w n z. c n 

rm.s during 1959-197 4
IS nea

..M zi iv 1 ■

/Pa-half times greater than the 1971-1975 

L P L ̂  S '5 “ L 5 T -- '0 O p O O"" 0 IT “ ~ 0 v'i.

j m i



55.93 3hoo~ir.c ever.-;
d  '

ro;: accravacea
■ar.a rrans .augntar ; zor: 

The Nev; York Citv :

jii V- -r; o

sncozzr.ce zor eaca ~ — n

Mo: n r o 1 1 ancct -
inqs in M e m h ; 0 'o 3 ““ .!_3"7~

q? 1 Q'

invoivec 3ncc“ ir.
1 SHSC3C'tl,S . 'T ri0 C ''*0. O 0 0 5 ^  ‘

v;as no Ttore zhan 11.3 percenz. This ccrriDarison

:k Cizy zigure includes ai;

3 in Mew
IS noz

snoozing;
1 nus , . T

by bozh property crimes and criraes cz violence. Mv
estimate of t: 

v/hich involve: 

d)

the averaca a;

I 121 V-N Ci V- ra ;d oolice

oerce:i ■- .

' o  t; rr

‘ ta r-

aoove,

” :i0 ir

T10 3USO0C’-3 Onj_*/ 1.3 30'J
O ' 0  G 1. G '0  0  S ^  C O. T

wh i c h Me zip his police f i r e c
guns az property cri.me suspects during 1959-1974 (15.9 

per 1000 officers annually) is at least 5.3 tiraes creatsr than 

the Maw York Cit'y average annual raze during 1971-1975 (averag 
annual raze of shootinc to prevent or terminate al

: o r 1 nL. a. i lo ̂

2 . 90
isz i;r.a: iverage annual rata of property crime shcczinc

1930 can;
.23)

indicates that 38.35 percent of 
the population of Memphis is black, but blacks accounted for 

84.21 percent of the property crime suspects shoe az by i'emohis 

1959-1974. Thus, the likelihoocpolice durin- 

zens ware sh:

(raze == .40 per 1000

•-» .-a r- ■
s y- -r- T 7 susoezzs durinc 1959-1974

ipulaticn) is aoorox irr.ate 1'

;opulat ion) .
true for v/h 1 1 a citizens irate === .042 

he raze at which blacks were wounded
j -_' j.

ze snoozincs !.n z  A per 1000 population) is aoproximataiy 20
imes higher than the v/hite rate ( .0025 per 1000) . The rate

791



at wnica oiacas v/era xiiiaa in 

par 1000) is nearly six tines highe 

ear 1000) .

'ceern'/ a r m e  sr.oc

^  rp
J. J *

:n^ro.

■ c: /-r -X* :

■ rti y  tri ‘

‘epane i:

igs ( . 053 

•are '.01

irua e'/an vnen on a
~  "n rg r* .--i r i >r CQ-3 r e’

rp r M t e.pnis oo 1 T , O J e _ c; )ner tv

r c r e a e: t J'j .c i a c s a r r a s a e a r o r p r o p e r a y

larceny, and auto theft) during 1969-1974- 

than "nice as high as the -white rate (1-31

uaryy

_ o

' nnn

1 ra t 3 }property a.
shot and wcunclet nora naan

^ 1

m e  3 ^ f>i  =  C

operny crime arres
me3 as often a 3 w n

ngs per 1000 arras
snsj . 31acK pr ope
eroent more often
deaths p e 1000 a

rresns) . In Yew Y

; i  o  „

'ounne(

in police shootings al
Pi for by Q 1 -f- -p ri Pi ro i"ial

.113 whita v.’O’andir.gs per 1000 ar; 

suspects xere shot and killed 40 

property crime suspects (.53 blac

versus .45 white deaths per 1000 arrases). In New York Citv, 

differential racial Involvenen 

it is almost totally ;

involvemane in the eypes of activities likely to precioitate 
shoot ings.

g) Memphis police officers were more than 15 times 

more likel'y to have shot at black property crim.e suspects thar 
at white property crim.e suspects during 1959-1974. More than 

one in five Memphis officers (205.06 per 1000) shot at black 

prooertv" crim.e suspects during 196 9-1974, while aporoximatei'.* 
one in 75 officers (14.27 per 1000) shot at white property 

crime suspects . “he rate at svhich Msm.ohis p-olic 
property crime suspects (11.50 per 1000 o f "'

13 times higher than the rata at which thsg' wounded whine pre- 

oernv crime susoects (.39 per 1000 officers) . The rate at whicli

1 n. \ pi ■

, o / W U .'O ^ :nan

p: • ' ! 12 . t'-



waice Drooertv crime susoects

, cave

fee rate at wnicr. tt.ev kil].

(3.57 per 1000 officers'.

13. On rae 'Pasis or r 

following conclusions;

a) The police shooting race discrapanev between 

Memphis and Nevv York Cicy is almost totallv attributable tc 

the high incidence of Memphis 
crime suspects. These shcotin 
bv scrona addmir.istraci\'e act!

pci ice shcoc inc 3 a.t proDertv
C 3 couId be  ̂ 'C cced significantly
on, such as 0 00.0 taken in New York

City in 1 9 7 2 3 ince that mime, ”fleeing felon" shootings have
declined by 7 5 per c e n. "I in New Yor k C 1 tv'.

b) As a n s s u. "I of the Memohis Police Deoanti.men 1 ' s
apparent tolerance of poii.ee shootings not precipitated by 

violent crime and not involving danger to oolice or citizens, 

black cicizens of Memphis were far m>cre likely to have been 

;hot at, wounded, or killed by police than were white citizensshot at , wounded
during 1959-1974

c) For reasons which cannot be oreciselv identified

:rom aaca m.P £12 nvailabla to me, the individual black 2n

J. O w 1. i t

or Memphis suspected of a property crime 'was far more likelv 

to have been shot at, wounded, or killed by police than wa 
individual v;hite property crime suspect. In other words, the 

data indicate that Memphis police responded with more force t 

black property crime than to white property crime during 1959 
1974 .

14. I have ena.mined data on fatal police shootings in 

Memphis during the years 1959 to 1975. The source of these

S.V 1

dara is the reoor-' 1 a 5 Hvisory Commission tc

.SIS -’1. IV 1Cunited States Commission on Civi.i Rights, Civic G :_______

Shallencre: Police Communit'/ Relations in Memphis 31 (19 73)
_ n - s e u a _ a '.v n . L  C i ’-2C 0

OCCU> •'h

,nferr^.atica on police ehc 
D e c e e n 31 " '3* *7 2 In c 1 c

ce p e n c e  n c - . n n  l 7 0 2 r ;se, were



black, 8 w0X0 V/ b i ca , ay-j tve r e
15 I analyz ed fV .ti c:d data

and whites — -ese V let im̂ s we
Table I , attachad as E;<hibi t B,
aminat ion. The ta ble shows that
and l,/3 (1 ) of the v/n ita V ict ims
assaultive at the 11 me the V' were
shows that i/2 (13 ) of the black
w n 1 1 e V i G t ims were rap ertea Iv en<

LCiz idsn'cifi0G. ' o v

:o C6w0rniin3 whsthsr t,ri0 blacks
c - n r ' : -ii CD -.Lllnn 1 i_a' :ir ĉ jiriS'canc 

: that ex-
(13) of the black vict ims
unarmed an;d none v i s  r e

:pcrtealy engaged in assaultive behavior 

against police or other citizens ioiraediately prior to the deaths, 
of these assaultive vicciais, 7 blacks (25.9?b of total black j

deaths) and 5 whites (52.5% of total white deaths) v/ere re- J
}
1

portedly armed with guns when shot b'v police. These are cer- ;

tainly dramatic differences, but no me; 

ficance is possible. This is so becaus

significant categor-y of whites killed is those armed with guns

)f this analysis, I have reached the

,easure of the ir s igni
0 the only s tat 2.3tica

16 . On the basi
follow-ing ccnclus ions

a) The cirrhe circumstances under which the Mam.ohis Polic;
r - o r * ramaticaily jshot and killed citizens during 1959 to 1975 v i  

with the race of the victims.

b) Memphis Police were far more likely to shoot and 

kill blacks in non-threatening circumstances than thev were to 

shoot whites in non-threatening circumstances in this period.

c) The great disproportion of black citizens shot 
and killed by Mamphls Police between 1959 to 1976 is iargelv 

accounted for by the great number of black citizens shot in
Gircum.soanc; : s ; wnrc present:r 5 1 - e - 1 .O or no cancer to

■ p o ­-ice or obher cif -zans. In those years. I'emphis pol
or killed 0.5 armed and assaultive whites for each n

white killed; but
Ls 3au...p Lue

.ed :teariy 2 unarmed non-- 

=aultive black killed.

79 1



it involv-3
r\ •>J e d j. o

S 3. V/0 1. “

17. 1 have exaT^ined the account of the fatal sheeting of
Eugene Garner set forth in che Sixth Circuit Court 
opinicn. My opinion of this case is th;

intentioned action on the part of a police officer v;ho acted 

up to the expectation of his superiors. On the basis of the 

limited account available to me, I can find no fault with ths 

, who did only what he had been trained to do bv his• ~  1 -V

suoer iors..

■ i the validity of what the officer

II h lJ. c .

ra i,s ed by t h i
O  V* * S 3upericr

for the office

hat the office

involves

trained and exoectedj

4- ,

what he did. Had Garner been apprehended, triec
:o ao 

in accordance
with due 

doubt of
:ess guarancees , ana touna guii.ty beyo •> 51 V-easonablei
burglary he is alleg; n a V e c omn i c t e d , ;in o  ^  o - r  —

.5 cead, r.owever, oe-tainly would not have been executed. He 

cause of policy and trai.ning which authorized the su.mm.ary shooting
I

of non-dangerous suspects on the basis of susoicion or orcbable
'i cause .

JAMES J . EYES ~ T j
I i
.1 ̂

DISTRICT OF C0LUM3IA, ss :

ON THIS DATE, before me, a Notary Public in and for the afore­
mentioned jurisdiction, personally appeared James J. Fyfa, iden­
tifying himself as James J. Fyfa, and acknowledged himself as
the person w hc 
ac

!! Mv commission expire;

mally apoea
yf e , and ac
docum.ent as

ial S e a i ,

•ee and voluntary

;f June, 1980.!

791)