By David M. Greenwald
Redwood City, CA – In the midst of a national discussion over policing, an incident that occurred in December of 2018 has triggered the widow of Kyle Hart to file a federal civil rights lawsuit after he was shot to death by Redwood City Police Officer Roman Gomez while fellow officer Leila Velez watched.
“This case shows how mentally impaired people are mistreated by police officers,” Attorney John Burris speaking on behalf of Kristin Hart said at a news conference on Wednesday. “In situations where family members call for help, because a loved one is suffering from a mental crisis, we’ve seen far too often that when the police arrive instead of deescalating the situation and taking control of the situation, they wind up killing the person and killing them under circumstances that were highly suspect.”
Burris noted that Kyle Hart was suffering, his wife communicated that, and “yet police did not have a plan—a plan to deescalate.”
Instead, he argued, “They just panicked.” He said, “They had no idea what to do. They were either not properly trained… or they ignored the training.”
Burris described them as young officers who did not act in any kind of way that suggested they had any training on what to do.
“That’s the tragedy of this situation,” he explained. “It would not have taken very much to calm this situation down.”
As Burris laid out during his talk, on the morning of December 10, 2018, the Redwood City Police Department received a call that Hart was cutting himself with a knife.
Kristin Hart during the press conference noted that she reported that Kyle was not harming anyone else but himself, and that she did not feel in danger nor did she feel that their small children 
were in danger.
“Kyle was a sick person in need of help, and rather than provide the help they are trained to give, the police killed him. Kyle deserved better; the citizens of Redwood City deserve better. Kyle will be forever missed by our family and his community.”
She described that he became “very ill, very quickly” and on the morning of December 10, “he was harming himself with a kitchen knife.
“He was not a threat to me, our two-year-old son, or our newborn daughter,” she explained.
Nevertheless, Officers Roman Gomez and Leila Velez showed up a few minutes later and within 29 seconds of arrival, the officers shot and killed Kyle Hart.
Burris called this a “needless” killing of “a loving family man in his own backyard when he was in need of help, not violence.”
According to their account, “When Officers Gomez and Velez arrived at the Harts’ home, they immediately charged into the backyard, without even so much as asking Kyle’s name. Beyond shouting at a man in the midst of a mental health crisis and attempting to Taser him while he walked in their direction, the officers made no attempts to de-escalate the situation.
“Instead, from behind a table that was between the officers and Kyle Hart, they shot him three times, killing him. Officer Gomez fired five times in total, missing Kyle twice—those two bullets ended up in the apartment building directly behind the Harts’ home.”
Burris said, “The family called the police to save Kyle’s life but not for them to take it. This case screams for de-escalation. The officers failed to follow generally accepted police practices when confronting a suicidal person by creating time and distance. The officers had no plan, consequently Mr. Hart is dead.”
Kristin Hart explained, “I called 911 as we were trained to do.”
But, “instead of giving us help, the police arrived with guns drawn and shot him in our backyard.”
She further said, “In the moments after the shooting, the officers had no regard for Kyle’s dignity or medical needs.”
She said during the press conference that they do not have a video of the shooting.
Kristin Hart said that she met her husband in college in 2005 and they were married in 2013. They were both teachers and she described him as a devoted father and family man.
“Kyle was the rare person who could strike up a conversation with anyone he met, from waiters at restaurants to the awkward tween at a family event. Kyle was kind and truly interested in the people around him. He was my best friend and a wonderful husband,” she said.
“We made the most of our summers, traveling and camping. He was down-to-earth and very caring. He loved to make me handmade pasta and we enjoyed listening to the summertime Friday night concerts in the town square. He was a truly devoted father, the kind that’s in the pool at baby swim lessons and a regular at the neighborhood park.”
She said, “He loved his life and did not intend to die that day.”
To sign up for our new newsletter – Everyday Injustice – https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9
Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:
John Burris press conference, again? 🙂
It’s a cottage industry, many are getting rich off of it.
Yeah. We need to disparage those attorneys who choose careers representing the victims of police violence and abuse. Particularly if they get financially compensated for what the do. Why don’t they get jobs defending large corporations like respectable lawyers do?!
Are we going down the path of “lawyer jokes”, now? 🙂
But more importantly – what do you think the point (reason) is for these news conferences, in regard to a case already pending in the legal system?
The point of the news conference is to get the story out there about the victim. And put pressure on the government to enact changes to prevent these incidents happening in the future. Contrary to Keith’s point, there aren’t a lot of attorneys getting rich off these lawsuits. Most civil rights attorneys I know get a good settlement once in a blue moon, take all their cases on contingency, and need to live off that settlement and pay their staffs for quite some time.
In part, to keep an important issue in the public consciousness. The public has a short memory.
I have a different theory regarding the reason.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Burris
Also – press conferences should not be viewed as a factual, unchallenged record of events.
Press conferences are viewed as one side of the story. We don’t have the other side until the entity riles a response brief.
The problem is that some people do indeed seem to view it as fact. And in fact, it starts leaving a “general impression” which might not be supported. The Vanguard is complicit in this result, in my opinion.
The other problem is that it might indeed put pressure on cash-strapped cities to cave (regardless of merit), rather than take it to trial. Hence, my theory regarding the primary reason for these news conferences.
It is likely quite intimidating to some entities, to go up against an attorney like Burris. Again, regardless of merit of a particular case.
Personally, I’d rather see cases tried in court, than in the media. Report on them afterward, assuming that they don’t “settle”.
Please substitute the words “contributes to”, rather than “is complicit in”, above. And delete this comment.
Complicit is not the right word.
Who said corporate lawyers are “respectable”? 🙂
Here’s someone who says differently:
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/police_brutality_cases_are_said_to_be_a_cottage_industry_for_plaintiffs_law
Since local and state prosecutors are so reluctant to take on these cases, this is very good news for those interested in pursuing justice.
Justice!
“justice”
just ice
shaken, not stirred . . .