APD officers will stand trial for murder in shooting of James Boyd

Judge Neil Candelaria on Tuesday ruled there is probable cause for two Albuquerque police officers to stand trial in the 2014 shooting death of a homeless man.

Retired officer Keith Sandy and officer Dominique Perez will face charges of 2nd-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter and battery in court. The officers fatally shot James Boyd during a standoff in the foothills. They will be arraigned and likely booked at some point.

“Counsel, having considered all the evidence in the case and applying the standard of probable cause… The court finds—with the exception of involuntary manslaughter—that the state has established probable cause as to all the counts in the amended information. The court will bind the matters over for trial,” Candelaria said.

View: Timeline of James Boyd Case

Special Prosecutor Randi McGinn argued Boyd, who suffered from schizophrenia, did not advance on the officers before he was shot. She also said Boyd was following orders before he was shot in the back, and that “reasonable people” do not shoot others in the back.

“I will say to you that what the judge decided is that police officers can’t shoot at people when there is an imagined threat, only a real threat,” McGinn said.

Defense attorneys maintained the officers were protecting an unarmed K9 officer from Boyd, who was armed with two knives during the standoff. They also argued the state failed to prove Perez and Sandy committed a crime when they shot him.

When defense attorney Sam Bregman asked the judge which standard of law he used to determine that the case had probable cause to move forward, Candelaria stated: “The standard that you argued for, counsel: What would a reasonable police officer in that position have done?”

BOYD’S FAMILY ATTORNEY RESPONDS

Attorney Shannon Kennedy, who represents Boyd’s family, says she was confident the case would go to trial and said Boyd’s family plans to attend the whole thing from their current home in Birmingham, Alabama.

“No one is above the law and no one is below the law,” Kennedy said.

ALBUQUERQUE, POLICE BRASS RESPONDS

APD Chief Gorden Eden also responded following Tuesday’s decision:

“As this case is moving though our judicial system, my focus is on continually moving the Albuquerque Police Department forward. We will protect our community, and I greatly appreciate the hard work and sacrifice of those who wear a uniform each and every day. As a witness in this case, it would be improper for me to comment about specifics.”

“We respect the judge’s decision today,” Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry said. “It is important that we all allow the judicial system to do it’s [sic] important work as we move forward.”

Second Judicial District Attorney Kari Brandenburg did not comment after her office was removed from the case and McGinn was appointed as special prosecutor.

The Albuquerque Police Officers Association has stood behind the officers from the beginning and said Tuesday they’re just as shocked about the decision as the defendants:

“These guys aren’t murderers, they were police officers, protecting the community with a dangerous, unstable, violent, individual who had every opportunity to end this standoff peacefully.”

ACLU of New Mexico spokesperson Peter Simonson praised Tuesday’s decision.

“We all want to see our law enforcement department here in Albuquerque improve the way it uses force, that it treats the public respectfully, that it regains its trust with the public – and I think this is one big important step in seeing that process move forward,” Simonson said.

SANDY’S DEFENSE ATTORNEY TALKS RESULT, UPCOMING TRIAL

Bregman, Sandy’s attorney, spoke extensively to KOB after the judge’s decision – much about what the defense discussed during the preliminary hearing. He retorted that the officers had done nothing wrong and were following the procedures laid out for them.

“I respect the judge’s decision. I respect this judge. But in 24 years of practicing, I’ve never disagreed more in a decision than the decision that was handed down today,” he said. “With that said, it’s a very low standard and Keith looks forward to clearing his good name in trial. So we go forward and that’s what we do.”

Bregman said it would be up to a judge to determine whether or not Sandy will be processed at the Metropolitan Detention Center.

He then continued the defense’s narrative that the officers were simply doing their jobs and following their training when Boyd was shot and killed.

“I think everybody would agree that according to the testimony, these officers followed their training,” Bregman said. “I can tell you that law enforcement is turned upside down on its head.  When it’s clear that they followed their training and the state provided that training, and now the state is prosecuting them for following that training.”

Bregman then questioned the burden of proof necessary to prove that a “reasonable person” would have acted similarly in such a situation.

“There’s an argument made by the state — that’s a reasonable person’s standard.  What would a reasonable person do in these circumstances that took place up in the foothills?” Bregman said. “But the standard is clearly set out in the law — that it’s what a reasonable police officer would do based on his training and experience would do.  It’s clear from the testimony that that’s what every officer is trained to do — exactly what these two officers did. And they are trained by the same state that is now prosecuting them for following their training.”

“Now with this question, it sends a lot of question marks to every police officer who goes out every day with the obligation and duty to protect their fellow officers from harm,” Bregman continued.

Bregman also discussed the prospects of Judge Candelaria presiding over the upcoming trial and the differences in the burden of proof necessary to be met at a trial as opposed to the preliminary hearing.

“The standard for a preliminary hearing is basically a little more than not.  It’s a probable cause, although I saw nothing that would amount to probably cause,” he said. “Now it’s beyond a reasonable doubt.  I believe this prosecution’s burden will be to convince 12 jurors that every single one of these officers who said they were trained this way and that every single one of them is a liar. That’s now the government’s job — to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt.”

“If you sincerely believe that the training is wrong, then don’t train it.  Get to the trainers, get to the Albuquerque Police Department, but this goes back to the whole point that this case is not about whether the Albuquerque Police Department trains their police officers correctly or not,” Bregman continued. “This case is about whether these officers followed their training.  How can you follow your training, given to you by the state, and have a criminal intent to commit murder?  It can’t be logical and it isn’t logic.”

FORMER CHIEF DEPUTY DA NOT SURPRISED

Former Chief Deputy District Attorney Pete Dinelli said he isn’t surprised by the judge’s ruling.

“I think the evidence was pretty clear-cut when it comes to probable cause. Again, probable cause is a very low level amount of evidence that has to be presented. And what that means is it’s more likely than not that a crime has occurred,” Dinelli said. “The fact is this was more like a mini trial, where the defense as well as the prosecution threw everything they had at it. And you had a judge that was pretty even-keel…and did not tip his hand whatsoever during six days of testimony. It was a really remarkable event, and I hope it’s going to restore some faith in our judicial system.”

-With Elizabeth Reed, originally published at KOB.com