The California Department of Justice announced last week that they won’t be pressing charges against the Culver City police officer who shot and killed Guillermo de Jesus Medina in December 2022.
The statement, released on Tuesday, September 10, in part reads, “California Attorney General Rob Bonta, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1506 (AB 1506), today released a report on Guillermo De Jesus Medina’s death from an officer-involved shooting in Culver City, California, on December 18, 2022. The incident involved officers from the Culver City Police Department (CCPD). The report is part of the California Department of Justice’s (DOJ) ongoing efforts to provide transparency and accountability in law enforcement practices. The report provides a detailed analysis of the incident and outlines DOJ’s findings. After a thorough investigation, DOJ concluded that criminal charges were not appropriate in this case.”
“We acknowledge that this incident posed challenges for all parties involved, including Mr. Medina’s family, law enforcement, and the community,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Loss of life is always a tragedy. The California Department of Justice remains steadfast in our commitment to working together with all law enforcement partners to ensure an unbiased, transparent, and accountable legal system for every resident of California.”
It was in February 2023 that the family of Medina held a press conference to announce a lawsuit against the City of Culver City after Medina was shot and killed by Culver City police officers.
Medina is reported to have crashed his car near the corner of Culver Boulevard and Cardiff Avenue, before being pursued on foot by police. Moments later, he was shot.
A vigil was held for Medina in May 2023.
“This wasn’t a bad person, a criminal,” Nancy Barba, a family friend, told ABC News. “This was someone having a mental health crisis and the tragic thing was this was the only resource to a family member.”
“I just don’t want the world to continue to talk bad about him and say bad things about him,” Medina’s widow, Adriana Medina, told ABC News. “And for God’s sake my children are reading this stuff. What’s wrong with people? They watched their father die. Was that not enough?”
In response to the lawsuit, the CCPD made video and surveillance footage available on social media, and posted: “CCPD posted the following to social media: “On the morning of December 18th, 2022, members of the Culver City Police Department were involved in an Officer Involved Shooting of Guillermo Medina. The incident is currently under investigation by the California Department of Justice and the California Office of the Attorney General. In the interest of transparency, the Culver City Police Department is releasing the following Critical Incident briefing to provide the community with details surrounding the incident. As part of this video briefing, you will be shown surveillance footage, as well as video footage from the responding officers’ body-worn and vehicle dashboard cameras. You will also hear the 9-1-1 call and radio traffic from our dispatch center, as well as other relevant facts and evidence.”
On the video, we see Medina in a 59 minute car chase, and ramming a vehicle at a stop sign into oncoming traffic. We see him exiting his damaged vehicle and running from the police before the eventual shooting that killed him. We hear an officer say that he’s reaching into his waist for something, and somebody remarks that it might be a cellphone. Medina was unarmed, though there was a replica gun in his vehicle.
However, according to this recent statement from the DOJ, there will be no further action.
“Under AB 1506, which requires DOJ to investigate all incidents of officer-involved shootings resulting in the death of an unarmed civilian in the state, DOJ conducted a thorough investigation into this incident and concluded that the evidence does not show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the officer involved acted without the intent to defend himself and others from what he reasonably believed to be imminent death or serious bodily injury. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution of the officer. As such, no further action will be taken in this case.”