Former Columbus police officer Adam Coy awaits sentencing next week, after a jury found him guilty earlier this month of murder, felonious assault and reckless homicide in the 2020 shooting death of Andre Hill.
Hill’s death, and others like it involving Black people killed by White officers—most notably, the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis—sparked nationwide protest and calls for reform in how police are trained in use of force.
So, what’s changed in the years since?
WOSU spoke with Rob Barnhart, a law professor at Capital University.
Rand: Adam Coy is the first Columbus police officer to be convicted of murder for causing someone's death in the line of duty. Were you expecting a conviction in this case or were you surprised by the jury's decision?
Barnhart: I was surprised. As you said, this hasn't happened before. We seem to—in Columbus and in other parts of the country—have had trouble finding 12 people willing to convict a police officer of intentional homicide. And so, any time it happens, it's surprising, but particularly here, because we haven't seen it happen before.
Rand: Not everyone was pleased with the decision. Brian Steel, president of the local chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police, said in a statement that Coy was “subject to political and media bias” and that the verdict against Coy will have repercussions for other officers. Is that a fair critique?
Barnhart: Anybody who's done any prosecution—which I started my career as a prosecutor—will tell you, finding 12 people to agree on anything is incredibly difficult, much less 12 people to agree that a law enforcement officer is guilty of intentional homicide. Remember, it only takes one person on a jury—just one out of 12—to have a mistrial. All verdicts have to be unanimous. Also, in this case, the jurors had the potential option of reckless homicide, sort of almost like a compromise verdict, and didn't choose to take it. So I don't find that in this case to be a particularly fair critique.
Rand: The Columbus Division of Police took steps to implement change in the wake of Hill’s killing. Coy himself was fired. Former Police Chief Thomas Quinlen stepped down at the behest of Mayor Andrew Ginther. And a few months later, City Council enacted Andre’s Law, which requires officers to have their body cameras turned on when responding to calls, and to provide medical assistance until paramedics arrive, if they shoot someone. In your opinion, did those steps go far enough?
Barnhart: I think that most people would say that they don't. On Feb. 21 of this year, Attorney General Dave Yost issued a report from a blue ribbon task force on the training of police, suggesting some changes to standard police training procedures, including adding 44 hours of interpersonal communication and mediation training; 16 hours of training in areas like decision making, tactical breathing, which I thought was interesting; crisis mitigation; de-escalation and managing cognitive demand. And so, there is a movement, or at least the beginnings of an understanding, that we have put too much on police. We have made police first responders to (not only) crime, which is probably their role, but we've made police first responders to mental health crises. We've made police first responders to family crises. And I don't think it's unfair to reflect upon the cognitive load that we have put upon law enforcement officers and suggest that even if you think the structure of the carceral state is a problem, that we're also asking too much. I don't think that's unfair to say on the other side as well.
Rand: Finally, what does this verdict in the Coy case mean for future cases involving police officers?
Barnhart: The function of the jury is to express the community's thoughts or will. And to some degree, the community, I think, with this case and said, “enough is enough.” And so, I do think for future trials, defense has to be careful that the community is ready to convict officers, is ready to take a stand. And from the prosecutor's perspective, from a trial strategy perspective, it's okay, is what we did here what works? Is how we explain this here what works to prosecute these cases, and can we do that again, a similar strategy with defense teams knowing that may be our strategy in the future.
