MARCH 2025. Blues Vol 41 No.3

GUEST COMENTARYpolice

GUEST COMENTARYpolice law newsDaniel CarrOfficer Involved: Jeffrey SchoppThis case is odd.A pursuit involving multiplepolice officers over a minorinfraction ends with the suspecttaking his own life.Something’s missing…WHAT HAPPENEDOn December 3, 2024 at 1515hrs an officer spotted JeffreySchopp (33) cross a streetwithout using a crosswalk. Theofficer attempted to stop Mr.Schopp, who was carrying abackpack.Mr. Schopp immediately andpolitely questioned if he wasbeing detained. The officer informedhim that he was beingdetained and explained the reasonwhy. Mr. Schopp then apologizedfor his actions.He then refused to follow theofficer’s instructions, droppedhis backpack, and ran on footfrom the officer.The officer engaged in footpursuit through a field and intoa drainage ditch. The officer advisedMr. Schopp that he woulduse force if he failed to stop andthreatened a Taser deployment.Other officers arrived on sceneand attempted to set a perimeteraround Mr. Schopp.Mr. Schopp was observed bythe initial officer holding a firearm- as he ran towards otherarriving officers.30 The BLUES - MARCH ‘25USE OF FORCEIn response to that threat -the officer fired 14 shots at Mr.Schopp.As he was taking rounds frompolice - Mr. Schopp used his owngun to end his life.During the investigation, a .22caliber handgun was recoveredfrom the sceneLAWThe law that governs policeuse of deadly force - Texas PenalCode - PENAL § 9.51:(c) A peace officer is justified inusing deadly force against anotherwhen and to the degree thepeace officer reasonably believesthe deadly force is immediatelynecessary to make an arrest, orto prevent escape after arrest, ifthe use of force would have beenjustified under Subsection (a)and:(1) the actor reasonably believesthe conduct for whicharrest is authorized included theuse or attempted use of deadlyforce; or(2) the actor reasonably believesthere is a substantial riskthat the person to be arrestedwill cause death or serious bodilyinjury to the actor or another ifthe arrest is delayed.The law that governs defenseof a third person - PENAL § 9.33.Defense of Third Person:A person is justified in usingforce or deadly force against anotherto protect a third person if:(1) under the circumstancesas the actor reasonably believesthem to be, the actor wouldbe justified under Section 9.31or 9.32 in using force or deadlyforce to protect himself againstthe unlawful force or unlawfuldeadly force he reasonably believesto be threatening the thirdperson he seeks to protect; and(2) the actor reasonably believesthat his intervention isimmediately necessary to protectthe third person.POLICYLike many major municipalities,San Antonio does have afoot pursuit policy. It reads:

“When engaging in a footpursuit of a suspect, officersmust exercise sound judgment,carefully consider the facts, andweigh the seriousness of theoffense against the consequencesof jeopardizing the safety ofothers.”ANALYSISMr. Schopp actively resistedarrest by fleeing from lawenforcement during a lawfuldetention. The officer providedclear instructions - as well asforce warnings in an attempt togain compliance.Mr. Schopp then armed himselfwith a firearm - as he approachedother officers whowere arriving on scene to assist.Therefore, it was reasonablefor the officer to believe thatMr. Schopp posed an immediatethreat of death or great bodilyinjury at the time that deadlyforce was utilized.Also, the actions of the officerwould be in line with the defenseof a third person law.The use of deadly force wasobjectively reasonable and withinthe law.Whether or not the officerviolated the “foot pursuit” policyis another, much less importantissue.The detention was within thelaw and will be up to the officerto explain his actions to internalinvestigators. Also, the action/inaction of the Sergeant on dutywho allowed the pursuit to continuewill be examined.It is quite possible that theactions of the officer to engagein the initial foot pursuit werewithin department policy and inaccordance with training.QUESTIONSNow that we have establishedthat the OIS was legal and (likely)within department policy -there is still something missing…The officer stopped and detainedMr. Schopp for crossingthe street without using a crosswalk.This is a minor infractionand rarely enforced by officers.Did the officer have anotherreason to detain Mr. Schopp?Did the officer suspect that Mr.Schopp was involved in othercriminal activity?Mr. Schopp fled on foot afterhe was informed that the reasonfor the detention was the crosswalkviolation.Why would he flee in order toavoid what is likely, at worst, acitation?Mr. Schopp dropped his backpackbefore he fled on foot.What was in the backpack?The officer engaged in a footpursuit, other officers joined,a perimeter was being established,for an interaction thatstarted with a Crosswalk violation.Was this approved by aSergeant?Is it typical to expend thismany resources to apprehend aCrosswalk violator?As Mr. Schopp was takingrounds from police officers - hepulled out his own gun and endedhis life. Why?I am not alleging a Livelsberger-typeconspiracy, but, somethingis missing here…The BLUES - MARCH ‘25 31