Photo: Minnesota Independent

On a Saturday night last month, roughly 70 Minneapolis Hmong residents gathered at Fairview Park on the city’s North Side. They were joined by Minneapolis City Council members Barb Johnson and Don Samuels, who represent the area, to discuss relations between the Minneapolis Police Department and the Hmong community.

The meeting was prompted, in part, by a recently released study by the University of Minnesota’s Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) that documents the paucity of Hmong police officers on the force. But also shadowing the meeting were several troubling incidents involving cops assigned to the MPD’s 4th Precinct and the Hmong community in recent years. In 2006, 19-year-old Fong Lee was shot eight times by an officer after fleeing police. Then in 2007, 22 shots were fired when police wrongly raided a Hmong family’s home during a botched drug raid.

“We’re a group that oftentimes doesn’t get heard from,” says Yia Yang, a community organizer with CURA who attended the meeting at Fairview Park. “But there’s really not that much trust with the Minneapolis Police Department.”

A couple of seemingly simple proposals came out of the meeting at Fairview Park. Representatives of the Hmong community wanted to sit down with Police Chief Tim Dolan and 4th Precinct Inspector Michael Martin to express their concerns. More concretely, they wanted a Hmong-speaking officer assigned to the day shift in the 4th Precinct as soon as possible.

The CURA study seemingly backs up the need for such a personnel move. At the time of the 2000 census, the most recent period for which figures are available, there were just under 10,000 Hmong residents of Minneapolis. Roughly 70 percent of those inhabitants were clustered in the 4th Precinct, which covers all of the city’s North Side.

But MPD recruitment has failed to keep up with demographic trends — a phenomenon that certainly isn’t limited to the Minneapolis force. The 900-officer agency has just eight Hmong police officers, representing less than one percent of the force.

Further troubling to members of the Hmong community is where those officers are assigned. More than half of the Hmong officers patrol the 5th Precinct in southwest Minneapolis, an area that is predominantly wealthy and white. Just 226 Hmong residents — or roughly two percent of the city’s overall Hmong population resided in the 5th District at the time of the 2000 census.

Meanwhile the 4th Precinct, home to the majority of Minneapolis’ Hmong population, has just two Hmong officers. What’s more, both of those cops work the overnight shift. The upshot: when Hmong residents of the North Side, many of whom are recent arrivals in this country and have limited English language skills, call the cops for help there’s generally no one available who speaks their language. Shifting one of the existing Hmong cops to the day shift in the 4th Precinct seemed like a simple, common-sense means to at least partly address the problem.

“That is what the community feels would address this problem for them,” says Don Samuels. “I’m supportive of it.”

But Samuels and others realize that getting a Hmong cop assigned to the day shift in the 4th Precinct is not as simple as it might sound. MPD’s personnel policies are governed by a labor contract with explicit rules regarding assignments and shifts. In essence, individual officers bid for assignments based on order of seniority.

“We can’t tell people where they can and cannot work,” says Sgt. Jesse Garcia, an MPD spokesman. “To actually move somebody over there would be outside of the contract and basically against their rights as an employee.”

Garcia compares it to posting a job listing for a police liaison at (predominantly-black) North Community High School and limiting it to African-American candidates. “You would be staring down the barrel of a lawsuit at some point,” he says.

Garcia also points out that the CURA study relies on outdated numbers to draw its conclusions, as the 2000 census was completed nearly a decade ago. He argues that the Hmong community is no longer so heavily concentrated on the North Side. “It has spread out through the city much more,” he says.

In addition, any deal would have to be brokered with the Minneapolis Police Federation. The police union has notoriously sharp elbows and lately has been at loggerheads with police brass over the firing of officer Jason Andersen.

Andersen is the cop who shot Fong Lee in 2006. He was exonerated of any wrongdoing by the department, and a civil jury subsequently ruled that Andersen did not use excessive force in shooting Lee. But Andersen was subsequently arrested on a domestic assault charge, which apparently prompted an internal affairs investigation by the MPD and led to his dismissal.

The police federation has made it clear that it’s not happy about Andersen’s firing. Lt. Robert Kroll, vice president of the police union, told the Pioneer Press last month that Andersen was simply a hard-nosed cop doing his job.

“In the current administration, that is not tolerated,” Kroll told the St. Paul daily. “They don’t want big, tough street cops. They feel he got them negative press over Fong Lee, so they’re going to make him pay.”

While the internal-police spat has little to do with whether a Hmong cop is assigned to the 4th Precinct day shift, it might mean that the police federation will be in little mood to compromise over contractual obligations. (Calls to the police union by Minnesota Independent were not returned.)

Despite these hurdles, Wameng Moua, editor of Hmong Today, argues that the city’s leadership can get a Hmong officer assigned to the day shift in the 4th Precinct if it’s truly viewed as a priority. Even a Hmong liaison who is not a sworn law-enforcement officer would be a big improvement, he notes.

“We all know that if anything is a priority they’re going to pursue it despite any budget restraints,” Moua says. “To me it just seems the mayor, the chief, they just don’t see it as a priority to help out a big part of their constituency.”

Samuels hopes that some kind of deal can eventually be brokered.

“I think we have to broach the subject with the police and the union to see if exceptional circumstances could bring about an exceptional compromise,” he says, “because there is significant hardship in the community.”

The 12-member, all-white jury deliberated for roughly six hours before determining that Andersen had not acted negligently in shooting the 19-year-old North Minneapolis resident. The week-long trial before U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson featured 35 witnesses and competing narratives of what occurred on the night in question.

Lee’s family argued in their lawsuit that he was unarmed and presented no threat to Andersen at the time he was gunned down. They also contended that the Russian-made handgun recovered at the scene was planted there by the police.

Attorneys for the City of Minneapolis countered that Lee was a dangerous gang member and that Andersen only opened fire because he legitimately feared for his life. He was awarded a Medal of Valor by the department for his conduct.

The jury apparently found the latter narrative to be more credible.

Minneapolis Police Chief  Tim Dolan issued a statement this afternoon hailing the court decision. “Officer Andersen acted with courage and integrity in fulfilling his duty to serve and protect the people of Minneapolis,” Dolan said. “Unfortunately, in return, the department and Officer Andersen have had to endure highly inflammatory accusations that have unfairly caused hardship for him and his family. We are pleased that Officer Andersen has been vindicated, and now hope that we can all move forward and heal as a community.”

But Minneapolis City Attorney James Moore repeatedly characterized this narrative as a “fantastical story” in his own closing statement. Moore described Lee as an armed and dangerous gang member who presented a grave threat to Andersen on that summer night three years ago.

Following a one-week trial before U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson, the 12-member, all-white jury will now decide which account to believe. Their deliberations will undoubtedly hinge on whether they believe Lee had a gun when he was shot eight times.

The incendiary case is hardly the first high-profile incident involving Minneapolis police officers and Asian residents. Six years ago, Duy Ngo, who is of Vietnamese descent, was working undercover when he was shot by an unknown assailant. Responding to the scene, fellow officer Charles Storlie mistakenly shot Ngo at least six additional times. The city subsequently settled a lawsuit filed by Ngo for $4.5 million.

Then in 2007 Minneapolis police officers mistakenly raided a house in North Minneapolis occupied by a Hmong family. Police fired 22 bullets during the raid, but somehow failed to injure any of the eight terrified family members. The MPD later admitted that it made a mistake and that the drug suspects they were investigating were African American. The Hmong family eventually received a $600,000 settlement from the city.

Routine patrol turns deadly

In the Fong Lee case, some basic narrative facts, as presented at the trial and in court documents, aren’t in dispute. Andersen and his patrol partner, Craig Benz, didn’t even know each other before that fateful night. But a bloody summer on Minneapolis’ North Side brought them together. Gov. Tim Pawlenty had ordered a contingent of state troopers dispatched to the city to help keep a lid on the violence, and Benz was among the chosen officers.

On July 22, both officers showed up at the Fourth Precinct Headquarters for their standard 4 p.m. to 2 a.m. shift. Anderson was a first-year Minneapolis cop, with previous law enforcement experience working at the Cass County Sheriff’s Office and the Forest Lake Police Department. Benz had spent four years working as a state trooper. Neither of their regular partners were present at roll call. So Andersen and Benz ended up heading out in a squad car together.

Not three hours into their shift, Andersen turned onto North Third Street, near Cityview Elementary School, and they came upon a group of five Hmong males on bikes. “We’re just going to drive behind these guys and see what happens,” Andersen later recalled saying in a deposition.

Andersen drove behind the boys as they peddled down the street. According to testimony from Andersen and Benz, they saw Lee and another of the bicyclists suspiciously pass something between them. Several eyewitnesses reported that the vehicle then ran into Lee, knocking him off his bicycle. But surveillance video shown during the court case strongly suggests that Lee dumped the bike as the squad car closed in and took off running.

Both Benz and Andersen reported seeing a gun in Lee’s right hand. The latter relayed this information to dispatch: “Chasing one with a gun.” Both cops then took off in pursuit of Lee. Benz briefly paused, however, considering whether to take the squad car. Andersen continued pursuing Lee around the school, and says he repeatedly called on him to drop the gun. “I know I said it at least 10 times,” Andersen recalled on the stand.

The Minneapolis cop testified that, while he was out of sight of his partner or school security cameras, Lee turned toward him and started to raise his weapon. Anderson responded by opening fire. His first shot missed the target, but the next three hit Lee.

Lee crumpled to the ground, but Andersen still felt he presented a threat. According to Andersen’s testimony, Lee was seated on the ground when he again raised the gun in a threatening manner. Andersen unloaded five more bullets into him. The 19-year-old died at the scene.

Andersen never approached the body after pumping it full of bullets. He testified that he didn’t want there to be any questions about whether Lee had been carrying a gun. “I never wanted anyone to be able to say I put it there,” he said.

Backup arrived almost immediately after the shooting. Responding officers reported discovering a Russian-made handgun roughly three feet from Lee’s bloody corpse.

But the four Asian males who were with Lee on the day in question testified that he was unarmed at the time. Footage from security cameras does not clearly show a gun in Lee’s possession during the pursuit, while the weapons of both Andersen and Benz are easily evident.

No traceable evidence on handgun

The history of the Russian-made handgun further muddies the waters. It was originally purchased in 1996 by Dang Her in Fresno, California. Her subsequently moved to Minnesota, taking the weapon with him. Then in February 2004, the handgun was stolen from Her’s residence in North Minneapolis. He reported the theft to police. Later that month he was contacted by Minneapolis officer Michael Fossum. Her testified that Fossum told him the gun had been recovered from a snowbank and that he could have it back once the cops were done using it as evidence.

Her never heard anything else about the gun until four days after Lee’s shooting. Two plainclothes officers showed up at his house asking about the weapon. Her recounted the previous interaction with the MPD regarding the handgun.

“I told them to my knowledge the gun was over at the MPD police department,” Her testified on the first day of the trial, speaking through a translator.

“How did they respond?” asked Padden. “They didn’t really say anything,” Her observed, “but they look at each other and their faces kind of turned red.”

If the gun really had been in police custody during the prior two years then there’s no way Lee could have been carrying it at the time that he was killed. This raised the specter that it was a “drop gun,” planted at the scene of the shooting by officers to protect a brother in blue.

But Minneapolis officers maintain any suspicions about the gun’s origins are simply due to a bureaucratic mishap. Fossum testified at trial that the weapon found in the snowbank in February 2004 was actually a Belgian-made handgun and that he’d simply made a mistake in telling Her that his gun had been recovered by police. He further stated that he’d never seen the Russian firearm prior to testifying at the trial.

The gun recovered at the scene raised suspicions for other reasons as well. It contained no fingerprints, smudge marks, blood or any other evidence that might link it to Fong Lee. “It’s not just lack of prints,” Padden said in his closing argument. “It’s no trace evidence whatsoever. None.”

But defense attorneys sought to undermine this fact with testimony from forensics experts. Shannon Holmes, a forensics scientist with the MPD, performed the analysis of the gun that was recovered from the crime scene. She testified that traceable evidence is found on only 12 percent of weapons recovered. “Did it surprise you when you didn’t find fingerprints on this weapon? ” Assistant City Attorney Gregory Sautter asked her on  the stand. “No it did not,” Holmes replied.

Now the jury will have to weigh which account to believe and whether or not to award damages to Lee’s family. Richard Hechter, the other attorney representing the family, pleaded with jurors to remember that a grieving family is at the heart of the case.  “I am very, very respectfully asking for your help to right a wrong and find justice, once and for all, for the family,” he said.

Update, May 28: No excessive force in Fong Lee shooting, jury rules

Fong Lee (Minneapolis Police Department)

Did Fong Lee have a gun on July 22, 2006, when he was shot eight times by Minneapolis police officer Jason Andersen? That’s the crucial question that a 12-member jury should begin deliberating Wednesday.

Attorneys for Lee’s family wrapped up their case Tuesday, arguing that the Russian-made handgun recovered at the scene was planted on Lee in order to cover up for Andersen’s fatal mistake. The City of Minneapolis then called just four witnesses in making the case that Andersen legitimately feared for his life and the shooting was justified. Closing arguments and jury instructions are slated for Wednesday morning.

After attorneys for Lee’s family had finished presenting their case, Minneapolis City Attorney Jim Moore argued that the lawsuit should be tossed out by U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson because the plaintiffs had failed to present a credible case. But Magnuson quickly ruled from the bench that the case would proceed to a jury.

The city then presented its first witness, Michael Brave, a veteran law-enforcement officer who has frequently consulted with police departments on proper procedures and training. Brave testified that Andersen was justified in using lethal force against Lee.

“Officers do not have to be shot before they can return fire,” he said. “That’s just not part of the job.”

Brave further testified that even if Lee didn’t have a gun, it doesn’t necessarily mean the shooting was excessive force. “If officer Andersen did reasonably believe he had a gun then the shooting is justified,” he said under cross examination.

Also taking the stand was Sgt. Michael Grahn, of the Minnneapolis Police Department. He arrived on the scene just minutes after Lee was killed. Surveillance video of Grahn standing by the bloody corpse was shown to the jury.

“I’m looking at a gun,” Grahn, testified, when asked what he was doing. “It was a unique looking gun.”

On cross-examination, however, attorney Michael Padden pointed out that there was no mention of a weapon in Grahn’s initial police report from that evening. “Your report doesn’t document seeing the gun, correct?” Padden asked. “Yes,” Grahn answered.

The final witness of the trial was Tina Schreiber. The North Minneapolis resident was enjoying a family barbeque at her residence at the time of the shooting.

“I heard somebody say, ‘Put the gun down,’ three or four times,” Schreiber testified. That was quickly followed by gunfire.

But Schreiber was uncertain how many gunshots subsequently rang out and admitted that the details of the night are a bit hazy.

“All I know is I was in my backyard and there was a kid shot,” she said.

Judge Paul Magnuson

Day two of the Fong Lee trial apparently started off exactly where it left off — with U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson extremely pissed off. This morning he threatened to declare a mistrial in the civil case  and force the attorneys for Lee’s family to cover all costs of the proceeding, according to Rochelle Olson’s excellent play-by-play over at the Star Tribune.

The legal mischief started late yesterday afternoon when attorney Michael Padden, who is representing Lee’s family, flashed a photo of his bullet-riddled corpse on a projection screen in the courtroom. Lee’s family, who were seated in the courtroom, began to audibly sob.

The problem with the grisly picture: it hadn’t been admitted into evidence and therefore shouldn’t have been shown to the jury. Padden claimed it was an innocent mistake.

Judge Magnuson apparently wasn’t buying it. “Let’s be candid,” Magnuson said. “You’ve lost my trust, and you’re going to earn it back. It’s as simple as that.”

Magnuson offered a similar tongue-lashing at the close of yesterday’s proceedings. “To spring something like that is incredible,” Magnuson told Padden, according to the account by David Hanners, who has been relentlessly bird-dogging the case for the Pioneer Press. “And to spring something like that on a jury without it being in evidence is wrong. It’s wrong. It’s just the wrong thing to do.”

The civil suit stems from the 2006 shooting of Lee by Minneapolis police officer Jason Andersen at CityView Performing Arts Magnet school on the city’s North Side.  The 19-year-old was shot eight times and died at the scene. The cops insist that Lee was carrying a handgun and that Andersen only fired because he feared for his life. But the attorneys for Lee’s family contend that there was no such gun and that police planted the weapon after the fact to cover up the officer’s fatal mistake.

(MPR.org)

Damning details relating to the 2006 shooting of Fong Lee by a Minneapolis police officer came to light last week. The capstone was David Hanners’ terrific Sunday piece profiling Lee, officer Jason Anderson and the handgun at the center of the controversy. The upshot from the coverage: evidence suggesting Lee was unarmed and that the gun purportedly recovered at the scene may have been planted by police.

The allegations have some activists calling  for a federal investigation of the shooting and demanding that  MPD Chief Tim Dolan resign. The city’s top cop was apparently on vacation last week and unavailable for comment. Today the department released a statement from Dolan:

We take all allegations of police misconduct very seriously. We want our community to be able to trust that its officers will protect with courage and serve with compassion.

That’s why we want to be absolutely clear: no officer ever planted evidence in this case and we look forward to proving that in court.

While no officer wants to take another life, two internal department investigations, as well as an independent grand jury, have ruled that the death of Fong Lee was a case of justifiable homicide.

Unfortunately, because of the ongoing civil litigation, we can’t comment specifically on the facts in this case. But we are confident that when this case concludes, the actions of our officers will be vindicated.

A lawsuit filed by Lee’s family is slated to go to trial on May 1 at U.S. District Court.