Syracuse, N.Y. — Jurors in a civil lawsuit deliberating the actions of a Syracuse police officer faced a challenging task as they weighed the complexity of a fatal shooting incident. After deliberating for about 30 minutes, the eight-member jury raised a question regarding whether their verdict needed to be unanimous, a sign that their views on the case might not align.
Chief U.S. District Judge Brenda Sannes clarified that a unanimous decision was mandatory and instructed the jury to continue deliberations. After two days, the jury issued a verdict last Friday that legal representatives described as seemingly a compromise, suggesting that the jurors were divided yet needed to arrive at a consensus.
The jury found that Officer Kelsey Francemone used excessive force in the shooting death of Gary Porter during a gunfight on June 19, 2016, at a crowded Father’s Day barbecue in Syracuse’s Near West Side. However, jurors also acknowledged key aspects of Francemone’s testimony, agreeing that she had confronted a man who was armed and firing at the party.
Fred Lichtmacher, representing Porter’s family, perceived the jury’s verdict as a “negotiated” outcome. He noted that it seemed there were jurors supporting both Porter and Francemone, indicating a split in opinion that influenced the final decision. John Powers, one of Francemone’s attorneys, expressed that the low damages awarded, set at $10,000 for conscious pain and suffering, suggested a compromise by the jury.
Throughout the two-week trial, the actions of Francemone, a relatively new member of the police department, were scrutinized. She reported rushing toward the gunfire erupting at the James Geddes public housing complex. Witnesses indicated that chaos ensued, with many attendees fleeing as at least 37 shots were fired. During her testimony, Francemone claimed she identified herself as a police officer and demanded that the shooters drop their weapons before firing at a man she perceived as a threat.
Jurors also answered several pointed questions regarding key details of the case. They agreed that Porter had possessed a firearm that night, that Francemone had a reasonable belief, albeit possibly mistaken, that he was among those firing, and that she believed he had a gun before her final shots were discharged.
Joseph Moran, president of the Syracuse Police Benevolent Association, responded critically to the jury’s finding, calling it “illogical.” Moran highlighted the contradictions in the jury’s decisions: while determining that Porter was armed and posed a threat, they simultaneously ruled that excessive force had been employed by Francemone.
The jury’s verdict may ultimately be rendered moot. Judge Sannes will consider the jury’s conclusions when determining whether Francemone is entitled to qualified immunity, a legal principle that protects law enforcement officers from liability in civil cases unless their actions have been previously deemed unconstitutional. Sannes has requested written arguments from both parties before making a ruling regarding this matter.
The article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested to be removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.