Even After Bodycam Footage Release, Questions Remain Around Alleged Shoplifter Killed by Virginia Police
One officer was fired and another was placed on restricted duty this week, but there are still a lot of unanswered questions.

Last month, police in Virginia's Fairfax County shot and killed a man suspected of shoplifting sunglasses. This week, the department released body camera footage and fired an officer involved, but questions remain over why a suspected thief had to die.
On February 22, officers responded to reports of a shoplifter at Tysons Corner Center, a large mall outside Washington, D.C. The officers in question were part of the Tysons Urban Team (TUT), a specialized division of the Fairfax County Police Department (FCPD) assigned to the mall around the clock.
Asset protection had alerted police to a shopper, later identified as 37-year-old Timothy Johnson, whom they suspected of swiping some designer sunglasses at Nordstrom with the intent to steal them. Responding officers saw Johnson set off multiple anti-theft alarms and followed him outside to the parking garage. One uniformed and one plainclothes officer chased Johnson into a nearby wooded area where they each discharged their weapons. Johnson was struck once in the chest and later pronounced dead at the hospital.
On Thursday, the FCPD released the full body camera footage of the encounter, plus a shorter narrated video that included both body camera and security camera footage. Chief Kevin Davis also announced that one of the officers who fired his weapon, Sergeant Wesley Shifflett, had been fired, citing "a failure to live up to the expectations of our agency, in particular use of force policies." The other officer is on restricted duty until the investigation concludes, though Davis did not specify why only one officer was fired or which one wore the body camera.
In the body camera video, as the officers pursue Johnson through the parking lot and into the woods, the scene is too dark to easily make out what's going on. The uniformed officer yells "get on the ground" several times before shots are fired; at that point, he dives to the ground and shouts "Stop reaching!" Moments later, he tells another officer, "He didn't get any rounds off. I don't know if he's armed. He was continually reaching in his waistband, I told him to 'let me see your hands, let me see your hands.'"
But it's clear from the footage that during the chase, the officer only ever said "get on the ground." He didn't say anything about Johnson reaching until after shots were fired.
At a press conference this week, Davis said, "More often than not, the police body camera footage speaks for itself. This time, it does not." He acknowledged that state authorities and the department's Internal Affairs Bureau were still investigating.
Davis told reporters at the time of the shooting that he didn't know whether Johnson was armed and wouldn't "speculate why the officers discharged their firearms," but he did note that Johnson was "very well known to law enforcement in the National Capital Region; he, in fact, has a significant violent criminal history." This week, Davis admitted, "At the time of the officer-involved shooting, they did not [know his criminal history]. They didn't even know who he was." Davis also apologized to Johnson's family and admitted, "I should have answered that question differently…I should have answered it with much greater sensitivity than I did."
While body camera footage is certainly a good thing in any case involving an officer's use of force (and for that matter, most any other case), there are still a lot of unanswered questions. For one, Johnson is barely visible in the moments leading up to the shooting. For another, Davis declined to answer a reporter's question of whether "the use of force in this case matched the situation," and it's still unclear whether Johnson had a weapon. (For her part, Johnson's mother told The Washington Post that he did not own a gun.)
It's also not clear why Johnson should ever have been in a position to lose his life over some sunglasses. Davis said in his press conference that the Police Executive Research Forum, a policing research think tank, could only find 18 police departments in the country that have policies regarding foot pursuits. But regardless of policy, when stealing some sunglasses and running away ends in getting shot by the police, it's hard to argue that the punishment fits the crime.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"But regardless of policy, when stealing some sunglasses and running away ends in getting shot by the police, it's hard to argue that the punishment fits the crime."
You probably think Prisoner 24601 was pursued because he stole a loaf of bread, right?
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
Online, Google paid $45 per hour. Nine months have passed since my close relative last had a job, but in the previous month she earned $10500 by working 8 hours a day from home. Now is the time for everyone to try this job by using this website…
Click the link—↠ http://Www.Smartjob1.com
I don’t know how anyone can think that the bodycam footage doesn’t vastly improve our understanding of the truth of every situation.
Here it clearly demonstrates its importance as even moments later the policeman’s biological memory recounts misinformation.
In every case, whether the laws or policies have been breached is black and white. Only our understanding of the facts can be grey. Body cameras minimize the grey.
Everyone should have the inalienable right to wear body cameras everywhere they go to protect themselves and others from the serious effects of misunderstanding and misinformation.
Criminalize lying and ask the policeman to revise his witness statement.
I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($550 to $750 / hr) online from my laptop. Last month I GOT chek of nearly 85000$, this online work is simple and straightforward, don't have to go OFFICE, Its home online job. You become independent after joining this JOB. I really thanks to my FRIEND who refer me this SITE. I hope you also got what I...go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart......
Click the link—————————————>>> http://WWW.Pay.JioSalary.COM
(1) First, and most importantly, Johnson was not shot because he stole a pair of sunglasses. Anyone whose words seek to lead you to that conclusion is selling azalea fertilizer or pushing a hidden agenda. If the “plan” had been to shoot this “nefarious sunglasses thief” there were plenty of opportunities before he reached the woods.
(2) It’s generally a good idea not to behave in such a fashion as give rise to a chase situation and the cops becoming highly adrenalized during that chase.
(3) You know the cops have guns. You know they face much less scrutiny than you would face for punching little round holes in people. You know that they are antsy now because of the number of cops shot in various circumstances over the last few years. And you should know/i> that some, likely very few, are out-and-out cowards who panic at the mention of a gun and will shoot you for the mere utterance of that word. Therefore, unless you have some other goal in mind than long-term, healthy survival, in an interaction with them do not behave in such a way to give them any reason to feel threatened! (e.g, “pointing” a cell phone at them). Or – it’s your choice – ignore this paragraph and assume the increased risk of having small round holes punched though your body, in the hope that your widow or po’ ol’ mother and her lawyer can collect a sackful after your funeral.
We get it. People are stupid and that includes cops.
Sunglass thief isn’t going to be smart and scared cop isn’t going to calm down.
But if we’re not okay with this outcome we need a better plan. Build on what we already know.
I’m thinking we need to simplify and standardize interactions between cops and civilians. Like we do with the rules of the road. Signs, lights and road markings are mostly simple and standardized. It saves lives.
The first few moments are the most dangerous and if everyone involved could expect simple standard commands and responses that apply everywhere, lives would probably be saved too.
These standards could be taught and practiced in school and by new immigrants.
So everyone knows what to expect, say and do in those most dangerous extreme stress first few moments.
Then don’t steal? I’m not scared of being shot when I go shopping because I actually pay for stuff.
But you should be, since there is every possibility that someone will mistakenly accuse you of stealing. It happens all the time.
That aside, what kind of hellhole do you want to live in where suspected shoplifting is punishable by summary execution?
That aside, what kind of hellhole do you want to live in where suspected shoplifting is punishable by summary execution?
If there is such a place, the events in this article certainly don't describe it. This article appears to be about events resulting from running from the cops. Attributing those events strictly to what they were trying to arrest him for is rather dishonest.
Yeah, but DumbDumb is a lying cunt.
I don't want to live in a world where running (on foot) from the cops gets you executed either.
If the crime of shoplifting were punishable by summary execution the sunglass thief would have been shot immediately, not ordered to stop running, and not ordered to lay down. He was shot for not showing his hands and giving the officers cause to think he had a weapon. Whether the thief's failure to show his hands gave the officers reason to believe he was armed is another matter, but clearly the thief was not summarily executed for stealing sunglasses.
All laws are ultimately punishable by death.
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
https://WWW.APPRICHS.com
The guy was obviously
*dons sunglasses *
making a spectacle of himself.
Yeeeeeaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh!
I wonder how much money Townsend has made off of Jerry Brucheimer and CBS
"He didn't get any rounds off. I don't know if he's armed. He was continually reaching in his waistband, I told him to 'let me see your hands, let me see your hands.'"
It almost seems as though the police are trained to use the exact same set of justifications, every single time.
That, or their training consisted of the hunting segment of the Volcano episode of South Park.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87ksbxHUNk0
Sad. No, not really.
Ah hell! At this point, I'm about ready to just say "go ahead and shoot them and let God sort it out".
The justice system has, over the past few years and especially since the death of St. George, decided that the criminals have special and even more rights than anyone else. Especially business owners who should just open their doors each morning so the thugs can walk out with the business' profit of the day. The longer the rap sheet, the more rights allowed.
If we are going to lock people in a D.C. jail for over two years for the simple act of walking into the Capitol, hide evidence, and embed feds in protests to make sure the proper narrative is promoted, then the cop's actions can be excused. If prosecutors can campaign upon the issue and then work to indict a former President for not properly bowing down to the "powers that be", and be prosecuted under special laws that apply only to him, then certainly a cop can shoot a shoplifter a few times without suffering any repercussions.
Reason writers have a three note tune. More illegal aliens into our country, more sex for profit (and especially if it involves young children, and the more crime there is the better it is for a free society. And if any of those issues can be used to criticize conservatives (and especially Trump), then a special paragraph will be sure to appear in each article noting that one of them has either "pounced" or "seized" on the issue.
Move to Russia, traitor.
You are destined to spend the rest of your worthless, disgusting life complying with the preferences of your betters, CindyF, because you are just a deplorable, bigoted, right-wing misfit.
You get to whine about it all you like, though, and this website provides a rare gathering place for disaffected losers like you to comfort one another as you await replacement.
Awesome, sounds good. I hope you're one of the people that gets shot and god sorts it out.
The dead man will have been a drug dealer who fell behind on his protection payments to the police.
They all are.
Now that he has died we know he will be voting dem in the next election
https://twitter.com/SwannMarcus89/status/1639351102054252544?t=Ti80oWjO9bs9oNNbqaceBA&s=19
My CHAZ research is incredibly surreal. Here are crimes that CHAZ medics or security have been either accused or convicted of: rape, sex trafficking, forced starvation, kidnapping, false imprisonment, grand theft auto, robbery in the second degree
second degree assault with “substantial bodily harm,” fourth degree assault on an intimate partner, second degree assault by strangulation, attempting to elude the police, trafficking in counterfeit drugs, endangerment while attempting to elude the police
possession with intent to distribute, criminal trespass, assaulting a law enforcement officer, assault of a household member, criminal harassment, statutory rape, distribution of drugs on school property, terroristic threats, and cocaine distribution
These are only people I've been able to identify and only crimes I've been able to confirm they were accused or convicted of in court (both civil and criminal). It doesn't include the vast majority I haven't identified or crimes committed in unknown jurisdictions
A decent number of these are just Raz or Zay Huncho, but you've also got all the crimes committed by Dan Baker, DeJaun Young, and Jaymie Jameson and a few minor convictions of other people for drug stuff.
DeJuan Young claimed that he was shot outside CHAZ by white supremacists, but the guy had a gofundme after getting shot in a totally different incident two years earlier and he's got a bunch of drug charges from New Jersey.
He clearly got shot because he's a fucking drug dealer
The reason this is important is because prior to the June 20th shootings (after which media outlets basically stopped talking about CHAZ) the media was claiming it was safe, like a street festival.
It was being patrolled by armed felons, wannabe terrorists, and drug dealers.
Dan Baker was in CHAZ with a gun. He was claiming to be a "medic" but he was also there for security stuff. While he was there, he told Gavin John (one of the only people to do serious journalism in CHAZ) that he was mad other CHAZians wouldn't help him build explosives
He openly told someone who was in CHAZ to do journalism that he was armed, that he'd fought with foreign militias, and that he wanted to build bombs. If journalists had done any research into who these people are, they would have known it would inevitably end in murder.
What's the race of everyone involved?
To ask that question is to answer it.
https://twitter.com/Tr00peRR/status/1639282134710906883?t=6BvWtVhE7x5c_Q7ODidAFg&s=19
#Houston
“In audio recordings Joseph Harell is heard talking about maybe getting probation and laughing at the fact someone would think he could spend up to 20 years in prison for his robbery.“
He’s the one who left the Asian woman paralyzed
-ABC 13
[Video]
Like I said below (quoting Ayn Rand): "[I]f the guilty do not pay, then the innocent have to pay..."
Why are you quoting Ayn Rand? Can't you tell us you're a fool in your own words?
Nice demonstration of that skill, Dave.
Last month i managed to pull my first five figure paycheck ever!!! I've been working for this company online for 2 years now and i never been happier.They are paying me $95/per hour and the best thing is cause i am not that tech-savy, they only asked for basic understanding of internet and basic typing skill.It's been an amazing experience working with them and i wanted to share this with you, because they are looking for new people to join their team now and i highly recommend to everyone to apply...
Visit following page for more information.................>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
How long will it take for the public to realize that, in encounters with the cops, the best way (though not foolproof) to avoid getting hurt is to throw your hands up and say "Don't Shoot."
Best way to survive an encounter with the cops is to not have one.
Not always an option.
But I those cases, acting like you're dealing with someone who can probably get away with shooting you and being *very polite* will probably help. Yes, it sucks. I've had quite a few unpleasant interactions with cops for "walking while punk". But I have somehow miraculously avoided being shot by not mouthing off to them or running away.
Best way to handle right-wing cop succors is to replace them.
Better Americans have been aware of this, and doing it, for decades.
How long will it take the cop apologists to stop telling this absurd lie? We have multiple cases where people doing exactly that were still summarily executed by lying, murderous, racist cops.
I was with you until you suggest that police should not pursue suspected thieves on foot if they run. That seems like a completely stupid policy.
It is right in line with left coast city decisions to announce that they will not prosecute shoplifting of less than 900 bucks. If you want to create more crime, these seem like great policies.
And you know what is going to get a lot more people shot? Ensuring that the police will not help of you are robbed. Then the only recourse in crime-ridden areas will be for people to shoot thieves on sight.
I'm not crazy about this, but ultimately property rights have to be backed by force. People aren't going to respect them just because.
ultimately property rights have to be backed by force.
Except if it's St. Ashli Babbitt the Martyr, of course.
You said her name! Good job.
everyone should get security protection https://nancynord.net/
Would have been better if the other shoppers had shot him rather than the cops.
"I'm TARRED o' niggers!"—Chris Rock
https://youtu.be/f3PJF0YE-x4
It's like I'm reading articles written by middle-school girls!
The only way to stop a thief -- regardless of what it is he is stealing -- is by use of force. If the thief refuses to comply with police commands (as in this case), he might suffer physical harm (as in this case). It is the thief himself who's to blame for this unfortunate outcome. He shouldn't've been stealing, and he should've complied with police commands.
The only alternative -- the one actually implemented in many major cities -- is to let criminal scum run wild. This is not a better alternative.
It is not "libertarian" to attack law-enforcement.
from Ayn Ran'd Atlas Shrugged:
Here is the final product of the unearned....[N]othing can justify injustice....When one acts on pity against justice, it is the good whom one punishes for the sake of the evil; when one saves the guilty from suffering, it is the innocent whom one forces to suffer. There is no escape from justice, nothing can be unearned and unpaid for in the universe, neither in matter nor in spirit—and if the guilty do not pay, then the innocent have to pay it.
I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($550 to $750 / hr) online from my laptop. Last month I GOT chek of nearly 85000$, this online work is simple and straightforward, don't have to go OFFICE, Its home online job. You become independent after joining this JOB. I really thanks to my FRIEND who refer me this SITE. I hope you also got what I...go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart......
Click the link—————————————>>> http://WWW.Pay.JioSalary.COM
Not to mention that the writer admits that not all the facts are known. So maybe the perp had a gun and was pointing it at the cops. Or maybe he went to his waistband. But apparently what happened after the shoplifting is irrelevant to the writer. It’s worse than middle school girl writing,
"Not to mention that the writer admits that not all the facts are known. "
The facts are known. By the police. The author refers to unanswered questions. Questions the police have left unanswered. This is hardly an 'admission' on the part of the author for journalistic malpractice. It's what happens when the police can get away with treating the public like middle school girls.
"There is no escape from justice, "
Except there is. Being shot to death by police before being arrested robs you of your chance to defend yourself in court before a judge and jury.
If someone runs away, you can run after them and stop them. You can't shoot them in the back for minor property crimes.
The problem with allowing police to conduct foot chases is that they're fat and lazy, so they pull out their guns and shoot to cover up the embarrassment of losing the perp because they're wheezing and clutching their chests after waddling 20 feet.
Can you repeat that after watching this video?
http://twitter.com/Tr00peRR/status/1639282134710906883?t=6BvWtVhE7x5c_Q7ODidAFg&s=19
Hmm, no.
I can get behind a policy of pursuing and stopping by any means necessary someone who is fleeing by car, since they're putting the general public in danger even if all they originally did was have a broken taillight. I can't get behind that for shoplifters fleeing on foot. The evil of killing the guy greatly outweighs the evil of his theft.
Should he have been shot? No, he should not have been.
But where the hell is the libertarian love of property rights? The criminal's right to your property exceeds yours?
"The criminal’s right to your property exceeds yours?"
The criminal is willing to risk his life for your property. Are you?
Why would I need to, since I got it legally and he is stealing from me?
Also, police are there to protect the criminals. Take away cops and people will have to defend themselves and the crook would not have walked out of the store if that was the case.
The criminal is willing to risk his life for your property. Are you?
Of course. Can I display the head when I'm done to deter others foolish enough to ignore the 'keep of the grass' signs.
"Why would I need to, since I got it legally and he is stealing from me?"
You don't need to. You can call any number of police agencies to do the work for you.
I agree about police being about protecting the rights of criminals. It probably works as well as can be expected for the most part.
"people will have to defend themselves and the crook would not have walked out of the store if that was the case."
Not so sure about that. Most typical shop workers pilfer if not steal from their work places. To expect them to pull out their pistols and shoot a suspected shoplifter is a bridge too far.
It's a "bridge too far" because we have police.
Without police, well, vigilante justice is not usually a very nice thing. Effective as all hell, but not nice.
“Without police,”
Why do we have police in the first place? Because people don’t want to engage in vigilante justice, and the state is more than happy to fill the gap. The clerk at the 7/11 isn’t about to put life on the line and risk getting into a gunfight when someone walks out with a stolen pair of sunglasses, protecting property that belongs to someone else.
We have police not because people don't want to engage in vigilante justice, but that history has shown that vigilante justice is worse. People people mobs and are too quick to judge, too quick to lynch
Cops acting as judge, jury and executioner is a form of vigilante justice.
We have police because the powerful are not fond of watching the lower classes show that they very much are a threat to them, so they demanded the state maintain a monopoly on legitimate violence.
"so they demanded the state maintain a monopoly on legitimate violence."
It's the illegitimate violence that's the problem. Nobody's demanding that.
If the state will not do so, then others shall.
"then others shall."
In that case there is no monopoly on violence, legitimate or otherwise. It's every man for himself.
That's what happens when the state shirks its responsibilities.
That’s what happens when the state cannot or will not govern. The half assed and contradictory response to covid19, or climate change is another example. But faced with rising civil unrest the state has been responding predictably. Summer 2020, Trump has demonstrators gassed and poses with an upside down bible, while the Washington major has ‘BLACK LIVES MATTER’ painted on the street in front of the WH. All theatre. What these two statists had in common was they both increased funding for police in response to the unrest.
"But faced with rising civil unrest the state has been responding predictably. Summer 2020, Trump has demonstrators gassed"
Trump had no part of that. And it should have dramatically harsher than just tear gassing.
"In that case there is no monopoly on violence, legitimate or otherwise. It’s every man for himself."
People currently do not do so because the state is supposed to do it on their behalf. If the state decides to not do so, then the people do not have other options other than to do it themselves.
"and it's still unclear whether Johnson had a weapon."
Bullshit. If the police found a weapon on him, they would be touting it and showing it off every time they get asked about the case.
Yes It is critical issue. And very Scred. https://expertmover.ae/
Searching for dependable INA bearings? HRD Bearing Co. Ltd . has got you covered. Our top-notch bearings are engineered for exceptional performance and extended durability. Trust HRD Bearing Co. Ltd. as your go-to source for all your INA bearing needs.
I strongly disagree with this article. He didn't "just steal some sunglasses." He resisted arrest and attempted to escape and evade by running into a dark wooded area. There was every reason to believe he could be armed. This is 100% a case of "play stupid games and win stupid prizes." He didn't have to steal the sunglasses. He didn't have to resist arrest. He didn't have to run into a dark wooded area. He chose to do all of these things knowing that someone, either himself or the officer, could be injured from his actions...and he did it anyway.
Most Beautiful Models and Hot Escorts are available in Karachi. You will find a lot of escort and call girls providers all over Pakistan, but supplying Escorts in Karachi absolutely has already been notable. Escorts in Karachi
The foundation's efforts have had a positive impact on the lives of countless children. By providing support and care to those who need it most, the Children's Kingdom Foundation is creating a brighter future for the next generation. Through their work, they are ensuring that children have the opportunity to grow up healthy, happy, and successful.