REQUIRE AN UNBIASED POLICE REVIEW PROCESS

D. The Defendants’ Second Reenactment
Contradicts Their Initial Statements To The
Kenosha Police Department, The Officers’ Sworn Testimony, And The Defendants’ Formal Discovery Responses.

  1. In June 2007, the defendants were aware that the plaintiffs claimed Officer Gonzales was standing on the right side of Bell (i.e., between Lieutenant Krueger and Officer Strausbaugh.
  2. A videotaped reenactment was made on December 12, 2007.
  3. This second reenactment was reenacted three times, videotaped only once, and is how the defendants now claim the shooting happened.
  4. The purpose of the second reenactment was to figure out how Officer Gonzales could stand at the front of the car and still shoot Michael Bell in the head.
  5. The second reenactment shows Bell shot as follows:



  6. This second reenactment contradicts Officer Gonzales’ statement, the first walk-through, his sworn testimony, and his formal discovery responses in at least the following material respects:
    • Officer Gonzales is not pointing his gun towards the windshield but is pointing it at a 60 to 90 degree angle away from the windshield;
    • Officer Gonzales is not pointing his gun away from the officers but is now pointing his weapon at Lieutenant Krueger;
    • Officer Gonzales is not canting his gun slightly to the right but is now canting his weapon slightly to the left;
  7. This second reenactment contradicts Lieutenant Krueger’s statement, the first walk-through, his sworn testimony, and formal discovery responses in at least the following material respects:
    • Lieutenant Kruger is not pinning Bell against the left front fender
    • Lieutenant Kruger is not holding Bell with Bell’s waist bent forward over the hood of the car;
    • Lieutenant Kruger does not have his head to the left side of Bell but rather places his head to the right side;
    • Lieutenant Krueger does not have Bell in anything resembling a “bear hug.”
    • The left side of Bell’s head is not closer to the windshield.
  8. The second reenactment contradicts Officer Weidner’s statement, the first walk-through, and his sworn testimony in at least the following material respects:
    • Officer Weidner can be seen running up to Lieutenant Krueger and Officer Strausbaugh at the Nissan, contrary to his statement that he only “started to move towards” the officers but then stopped to keep Kim and Shantae Bell back.
    • Officer Weidner looks back over his shoulder while he is running away from Lieutenant Krueger and Officer Strausbaugh and claims to see Bell’s hand on Officer Strausbaugh’s gun, contrary to his statement that after he kept Kim and Shantae Bell back, he turned back to the Nissan and saw Officer Strausbaugh’s gun.
  9. The second reenactment contradicts Officer Strausbaugh’s statement and his first walk-through in that this is the very first time that Officer Strausbaugh ever claimed he knew what position Bell was in when he was shot.
  10. The second reenactment is also incredible..
  11. Officer Gonzales’ gun as shown in the reenactment does not line up with the forensic evidence:
    • Officer Gonzales’ gun does not line up with the muzzle stamp left on Bell’s head.
    • Officer Gonzales’ gun’ trajectory also does not line up with the exit wound.
    • Officer Gonzales’ gun placement still does not take into account the location of the spent shell casing, which was found to the left of where Officer Gonzales claims he was standing.
  12. As reflected in the autopsy report, the trajectory of the bullet that went through Michael Edward Bell’s head was right to left, front to back, and slightly downwards, which is depicted in the autopsy…
  13. The bullet exiting Bell’s head had a velocity in excess of one hundred feet per second.
  14. Given the trajectory of the bullet of right to left, front to back, and slightly downwards, Lieutenant Kruger would be in the path of the exiting bullet and should have been injured or killed.
  15. Lieutenant Krueger confirmed he was not wounded in the shooting of Bell.
  16. Given the clear exit wound, there would be blood or brain matter deposited on Lieutenant Krueger, as even the defendant’s blood spatter consultant agreed.
  17. No blood or brain matter was left on Lieutenant Krueger, and Lieutenant Krueger has since laundered his jacket.
The Incident
›  OVERVIEW OF KEY POINTS  ‹ ›  SUMMARY BRIEF  ‹ The Unlawful Stop Choking and Tasing Gratuitous Beating The Unlawful Use of Deadly Force No DNA Evidence or Fingerprints "Muzzle" Stamp and Entry Wound Lack of Blood Splatter Location of Shell Casing Defendant's Contradictory Accounts First Reenactment at the Crime Scene Defendant's Discovery Responses Second Reenactment Third Reenactment
Who Was Michael? Evidence & Investigation Change The Process Billboard Campaign In The News Contact Us Kenosha PD Tasing AG Schimel's
Dec 8th 2017 Letter New York Times
Advertisements