Incidents

While employed with the Richmond Police Department as a School Resource Officer at Fairfield Court Elementary School, Harold L. Ford was reportedly called in to a classroom to deal with a misbehaving child. He then reportedly took a Black eight-year-old girl into the hall and assaulted her, forced the child into handcuffs, then slammed her face-down in a police car, a civil rights complaint stated.

The case, Brown et al v Ford, was filed by Sakia Hall on behalf of the child on January 25, 2011 in Richmond Circuit Court, then later transferred to Virginia Eastern District Court as a federal case.

Judge James R. Spencer, presiding, dismissed the case with prejudice after Harold L. Ford's attorneys cited qualified immunity. Ford continued serving as an officer with the City. In 2019 and 2023, he ran for Sheriff in Henrico County.

Aeschlimann followed Brian Portis and violently invaded his home, according to a lawsuit.

Alone on "patrol," Officer Chris Snyder shot and killed Yobani Sosa.

Richmond Police officers Marshall Young and William Turner were named in a 2005-2006 lawsuit filed by Adell Cammack over civil rights abuses.

Richmond Police officers Michael Couture and Edward Aeschlimann shot 21-year-old Santana Olavarria during a traffic stop. The officer said there was a struggle to remove Olavarria from the car, and he was dragged by the car and pulled into the vehicle as it started to move.

Officer Couture shot Santanna Olavarria, killing him, and Officer Ed Aeschlimann shot him four times. Couture was tried twice and convicted of manslaughter, served no jail time, but was given a fine.

Aeschlimann was indicted for murder. The charge was later reduced to second-degree manslaughter. He was found guilty, but is still employed at the Richmond Police Department.

Dwayne Swann was shot five times by Richmond City police officers during an encounter in the Hillside Court area of Richmond, Virginia, on February 3, 2004. During the encounter, Hathaway fired three shots; Wilson, two; and Mocello, four.

Richmond police fatally shot Isaac Thompson, 21.

Isaac Jerome Thompson was killed during a traffic stop for improper registration.

29-year-old Verlon Johnson was shot to death unarmed on his front porch.

"On May 17, 2002, Detective Melvin led a team of eight other police officers to Verlon Johnson's South Side home to arrest him. Mr. Johnson came out of his house as ordered, his hands in the air. Detective Melvin testified that he saw the self-employed landscaper suddenly drop his right hand. The detective fired. Verlon Johnson fell backward onto his porch, his hands upraised and coming to rest by the sides of his head.

No gun was found. Further, Rosa Johnson, Mr. Johnson's wife, testified that her husband was left-handed. The Johnsons had five children, four of whom were in the house with their mother when their father was killed."

Twenty-nine-year-old father of five Verlon Johnson was shot to death while unarmed on his front porch in South Side as a nine-member police team attempted to arrest him on robbery and firearms charges.

No gun was found on or near Johnson. Detective David Melvin, the only officer at the scene to pull his gun, was charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Following two mistrials, he was acquitted at the third trial. The City settled out of court with Johnson’s widow for an undisclosed amount.

"On the evening of October 21, 2001, Officers Chuck Howell (Howell) and Robert Sprinkle (Sprinkle) of the Richmond City Police Department... as members of the drugs and weapons unit... arrived at the Creighton Court apartment complex at approximately 8:30 p.m. as part of an effort to surprise 'anyone who was dealing drugs' in the neighborhood, which was 'known for its numerous drug activities.'

They parked at the southern end of the complex and were walking north when they noticed a group of individuals in a 'cut' between two apartment buildings...

Howell [said that he] suspected that a drug transaction 'was going to occur or had occurred.'

However, neither officer saw any drug activities or exchanges.

Howell and Sprinkle continued walking toward the group. At that point, defendant 'looked in [the officers'] direction' and immediately 'took off running' in the opposite direction...

Howell yelled at defendant to stop, and he 'got on the ground.'

Sprinkle handcuffed defendant and did a 'pat down' search for weapons.

No weapons or drugs were found at that time.

Howell did not tell defendant that he was under arrest, and Sprinkle told defendant 'you're not under arrest, [you're] under investigative detention until we can figure out . . . what's going on...'

Sprinkle arrested him for trespassing and in a search incident to the arrest found drugs and a cellular telephone.

The trial court ruled:

'I understand why the officers did what they did. But . . . [u]nder the evidence that has been presented to this Court, I do not find the facts to rise to a reasonable articulable suspicion that a crime has occurred or even that a crime is about to occur, and I grant the motion to suppress."

The Commonwealth appeals this ruling.

"..[T]he district court, in the Suppression Order of November 29, 2001, concluded that “[g]iven the totality of the circumstances known to the officers in this case [Robert S. Sprinkle and Eric Flick], there was not reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot, sufficient to conduct an investigatory stop of the defendant.'

,.[T]he question of “[w]hether an officer has such reasonable suspicion to justify a stop-and-frisk is subject to de novo review...

Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Terry v. Ohio, law enforcement officers may properly conduct a brief investigative stop of an individual when they possess reasonable suspicion, grounded in specific articulable facts, that he has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity.

On appeal, the Government asserts that the events occurring in connection with the surveillance operation of July 12, 2001, were sufficient to create a reasonable suspicion... The Government maintains that... the district court erred... [W]e agree."