FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Following the events of April 19, 2016 at Crescent Drive in the City of Erie, the District Attorney's Office commenced a review of the circumstances involving a civilian shooting and wounding another civilian in the course of those events. Materials obtained include: videotaped interview of the « videotaped interview of a civilian ey three (3) 911 calls, one of which was initiated by the civilian shooter; emergency records from UPMC Hamot; medical records from the Erie County Prison, Dawe Discussions were also held with Erie Police personnel conducting their investigation, Having done so, itis the determination of our office the actions of the civilian in shooting, and twice hitting, the defendant were justified under the laws of Pennsylvania, Although the defendanv/assailant Johnson was shot both times while running away from the civilian shooter, suffering injuries to his upper back and leg areas, each shooting incident was, justified. At the time the civilian shooter first shot defendant, he had reason to believe the defendant was armed and has just shot Kum Miller. This information came from the exclamations of Gary Miller as defendant fled from his home, and is corroborated by the contents of the civilian shooter's 911 call, With the reasonable belief that he and others in the immediate area were in danger of death or serious bodily injury, and/or that the defendant may escape into the neighborhood, the civilian justifiably fired at the defendant. ‘The defendant fell to the ground and was surrounded by the civilian shooter and another neighbor, being warned numerous times not to move or risk being shot again, At this time, the civilian shooter realized the defendant did not have a gun, but defendant continued to ignore commands to stay still. At some point, the defendant managed to get up and flee, whereupon the civilian shooter fired three more times, hitting the defendant once. The actions of the civilian shooter in this scenario are justified as well, despite his knowledge defendant did not have a firearm on his person at that time. The use of deadly force is justified if'a person reasonably believes the force is necessary to prevent an escape, particularly if the person escaping may harm others. Evidence indicates police were then on scene when the civilian shooter shot the defendant a second time, and his belief the defendant would escape was therefore mistaken, However, given all the facts, circumstances, and the chaotic nature of events unfolding, it was nevertheless reasonable for him to think deadly force was needed to prevent an escape. Because that belief, although mistaken, was reasonable, the use of deadly force was justified under the laws of Pennsylvania, Accordingly, criminal charges are not warranted in this matter. ‘k Daneri rie County District Attorney