Bucks DA: New Hope police-involved shooting not justified, but excused

Posted April 12, 2019

Brian Riling (left) at moment he was shot on March 3, 2019

The New Hope police officer who shot and seriously wounded a Pipersville man after he grabbed his service weapon instead of his stun gun during an altercation inside a holding cell did not have mandatory up-to-date Taser training, according to the Bucks County District Attorney’s Office, which on Friday released its finding the shooting was not justified, but “excused.”

Bucks County District Attorney Matt Weintraub confirmed the outdated training detail, which goes against the New Hope Police Department’s Taser policy, a copy of which was obtained by this news organization.

In a news release announcing his decision, Weintraub added the investigation led by Bucks County detectives also found the officer wore his Taser on the right side, in front of his firearm, which also goes against the police department’s policy. The policy states officers should wear their Tasers on their non-dominant side, in what is known as a cross-draw position.

“This violation of policy, however, does not constitute a violation of law,” Weintraub wrote.

New Hope police Chief Michael Cummings did not response to an email and phone message left for him Friday seeking comment.

Pennsylvania law excuses the shooting officer’s conduct from criminal prosecution because of his “honest but mistaken” belief he was deploying his Taser at the time he fired one shot that struck Brian Riling, 38, in the abdomen on March 3, Weintraub wrote.

Riling survived the shooting, but he has experienced ongoing medical complications as a result of it, according to his criminal defense attorney, Richard Fink.

In the release, Weintraub said the officer would have been justified in using his Taser to regain control of Riling, “as the officer had a reasonable belief the scuffle posed a danger to his fellow officer.” But the use of a firearm must be an officer’s last resort and it was not justified in this case, he added.

But since the officer believe he was deploying his Taser, “not wielding his service firearm,” he did not possess the criminal mental state required to be guilty of a crime under state law, according to Weintraub.

“The state crimes code states a person has a defense to a criminal charge if he makes a mistake for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse,” Weintraub wrote.

Weintraub declined to release or confirm the identity of the officer, citing his office’s policy not to identify individuals who are not charged with crimes. Attorney William Goldman, who is representing the officer, also declined to confirm his name, but said his client worked for decades on the borough force and he was not asked to retire.

Weintraub made available an uncut, roughly 12-minute surveillance video of the shooting incident with the news release. The video, which depicts the altercation, does not show the full faces of the two officers involved.

Court documents filed in Riling’s March 3 arrest identified New Hope police Cpl. Dawn Haas, Cpl. Matt Zimmerman and Officer Justin Hagan as responding to an assault report and subsequent arrest, but do not include any details of the shooting. It is not known if either Hagan or Zimmerman are the male officers seen in the video from inside the borough police department’s holding cell.

The shooting officer, who was placed on paid administrative leave following the shooting, submitted paperwork seeking immediate retirement three days before the Bucks County District Attorney’s Office issued its determination, according to the DA release and confirmed by Goldman.

In the release, Weintraub said his investigation included extensive review of police reports and video footage, interviews with involved parties, and the examination of the circumstances surrounding Riling’s detention and arrest the night of the shooting.

New Hope police arrested Riling earlier in the evening after he allegedly harassed, threatened and assaulted his estranged girlfriend in a confrontation outside the New Hope restaurant where she works, according to court documents. Riling also had an active arrest warrant on charges of burglary and harassment stemming from a February incident with the same woman.

Riling was apprehended while he was allegedly waiting in his vehicle parked in the complex where the woman lives, according to court documents. He is charged with witness intimidation and retaliation against a witness, both felonies, and misdemeanor charges of stalking, simple assault and harassment and driving with a DUI-suspended license. His preliminary hearing on those charges is scheduled for Monday.

The officer who shot Riling was aware of these two incidents involving Riling before the holding cell incident, and had personally heard threats of violence made by Riling during a phone call between Riling and his estranged girlfriend, Weintraub said, adding they “illustrate the mindset of the officer” who shot Riling.

Goldman echoed the district attorney’s assessment.

“Police officers are called upon to make split-second decisions and with this, it was in defense of a fellow officer with a large man ... who had professed he was not going back to prison, announced he would kill himself, and was fighting with an officer in a jail cell. This man had committed burglary with a crowbar, he assaulted (the estranged girlfriend) he stalked her, he instructed her to lie, he resisted arrest,” Goldman said. “It’s important to know the events that led up to this incident. Really important.”

The video of the altercation and shooting, which this news organization viewed, shows Riling entering the holding cell and removing his belt at the direction of one of the officers. After removing his belt, an unidentified white packet falls to the cell floor and Riling steps on it. The unidentified officer attempts to move Riling, who is described as a “fit” 6-foot-4-inch construction worker, off the packet, which Riling is heard denying is his in the video.

A struggle between with the first officer ensues and Riling retrieves the packet and throws it into the cell toilet. Roughly one minute and 30 seconds into the video, the second unidentified officer enters the cell to assist his fellow officer, who is attempting to subdue Riling on a bench in the cell. Approximately 10 seconds later, the second officer, his service firearm in his hand, shoots Riling in the torso after yelling “Taser.”

“In reviewing the totality of the circumstances, Weintraub also considered the officer’s decades of exemplary service to the citizens of New Hope as evidenced by dozens of commendations and letters, as compared to relatively few minor historical infractions on his service record,” the release said. Weintraub declined to describe the type of infractions on the officer’s record.

Bucks DA Matt Weintraub

Friday’s announcement capped nearly six weeks of mystery surrounding the shooting. The District Attorney’s Office had declined to provide basic details that are typically released days after a police-involved shooting including where it happened, circumstances surrounding the shooting, and the victim’s identity or an update of his condition. This news organization obtained those details and others after obtaining court documents and filing Right to Know requests.

It is the first time in recent memory where the district attorney has not deemed a police-involved shooting justified. Since 2009, at least 12 police-involved shootings have occurred in Bucks County, including one in 2012 in New Hope that left a man paralyzed

In the earlier shooting, police contended Steven Cabelus was shot after he answered the door to his apartment with a gun in his hand when police attempted to serve an involuntary mental health commitment warrant on him. The DA’s subsequent investigation found Cabelus pointed the gun at officers, refused to drop the gun and appeared to be moving toward them, prompting an officer to shoot him.

The DA did not pursue criminal charges against Cabelus, according to a search of online court records. Cabelus also denied the police and DA version of the shooting in a 2014 federal civil suit he filed against the borough, four police officers, and Cummings. In his suit, Cabelus claimed police never announced themselves when they knocked on his door and when he saw the officers he dropped his gun before the officers fired.

New Hope Borough paid Cabelus $500,000 as part of a 2015 settlement agreement that released the officers from the suit, according to documents obtained through a Right to Know request.