Part III

​​Wrongful Police Shooting

​

On April 30, 2011, shortly after the fatal barbershop shooting was reported, there was a strong police presence in the area. Tamik was still wanted for walking away from the minimum security facility and knew he needed to leave the area. Karen Fuller came to pick him up from a house about a block from the barbershop. Tamik jumped into the trunk of her car, unaware that a twelve-year-old girl and six-month-old boy were in the backseat.

​

Undercover officers saw Tamik enter the trunk, blocked the car from leaving, and approached with guns drawn. Although officers claimed they “cleared the vehicle,” they somehow failed to notice both children in the backseat.

Springfield Police Officer Raul Gonzalez pulled Fuller from the vehicle and handed her to Officer Marcus Starks. Gonzalez then reached inside the car, activated the trunk release, walked to the rear, pushed the trunk open and, without allowing Tamik to surrender, shot him six times at close range. After being shot, Tamik fired back to protect his life.

​

To justify the shooting, Gonzalez claimed Tamik opened the trunk from inside and came up shooting at police. SEE OFFICER GONZALEZ'S REPORT.

​

But the twelve-year-old child who witnessed the incident gave police a written statement immediately afterward stating, “The police officer reached into the car and popped the button to open the trunk.”  SEE THE TWELVE-YEAR-OLD CHILD'S STATEMENT. Massachusetts State Police Trooper Stephen Gregorczyk, who was also shot during the incident, originally reported the same thing: “Officer Gonzalez reached near the driver side seat and activated the trunk release... Officer Gonzalez reached the vehicle's rear and pushed the trunk open.” SEE TROOPER GREGORCZYK'S  REPORT.

​

At trial, however, Gregorczyk recanted and testified that he did not see Gonzalez do those things.  SEE TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS OF TROOPER GREGORCZYK'S TESTIMONY.This is the “Blue Wall,” officers covering for fellow officers. Sgt. David Martin's report also stated that Gonzalez had the trunk “partially open” while giving Tamik commands to show his hands. Yet Gonzalez's own report did not say that he gave Tamik an opportunity to surrender. SEE SGT. MARTIN'S REPORT.

​

If this was not a wrongful police shooting, why were there so many conflicting accounts about how the trunk was opened and what happened immediately before Tamik was shot? Officer Marcus Starks reported that after Gonzalez removed Fuller from the car, Starks grabbed her and forced her against a fence. Fuller told him Tamik was in the trunk. According to Starks, Gonzalez then moved toward the rear of the vehicle. His report omitted Gonzalez reaching inside the car to open the trunk, although at trial Starks testified that he saw Gonzalez “reaching” into the vehicle. Starks claimed he then saw the trunk open and “a black pistol emerge, pointing out towards Officer Gonzalez and Trooper Gregorczyk.” ​SEE OFFICER STARKS REPORT.   

​

But the officers' own descriptions raise serious questions about whether Starks could have seen what he claimed. Gonzalez was positioned near the driver's rear side of the vehicle, Gregorczyk was on the passenger's rear side, and Starks was near the rear driver's side door. Gregorczyk reported that when the trunk opened, Tamik was lying on his right side with his head toward the driver's side and his feet toward Gregorczyk. He also stated that after Tamik was shot, he “still had a handgun in his right hand.”
 

At trial, Starks testified that he saw the gun emerge through the small opening beneath the raised trunk lid. SEE PHOTO OF TRUNK.  SEE TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS OF OFFICER STARKS' TESTIMONY.

But if Tamik was lying on his right side with the gun in his right hand, as Gregorczyk described, how could Starks have seen that gun emerge through that opening from his position?

That's impossible.

The evidence and conflicting accounts presented here support Tamik's position that officers opened the trunk and shot him before giving him an opportunity to surrender. Tamik maintains that if he had not been armed and defended himself after being shot, the officers would have killed him and the truth about what occurred would never have been questioned.

​

Officer Gonzalez Lied   and was Never Shot

​

During this incident, in self-defense, Tamik shot Gregorczyk in his bullet-resistant vest.  Officer Gonzalez actually lied, acting like he was shot in his vest, too.  We have some of Gonzalez's medical records from his hospital visit immediately after this shooting.  At one point, his record states that Gonzalez had “GSW [gunshot wounds] to R [right] upper chest + R [right] axilla - both bullets caught in a bulletproof vest.”    Then, during that same visit, about thirty minutes later, Gonzalez's records indicate, “GSW [gunshot wound] to Left upper chest-bullet lodged in a vest.”  SEE OFFICER GONZALEZ'S MEDICAL RECORDS - RIGHT.  SEE OFFICER GONZALEZ'S MEDICAL RECORDS - LEFT.

​

That's three bullets alleged to have been lodged in Officer Gonzalez's vest.  But Massachusetts State Police Sergeant John Crane testified that he “looked over this vest carefully, and it's his opinion that there are no obvious bullet strikes on this vest.”  Sgt. Crane also testified that he examined the shirt Officer Gonzalez wore over his vest that day, and he “did not find any tears or punctures consistent with a bullet or projectile going into it.”  SEE TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS OF SGT. CRANE'S TESTIMONY. 

​

Had Gonzalez actually been struck by bullets, there should have been physical evidence of those strikes. Aside from Gonzalez's claim and the conflicting medical documentation, the examination of his clothing and vest revealed no evidence of a bullet strike.

Yet Tamik was still convicted of shooting Officer Gonzalez.

​

Police officers involved in shootings can be placed on paid administrative leave while an incident is investigated. Tamik, however, was charged, tried, convicted and sentenced to twenty years for shooting an officer whose vest and clothing showed no evidence of being struck by a bullet.

​

There are too many contradictions surrounding what happened that day to ignore. From the opening of the trunk, to the officers' conflicting accounts, to the physical evidence concerning Gonzalez's alleged gunshot wounds, serious questions remain about the police shooting of Tamik Kirkland and the convictions that followed.

​

For Tamik, the wrongful police shooting and wrongful convictions are connected parts of a much larger story about accountability, constitutional rights, and what can happen when the people entrusted with enforcing the law are not held accountable for their own actions.