Jeremy McCracken, who was shot dead by Springfield Township police earlier this month, sued the township in federal court over the summer, alleging civil rights violations in a zoning dispute, but lost.
New records obtained by the Akron Beacon Journal also provide additional details about police visiting McCracken’s home on Oct. 5 and what happened with the zoning violation, including what the town deemed an abandoned vehicle. increase. Two police officers reported finding a gun near his wounded McCracken.
Initial report:A man has been identified dead after shooting at Springfield police on Wednesday
Springfield police say 38-year-old McCracken was shot by officers at his East Waterloo Road home as he opened fire and the township was about to tow a vehicle. The officer was unharmed. The shooting is being investigated by the Ohio Criminal Investigative Service. Township officials involved in the incident are on administrative leave.
Why did McCracken sue Springfield?
On August 8, McCracken filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. He lived on East Waterloo property, but he claimed that township officials and employees had entered land that belonged to his father, violating his civil rights.
According to the complaint, Springfield Township Police accused McCracken of violating local law and possessing a “junk car” on the property.
McCracken filed the lawsuit on his own without an attorney.
He alleges Springfield Township removed two other vehicles from its Edith Avenue property in February, and Jeremy McCracken was not compensated for their removal. It also claimed that the actions taken on the Edith Avenue site were also infringement.
McCracken was seeking punitive damages totaling $1 million from the township and police, and $250,000 in punitive damages of $50,000 each from five Springfield Township officials.
However, U.S. District Judge Benita Pearson dismissed the case on August 31, saying McCracken had failed to prove that his constitutional rights were violated by the township.
Police say a gun was found at the scene
The Springfield Township Police Incident Report and Supplemental Investigation Report, released Tuesday, largely describes what officers responding to the shooting saw. The record does not include reports filed by officers directly involved in the shooting.
According to one report, officers went to 2348 E. Waterloo Road at 11:18 am on October 5 to tow a zoning-violating vehicle, waiting for a tow truck to arrive.
“After a while, the officer radioed them to say they had fired and to send EMS,” the officer said. “Myself and other officers responded to the scene. The officers involved said McCracken left the back of his house and began shooting at them without warning. They said they returned shots out of fear for their own safety and the safety of others at the scene.”
In another report, an officer said he was in the office when he heard a radio transmission that a shot had been fired. When he arrived at the scene, he said he saw a flatbed tow truck backing up to cars on the property.
He said he saw another officer “attending a male suspect lying face down. The male subject was breathing but unresponsive. [one] Handcuff on left wrist. Not far from the suspect lay a large revolver with his hammer pointing backwards. ”
One officer said when he arrived at the scene he saw a gun about three feet in front of McCracken, who appeared to be breathing and had a gunshot wound to his torso.
One officer reported going to a nearby facility to check on the welfare of the people there “because the bullets were flying in different directions”. said it had submitted it to investigators.
Another officer recovered a gun from an officer involved in the shooting and made sure the weapon was first lowered before being placed in an evidence bag and handed over to detectives.
