Pittsburgh appeals reinstatement of cop in Jim Rogers Taser case

The city of Pittsburgh on Friday appealed the reinstatement of the officer who was fired after repeatedly Tasing a homeless man who died the next day.

The appeal, filed in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court, includes the arbitration award and a dissent written by the city’s representative on the panel, attorney Juan Rivera.

Rivera suggests in his dissent that the arbitration decision in favor of Officer Keith Edmonds should be “rejected as a gross mischaracterization, obfuscation and abandonment of law.”

“Edmonds repeatedly testified he violated the policies to Jim Rogers’ peril,” Rivera wrote. “But, according to the panel, that’s not enough.”

Edmonds, who was terminated March 24, 2022, appealed that decision through the city’s police union. He was reinstated by an arbitrator on March 8 who found that there was not sufficient evidence presented by the city to justify the firing.

“[A]lthough the grievant may not have followed each and every policy, rule and regulation for which he was charged by the strict letter or strictest interpretation of that policy, rule or regulation, the grievant did not violate them either,” wrote neutral arbitrator Marc A. Winters.

Instead, the decision goes on, each of the policies allegedly violated contains language that permits officers to use their discretion based on the totality of the circumstances they encounter.

“And in certain policies, rules and regulations, it was the failure of adequate training for the particular circumstance occurring not the grievant’s conduct,” the arbitrator wrote.

Attorney Michael Machen, who has represented Edmonds, said his client ought to be reinstated.

“I have maintained throughout this investigation that Mr. Edmonds had no culpability in this matter, and while not directly involved in his arbitration hearing, I believe the decision is appropriate.”

On the morning of Oct. 13, 2021, Edmonds was dispatched to Harriet Street in Bloomfield for a report of a possibly stolen bike.

When he arrived, Edmonds confronted Jim Rogers, a homeless Black man.

He asked him questions and then started to pat him down.

According to video footage of the incident released in February, Rogers became upset when Edmonds removed his wallet from his pants pocket.

Edmonds responded forcefully and in less than a minute deployed his Taser.

The video of the incident showed that Edmonds deployed his Taser 10 times over three minutes and 15 seconds.

After Rogers was subdued and taken into custody, officers on the scene left him sitting in the back of a police car for 17 minutes, where he repeatedly said he couldn’t breathe, screamed and banged his head against the cage behind him.

Two officers then drove him to UPMC Mercy, where they arrived in 17 minutes.

They found Rogers unresponsive in the back seat.

He died the next day.

His cause of death, according to the Allegheny County Medical Examiner’s Office, was a lack of oxygen to the brain. The death was ruled accidental.

An investigating grand jury convened by the Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office resulted in no criminal charges being filed.

The city of Pittsburgh settled a wrongful death lawsuit with Rogers’ family for $8 million.

Nine officers on the scene that day were disciplined by the department. Of those, two retired, four were fired but reinstated, and three others were suspended.

The arbitration hearings before Winters, Rivera and FOP President Robert Swartzwelder were held on Sept. 15 and Nov. 8.

Winters wrote in the arbitration award that there was not sufficient evidence presented at the hearings to justify termination. It ordered the city to reinstate Edmonds to his previous position and make him whole from any and all lost earnings and benefits.

Reasons for appeal

In the appeal filed Friday, attorneys for the city list eight reasons why the arbitration award should be vacated, including that the arbitrator acted outside of his authority in deciding an issue not before him — the adequacy of Edmonds’ training.

The appeal also alleged that there was substantial evidence to support termination and that the arbitrator failed to answer the factual question of whether Edmonds violated the rules he was charged with.

It additionally accused the arbitrator of invading managerial prerogative and discretion.

According to the arbitration award, Edmonds was terminated for violating 11 separate policies or regulations, including warrantless searches and seizures; de-escalation; use of deadly force; neglect of duty; handling of prisoners; and pepper aerosol restraint spray.

But the award found there was not enough evidence to show “just cause” exists to support termination.

In Rivera’s dissent, he called the panel’s decision “not only disappointing, but a true abandonment of all semblance of law and jurisprudence.”

The panel’s only job, Rivera wrote, was to determine if there was just cause to terminate Edmonds, who he noted admitted in his testimony that he violated rules and policies.

“Furthermore, the panel cowardly and erroneously hides behind the officer’s discretion, while removing all discretion from the city to provide for the safety of its citizens and to even keep them alive.”

Rivera said that the decision eviscerates the city’s managerial right to enforce its policies, especially since a deviation from the rules “is no longer grounds for termination or even discipline.”

Swartzwelder was not immediately available for comment regarding the city’s appeal.