Pasadena police have reopened their investigation into the fatal shooting of Officer Ryan Twyman by a colleague in 2022 after a witness provided new evidence, Police Chief John Perez confirmed Thursday. The department is reviewing the incident under a new lens following the witness’s account, which contradicts earlier versions of events described as “horseplay” between officers. While Perez declined to specify the nature of the new evidence, legal experts say the case now carries heightened scrutiny amid growing public distrust of police accounts in officer-involved shootings.
The shooting occurred on June 15, 2022, when Officer Twyman was fatally shot during what was initially described as a training exercise gone wrong. At the time, the Pasadena Police Department stated the incident stemmed from “horseplay” between officers, a conclusion that drew immediate skepticism from Twyman’s family and some community members. The case has since become a flashpoint in discussions about police accountability and internal investigations.
According to the Los Angeles Times, the new witness—whose identity remains confidential—has provided details that allegedly contradict the department’s initial narrative. While Perez did not disclose specifics, sources familiar with the matter suggest the witness’s account may challenge the department’s characterization of the shooting as an accident. Legal observers note that such discrepancies often trigger broader reviews by independent agencies.
What Happened in the Original Investigation?
In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, Pasadena police released a statement calling the incident a “tragic accident” during a training exercise. Officer Twyman, a 10-year veteran of the force, was pronounced dead at the scene. His colleague, Officer Michael Johnson, was taken into custody but later released without charges. The department’s initial report described the shooting as resulting from “improper handling of a firearm during a simulated training scenario,” a narrative that was widely questioned by Twyman’s family and some legal advocates.
Critics pointed to inconsistencies in the timeline and lack of transparency in the department’s internal review. The New York Times reported at the time that Twyman’s family had requested an independent investigation, citing concerns about the department’s handling of the case. The family’s attorney, Benjamin Crump, stated that the initial account “lacked credibility” and called for a full review by an outside agency.
Why Is the Case Being Reopened Now?
The reopening of the case follows a pattern seen in other high-profile officer-involved shootings, where new evidence or witness testimonies prompt second looks. In this instance, the witness’s account—while not yet publicly detailed—has reportedly provided information that contradicts the department’s original findings. Police Chief Perez stated in a press conference that the department is “taking this very seriously” and will conduct a thorough review.
Legal experts, including Professor David Harris of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, note that such cases often hinge on whether the shooting was truly accidental or whether there were underlying factors, such as misconduct or negligence. “When a witness comes forward with a different version of events, it forces the department to re-examine not just the facts but also the credibility of their initial assessment,” Harris said.
According to internal police records obtained by Reuters, the original investigation was conducted by the Pasadena Police Department’s Internal Affairs Division. However, critics have argued that internal reviews may lack the independence needed to fully scrutinize such cases. The reopening could lead to an external review, though Perez has not confirmed this possibility.
What Are the Implications for Police Accountability?
The case has drawn comparisons to other officer-involved shootings where initial narratives were later challenged. For example, the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, began with a police account that was later contradicted by forensic evidence and witness testimonies. Similarly, the 2016 shooting of Philando Castile in Minnesota was initially described as a routine traffic stop gone wrong, but later investigations revealed inconsistencies in the officer’s account.
In Pasadena, the reopening of the case comes amid broader calls for police departments to adopt more transparent and independent review processes. The Police Executive Research Forum has previously recommended that departments use outside agencies to investigate officer-involved shootings to avoid conflicts of interest. While Pasadena has not yet announced plans for an external review, the witness’s testimony may pressure the department to take such steps.
For families of officers involved in such incidents, the reopening of the case offers a glimmer of hope. Twyman’s family, who have been vocal advocates for transparency, have welcomed the news. “This is a step in the right direction,” said Twyman’s sister, Laura Martinez, in a statement to Fox 11 Los Angeles. “We’ve been saying from the beginning that something didn’t add up, and now the department is listening.”
What Happens Next in the Investigation?
Police Chief Perez has stated that the reopening of the case does not indicate any change in the department’s initial findings but rather a thorough review of the new evidence. The timeline for the investigation’s conclusion remains unclear, though Perez has indicated that updates will be provided as the review progresses. Legal experts suggest that the process could take several months, depending on the complexity of the new evidence and whether additional witnesses come forward.
If the investigation uncovers new information that contradicts the original narrative, it could lead to disciplinary action against the officer involved or even criminal charges, depending on the findings. The California Department of Justice has not yet been involved, but its oversight could become relevant if the case escalates.
In the meantime, the Pasadena Police Department has urged the public to avoid speculation and await official updates. The department’s press office has directed inquiries to Chief Perez’s office, which has not yet released a detailed statement on the new witness’s account.
Key Takeaways
- New Evidence: A witness has come forward with information that contradicts the Pasadena Police Department’s initial account of the 2022 shooting of Officer Ryan Twyman.
- Reopened Investigation: Police Chief John Perez announced the department will review the case under a new lens, though details of the witness’s testimony remain confidential.
- Broader Implications: The case highlights ongoing debates about police accountability and the need for independent reviews in officer-involved shootings.
- Family Response: Twyman’s family has welcomed the reopening, calling it a step toward transparency.
- Next Steps: The investigation’s timeline is unclear, but updates are expected as the review progresses.
As the case unfolds, readers are encouraged to follow official updates from the Pasadena Police Department and monitor developments from trusted news sources. If you have information related to this case, the department has urged the public to contact their tip line.
For those seeking further context, our previous coverage on police accountability reforms and the challenges of internal police investigations provides additional background. Share your thoughts on this developing story in the comments below.