Appeals court dismisses lawsuit over 2020 fatal police shooting in Brookline

Federal judges dismissed a wrongful death lawsuit Monday against Boston and State Police officers who shot at a man 31 times in three seconds after an incident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and a car chase into Brookline in 2020.

During the Feb. 7, 2020 incident, Juston Root, 41, was armed with what appeared to be a gun, police said, but was actually a BB pistol. Police responded to the hospital after Root brandished the apparent firearm to a hospital security guard.

Root then pulled the BB gun at a Boston police officer who fired his weapon, police said. Root, potentially injured from one of the shots, drove towards Brookline where police fatally shot him.

In 2023, an investigation determined that the officers involved should not face criminal charges related to the shooting. 

Decision: ‘Officers acted reasonably’

Root suffered from mental illness, according to his family, who called for an independent investigation repeatedly in the years after his death. His sister Jennifer Root Bannon filed the federal lawsuit, which was dismissed in the court of appeals Monday, in 2020.

Root Bannon sued the six officers involved and the City of Boston, claiming that excessive force was used against Root.

In the suit, Root Bannon claimed the City did not adequately train or supervise the involved officers. According to court documents, one officer intentionally hit Root’s car with his police cruiser while in pursuit, which is against Boston police policy.

Judge Sandra Lynch, who wrote the majority opinion, said five officers who fired their guns independently gave evidence that Root reached into his jacket when told to put his hands up. Lynch wrote that is “exactly” what other witnesses saw in Brookline — including a medical doctor and a woman with EMS training.

“We agree with the district court’s conclusion that the officers acted reasonably under the circumstances during the fatal shooting and so did not violate the Fourth Amendment,” the decision read.

Lynch wrote that because the officers weren’t found to have used excessive force, the City of Boston was cleared of the claims.

Dissent: ‘Significant reasons to discount the officers’ stories’

Judge Lara Montecalvo wrote her own opinion, in which she agreed with the majority’s decision in favor of the City of Boston but dissented from part of the majority opinion.

“Although we face a fact-intensive inquiry, in my mind, only one question remains: What was Juston Root doing in those few seconds prior to the officers’ use of deadly force?” Montecalvo wrote. “If, as the Plaintiff contends, Root was on the ground, severely bleeding, and merely holding his hand to his chest, the officers’ actions appear to be ‘patently unreasonable.’”

Montecalvo said more than one officer did not have their body camera turned on or on their person, which leaves the seconds before the fatal 31 shots were fired unclear. 

One officer, who fired eight rounds at Root, testified that he was not wearing his body camera, the decision said. However, video evidence showed otherwise. Only one officer was recording the interaction with her body camera — which was blocked for five seconds before Root was shot, according to court documents. 

“My view is that the majority has taken an unduly narrow view of the evidence. It is readily apparent that the officers’ accounts contain many inconsistencies as to Root’s movements directly before the shooting,” Montecalvo wrote. Some officers said Root was seated or kneeling, while some said he was standing. Another later said he was “merely attempting to stand.”

Montecalvo also writes that officers conferred for about an hour about the incident, and, against Boston police policy, some officers met with their lawyers.

“The evidence, at this summary-judgment stage, presents significant reasons to discount the officers’ stories and offers a reasonable alternative – that Root was unable to act threateningly during the essential time period,” Montecalvo wrote.