De'Von Bailey Colorado Springs Police Shooting $3 Million Settlement Update | Westword
Navigation

De'Von Bailey Shooting Settlement: Colorado Springs Excuses for Paying $3 Million

The mayor portrayed the settlement as fiscally responsible.
Colorado Springs Police Sergeant Alan Van't Land holding a gun on De'Von Bailey shortly after shooting the nineteen-year-old.
Colorado Springs Police Sergeant Alan Van't Land holding a gun on De'Von Bailey shortly after shooting the nineteen-year-old. Colorado Springs Police Department
Share this:
The City of Colorado Springs will pay $3 million to settle a lawsuit over the 2019 police killing of nineteen-year-old De'Von Bailey, who was shot in the back as he was running away. But despite the city acceding to several reform measures as part of the settlement, the Colorado Springs Police Department continues to argue that the shooting was justified, and Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers portrays the payout as more about fiscal responsibility than about doing the right moral thing.

Bailey's parents would disagree. "Nothing in this nightmare could ever make what happened to my son okay or justifiable," says Greg Bailey, his father, in a statement. "There is no amount of money that will bring him back. He was running away, and they shot him in the back like an animal." Adds mother Delisha Searcy, "My heart is broken at the loss of my son, but I am hopeful that the changes in the Colorado Springs Police Department will prevent another family from losing a child."

Sergeant Alan Van't Land and Officer Blake Evenson, the CSPD members who opened fire on Bailey, have never been disciplined for their actions, despite a community outcry after the first video surfaced in the days following the August 3, 2019, incident. "They shot De'Von seven times in the back as he was trying to get away from them," Darold Killmer of Killmer, Lane & Newman LLP, the Denver-based law firm representing Bailey's family, said after first seeing the video. "If it plays out that he was not reaching for a gun, this is cold-blooded murder — and cold-blooded murder should be prosecuted as first-degree murder against the officers."

Body-camera footage subsequently released by the CSPD offered more details about what was originally depicted as a "personal robbery" on the 2400 block of East Fountain Boulevard in Colorado Springs — though that description was soon called into question. Indeed, Lawrence Stoker, Bailey's cousin, who was with him at the time of the shooting, was found not guilty of wrongdoing that November after the jury deliberated for just ten minutes.

Still, Bailey definitely took off running while being interrogated by V'ant Land and Evenson. The footage confirms that he had a gun in one pocket of his basketball shorts, and he can be seen moving his hand toward the opening on two occasions (once shortly after encountering the cops and again as he sprinted in the opposite direction). But he never came close to grabbing the gun, much less pointing it at anyone. It appears that he was simply trying to get away when Van't Land and Evenson began pulling their triggers.

Here's the clip, preceded by 911 audio. The Van't Land material gets underway at around the ten-minute point, while Evenson's starts at about 12:30.
This wasn't the first time Van't Land had been involved in the shooting of a fleeing suspect; he'd done so eight years earlier, and two years before that, he was accused of beating a man to whom the City of Colorado Springs eventually paid a $50,000 settlement. But that November, a grand jury determined there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute him and Evenson. Several months later, in March 2020, the U.S. Attorney's Office came to the same conclusion.

The only option remaining for Bailey's family was civil court, and in early June 2020, in the wake of protests over the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, they filed a lawsuit against the City of Colorado Springs and both officers. And yesterday, February 8, the deal was announced. Aside from the $3 million, Killmer, Lane & Newman touted "the following significant changes in its policies and training":
• Provide training for every officer who has not already received training regarding the new use of force policies and other police practices set forth in SB 2020-217 and HB 2021-1250;

• Provide annual anti-bias training, for no less than two years, that specifically addresses the understanding that race should have no role in officers’ perceptions of risk;

• Actively maintain an early intervention program to mitigate the potential for escalating employee issues, identify personnel who may require assistance or training to perform their duties and to preemptively intervene and improve performance, with a focus on officers who have recent use of force, internal affairs investigation, pursuit, and/or vehicular collision history that merits review. The program shall remain active with information reviewed for action on a weekly basis.

• The Colorado Springs Police Department will participate in the United Way Give Campaign in 2021 so long as the City of Colorado Springs participates, as it has in the past, in the program;

• On an annual basis, for no less than two years, provide communication regarding the Good Neighbor Next Door Program available through the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development;

• Ensure that all officers’ personnel files are retained for the duration of the employee’s career, including but not limited to all personnel investigative files, Supervisory Discussion Reports, findings of misconduct, all internal affairs (or other) investigations, and all CSPD administrative reviews, and all use of force internal affairs reviews.
The Colorado Springs Police Department's response to the settlement acknowledged that "any loss of life in our community, regardless of the circumstance, is a tragic event, and the officers involved never wished to be part of this incident, nor did they want an outcome resulting in the loss of life." But then the statement took a turn with this: "However, under the law and based on the officers’ extensive training, they acted justifiably to protect both themselves and the community. We strongly stand behind our officers and their actions." The department also emphasized that "this settlement is not, in any way, an admission or indication of wrongdoing by these officers. Rather, it was a decision made to mitigate financial risk to the City and taxpayers."

Mayor Suthers picked up on this theme. "It is important to note that in the conduct of the civil case, neither the judge who mediated a possible settlement nor the insurance adjusters assigned to the case suggested at any time that the officers acted unlawfully or contrary to department policy," he said in a statement. "Rather, the insurance carrier cited the ‘anti-law enforcement climate around the country,’ and much larger settlements in other cases in support of its desire to settle this case."

As a result, "the settlement of the civil case was dictated by the desire of the city’s excess insurance carrier to resolve the matter and eliminate any risk of a jury trial in Denver," Suthers continued. "The City of Colorado Springs is self-insured up to $1M in liability for any incident. The City has excess insurance coverage for any liability in excess of $1M. The estimated cost of trying the case through appeal is $1M, so the City would be responsible for that amount whether the case was tried or settled."

Click to read the Estate of De'Von Bailey v. City of Colorado Springs, et al.
KEEP WESTWORD FREE... Since we started Westword, it has been defined as the free, independent voice of Denver, and we'd like to keep it that way. Your membership allows us to continue offering readers access to our incisive coverage of local news, food, and culture with no paywalls. You can support us by joining as a member for as little as $1.