Sean Corcoran,

I have read your letter regarding the Geer shooting. While I am certain that police support organizations serve a
valuable purpose. your comments on behalf of one of those organizations are concerning to say the least. Adam Torres
deserves a fair trial for his actions. To that end, the FCOP 5000 should fulfill their commitments to their members of
financial assistance for legal services and support for the family. However, your apparent willingness to not only misstate
known facts but actually create facts is at the least irresponsible and at most flat out dishonest. I have refuted some of
your statements below.
"However, to see an officer indicted for murder in a situation in which he was in the commission of his duties has
been unbelievable."
If put in context with the entire first paragraph of your letter, this statement would imply that an officer cannot
possibly commit a murder while in the commission of his duties.
"Officer Torres did not come to work that day looking to hurt or kill anyone. He didn't get out of his car looking to
hurt or kill anyone."
Again, this statement implies that just because Torres did not arrive at the scene with the intent to hurt or kill,
that what he did cannot be a crime. The fact is, he did kill someone. And under the law, he needs to account for his
actions and be held legally accountable if his actions are deemed unlawful. Officers are given a very wide berth in
determining a perceived threat and rightly so. But there is a huge difference between actions that are perceived as a
threat and the creation of actions that did not occur. Had John Geer made an aggressive move toward officers or a
weapon, I would have been the first to testify on behalf of Officer Torres.
"....he was dealing with an armed irrational subject that had made numerous threats to friends, family and police
officers."
Your letter makes it clear that you are not well informed of the facts of this case as set forth in the CIB
investigative report which was published on the Fairfax Board of Supervisors website. The other possibility is that you
just don't care about the actual facts because they do not fit your narrative. The CIB investigation makes it clear that
John had no weapon in his possession or within his immediate reach at the time he was killed. With regard to your
opinion of his state of mind, irrational people do not have a calm conversation with officers for over 40 minutes with
their hands up. Irrational people do not state that they do not want to be shot and do not want to shoot anyone.
Irrational people do not say that they don't want anyone to get hurt. Irrational people do not continually inform officers
when they are going to move their hand to scratch their nose. Irrational people do not politely ask officers if Officer
Torres could lower his weapon because he is making them nervous. Furthermore, John made absolutely NO threats to
family or friends as you falsely stated, let alone "numerous threats. It is also debatable whether or not John's statements
to police at the scene were a credible threat. Displaying a holstered weapon in your own home is not against the law.
Stating that you have a weapon and are willing to use it if you need to, because the police have weapons, is not against
the law.
"It may be human error, a judgment call based on poor information, or a mistake. Sure, the department and county
will defend and support the officer, to a point."
I do not see how you can claim or imply that the Geer shooting was a result of "human error, a judgment call
based on poor information, or a mistake." The facts as set out in the CIB report belie such a claim. Furthermore, the facts
as stated in the CIB report are supported by the testimony of 6 witnesses including 4 veteran police officers. Adam
Torres testified that he intended to pull the trigger and that he did not regret killing John.
"When the mirage of this just appeals process has been concluded, they will then be left broken with their life in
tatters, their family dragged through the mud, dehumanized, demeaned, and without the means to support
themselves."

It is very disheartening that an officer that has sworn to uphold the system of law would appear to hold that
same system in such contempt. The collateral damage of ones actions and penalties imposed for those actions are not
always pleasant. However, whatever quality of life Adam Torres and his family are able to salvage once this process has
concluded is still a life. John Geer would welcome the same opportunity.
"It should be abundantly clear to all officers, we could all be Adam Torres."
Although not as you intended, I could not agree more with this statement. If an officer shoots an unarmed man
who has committed no crime as he stands motionless in his home talking calmly to officers with his hands in the air for
over 40 minutes, then yes, any officer could find their self in the same situation as Adam Torres. Maybe this process will
remind officers that the job they accepted carries with it a huge responsibility. Maybe this process will remind officers
that their actions may have severe consequences if deemed unlawful and that they cannot act with impunity.
I will not get into your distorted views of what qualifies as a "miscarriage of Justice". I will not get into your
unwarranted scathing assessment of your superiors or of the Commonwealth Attorney. You claim that your statements
represent the feelings and concerns of the roughly 500 members of your organization. Although I am sure unintended,
your message has been conveyed loud and clear. Officers can do no wrong if that wrong is committed in the
performance of their duties. In addition, you have demonstrated your willingness to misstate known facts and even
create facts in an attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
Your expression of sympathy for the Geer family wrapped into the same context condoning and excusing the
action that killed their son is insulting. The Geers do want your sympathy. They want a Police Department that will do
the right thing when bad things happen. They want organizations like yours to step up and accept responsibility for the
poor decisions of its members. In my opinion, your letter clearly demonstrates that you do not possess the integrity to
give the Geers the fair accountability that they, along with the people of this county, want and deserve.
You sent this letter to the Washington Post in an effort to have your voice heard. I am going to help you with the
mission. In addition to all those copied on this email, I am requesting that your complete letter (attached) and this
correspondence be posted for public review and distributed to the full Ad Hoc Commission. It is difficult for me to
imagine a better example of the need for civilian oversight, than a police union willing to misstate known facts and be
irresponsible enough to publicly post inaccurate information in defense of a police shooting.

Jeff Stewart
Commissioner
Ad Hoc Police Practices Review Commission