Thurston prosecutor declines to charge federal officers for killing Michael Reinoehl
Regional police deputized as U.S. Marshals who shot and killed a Portland shooting suspect near Lacey in September 2020 will not be prosecuted in Thurston County.
In a memo dated Sept. 20, Prosecuting Attorney Jon Tunheim concluded the officer’s use of force against Michael Reinoehl, 48, was justified under Washington state Law.
“As such, no criminal charges will be filed against the involved officers by this office,” Tunheim wrote.
Reinoehl, who was wanted for the fatal shooting of a far-right-wing supporter in Portland on Aug. 29, 2020, died from gunshot wounds to the head and torso on Sept. 3, 2020. Police shot him outside an apartment complex on the 7600 block of Third Way Southeast in Tanglewilde at about 7 p.m., the Olympian previously reported.
To make his decision, Tunheim reviewed evidence collected by the Region 3 Critical Incident Investigation Team, including witness statements, photographs, recordings and crime lab reports. The Thurston County Sheriff’s Office led the investigation as they were not involved in the shooting.
In the memo, Tunheim indicates he cannot proceed with criminal prosecution against the involved officers without producing sufficient evident that the use of deadly force was not lawful beyond a reasonable doubt.
Several task-force members took part in the incident but the four who fired their weapons at Reinoehl included Jacob Whitehurst with the Washington Department of Corrections, Pierce County deputies James Oleole and Craig Gocha, and Lakewood police officer Michael Merrill.
Tunheim notes none of the involved officers submitted to a live interview and instead provided written statements. One task force member, Deputy U.S. Marshal Ryan Kimmel, did not respond to repeated interview or statement requests, per the memo.
Though Kimmel was at the scene of the shooting, Tunheim wrote there’s no evidence he fired any rounds at the time.
For each of four officers that did fire their weapons, Tunheim determined their use of force was justified because it was used without malice, in good faith and in compliance with state law.
Tunheim wrote the officers believed Reinoehl had a propensity for violence and had previously stated he intended to evade or resist arrest based on the initial briefing they received.
“All of the officers indicated in their written statements they were aware that Reinoehl was wanted for murder and that a warrant had been issued for his arrest,” Tunheim wrote.
When they moved in on Reinoehl, the officers who fired their weapons stated he did not comply with commands and instead appeared to reach down toward his waist for what they suspected to be a handgun, per the memo.
“In my view, Washington law does not require officers to actually see a weapon when they have probable cause to believe a person is armed and a good faith belief the person is intending to use deadly force against officers or others in an effort to escape capture,” Tunheim wrote.
However, Tunheim also raised some concerns about some of the decisions the task force made. For one, he wrote the task force should have notified the Thurston County Sheriff’s Office that they we’re planning a high-risk arrest within their jurisdiction.
“Fortunately, no bystanders were injured and responding officers were able to determine that other law enforcement officers were involved before they arrived on the scene,” Tunheim wrote.
Tunheim notes one child reported being struck by “sparks” from the gunfire, but it’s unclear what that may have been. Additionally, a bullet passed through an apartment building where it was found lodged in a wall, per the memo.
He also questions the task force’s decision to communicate via Pierce County law enforcement frequencies while operating in Thurston County. This meant their communications were “intermittent” and transmissions had “considerable static,” the memo says.
“The communication deficiency created confusion during the critical tactical decision to attempt an arrest and it appears that the leader of the team could not effectively communicate a decision to the other officers,” Tunheim wrote.
Additionally, Tunheim questioned whether his office had jurisdiction to prosecute the officers involved in the task force.
Though the officers came from local agencies, they were acting as federal agents at the time. As such, they may be immune from criminal prosecution under state authority.
“In my opinion, if the state were to file criminal charges against any of these officers, a federal court would likely be petitioned to review the case to determine if federal immunity applies,” Tunheim wrote. “If that court deemed the officers’ actions reasonable, then immunity would apply, and the state would be barred from pursuing a criminal prosecution.”
This story was originally published September 22, 2021 at 2:11 PM.
