Knoxville, TN – A federal appeals court has ruled that three Knoxville Police Department officers who were involved in the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Anthony Thompson Jr. can be sued for failing to provide timely medical assistance to the teen following the confrontation. The ruling, which raises concerns about police conduct in handling the aftermath of a shooting, is a significant development in the legal scrutiny surrounding law enforcement accountability.
The incident occurred in April 2021 at Austin-East Magnet High School, where officers Brian Baldwin, Lt. Stanley Cash, and Officer Jonathon Clabough responded to a report that Thompson, a student, was armed. During the encounter, a handgun, allegedly in Thompson’s hoodie, went off, prompting Officer Clabough to fire, striking Thompson and another officer, Adam Willson.
An investigation by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation concluded that the officers acted in self-defense. However, body camera footage of the incident revealed that Thompson went without medical assistance for at least four minutes after the shooting, sparking concerns about the officers’ actions in the critical moments that followed.
The court’s ruling emphasized that, despite the officers calling an ambulance, there were enough questions regarding whether they did everything in their power to save Thompson’s life. “Concerningly, the video also shows that Thompson went unassisted for at least four minutes,” the ruling stated, adding that the school nurse did not begin attending to Thompson until approximately five minutes after the initial shooting.
Gralyn Stong, a friend of Thompson who was inside the school bathroom during the shooting, later filed a lawsuit alongside Thompson’s mother, Chanada Robinson, against the city. According to the ruling, Stong repeatedly pleaded with the officers to help Thompson, shouting that he was bleeding and in urgent need of assistance.
While the officers were not charged in connection with Thompson’s death, the court’s decision marks an important shift in legal precedent, particularly regarding the doctrine of qualified immunity. Qualified immunity typically shields law enforcement officers from lawsuits unless they have violated a “clearly established” constitutional right. In this case, the appeals court ruled that the officers might not be entitled to qualified immunity concerning their failure to assist Thompson after he was shot.
Though the court did uphold the officers’ actions leading up to the shooting—agreeing that they were justified in approaching Thompson under the belief that he could be armed—the ruling provides a rare instance where qualified immunity was not granted to officers in the aftermath of a deadly encounter. The decision marks a notable moment in the ongoing debate over police accountability and the protection of citizens’ rights in the face of law enforcement actions.
As the case progresses, legal experts and civil rights advocates will likely continue to scrutinize the balance between law enforcement protection and individual rights, particularly when it comes to the actions—or lack thereof—taken after a police-involved shooting.
