The Herald of Everett, Washington
Customer service  |  Subscribe   |   Log in or sign up   |   Advertising information   |   Contact us
HeraldNet on Facebook HeraldNet on Twitter HeraldNet RSS feeds HeraldNet Pinterest HeraldNet Google Plus HeraldNet Youtube
HeraldNet Newsletters  Newsletters: Sign up  Green editions icon Green editions

A timeline of the Troy Meade case

SHARE: facebook Twitter icon Linkedin icon Google+ icon Email icon |  PRINTER-FRIENDLY  |  COMMENTS
Meade case timeline
June 10, 2009: Everett police officer Troy Meade fatally shoots Niles Meservey, 51, of Stanwood.
June 11, 2009: Meade is placed on administrative leave.
Aug. 11-Sept. 18, 2009: Meade returns to work but not back to the streets.
Sept. 22, 2009: Meade is told to turn over his gun and badge and is place on administrative leave.
Oct. 26, 2009: Prosecutors charge Meade with first-degree manslaughter. A second-degree murder charge is added before trial.
Feb. 17, 2010: Niles Meservey's daughter files a civil lawsuit against the city of Everett.
April 26, 2010: A Snohomish County jury acquits Meade of all criminal charges. The next day, jurors conclude the shooting was not self-defense.
Feb. 23, 2011: Everett City Council agrees to pay $500,000 to Niles Meservey's daughter to settle a civil lawsuit.
March 21: City officials announce Police Chief Jim Scharf will delay his retirement until the internal investigation into Meade's conduct is completed.
June 30: Meade is fired after serving 13 years with the department.
City of Everett expenses
Here's what police officer Troy Meade collected while on paid administrative leave for more than two years:
•$172,506.13 in wages.
$11,478.74 for vacation and holiday pay.
Total: $183,984.87
Other costs covered by Everett:
•$241,000 for his criminal defense.
$500,000 in lawyer bills for civil litigation and labor matters.
$500,000 to settle lawsuit with slain man's family.
The firing letter
Here are some of Everett Police Chief Jim Scharf's conclusions about Troy Meade's decision to fatally shoot Niles Meservey:
"You are an experienced member of this Department. You should know, and you must know, that sound judgment and articulable factors for the use of deadly force are paramount for responsible, effective law enforcement. I, the Department, and the public we serve demand and expect the use of force, especially deadly force, to be reasonable and necessary. You did not meet those fundamentals ... and the result was the unfortunate and unnecessary death of Mr. Meservey."

"Your use of deadly force was not necessary. The Taser was not the only reasonably effective alternative available to you. Hand strikes, pain compliance techniques, and the use of your asp (a baton) in the collapsed position were available to you."

"Mr. Meservey's vehicle was stuck over the parking curb, but -- even if it had bumped back slightly after hitting the fence -- it did not constitute a 'moving vehicle.' Firing into a moving vehicle is 'generally prohibited' as it constitutes 'extreme action,' permissible only when reasonably believed to be necessary to prevent an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury. Such threat plainly was not present ..."
Story tags » EverettPolice

More Local News Headlines


HeraldNet Headlines

Top stories and breaking news updates


Share your comments: Log in using your HeraldNet account or your Facebook, Twitter or Disqus profile. Comments that violate the rules are subject to removal. Please see our terms of use. Please note that you must verify your email address for your comments to appear.

You are logged in using your HeraldNet ID. Click here to update your profile. | Log out.

Our new comment system is not supported in IE 7. Please upgrade your browser here.

comments powered by Disqus