How should prosecutors handle cases against police officers? Candidates for Franklin County prosecutor disagree

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) – Whoever becomes Franklin County prosecutor later this year will inherit a bevy of cases against law enforcement officers who have killed – and decisions on how to prosecute them.

Days after a deadlocked jury forced a mistrial in the murder case of ex-Franklin County Sheriff’s deputy Jason Meade, four candidates vying for the county prosecutor role spoke at length during a forum on Tuesday about the role of the prosecutor’s office in handling criminal cases against officers who kill on duty.

While Meade, who killed 23-year-old Casey Goodson Jr. in 2020, was top-of-mind for candidates and community members alike, he is not the only officer whose fate rests ultimately with the Franklin County prosecutor. 

Meade’s case was handled by special prosecutors because the county prosecutor represents the sheriff’s office in court. But the prosecutor’s office has appointed outside counsel in several high-profile deadly police shootings of Black people where no conflict of interest is apparent.

Special prosecutors Tim Merkle and Gary Shroyer, who presented the state’s case against Meade, will prosecute former Columbus police officer Ricky Anderson, who killed 20-year-old Donovan Lewis in his Hilltop apartment in 2022. The prosecutor’s office also quietly tapped the Montgomery County prosecutor to present to a grand jury the case against a Blendon Township officer who killed 21-year-old Ta’Kiya Young outside a Kroger this past fall.

Anthony Pierson, one of three Democrats running for county prosecutor and current deputy chief legal counsel of the prosecutor’s office, said assigning special counsel to handle officers’ criminal cases is a decision above his pay grade – current prosecutor Gary Tyack makes those calls. But he said referring cases to outside counsel can reduce the appearance of unfairness in the system.

“We work with the Columbus police department, so if we prosecute an officer and the case doesn’t go well, people may claim, ‘Hey, you did this on purpose. You didn’t put your full force behind that prosecution because you work with them, you’re in it together,’” Pierson said.

Until Pierson joined the prosecutor’s office as its deputy chief legal counsel in May 2023, the case against former Columbus police officer Adam Coy, who killed Andre Hill weeks after Meade killed Goodson in 2020, was also assigned to a special prosecutor – Pierson. His move from the Ohio Attorney General’s office to the prosecutor's office happened because Pierson was promised he could take Coy’s case with him, he said.

“There appears to be inconsistencies on this policy when it’s convenient,” said Shayla Favor, a current Columbus city councilmember and Democrat running for the prosecutor position. She said whatever the office’s policy for using outside counsel for officers on trial, the most important thing is the community understood the office’s decisions.

“The community has to know how to hold someone accountable,” Favor, who has no prosecutorial experience, added.

John Rutan, the sole Republican running for the prosecutor’s seat, said he would “absolutely not” give officers’ deadly shooting cases to outside counsel unless there was an unquestionable conflict of interest, like the officer was his relative. With years of trial experience as a criminal defense attorney, he said he would want to be in the courtroom arguing for the state.

Natalia Harris, chief Delaware city attorney and former Delaware city prosecutor, said the office should not adopt a “blanket policy” either way – the decision to assign special counsel should happen on a case-by-case basis. Transparency in the process is key to building the community’s trust, she said.

Harris criticized the prosecutor’s office for not keeping the public abreast of its decisions, including its decision to hand over the Blendon Township police shooting to the Montgomery County prosecutor. 

“Just because the case is assigned to special prosecutors does not mean that the community cannot be informed about what’s going on,” Harris said.

What should happen with Jason Meade’s case?

While all candidates agreed that a mistrial in the Meade case was an undesirable result, they differed significantly on what they thought the next steps should be. 

Pierson said emphatically that the case needs to be retried. The special prosecutors shouldn’t back down because the jury was hung the first time, he said, adding he’s faced the same thing when prosecuting criminal cases.

“This case is far too important to the community to not have closure,” Pierson said. 

Rutan, on the other hand, said the decision depends on how the jury was split. If a majority voted to acquit Meade, he wouldn’t prosecute again, he said. He added he thought Meade, indicted on two counts of murder and one count of reckless homicide, was overcharged to begin with.

“It was never murder, it was manslaughter, reckless,” Rutan said. “And what happens when you start off with murder? You take away integrity from the jury.” 

Favor said justice for Goodson’s family meant reaching resolution “as quickly as possible,” but she did not say whether that meant retrying Meade or not.

Harris, meanwhile, disagreed with Rutan that the decision should be based on the jury split. She said she’s prosecuted cases that ended in two mistrials before a jury returned a guilty verdict. 

The best decision in Meade’s case, she said, is one that provides the quickest path to closure for the Goodson family.

“If the decision is made not to retry that case, there should be a very good reason for it, and we as a community need to know it, down to every detail,” Harris added.