Audio By Carbonatix
Apache Junction police officers killed a deaf man.
The officers shot and killed Charles Back outside his home in Apache Junction around 7:30 p.m. on Valentine’s Day. Charles Back allegedly raised what turned out to be a BB gun at the officers and didn’t comply with their commands to drop it. Now, his son, Adam Back, has revealed in a wrongful death lawsuit filed this week that his father didn’t drop the gun because the 69-year-old military veteran couldn’t hear the officers.
“Because of his profound deafness, Charles could not hear the officers’ commands,” the lawsuit’s complaint reads.
Adam Back is taking the City of Apache Junction and three anonymous officers (“Doe Defendants,” in the suit) to federal court. He’s suing for wrongful death, excessive force and other claims related to the shooting. He also accuses the officers of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by not providing any visual cues that they were officers.
“In the moments leading up to his death, Charles was subjected to terror, disorientation, and fear for his life,” the complaint reads. “He was blinded by bright lights in otherwise darkness, unable to hear anything and unable to identify who was at his gate.”
He also alleges that members of the department showed up at the house at 4 a.m. about a month later, and shined flashlights into the home. The officers said they were responding to a 911 call but would not say what it was about. As of the filing of the complaint, Adam Back had not received a response to his request for the 911 calls or reports from that night.
“Plaintiffs therefore do not know whether the March visit was related to the February shooting but include these allegations because the timing, circumstances, and lack of explanation have contributed and continue to contribute to Adam Back’s distress,” the complaint reads.
Phoenix New Times could not reach Adam Back for this story. His attorney, Saylor Soinski, the City of Apache Junction and its police department did not respond to requests for comment.
In February the officers were responding to a report of a domestic violence call at Back’s address.
“He can hear a 101 yelling inside,” a dispatcher told the officers, using code for a female subject.
When the officers arrived, they came across a fenced-in yard with a locked gate. While the officers were on the radio with dispatch trying to figure out how to get inside the gate or call the residents, Back came outside carrying what the officers thought was a handgun at his side. The officers shined their flashlights on him and yelled at him to drop it, saying that they were police. Within 30 seconds of arriving at his address they fired 13 shots, 10 which struck Back’s body directly.
“Doe Defendants did not wait for dispatch to respond with Charles’s information, attempt to use any means of less-lethal force, or take the clear path of retreat available to them,” the complaint reads.
In the days after the shooting, police revealed that the supposed handgun was in fact a realistic BB gun — a replica of a Sig Sauer handgun. Back raised the BB gun at the officers, the department said, in the moments before they shot. It released a critical incident briefing video with excerpts of dispatch radio recordings and body-worn camera footage of the incident. In it the department slowed and annotated the moment Charles Back lifted his arm.
The family contests that the video shows Charles Back raising the BB gun.
“The body-worn camera footage released in AJPD’s Critical Incident Briefing reveals movement but does not clearly show Charles brandishing, pointing, or aiming the BB gun at Doe Defendants or otherwise acting in a way indicating that he posed an immediate threat,” the complaint reads.
The East Valley Critical Incident Response Team, a regional task force made up of eight police departments to investigate critical incidents, is investigating the shooting. The Mesa Police Department is spearheading the investigation; the Pinal County Attorney’s Office will review it. Phoenix New Times reached out to the Pinal County Attorney’s Office for an update on its status but did not hear back in time for this story.
In the lawsuit, Adam Back says that his family has suffered from his father’s death emotionally and financially. Between the shooting and late night visit by the officers a month later, their home is no longer the safe place it used to be. And the family no longer trusts law enforcement.
“Adam has lost peace and security in his home and now feels continuous hypervigilance and anxiety,” the lawsuit reads.
According to the lawsuit, the family has had to pay for funeral expenses and repairs to the house and cars from the bullets. Charles Back was closely involved in their day-to-day life, driving their kids to school and helping his wife around the house when she was going through cancer treatments. Adam Back, who used to see his father once a week, had to take time off work to grieve.
“Adam Back has suffered the profound, permanent, and irreplaceable loss of his father,” the lawsuit reads. “He has lost his father’s love, affection, companionship, and guidance.”
