February 4, 2025
OPO Objection for 2024-0863, Officer Calvin Fusilier
The Office of Police Oversight objects to Commander Shauna Griffin's disciplinary determination regarding Officer Calvin Fusilier's conduct. While APD sustained Officer Fusilier's violation of APD General Orders 200.2.1, Assessment and De-escalation, and 208.4.2, Prohibited Uses-Taser Device, the officer only received training in lieu of a one-day suspension.
OPO disagrees that the discipline assessed appropriately reflects the seriousness of the incident, given that Officer Fusilier deployed a taser device on a passively resistant subject.
View OPO's Disciplinary Recommendation related to this case here.
Document
OPO Objection for 2024-0863, Officer Calvin Fusilier245.63 KBPDF Content
Disclaimer: The following text was extracted from the PDF file to make this document more accessible. This machine-generated content may contain styling errors due to redactions. In some instances, text may not load if the original file is a scanned image or has not been made searchable. For the full version of the document, please view the PDF.OF
CITY
AURUS
P.O. BOX 1088, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78767
OFFICE OF
WWW.ATXPOLICEOVERSIGHT.ORG
POLICEOVERSIGHT@AUSTINTEXAS.GOV
POLICE OVERSIGHT
PHONE: 512.974.9090 TTY: 711 FAX: 512.974.6306
FOUNDED
COMPLAINT HOTLINE: 512-972-20PO
DISCIPLINE OBJECTION
TO:
Chief Lisa Davis, Austin Police Department
FROM:
Director Gail McCant, Office of Police Oversight
DATE:
February 4, 2025
SUBJECT:
2024-0863 Discipline Objection
Dear Chief Davis:
On August 14, 2024, the Office of Police Oversight (OPO) received an external citizen's
complaint, 2024-0820, alleging an Austin Police Department (APD) officer had used
excessive force during her arrest. OPO conducted a Preliminary Review that identified Officer
Calvin Fusilier, AP9065, as the subject of the complaint. Commander Shauna Griffin
subsequently requested that IAD conduct an Administrative Investigation on Officer
Fusilier's actions regarding the same incident and it was given case number 2024-0863.
At the conclusion of the investigation, I made the following recommendation to Commander
Griffin regarding case classification and disposition:
"During Officer Fusilier's IAD interview, he admitted to violating General Orders 200.2.1, 200.4
and 208.4.2. It should be noted that Officer Fusilier failed to attempt de-escalation and used
excessive force on a passively resistant individual. This action is in direct violation of General
Orders established by APD.
Considering the totality of the circumstances and in alignment with APD's General Orders
discipline matrix, The OPO recommended the complaint be Sustained and Officer Fusilier receive
a 1-5-day suspension in accordance with the Discipline Matrix. "
On January 24, 2025, a Disciplinary Meeting (DM) was held for Officer Fusilier that resulted
in a Sustained finding for violation of APD General Orders 200.2.1, Assessment and De-
Escalation, and 208.4.2, Prohibited Uses-Taser Device. Officer Fusilier's Chain of Command
issued a discipline of Education Based training in lieu of a one-day suspension.
OPO Discipline Objection:
I do not believe the discipline assessed appropriately reflects the seriousness of the incident.
I also believe that the use of force in violation of APD General Orders is less a matter of re-
training, and more reflective of a discipline that serves as a deterrent for future behavior.
Officer Fusilier deployed the taser device on a passively resistant subject, which is contrary
to his training and APD General Orders.
1
CITY OF AUSTIN
P.O. BOX 1088, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78767
OFFICE OF
WWW.ATXPOLICEOVERSIGHT.ORG
POLICEOVERSIGHT@AUSTINTEXAS.GOV
POLICE OVERSIGHT
PHONE: 512.974.9090 | TTY: 711 I FAX: 512.974.6306
FOUNDED
1839
COMPLAINT HOTLINE: 512-972-20PO
DISCIPLINE OBJECTION
Due to the nature of the violation of APD General Orders, I object to the issuance of Education
Based Discipline and recommend that the Chain of Command upholds the one-day
suspension in accordance with the APD Discipline Matrix.
Sincerely,
Dail
Mccal
Gail McCant
Director
Office of Police Oversight
OUNDED
1839
2
CITY
AURUS
P.O. BOX 1088, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78767
OFFICE OF
WWW.ATXPOLICEOVERSIGHT.ORG
POLICEOVERSIGHT@AUSTINTEXAS.GOV
POLICE OVERSIGHT
PHONE: 512.974.9090 TTY: 711 FAX: 512.974.6306
FOUNDED
COMPLAINT HOTLINE: 512-972-20PO
DISCIPLINE OBJECTION
TO:
Chief Lisa Davis, Austin Police Department
FROM:
Director Gail McCant, Office of Police Oversight
DATE:
February 4, 2025
SUBJECT:
2024-0863 Discipline Objection
Dear Chief Davis:
On August 14, 2024, the Office of Police Oversight (OPO) received an external citizen's
complaint, 2024-0820, alleging an Austin Police Department (APD) officer had used
excessive force during her arrest. OPO conducted a Preliminary Review that identified Officer
Calvin Fusilier, AP9065, as the subject of the complaint. Commander Shauna Griffin
subsequently requested that IAD conduct an Administrative Investigation on Officer
Fusilier's actions regarding the same incident and it was given case number 2024-0863.
At the conclusion of the investigation, I made the following recommendation to Commander
Griffin regarding case classification and disposition:
"During Officer Fusilier's IAD interview, he admitted to violating General Orders 200.2.1, 200.4
and 208.4.2. It should be noted that Officer Fusilier failed to attempt de-escalation and used
excessive force on a passively resistant individual. This action is in direct violation of General
Orders established by APD.
Considering the totality of the circumstances and in alignment with APD's General Orders
discipline matrix, The OPO recommended the complaint be Sustained and Officer Fusilier receive
a 1-5-day suspension in accordance with the Discipline Matrix. "
On January 24, 2025, a Disciplinary Meeting (DM) was held for Officer Fusilier that resulted
in a Sustained finding for violation of APD General Orders 200.2.1, Assessment and De-
Escalation, and 208.4.2, Prohibited Uses-Taser Device. Officer Fusilier's Chain of Command
issued a discipline of Education Based training in lieu of a one-day suspension.
OPO Discipline Objection:
I do not believe the discipline assessed appropriately reflects the seriousness of the incident.
I also believe that the use of force in violation of APD General Orders is less a matter of re-
training, and more reflective of a discipline that serves as a deterrent for future behavior.
Officer Fusilier deployed the taser device on a passively resistant subject, which is contrary
to his training and APD General Orders.
1
CITY OF AUSTIN
P.O. BOX 1088, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78767
OFFICE OF
WWW.ATXPOLICEOVERSIGHT.ORG
POLICEOVERSIGHT@AUSTINTEXAS.GOV
POLICE OVERSIGHT
PHONE: 512.974.9090 | TTY: 711 I FAX: 512.974.6306
FOUNDED
1839
COMPLAINT HOTLINE: 512-972-20PO
DISCIPLINE OBJECTION
Due to the nature of the violation of APD General Orders, I object to the issuance of Education
Based Discipline and recommend that the Chain of Command upholds the one-day
suspension in accordance with the APD Discipline Matrix.
Sincerely,
Dail
Mccal
Gail McCant
Director
Office of Police Oversight
OUNDED
1839
2