New York City

New York AG's Office Concludes Johnstown Officer's Use of Force Likely Justified in Fatal Shooting of Nathan Wood

AI Assisted Icon
Published on December 18, 2024
New York AG's Office Concludes Johnstown Officer's Use of Force Likely Justified in Fatal Shooting of Nathan WoodSource: Google Street View

Following a four-month long inquiry, the Office of Special Investigation under New York Attorney General Letitia James released a detailed report into the events leading up to the death of Nathan Wood, who was fatally shot by an officer of the Johnstown Police Department. The incident, which occurred on September 17, 2023, was scrutinized through witness testimonies, home security video evidence, and rigorous legal review. The findings, published yesterday, concluded that a prosecutor likely would not be able to disprove the officer's actions as unjustified, according to New York law.

The case began in the early hours of that fateful September morning when JPD responded to a distress call about a man inflicting damage inside an apartment with hammers. The report, as obtained by the Attorney General's office, indicates that upon their arrival, officers found a man bleeding on the floor and a struggle ensued with Mr. Wood who was armed with a hammer. Despite repeated commands to drop the hammer, he failed to comply. Instead, he broke a window and, claiming to want to "kill" his "buddy", charged upstairs where he was pursued by an officer.

The OSI’s report illustrates a chaotic confrontation where Wood, still brandishing the hammer, lunged at one of the officers, prompting the officer to shoot. Wood managed to strike the officer in the face, even as more shots were fired. He was later pronounced dead at a nearby hospital. The officer involved has since recovered from the injuries sustained during the altercation.

In this case, the first responding officer faced a violent situation and a direct attack. "The officer then repeatedly instructed Mr. Wood to drop his weapon, but Mr. Wood refused and attacked the officer," according to the official report. Under such circumstances, the OSI determined that charges against the officer were not warranted, as they could not incontrovertibly prove the actions as unjustified.