GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. – The defense will continue to call witnesses on day six of the trial in the death of Patrick Lyoya.

Lyoya, a 26-year-old Congolese refugee, was shot and killed by a Grand Rapids Police Officer during a traffic stop in April 2022.

The former officer, Christopher Schurr, is charged with second-degree Murder in Lyoya’s death.

On Monday, the prosecution called eight of its eleven witnesses to testify.

Witnesses included Grand Rapids residents who witnessed the incident, the passenger in Lyoya’s car, and investigators on the case.

Day two of the trial focused on experts giving their opinion on the case.

The prosecution rested its case on Wednesday. The defense began calling witnesses to the stand and will continue to do so on Thursday.

Schurr took the stand on Friday, defending his reasoning as to why he had to shoot and kill Lyoya.

Defense attorneys are expected to wrap up their case on Monday, May 5.

Previous coverage: Christopher Schurr testifies in Patrick Lyoya murder trial

You can watch the trial live in the live stream at the top of this article. NOTE: The livestream is on a 30-minute delay due to the court’s request.

Here’s what happened on the first day of the trial:

Footage shown in court

In cell phone and body camera video, Schurr and Lyoya are seen struggling for several minutes. Schurr demanded that Lyoya needed to “let go” of the officer’s taser. Schurr fired the fatal shot while Lyoya was on the ground.

Prosecution opening statement

Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker gave the opening statement on Monday morning during the trial.

“A single gunshot wound right to the back of the head,” Becker said to the jury during opening statements. “That’s what killed Patrick Lyoya on a cold, wet, rainy day back in April of 2022.

Becker told the jury the barrel of Schurr’s gun was on the back of Lyoya’s head when the shot was fired.

“You’ll see the video here. The defendant that sits before you here today fired that shot that day,” Becker said, pointing to Schurr sitting in the courtroom.

Becker told the jury this case may have more video evidence of the incident than any other case.

“You’ll have cell phone video, body camera video,” Becker said. “You’ll have body camera video, you’ll have in-car video. You’ll have security camera video from across the street.”

Becker walked the jury through the video they’ll see, explaining they’ll see a traffic stop turn into a struggle.

He also told the jury the struggle for Schurr’s taser will be pivotal to the case.

“It’s not a gun; even the taser training manual says it’s an option that doesn’t replace lethal force,” Becker said.

Becker also talked about the witnesses that will be taking the stand, including Lyoya’s friend and passenger in the car when the shooting happened.

Becker said a taser expert will be called on to testify about the range you should use a taser.

Becker claims Schurr was too close to Lyoya to be using the taser.

Central to the prosecution’s case is arguing that a reasonable officer would not have used deadly force in that situation.

“There was no intent, and there was no ability to cause any sort of harm to the officer,” Becker said.

Becker concluded his 20-minute opening by asking the jury to return a guilty verdict.

“A police officer can commit murder; they are no different than anybody else,” Becker said. “They are no different than any other citizen; they can commit murder, and that is what happened in April 2022.

Defense opening statement

The attorney for Christopher Schurr made their opening statement to the jury, arguing this is a case of self-defense.

“He didn’t choose to take a life. He chose to save his own,” defense attorney Mikayla Hamilton said.

Hamilton gave the jury background about Schurr, mentioning his time as a high school athlete, earning a scholarship, and marrying his high school sweetheart.

Hamilton talked about Schurr and his wife getting married on a mission trip in Keya and emphasized their service to others.

The defense then walked the jury through the day of the shooting, starting with Schurr stopping Lyoya for the license plate not matching the vehicle.

Hamilton said that Lyoya disregarded 29 police commands from Schurr.

“Mr. Lyoya continued to escalate the situation by failing to comply with Officer Schurr’s lawful commands,” Hamilton said. “He created to a danger not only to Officer Schurr but to the citizens of Grand Rapids.”

When describing the physical struggle, Hamilton argues that Lyoya was bigger and stronger than Schurr.

She also said Schurr was “flooded with fear” when Lyoya grabbed for his taser.

“If Mr. Lyoya tased him, he could take his firearm and shoot him with his own weapon, which is something officers are trained to consider,” Hamilton said.

The defense said they plan to call several experts to testify that Schurr’s actions were reasonable.

Hamilton concluded her 30-minute opening by asking the jury to return a not-guilty verdict.

First witness

The first witness testified he was hanging out with Lyoya the day before he was killed. He said Lyoya slept on the couch at his house the night before the shooting.

Lyoya told him to wake him up early the next day because he had plans in the morning. He testified he woke up Lyoya and never saw him again.

“My biggest regret is waking him up,” he said.

He could not testify whether or not Lyoya had been drinking the night before.

Second witness

The second witness testified Lyoya was like a brother to him — a very close friend.

He said he was in Lyoya’s car that morning. He testified the car was making a lot of noise, leading to Lyoya pulling over to check on his car.

The second witness testified he didn’t know a cop was behind them while Lyoya was pulling over until Lyoya stepped out of the car and started talking to an officer.

He recorded the incident between Schurr and Lyoya. He recalled hearing a pop after seeing the officer on top of Lyoya. Schurr then instructed him to step back.

The second witness testified that he, Lyoya, and other friends had been drinking the night before.

Third witness

The third witness testified that he saw police lights out of his window the day of the shooting. He recalled seeing what looked like a traffic stop, which he said was unusual because he had never seen someone get pulled over near his home.

When he got dressed and went outside to his front porch, he saw the altercation between Schurr and Lyoya.

He described the incident as a “tussle” or “wrestling match.”

He said he saw Lyoya was not physically fighting back, but he wasn’t directly listening to Schurr.

The third witness testified that Lyoya tried to avoid the taser when Schurr was trying to use it on him. He recalled Lyoya was pushing down on the taser to prevent it from being tased.

He recalled hearing a pop sound when he went back inside to grab his phone, then heard Schurr say, “Officer-involved shooting.”

“The last six seconds God spared my eyes,” he stated when the defense said he didn’t see all the events transpire.

Fourth witness

A fourth witness testified he lived in the area where the shooting happened. He said what caught his attention to look outside was his dog barking.

He looked outside and saw Schurr and Lyoya running around outside. He said he didn’t think anything of it, but he then heard a gunshot.

The fourth witness then saw Lyoya on the ground with Schurr still standing.

He said he went back to bed after.

He testified he didn’t hear anything about a taser or doesn’t recall as it was so long ago.

Fifth witness

Zachary Batchelor, a detective sergeant with Michigan State Police, testified he was part of the investigation into the shooting, focusing on video analysis.

He received bodycam and dashcam footage, as well as cell phone video of the shooting, from his supervisor to analyze the case.

Batchelor testified took the video files and synchronized them into one video file to show all angles of the event unfolding.

Sixth witness

Jessica Beaudry, a crime scene technician with the Grand Rapids Police Department, testified about her involvement in taking photos of Schurr directly after the shooting.

The photos were taken to document the appearance of what an officer looks like after a shooting. Beaudry testified that Schurr said one of his hands felt sore, and they photographed the hand to document what appeared to be some redness and “minor scratches.”

A close-up of his face was taken to document dirt that made it onto Schurr’s face.

Seventh witness

The seventh witness was Michigan State Police Det. Sgt. Aaron Tubergen, the officer in charge of the investigation.

He said he worked to preserve all possible digital evidence, and his team searched for doorbell cameras, cellphones, or anything that could have documented the shooting. Tubergen testified that they were able to find nearby doorbell footage that captured Lyoya’s death from across the street.

Additionally, footage from Schurr’s time at a police academy with music — including Kenny Loggins’ “Danger Zone” and Imagine Dragons’ “Radioactive” played over it.

After that footage was shown, Tubergen was asked if Lyoya grabbing Schurr’s taser was a felony offense. Tubergen said it was.

Eighth witness

Forensic pathologist Stephen Cole, who was the eighth witness, testified he conducted the autopsy on Lyoya and found his blood alcohol level was .29%.

“The main finding is that he had a very high blood alcohol,” he said.

Cole also testified that he did not find gunpowder residue around the bullet wound to the back of Lyoya’s head, saying the gun either fired from greater than three or four feet away or that the muzzle was up against Lyoya’s head and the residue was blown into the wound.

“I believe it is a contact wound,” he said.

Here’s what happened on the second day of the trial:

Taser expert testifies

A taser expert testified in court on Tuesday, explaining to the jury how the tool works. He testified that a taser, especially the taser used before the 2022 shooting, is classified as a “serious weapon.”

The training video on how to use the taser that’s shown to police officers was presented in court. The video demonstrated how to use a taser and used a mannequin as the target. The training video highlights that the taser can reach a person from a greater distance, giving the officer some space for safety.

Prosecutors also went through the slideshow that’s required to be presented to officers in training on why using a taser is important, along with the risks.

The expert testified the weapon is pretty effective but can be less effective for people who have pre-existing medical conditions causing numbing in the body or are drunk.

Law professor, former police officer testifies

Seth W. Stoughton, a law professor at the University of South Carolina, testified his knowledge on police use of force in court immediately after the taser expert.

Prior to being a professor, he worked as an officer at the Tallahassee Police Department.

He reviewed the case involving Schurr in the 2022 shooting, and has expert knowledge about “officer-created jeopardy.”

Prosecutors submitted Stoughton as an expert in the case, but the defense argued prosecutors could “confuse the jury completely by letting professor Stoughton give opinions about things that, based on this theory.”

Generally accepted police practices, use of force

He went on to discuss “generally accepted police practices” and what he believed were the reasons Schurr chose the actions he did during the traffic stop. Stoughton said it was reasonable for Schurr to pull over Lyoya and attempt to grab him, but chasing him was unreasonable. Since there was another person in Lyoya’s car, Schurr was exposing himself to risk and it would have been safer to question the person inside the car.

Stoughton also testified that Schurr should have given Lyoya a warning about the use of lethal force beforehand and that “he had time to do so.”

When asked if a reasonable officer in a similar situation would have made the decision to pull the trigger, Stoughton said “no.”

When asked if he felt Schurr was responding to an imminent threat, Stoughton answered that he didn’t think so, “not one that justified a use of deadly force.”

Questions of bias

The defense asked Stoughton if he remembered an interview he did with WOOD-TV about Lyoya’s death shortly after he was killed. The defense called attention to a book presented on a shelf behind him during his interview, “Evaluating Police Uses of Force,” and claimed Stoughton wanted to bring attention to the book he wrote.

The defense asked what Stoughton knew about confirmation bias before asking if he had formed his opinion on Lyoya’s death before the April 2022 interview with WOOD-TV and has since sought evidence to support his prior opinion.

Stoughton testified that that wasn’t the case and that the new information just caused him to maintain his original opinion, and there were multiple times when his opinion on cases had changed as more evidence was revealed.

“The additional evidence did not call into question or lead me to draw a different conclusion about the specific tactical aspects that I talked about in that interview,” Stoughton said.

“No reasonable officer?”

When asked if he really believed that “no reasonable officer” would have pursued Lyoya, Stoughton said letting someone flee for an improper license plate is better than “getting into a fight and losing.”

Stoughton said Schurr chased after Lyoya and left the passenger in the car. The passenger went on to get out of the car and began filming the altercation.

“The reason why that’s unreasonable is because if he had gotten out with a gun and shot the officer in the back of the head, he would not see that coming,” Stoughton said. “That is one of several reasons why you do not do exactly what we just saw.”

When asked if Schurr was at a tactical advantage during his altercation with Lyoya, Stoughton said Schurr was never at a disadvantage.

Here’s what happened on the third day:

On the third day of the trial in the death of Patrick Lyoya, prosecutors had their final witness take the stand.

The defense then requested a mistrial, arguing two of the prosecution’s expert witnesses said they didn’t know Michigan law.

The defense also requested a directed verdict, which would take the decision out of the hands of the jury and give it to the judge.

Judge Christina Mims denied both requests.

The first witness called by the defense was a forensic video analyst expert.

The second witness called by the defense was Timothy Johnston, a recently retired Grand Rapids Police Officer who responded as backup after the fatal shooting.

Johnston said that upon arriving on scene, Schurr appeared exhausted from the struggle.

“He reminded me of the end of an Olympic sprint race or something, you see the athletes afterwards with their hands on their knees breathing hard,” Johnston said.

Other officers who responded to the scene that day also testified, including Officer Nicholas Calati, who testified to Schurr’s exhaustion.

“He was worn out, tired,” Calati said. “His face was pale.”

Grand Rapids Police Capt. David Siver weighed in on the struggle for Christopher Schurr’s taser.

“That’s not an attempt to just swat it away,” Siver said. “They’re grabbing hold of it and potentially going to disarm you.”

Contrary to the opinions of expert witnesses called by the prosecution, Siver told the jury Schurr’s use of deadly force was reasonable.

“A reasonable officer would perform the same way in that situation,” Siver said.

Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker began his cross-examination of Siver before court adjourned for the day.

Key moments from Day 4 of the trial:

Cross-examination of Captain Siver

Kent County Prosecutor questioned Siver in cross-examination, after Siver told the jury Tuesday that Schurr was appropriate in using deadly force.

Previous coverage — Ex-officer’s murder trial in death of Patrick Lyoya: Police captain defends Schurr’s actions

Judge Christina Mims read a question from a juror for Siver to answer.

Juror Question: “Is deadly force appropriate in situations of active resistance or only in situations of active aggression?”

Siver: “Active resistance you can’t say always, but would most likely not lead to a deadly force incident. It becomes, it’s a fine line between resistance and aggression. For example, grabbing at a taser would be an aggressive act and that would raise the level of force greatly. So hopefully that answers that.”

Testimony from Captain Chad McKersie

The next witness called by the defense was Capt. Chad McKersie with the Grand Rapids Police Department, who discussed what it’s like to be tased.

“Unbelievably painful,” McKersie said.

Mark Dodge (Defense Attorney): “Was Officer Schurr reasonable to resort to deadly force in this situation?”

McKersie: “Yes, I believe in my opinion he was in fear that this device was going to be used against him. He was going to be incapacitated, he’s already exhausted at that moment.”

The prosecution objected to this statement, arguing McKersie can’t testify to what Schurr believed.

The judge agreed with the prosecution and struck the comment from the record.

The next witness called by the defense was Officer Jason Gady with the Grand Rapids Police Department.

Expert testimony from Lon Bartel

The eighth witness called by the defense is Lon Bartel.

The judge allowed Bartel to testify as an expert in exhaustion and exertion factors.

Bartel gave his opinion on Schurr’s state after the physical struggle with Lyoya.

“Is then at a point where he is exhausted and has very little options other than the use of deadly force to stop the ongoing assault,” Bartel said.

Day 5 of the trial:

Christopher Schurr testifies

The jury learned about Schurr’s background, as he answered questions about his life going back to being a college athlete in track and field.

He also talked about marrying his high school sweetheart in Kenya.

“We were there on a mission trip,” Schurr said.

Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker objected, saying it’s irrelevant.

Judge Christina Mims sustained the objection.

When asked why he wanted to join the police academy, Schurr said, “I just wanted to do a job that was more fulfilling.”

Schurr talked about his training at the academy and at the Grand Rapids Police Department.

He was also asked about being tased as part of training.

“It’s extremely, excruciating pain,” Schurr said.

Defense Attorney Mark Dodge then asked, “After having felt the effects of the taser, would you volunteer to do it again?”

“No,” Schurr responded.

Details of the day of the shooting

Shifting focus to the day of the deadly shooting, Schurr walked the jury through his morning routine. He stated he arrived at work at 5 a.m. on April 4, 2022. Schurr explained that he initiated the traffic stop because the license plate did not match the vehicle.

Without mentioning Lyoya by name, Schurr described how “the driver” did not comply with his commands and ran away. Prior to the incident, Schurr noted he had partaken in 30 to 40 solo foot chases.

Schurr detailed what happened when he deployed his taser. “When I deployed it, the driver grabs onto the taser itself,” he said.

Dodge asked, “After the driver grabs onto your taser, did he ever let it go?”

Schurr responded that this was the first time someone attempted to take the taser from him.

“At this point, I’m afraid he’s going to get the taser from me and use it on me,” Schurr testified.

He repeatedly stated that he was afraid for his life when he made the decision to shoot.

“If I waited for him to point it at me, it would have been too late,” he explained.

“And what were you fearful of?” Dodge asked.

“That he was going to use it on me and I was going to die,” Schurr said.

Throughout his testimony, Schurr appeared emotional at times, wiping his eyes and quietly sniffling. “I believe if I didn’t do what I did when I did it, I wouldn’t be here today,” he said.

Cross-examination

After a brief court break, Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker began cross-examination of Schurr.

Becker asked Schurr if Lyoya was trying to get away.

“That’s what he was doing,” Becker said. “He was trying to get away, wasn’t he?”

“I would say that he was moving his arms in a manner that struck me in an attempt to get away,” Schurr said.

The cross-examination ended with a tense exchange, where Becker points out that Lyoya is dead.

“I felt if I didn’t respond in that at that time, I wouldn’t be here,” Schurr said.

Becker said, “Sure, but he’s (Lyoya) not here, is he?”

“No, he’s not,” said Schurr.

Becker: “I have nothing further.”