A federal appeals court has affirmed that a University of South Alabama police officer is legally protected from a lawsuit over the 2012 shooting death of an 18-year-old freshman, closing out one of the most closely watched police use-of-force cases in the Mobile area in recent years.
In a mandate issued Oct. 31, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with USA police officer Trevis Austin, ruling that he is shielded by qualified immunity in the fatal shooting of Gil Collar outside the university’s campus police station in October 2012. The decision upholds a federal district judge’s earlier finding and closes out an appeal brought by Collar’s parents, Bonnie and Reed Collar, who had hoped to bring their case before a jury.
The shooting unfolded in the early morning hours when Collar, who witnesses said had ingested the psychedelic designer drug known as 25I earlier that night, was seen walking naked around campus and allegedly assaulting passersby. He eventually made his way to the university’s police station, where he pounded on the windows and shouted, drawing Austin’s attention.
According to the court’s account of the encounter, the confrontation between Austin and Collar lasted roughly 25 seconds and ended just as a second officer, Bernard Parrish, was arriving on scene as backup. Austin fired a single shot, and Collar died from the wound.
A central question in the case was whether Austin should have reached for pepper spray instead of his firearm. The appeals court rejected that argument, noting that Austin carried his pepper spray on the same side of his belt as his handgun. Attempting to reach it, the court found, would have required him to holster his firearm, open a second holster, remove the canister, aim it and fire it, all in the span of a few seconds while he was backing away from a rapidly approaching Collar. Under those circumstances, the judges concluded, a reasonable officer could have determined there simply was not time to try pepper spray first.
The court’s order did not shy away from the emotional weight of the case. The judges wrote that Collar’s death was “unquestionably tragic” and called it another example of the toll that drug use can take, while acknowledging the Collar family’s sincere belief that their son’s death might have been prevented. Still, the panel found that Austin, in the moment, did not have the luxury of hindsight or time to weigh his options the way the case has since been examined in court.
Cameras mounted on the exterior of the campus police station captured part of the encounter. That footage has been shown to members of the media over the years but has never been made public.
Benjamin Locklear, an attorney for the Collar family, said the legal team knew from the outset that overcoming the legal protections afforded to law enforcement officers would be difficult. Locklear, who worked alongside Mobile attorneys Charlie Potts and Josh Briskman of Briskman and Binion, said the family remains convinced that the shooting could have been avoided, even though the courts did not agree that the case should go before a jury.
“We believed, and continue to believe, that Gil Collar should never have been shot and killed by Officer Trevis Austin,” Locklear said. “We understand that the governmental immunity protections provided to police officers create a very high and wide barrier to overcome. Unfortunately, we were not able to convince the District Court judge or the 11th Circuit that the evidence supported presenting this case to a jury. We are extremely disappointed in the outcome, but we respect the judicial process. The Collars are, of course, very disappointed as well, and our heart and prayers continue to be with them.”
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that shields government officials, including police officers, from civil liability so long as their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights that a reasonable person would have known about. The doctrine has been a frequent flashpoint in cases involving police shootings nationwide, with critics arguing it sets too high a bar for families seeking accountability and defenders arguing it is necessary to allow officers to make split-second decisions without fear of endless litigation.
Payroll records show Austin remained employed with the University of South Alabama as of September 2016. University officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment following the appellate ruling.
The case has remained a point of reflection for the USA campus community and for Mobile-area law enforcement more broadly, prompting ongoing conversations about how campus police are trained to respond to erratic or drug-influenced behavior and what less-lethal options officers carry and how quickly they can access them in a crisis.