CRIMINAL DIVISION

821oniaAveN,W.
Suite 450
Grand Rapids, Ml 49503-3022
Telephone: (616) 632-6710
Fax^6T6)'632-6714"~ " '' CHRISTOPHER BECKER
Prosecutor

MONICA M. JANISKEE
Chief Assistant Prosecutor

FACTS

On October 24, 2021, at approximately 10:20 PM, Kentwood Police were dispatched to 4514 Grantwood
in the City of Kentwood. The 911 call indicated that a male in the home had stabbed another male in the
back at the home/ and the individual was still armed with a knife.

Kentwood Officer Tyler Smith was working as a field training officer with Officer WendyCoHn. Officer
Colin was driving/ and responded to the scene using full lights and siren. As they were driving to the
residence. Officer Smith prepared the less-lethal shotgun. This is a special shotgun which shoots out
super sock bean bag rounds. Officer Smith indicates in his report that he planned to have a fong-range
less lethal option due to the potential of facing an edged weapon. Officer Smith was wearing a body
camera, and you clearly see him loading these non-lethal rounds as he and his partner respond to the
Grantwood address.

Officer Smith and Colin arrived at the scene and parked a few houses down from the address. Kentwood
Officer Beleen was already at the scene, and he and Officer Smith took the lead when approaching 4514
Grantwood.Asthetwoofthem approached the home, there was an un-attached garage, a fence
approximately 5 feet tall between the house and the garage with a gate that led to a side door. Officer
Beleen was first; he opened the gate on the fence and as he is doing this, you can hear Officer Smith yell,
"Police! Show me your hands!" The side door was open, a storm/screen door was dosed but you can
see figures by the door that seem to be in a struggle. Officer Beleen opened the storm/screen door and
an individual met him and came right out of the door. Officer Beleen took that person and moved him
out of the way. Officer Smith, armed with the less-lethal shotgun was now the lead and went to the
door.

Officer Smith saw two men struggling over a large butcher knife. A black male pushed an older white
mate later identified as Kim Ropp, into a cabinet. Dispatch had informed police that the suspect with the
knife who had done the stabbing was an older white male, and seeing a knife, Officer Smith shot Mr.
Ropp with two rounds from his less-lethal shotgun. From the body camera of Officer Smith/ you can see
the two rounds strike Mr. Ropp with little effect. He then fires a third round, which struck the black
male, knocking him to the ground. Mr. Ropp was then standing there in the kitchen with the knife.

There was not more than 3-5 feet between Officer Smith in the doorway of the home and Mr. Roppwho
is armed with a large butcher knife. Mr. Ropp was approximately the same distance from the two other
individuals in the home that had called the police. From the body camera footage, you can see biood on
the knife, and the second black male on the floor of the kitchen who was not moving, the stabbing
victim. Officer Smith dearly told Mr. Ropp to, "Drop the knife! Drop the knife! Drop it!" Mr. Ropp did
not drop the knife. Officer Smith writes in his report, "Kim Ropp looked at me and raised the knife.
Fearing t was about to be stabbed, i aimed my service pistol at Kim Ropp's upper body by his right
shoulder and fired three to four shots at the targeted area." Officer Smith's statement is corroborated
by the body camera footage. The body camera video shows Mr. Ropp with the knife, he does not drop it
when told to by Officer Smith. After being told to drop it he begins to bring it up and the knife is at his
waist or slightly above when Officer Smith fires the first shot.

The shots struck Mr. Ropp and he fell to the floor. Three of the bullets hit Mr. Ropp in the right lateral
chest according to the autopsy report, striking the heart, lung and liver. He was pronounced dead at the
scene. The individual he stabbed was transported to the hospital and survived the attack.

THE LAW

The rule of self-defense is well established in Michigan law. As a general rule, the use of deadly force
against another person in self-defense by one who is free from fault is justifiable if, under all the
circumstances, he honestly and reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of death or great bodily
harm and that it is necessary for him to exercise deadly force. People v Riddle, 467 Mich 116,119 (2002,

The use of deadly force in setf-defense is Justified where the actor (1) is not the aggressor/ (2) acts under
an honest and reasonable belief that he is in danger of death or great bodily harm/ (3) retreats from the
scene if possible, and (4) the only recourse lay in repelling the attack by the use of deadly force. People v
Hefl'm, 434 Mich 482, 502-503, 509 (1990,?. In Riddle, the Supreme Court clarified that "a person is never
required to retreat from a sudden, fierce and violent attack; nor is he required to retreat from an attacker
who he reasonably believes is about to use a deadly weapon." A police officer/ because of his duty and
responsibility to protect the public, is not required to retreat in the face of a display of force. People v
Doss, 406 Mich 90,102 (1979).

Heflin, Riddle and Ooss notwithstanding, the Setf-Defense Act of 2006 abrogated the duty to retreat under
most circumstances: "an individual who is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he uses
deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he has the legal right to be with
no duty to retreat if.........the individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is
necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or another
individual../' Even under the Self-Defense Act/however, self-defense is not justified simply on a belief that
deadly force is needed to repel an attack. Rather, the actor's belief must be both honest and reasonable.
People v Helftin, supra. The belief does not, however/ have to be correct. Self-defense justifies the use of
deadly force in response to an honest and reasonable belief that such force is required to prevent death
or great bodily harm, even if that belief is in error. People vShelton, 64 MichApp 154(1975,

Defense of Others

The law of self-defense applies with equal force to the defense of others. People v Kurr, 253 Mich App
317, 321; 654 NW2d 651(2002). Traditionally a person could invoke a claim of the defense of others only
where the person had a special relationship to the person they were defending (such as a parent and
child). That distinction is no longer important; see Peop/ev/Curr/supra. More significantly, a police officer
has a duty and responsibility to protect the citizens of his/her community and therefore has the right to
use appropriate force in defense of the genera! public.
 ANALYSIS

Officer Smith was Justified in the use of deadly force in this incident. He came upon a chaotic scene where
Mr. Ropp had already stabbed one person. That individual was lying on the floor of the kitchen
incapacitated when Officer Smith arrived on scene. Mr. Ropp was struggling with another individual for
control of a large knife when Officer Smith opened the door to the home. Officer Smith deployed non-
lethal bean bag force initially, which had no effect on Mr. Ropp. In addition, Officer Smith indicated in his
report that Mr. Ropp had what he described as, "1000-yard stare", a look that, in his training, is consistent
with someone emotionally detached from reality. This description is consistent with that of other civilian
witnesses in the home who describe an unprovoked attack on them by Mr. Ropp which led to the police
being called. One person in the home said, "He had the devil in his eyes." There were no arguments/ no
issues, Mr. Ropp simply came out of his room armed with a knife. He apparently thought other individuals
were talking about him, when all witnesses indicated to police, nothing like that was going on. Mr. Ropp
was apparently drinking heavily; one of the civilians in the home said he was drunk when the attack
began, another stated to police that he attempted to get Mr.Ropp to put the knife down, "but he wouid
not listen to him due to the fact he was drunk/' From Officer Smith's report, and the body camera footage,
Mr. Ropp acted similarly when confronted by the police, he would not listen to commands to drop the
knife. His autopsy report also supports their observations that Mr. Ropp was intoxicated; it shows his
blood alcohol level at 290 mg/dl, which converts to a .29 if it were a breath test.

Given the smail distance between Mr. Ropp, Officer Smith, and the other civilians in the home, there was
an imminent threat of deadly force posed by Mr. Ropp. Officer Smith justifiably met that threat with
deadly force when he decided to fire his weapon to stop him. As the law states, a police officer has a duty
and responsibility to protect the citizens of their community and use appropriate force in defense of the
genera! public. Officer Smith used appropriate force, to protect himself and the others in the home.

Chris Becker
Kent County Prosecutor

l^ff-^t
Date