AKRON CITIZENS’ POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD

STATEMENT CONCERNING POLICE CHIEF’S FINDINGS AND DECISION

ON THE JAYLAND WALKER INTERNAL INVESTIGATION

The Akron Citizens’ Police Oversight Board and the Office of Independent Police Auditor will
promptly begin a rigorous review of the findings and decision of Chief Stephen L. Mylett as to
the death of Jayland Walker. The Board will report the results of the review and make any
recommendations that are warranted.

While reserving judgment as to what will be the outcome of its review, the Board must
acknowledge the pain felt by the Walker family and through the entire Akron community,
including by the members of the Board, concerning Jayland Walker’s tragic death.

The Board and the OIPA will consider all available evidence, including the report of the Ohio
Bureau of Criminal Investigation, as well as the full findings of the Chief pursuant to the internal
investigation conducted by the Division of Police (“APD”). The Board does not expect the
failure of the Grand Jury to bring indictments to be taken into consideration.1

The Board and the OIPA will review the Chief’s conclusions as to whether the actions of the
involved officers violated policies of APD and if so whether discipline is warranted. The Board
expects these additional issues to be examined:

If the actions of the officers who pursued Jayland Walker and of those officers who fired
at him did not violate APD policies, should those policies be revised?

In particular, should the Use of Force policy be revised as to what levels of force should
be used under what circumstances and as to the standard for assessing whether the policy
has been violated?

Was appropriate command and control exercised by APD in the Jayland Walker incident?
If not, should the policies and procedures for incident command and control be revised?

The Board well understands its responsibility to the entire community to exercise independent
judgment as to this matter and it intends to fulfill that obligation.

Akron Citizens’ Police Oversight Board

November 29, 2023

1
The Board does not agree with the Chief that any relevant inferences can be drawn from the
failure of the required supermajority of the Grand Jury to bring indictments. A majority of the
Grand Jury may have voted to bring one or more indictments. The proceedings of the Grand
Jury are of course secret so that the results of the votes and any statements made by members of
the Grand Jury as to the reasons for their votes cannot be known.