Brooklyn MDC guard fired at a car during chase, believing it was related to a jailbreak incident.
A former correctional officer at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn is currently on trial for his involvement in a high-speed chase and subsequent shooting incident that occurred on September 4, 2023. Leon Wilson, 51, is facing charges for firing his service weapon at a BMW while pursuing it in a Bureau of Prisons vehicle. His defense centers around the assertion that he believed he was responding to an attempted jailbreak, which prompted his actions during the encounter.
On Monday, during his testimony at the Brooklyn Federal Court, Wilson recounted the events leading to the chase, stating that he felt compelled to act after witnessing the BMW back into the parking lot. He alleged that the occupants of the vehicle were there to deliver contraband items, including marijuana, cigarettes, and cell phones. Demonstrating an understanding of the heightened alert protocols in effect at the facility due to intelligence of a potential contraband plot, he described feeling a surge of adrenaline that led him to make a “split-second decision.”
Wilson initiated a pursuit of the BMW that extended for more than a mile, during which he reportedly opened fire on the vehicle. A passenger in the back seat sustained injuries from the gunfire. His actions raised significant legal and ethical questions, particularly concerning his authority to leave the prison grounds and the decision to use his firearm in such circumstances.
The prosecution, led by Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Silverberg, challenged Wilson’s narrative during cross-examination. Silverberg pointed out inconsistencies in Wilson’s testimony, such as his failure to report the shooting or call for emergency assistance immediately following the incident. Wilson contended he was in a state of shock, and didn’t have access to his radio or cell phone after they were displaced during the chase.
During the trial, testimony revealed that Wilson had temporarily left his post before returning to the parking lot after hearing signals from a colleague’s radio, reinforcing the precarious nature of his actions that day. Despite a clear understanding of professional protocols, Wilson’s responses during questioning seemed to illustrate a struggle to reconcile his decisions with standard procedures.
The trial does not allow for broader discussions regarding the systemic violence and contraband issues prevalent at the facility, which adds a layer of complexity to the case. Wilson’s defense hinges on his claimed perception of imminent danger during the pursuit, particularly after he noticed a firearm allegedly pointed at him from the rear window of the BMW. However, material evidence, including testimony from other passengers in the vehicle, contradicts his assertion regarding the presence of firearms.
As jury deliberations continue, the case raises critical questions about the conduct and accountability of prison officers, particularly regarding the use of force and the adherence to established protocols in high-stakes situations. The outcome of this trial will have implications not only for Wilson but for broader discussions regarding safety and law enforcement practices within correctional facilities.
