AUSTIN, Texas — A jury has found Austin Police Department officer Christopher Taylor guilty of deadly conduct in the 2019 shooting death of Mauris DeSilva, a man suffering mental illness and armed with a knife.
Taylor was initially indicted for murder in connection DeSilva's death, but the charge was downgraded to deadly conduct shortly before his trial began. Jury selection kicked off on Sept. 23, with closing statements delivered Oct. 2. The jury began deliberations on Wednesday before returning its verdict on Saturday morning.
The conviction of Taylor marks the first time ever in Travis County a police officer has been found criminally liable in an on-duty fatal shooting. Taylor faces up to 10 years in prison.
The judge will decide the sentencing date for Taylor on Oct. 15.
“We hope this outcome continues to help the DeSilva family with their healing process,” said Travis County District Attorney José Garza in a statement. “Our office is grateful to our dedicated staff who worked tirelessly to hold the defendant accountable and seek justice for the victim and their family. We further hope this verdict allows the community to heal and that we can move forward together.”
APD also issued a statement after the guilty verdict on Saturday afternoon.
"The Austin Police Department respects the criminal justice process and understands this is a difficult time for all who have been impacted," the department said.
President of the Austin Police Association Michael Bullock posted on social media, calling the verdict "a sad day for Travis County and for the law enforcement profession."
"APD Detective Taylor being found guilty for lawfully defending themselves against an armed individual puts our entire city at risk," Bullock said. "Countless cases of deadly conduct have been dropped, pled out, or rejected by the Travis County District Attorney. Yet an extraordinary amount of resources and time has gone into prosecuting an officer who not only followed APD training but also national training standards. An officer who had to make a decision none of us ever want to have to make."
State's closing arguments
During this whole trial, the state has been arguing that all of the decisions Taylor and the other offices made leading up to the shooting were not reasonable or prudent.
Prosecutors spent a lot of time talking about the officers' decision to take the elevator up to where DeSilva was on the fifth floor of the condo instead of the stairs, and not stopping to ask witnesses more questions about DeSilva's mental state. They said by making those "imprudent decisions," it put Taylor and the other officers in a difficult position.
"What they did was make sure, through their faulty decision making, they were going to make sure that they confronted Mauris DeSilva in the smallest possible place, with the least amount of time, using the most amount of force," said Rob Drummond, a state attorney. "And now ... He wants to say I'm not guilty because there was no time and no space."
They also brought up the fact that one of the witnesses who saw DeSilva walking around the condo with a knife was able to tell him to go away just by talking to him. The prosecution made it a point to emphasize how none of the officers chose "voice" as a defense when they got in the elevator, all of them chose "lethal," "less lethal," or "hands."
Another central part of the state's argument is that DeSilva was not a threat to officers. Drummond argued that because DeSilva lowered the knife a few inches when turning around to face officers, he was not threatening to murder them or cause them serious bodily injury.
"No ordinary, prudent person would have believed that what Mauris DeSilva was doing was attempting to cause serious bodily injury or death to Chris Taylor or anybody else on that elevator," Drummond said.
The state also addressed the audio recording of Garza that was brought by the defense as evidence in the trial. On the recording, Garza is talking about a hypothetical situation of a person 30 feet away brandishing a knife, and saying that it may be a situation where officers would need to use deadly force. State prosecutors argued that the hypothetical was different from this situation because DeSilva was not "brandishing" the knife or holding it in a way that looked like he planned to attack officers.
Prosecutors argued that just because DeSilva was a threat to himself, was not a reason to believe he would be a threat to others.
Defense's closing arguments
In contrast to the state, Taylor's defense said it's not the jury's role to figure out what Taylor and other officers should have done prior to the shooting, just if Taylor's response was reasonable in those three seconds when the elevator doors opened.
"You already know what this case is about, it's about self-defense and only self-defense," Doug O'Connell, Taylor's defense attorney said. "Chris Taylor is not charged with the crime of taking the elevator, he's charged with deadly conduct."
His defense also explained the difference of how self-defense law in Texas only requires them to prove that Taylor had reason to believe a person was committing or attempting to commit bodily injury or death. The state focused on the idea that DeSilva was not trying to threaten officers, but Taylor's defense says that point is moot because they don't have to prove DeSilva's motive; just if Taylor had reason to believe DeSilva was going to harm them.
"Nowhere do you have to consider or decide what was in Mr. DeSilva's head," said Ken Ervin, Taylor's defense attorney. "It is only whether Detective Taylor could have had a reasonable belief that that's what was happening."
His attorneys say all the evidence leads to that belief. When the elevator doors open, DeSilva turns around and lowers the knife a few inches, but keeps it in his hands and with the blade facing up. The video also shows DeSilva walking toward officers, which they say was "suicidal."
"The act of walking towards police officers, yelling at you to stop with a knife, getting within three feet, that alone is suicidal," Ervin said.
Taylor's defense also said the state has been trying to distract from the real issue and in a convoluted way "victim blame" Taylor by saying it's his fault he was there and killed DeSilva.
"They were told by multiple people to deal with this man with a knife," Ervin said. "That's his job, that's what we expect. That's why we have police officers because we don't want to deal with that."
His defense said it also shouldn't come down to getting actually attacked or killed before officers take action.
"Chris and every other officer has the right to go home to their spouses and the people that love them," O'Connell said. "Our law does not require anyone, police or civilian, to have to get stabbed, slashed or otherwise injured before they use self-defense."
They also emphasized that this case is not about evaluating the Austin Police Department or its police tactics. O'Connell said the jury may have formed an opinion about police tactics during the course of the trial, but that is not what they're there to evaluate; only self-defense.
"The department is not on trial, Chris Taylor is," O'Connell said "So every time they talk to you about the stairs or front line with less lethal versus too lethal, or they should've hovered in the lobby and they shouldn't have gone straight up, all of that is tactical decisions or police tactics, but that's not what this case is about."
Background information
On July 31, 2019, Austin Police Department (APD) officers, including Taylor, responded to 911 calls coming from the Spring Condominiums in Downtown Austin.
At the time, DeSilva was said to be going through a mental health crisis. Officers found DeSilva inside the building, armed with a knife, threatening to harm himself. They told him to drop the knife, but after he failed to do so, Taylor shot DeSilva.
Taylor stood trial last year on a murder charge in connection with the 2020 shooting of Michael Ramos. A jury deadlocked, and prosecutors have since said they will not retry Taylor in that case.
