Peoria, IL (CAPITOL CITY NOW) – This will be the live blog for day four of the Sean Grayson murder trial.  Grayson, a former Sangamon County Sheriffs Deputy, is charged with murder for the death of Sonya Massey in July, 2024.  Grayson has pleaded not guilty and has claimed self defense.

WTAX and CapitolCityNow’s Will Stevenson is covering the trial at the Peoria County Courthouse, moved there from Springfield due to pre-trial publicity.

This story will be updated throughout day four of the trial. Click “refresh” on your browser to see the latest entries.  A new post will be created every day during the trial. (Some post times may be approximate.) Some of these entries may contain typographical errors that will be fixed as time allows.

Some of the language below may be coarse, and some descriptions may be disturbing.

4:32pm: With the jury back in the room, questioning continues regarding reviewing policies and reports related to potential department violations. Dekmar says he reviewed hundreds of pages of reports on the matter.

Do you agree that Massey, though slow-mo video and frames of that, that Massey threw the pot of water? “That was not my interpretation of what I saw,” Dekmar said. “What I saw was him advancing on her,” said Dekmar. If Massey does throw the water, does that put Grayson in threat of death or injury? “I can’t offer an opinion, if I don’t agree on the fact,” said Dekmar. If Grayson sees Massey coming up from behind the cabinet directing a pot at Grayson or in his direction, “does that now place him in the immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury?” asked Wykoff. “It could,” said Dekmar. Says it wouldn’t change his opinion on policy violation. Says Grayson has a duty to obey policy. “That was clearly not done in this case, in my opinion,” said Dekmar. Says Grayson should have looked at alternatives to use of force.

“Where does it say anywhere in the policy in totality ‘Be forewarded…any violation of any area of this policy will render deadly force applications…inapplicable’?” asked Wykoff. Says there not mere suggestions otherwise you don’t have accountability. A violation of one policy is a violation of all of them, Wykoff asks? “Yes or no!” “I can’t answer the question,” said Dekmar. Objection made to badgering the witness. Wykoff says Dekmar said no.

Question about the value of human life being a guiding principle. Aren’t deputies human beings, too, Wykoff asked. “Correct,” said Dekmar. Deputy had to balance the lives of three human beings, said Wykoff. “That’s why there’s policy and procedure,” said Dekmar.

4:14pm: One of the alternate jurors was seated today. I incorrectly stated earlier that there were eight women and four men on the jury. Now, with the seating of an alternate, there really are. My apologies for the mistake.

4:03pm: After lengthy sidebar, and outside the presence of the jury, objection detailed that part of an agreement on expert witness testimony that Rodgers believes violated. Wykoff believes he can rephrase the question without using the words “expert” and “opinion.” Rodgers still objects. Wykoff won’t bring up ISP names, and just bring up about what witness knew at the time be formed his opinion, not the finding of the ISP use of force expert. Says he’ll form “benign” questions.

3:58pm: Explained that there were other parts of the use of force policy that Grayson followed. Focus now on the term “imminent danger.”

3:53pm: Cross-examination by Wykoff. Has reviewed over 2,000 use of force incidents with his career, more than 30 involved use of deadly force. Wykoff asks a series of questions about “facts matter.”

Regarding Crisis Intervention Training policies and what Grayson violated, Grayson was not advised of what call he was going to, but was he supposed to know in what state Massey was before knocking on the door and yelling? Dekmar says crisis intervention training is used in all calls, because you need to reduce the application of force. But, the situation escalated because Massey didn’t open the door. Dekmar says that’s still not how a deputy is expected to act.

Grayson did ask if she was doing okay, and Massey referenced that she was, and she was taking her medications. Dekmar says it seems she wasn’t really okay, based on CIT training. Yes, Dekmar says he was reviewing the situation was different in perspective to him, than to Grayson. Admits he was trying to look at both Deputy Farley’s perspective and through Grayson’s. Farley at first wrote he feared Massey’s actions, but later clarified to say Grayson’s.

Wykoff admits that while Grayson violated a high risk traffic stop policy, even though it wasn’t a traffic stop.

3:26pm: Dekmar says you don’t expect officers to act perfectly on every call, but that’s what policy is for. Grayson’s policies did not adhere to any of the department’s core principals when it comes to crisis intervention training. It would have been very easy to call for assistance if Grayson actually received a threat. There is also mention in county policy of “value of human life” being a principle of the agency, “and that’s supposed to be paramount.” The policy was violated. You give immediate attention to someone who was shot, and that didn’t happen here, referenced by Grayson saying the medical kit wasn’t needed.

3:25pm After a sidebar and a break, questioning continues. Dekmar says he reviewed high risk vehicle stops, too, since that can also be essential to deescalation. References “tactical patience” where officer takes a certain distance, and how you listen and use open questions. Helps recognize that we’re intentional about developing repour. The defendant didn’t exhibit anything like that in dealing with Massey. In fact, Grayson said he sped up the process, instead of slowing it down, because he was in what he perceived to be jeopardy. Can’t take advantage of time that way. Actions were inconsistent with protocols and values of a modern high-risk vehicle stop.

Also reviewed use of force policy, created by SCSO and given to deputies. Policy talks in part about “proportionate force.” In reviewing the body-worn camera video and reports, “it was inconsistent…and contrary” to policies. Pointing a gun is use of force, and Grayson pointed a gun at Massey. It was not in line with Sangamon County Policy. Says Grayson raised his voice, and Massey did nothing to threaten the officer. Massey was stationary when threats by Grayson were made, but after going from sofa to the kitchen sink. She was not a “credible threat.” Says that’s in violation of county policy.

Also reviewed county’s crisis intervention policy. It requires use of deescalation techniques that Grayson did not use, in his opinion, and that they actually escalated the situation.

Says Massey did not pose a threat. “Disoriented, confused” and later said “I’m sorry” to the deputies.

2:52pm: Objection outside of the presence of the jury again, Wykoff says the prosecutors did say he was an expert of use of force, which prosecutors didn’t want going forward, but it was brought up in direct exam only.

Rodgers says he will talk about use of force policy in Sangamon County only. Wykoff: If he’s going to talk about a violation of use of force, I’m going to cross-examine him on it. Judge says we’re not getting into a nationwide standard, just Sangamon County use of force policies.

Cadigan also explains why he’s allowing the expert witness.

2:50pm: Body-worn camera videos from Deputies Grayson and Farley were provided to him. Also reviewed User of Force and Crisis Intervention policies from Sangamon County Sheriff’s Department, along with camera procedure. Important to review policies in order to make sure that officer acted appropriately or not. Also review training so that standards of the agency are met.

Grayson had Crisis Intervention Team training. Some of the things learned in such trainings, like de-escalation techniques can be just as effective with someone involved in, for example, drugs or alcohol.

Also reviewed reports from Deputies Farley and Grayson, and with the Illinois State Police report.

Says there were signs of a potential mental illness within Massey, evidenced by how much time she took to answer the door. Says maybe Grayson had cued in on whether or not Massey was okay, and that it should have been clear she was having some sort of mental crisis. Says officers should talk calmly, ask open-ended questions, assess what potential fears there are, then make a determination on next actions are.

CIT is based on observations on what behaviors are, not a medical diagnosis. Says Grayson’s actions were not consistent with CIT protocols, and did not adjust actions to deal with that.

Says the short time in living room before going to the kitchen, she asked for a Bible, and Grayson asked for identification. Says there wasn’t any sort of assessment to try and refer Sonya to “some sort of mental health resource.”

No communication about what deputies were doing when they got into the house, and she wanted reassurance from dispatch at the time. Needed to ask Sonya open-ended questions and didn’t.

Other verbal deescalation techniques weren’t followed. Didn’t develop a repour with Massey. Didn’t follow tactical awareness protocols, including time and distance, like when Grayson trailed Massey going to kitchen and put the pot of water down. Shouldn’t shout, threaten, or use profanity when asking to put the pot down. Grayson could have used his partner but didn’t. CIT says victims will say things like religious ideations because of the crisis. Deputies should keep distance, start open-ended dialogue. Says he saw evidence on the video of Massey trying to comply with deputy’s actions, like putting the pot down. Says she also did try to apologize.

Says there also were “failures” of following use of force policy.

2:29pm: “Is this the first time ever in your 50 years of law enforcement experience that you’re sitting in a witness chair to testify in front of a jury in a criminal case?” “No. I’ve testified in numerous criminal cases” as a police chief. “How about as an expert?” “I’ve testified as a subject matter expert.” Dekmar admits it’s the first time he’s testified as an expert in a case like this. Wykoff: “As an expert, not acting as an agent of an agency…is this the first time you are testifying as an expert in a criminal trial?” Dekmar: “Yes.” Wykoff says “the lack of expertise speaks for itself.” Rodgers says “he may not be a professional witness…but he is a professional expert in law enforcement policy and procedure.” Judge Cadigan allows him to be used as an expert.

2:15pm: In his questions to establish Dekmar as an expert witness, Wykoff questions Dekmar’s CV. Most recent case he’s been contracted to review the Grayson matter, followed by one more. Wykoff claims he is here to testify about use of force and police training. Rodgers says he’s not here to discuss use of force, only police training. Wykoff says Dekmar seems to be used in cases where there is no trial, or the case is resolved prior to trial, or also in civil cases. Clearly trying to prove Dekmar can’t be used as an expert witness.

2:04pm: Next witness is Louis Dekmar, a retired police officer, a retired chief of police in Georgia, questioned by Rodgers. Says he has almost 50 years of law enforcement experience. Former head of International Association of Chiefs of Police. Served on a number of committees, including those dealing with police misconduct. Also part of the Council on Criminal Justice.

1:45pm: We’re in a brief recess. I’ve been told that our message in the blue bar at the top of our website obscures the “listen live” link on the website. It seems to be only a problem when you are looking at our full website on our mobile device. I recommend downloading our Capitol City Now app, which is set up differently, and has its own Listen Live button. CLICK HERE to download our mobile app.

Also, the “Listen Live” link is not at all covered up when you’re using a laptop or desktop computer.

1:43pm: Cross-examination by Wykoff. Even service providers have to deal with people who are irate. Shawn Grayson was in one of Rigano’s training classes. Asked about dealing with tho

se with mental health crises. New term is “emotionally-distressed person,” asked about on re-direct. Not necessarily dealing with a mental crisis, but when things get to us.

1:32pm: Rigano says about 60 percent of communication is body language, the next 28% is tone and delivery. You don’t want to be like Charlie Brown’s teacher.

Have a flexible set of skills. Not every technique will work with everyone. Be capable of pivoting to some other technique. Allow people to vent, listen first.

Rigano says the goal of deescalation is to project empathy, get the person talking. Good deescalation results in compliance most of the time.

There is no automatic pass, and sometimes officers don’t get credit until they can demonstrate to learn and use the skills provided.

1:26pm: Time is important in dealing with someone who might be in crisis, says Rigano. Time must be used to your advantage, “throwing out the script” in terms of the agenda while responding to a call. Anxiety can be reduced more quickly and effectively that way. “It works for everybody,” says Rigano.

There can be types of barriers and how that influences interaction with law enforcement. It’s the officer’s job to use the appropriate safety skill along with crisis intervention. Barriers can be impacted by space — personal space, social space, public space, and intimate space. Start out being distant, unless officer safety says I have to lessen the distance. Figure out why they’re in the space they’re in.

“Officer created jeopardy”: When we do something that triggers them to do something else. Like someone barricaded in a bathroom, opening the door, and deadly force encounter ensues. The idea to manage that is to recognize barriers, treat them with respect.

“Active listening”: We’re not trying to placate someone, we’re trying to address someone’s emotional state. Use explicit, direct, and clear phrases. Be direct, and don’t lie to someone in crisis. Use minimal encouragement. Be effective with use of silence and pauses, paraphrase contact., paraphrasing of emotions also is part of what works.

People in crisis don’t always feel they’re being heard, so building repour is good through summarizing with them what’s wrong.

“Be Captain Obvious” when dealing with someone in crisis.

1:15pm: Rigano says maturity is also important, almost comparable to what a parent would do. Mature officers are capable to handling challenges to their authority. Immature officers aren’t. Maturity can go wrong, though. Sometimes officers’ maturity can be used in the wrong way, like to lean on tenure. There are two types of officers: those who bring confident energy, and those who bring arrogant energy. Conflict resolution training brings the right skillsets to officers.

1:10pm: Rigano teaches conflict resolution as part of some officers’ training. Says they should be used in “pretty much every single aspect of policing,” saying it can make officers and policing better. He says there’s not much you can do to get the public to be more in favor of police, but someone who’s good at conflict resolution can reduce lawsuits, and can make situations less stressful.

1:01pm: First witness after lunch is Anthony Rigano, who has taught for the Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board, retired from the Elgin Police Department. He’s been an instructor in crisis intervention.

11:07am: On redirect examination, the sooner treatment is given, the better chance of survival. Lunch break until 1pm.

11:06am: With jury back at the room, as part of normal forensic autopsy report, peripheral blood of Massey is drawn, “away from the center” taken as far away as possible. Toxicology work is outsourced to a lab in Pennsylvania. Tested positive for “Delta 9 THC” — a ingredient in marijuana, which can cause “distorted perception,” confusion, speech difficulties, and lethargy. Also positive for gabapentin which affects the central nervous system and can cause sedation.

11:01am: Wykoff says he laid a foundation properly for the testimony that prosecution objected to, including that toxicology work is done as part of a typical autopsy. Says he’s going to indicate that Massey tested positive for “some peripheral substances in her blood…just that they were there” and that those drugs can have effects and are embodied in her report. Milhiser says he understands the arguments, and that the objection will be withdrawn.

10:56am: Patterson conducted the autopsy of Sonya Massey. Some of the following notes may be disturbing.

Cross-examination by Wykoff. “If I saw you with an allergy ailment,” theoretically he could give a prescription. Admits survivability could be speculative, but medical data backs up survivability of people with gunshot wounds. “Some people that live, some people that die,” said Wykoff.

Prosecution objects to questioning the toxicology reports, even though it’s a routine matter.

Jury now out of the room. White noise seems to be present in the room during a sidebar about the objection.

10:48am: Says there was some minor bruising on the right leg. No real brain injuries except for a hairline skull fracture, but that the bullet did not go through the brain. A little hemorrhaging, but not much. Left internal carotid artery had been cut in half by the gunshot wound.

Now looking at the underside of the brain. Showing hemorrhaging mentioned above, along with broken capillaries. Looking at the right side of the brain where there was damage at the temple lobe.

Moving to back side of the neck. Shows the carotid artery. Hole in a blood vessel. Hairline fracture at the base of the skull.

X-Ray of Massey’s head further shows some bullet projectile fragments. The bullet did miss Massey’s brain.

Recapping injuries: Skull fracture that was not life threatening, hemorrhaging not to do with death either. Damage to carotid artery was “significant,” “that’s the vital structure.” “She died from a gunshot wound to the head. How did she died? Internal carotid artery damaged, but ultimately, she bled to death. If the bleeding could have been controlled, she might have survived. If medical treatment was provided right away, followed by surgery, survival might have been possible. You’ll recall Grayson intially told his partner, against department policy, that he didn’t need to get his medical kit. Applying pressure on the wound didn’t happen until later.

There are a ring of arteries around the brain. Two carotid arteries feed the brain. One of the arteries can provide enough blood flow to the brain. If medical treatment had happened sooner, Sonya could have lived, confirmed by Patterson.

10:35am: Noted first the gunshot wound to the head in an external examination. Jury is now shown photos of the injuries, including those of the face, including the “entrance wound” just below Massey’s left eye. “Exit wound” is on the back of her neck, below the left ear. Looks at the top of Massey’s brain. Some of the Massey family leaves the courtroom.

10:27am: Next witness is Dr. Nathaniel Patterson, forensic pathologist for Sangamon County Coroner.

10:20am: Outside the presence of the jury, the defense is objecting to some photos of Massey’s injuries, calling them “repetitive” and “inflammatory.” Some of the objections are sustained, while others are not.

9:58am: On cross-examination by Wykoff, Carls-Miller further explains how she test-fires a gun and confirms it was operable. Can she say “I guarantee you” that spent shell casings came from that gun? “It is my opinion based on my training and experience” that the bullets came from Grayson’s gun. Wykoff is trying to cast doubt that she knows that the test-fire matches cartridges collected from the scene. She said “I can determine” that. But she can’t say what was going through the mind of the shooter.

9:48am: Next, Hali Carls-Miller, forensic scientist with Illinois State Police in Springfield, questioned by State’s Attorney John Milhiser. She is explaining how she examines spent shell casings in the crime lab, compared to the examination of a gun. Verified that shots fired were from Grayson’s gun. Shows the jury a semi-automatic piston magazine, identified as Grayson’s. Also points out a magazine used to “test-fire” the gun, and lab-generated test shots.

9:41am: A pot collected from the home — the one with boiling water — was identified by Maulding. It was collected July 23 from the home. No cross-examination.

9:40am: Emily Maulding, an Illinois State Police crime scene investigator, is on the stand now. She collected evidence including the robe Sonya Massey was wearing July 6, 2024. Helped Markwell collect additional evidence referenced below.

9:21am: On cross-examination by defense attorney Mark Wykoff, regarding a picture of Grayson in his full duty uniform, confirming body-worn camera was on Grayson at the time. Camera was chest-high, around the location of pectorals, not between his eyes, nor immediately above his eyes.

Other items were collected as evidence, too, including a box that had 41 bullets, .38 special, “live rounds,” collected from the kitchen counter on the west side.

9:17am: Now identified is an evidence box containing an orange medical kit. Also took a series of measurements. He went to the scene two days later based on body cam footage because it had been learned three shots were fired instead of two. The third shell casing was then found and identified. Other evidence was also found at the time, including “fragments of a projectile.”

Attended Massey’s autopsy. Collected evidence of clothing, fingerprints, other items. Send to state police evidence vault.

9:12am: Markwell says he then went to the Hoover Ave. home of Massey. He identifies pictures from the scene on July 6, 2024. Photos of the scene include cell phone, ID cards, and the pot that had boiling water in it. While it was admitted to yesterday that an investigator didn’t collect the pot for weeks, a photo from the scene is of the pot. Markers were placed at the scene identifying spent shell casings.

9:08am: Also identifies a package in court that includes Grayson’s uniform: paper bag with uniform, vest, pins, notepad, gun holster, items, etc. Also identifies a package with Grayson’s gun.

9:05am: Met with Grayson and Dep. Dawson Farley after the shooting. Been reported that Massey called 911 to Sangamon County for a prowler. Was told she had attempted to throw boiling water at deputies, and that Grayson fired two to three rounds. Did not review body-work camera footage. Identifies state exhibits of photos of Grayson, and his duty equipment, including Grayson’s duty gun.

9:00am: Illinois State Trooper Adam Markwell is the first witness up today, questioned by Assistant State’s Attorney Marybeth Rodgers. He’s a crime scene investigator. He helped process the crime scene July 6, 2024.

8:57am:  A woman believed to be Sean Grayson’s mother, approached the Massey family prior to court starting for the day.  They hugged, and each side agreed they couldn’t imagine what the other was going through.