Charlotte school teacher handcuffed at gunpoint — but she wasn’t the suspect

Charlotte’s police review board has agreed to investigate a citizen’s complaint about officers who pointed a gun at and handcuffed a school teacher last year after they mistakenly identified her as an stabbing suspect.

The Citizens Review Board has rarely ruled in favor of citizens bringing complaints against police and often hears cases related to officers’ use of force, like shootings. Last week’s unanimous vote signals the review board believes there’s enough evidence that CMPD should have taken disciplinary action against the officers involved but is not a final decision.

A hearing is scheduled for May, where the board may interview witnesses and vote to agree or disagree with Police Chief Johnny Jennings’ decision to not punish his officers.

The woman police wrongly detained — Jasmine Horne — says she was not injured but believes the officers involved should have faced discipline. In a statement last week, police officials acknowledged the teacher wasn’t their suspect but say officers did not know that at the time. And an internal police investigation found no policies were broken, which is the decision Horne has appealed to the review board.

Their confusion stemmed from the misspelling of a name similar to hers, which led Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police to track down her car, confront her at gunpoint in front of her home, and detain her in handcuffs and in a police vehicle for around 15 minutes on June 14, 2021.

WFAE first broke the story last June, and Horne told the station she feared for her life and worried about becoming the next Breonna Taylor. In March 2020, Taylor was shot and killed at her home by police officers in Louisville, Kentucky during a botched raid while looking for a suspect who did not live with her.

In Horne’s case, body camera footage shows the second grade Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools teacher was sitting in her car outside of her home on Englehardt Street in west Charlotte when police approached her, guns drawn.

They tell Horne to put her hands up, and they have her step out of her vehicle and place her in handcuffs.

“I live here, what’s wrong?” Horne asks the officers.

Police were looking for a suspect in an assault with a deadly weapon that happened the day before where a man had been stabbed multiple times. He told police he knew the woman who stabbed them, which gave them a name — but the wrong name was used in the initial investigation.

Police detain wrong person

Police put Jasmine Horne’s name into their license plate reader system — which uses camera technology to track vehicles in various locations citywide. Police later would say the person they were looking for had the same last name but a different first name: Jaselyn. That person was later charged with attempted first degree murder.

Jasmine Horne was in handcuffs for about 15 minutes, according to police. During that time officers spoke with her mother and grandmother who confirmed that they had no idea who Jaselyn Horne was.

“For some reason, we got an email saying that a Jaselyn Horne was driving your daughter’s vehicle,” an officer tells Jasmine Horne’s mother who is on speaker phone with him and her grandmother. “And so we found the vehicle and your daughter in it and we thought that’s who that was.”

“No that’s my daughter’s car,” her mother replies.

“Yeah that’s why we’re confused and we’re trying to sort it all out,” the officer says. “But you don’t know anybody by that name?”

“No,” her mother says.

“Ok, well your daughter is out of handcuffs she’s about to be let go, um I just wanted to talk to ya’ll and see if you knew who that was,” he says.

“You handcuffed my daughter?,” her mother asks.

“Yeah based on what I told you,” he says.

“Why would you handcuff my daughter and that’s her car, that’s her vehicle?”

“Right and we’ve got that as a suspect vehicle”

Video released by the city in January of the incident does not show a conversation between Jasmine Horne and the officers on scene, explaining the mix-up. The Observer could not reach Horne or her attorney this week.

CMPD maintains its officers followed policy

The police review board deliberates and votes behind closed doors due to an exemption in state law for public board discussion and records concerning personnel to be kept private.

Even if the Citizens Review Board disagrees with CMPD, members do not have the authority to overrule Jennings.

Julian Wright, an attorney for the board with the law firm Robinson Bradshaw, said the function of the board is to review citizen complaints made against police officers in certain categories. These include the unlawful use of force, unlawful arrest, improper search and seizure, racial profiling, conduct unbecoming of an officer, or any officer-involved shooting.

First a complaint would go through CMPD’s own internal affairs process, however if a citizen disagrees with the resolution of that process, they can take their complaint to the Citizens Review Board, Wright said.

The review board’s lack of authority — such as subpoena power to compel officers and witnesses to give statements — has been a point of contention for years locally. And in 2017, when a short-handed board deadlocked over its decision in the case of Keith Lamont Scott’s police shooting death, one board member criticized the policy of holding two hearings, saying it was skewed in favor of accused police officers.

Since 2013, out of 21 appeals not including Horne’s, only seven have made it to the second step in the hearing process.

That two-step hearing process is unfolding in Horne’s case, with the Citizens Review Board’s next decision resting on whether members find Jennings clearly “erred” by not taking disciplinary action against the officers.

After the hearing, the board makes a recommendation to the chief of police, Wright said.

“The board can only give an advisory opinion; the board can’t make the chief change his mind or make the police department discipline the officers,” Wright said. “But it can write out and does typically write out detailed findings and recommendation of how the citizen’s review board thinks the matter should be handled.”

The chief then has seven days to determine how the matter will be handled. If they choose not to accept the recommendation, it goes to the city manager who also has seven days to decide whether to overrule the chief, Wright said.