A federal judge ordered new trials for three former Memphis police officers — all convicted on federal charges relating to the death of Tyre Nichols — after their lawyers alleged the trial judge of being biased when he accused one of the men of belonging to a gang. The judge’s accusation came after learning his clerk suffered a gunshot wound to the chest.
Judge Sheryl Lipman approved a new trial, writing that a communication notice federal prosecutors filed in the case violated the men’s rights to a fair trial. In the notice, prosecutors described trial Judge Mark Norris as claiming the Memphis Police Department was “infiltrated to the top with gang members,” according to court records.
Attorneys wrote that the judge allegedly expressed his bias after becoming frustrated with a federal investigation into his law clerk’s shooting. Federal prosecutors informed him they could not charge a suspect in the case and that it would be left up to the Memphis Police Department.
Lipman granted the motion to retry the defendants even though she said Norris’ decisions in the case were “deliberate and searching” and she said she found no decisions that were “inconsistent with the law.“ But she approved the request for a new trial because the risk is “too high to be constitutionally tolerable.”
The police department’s actions were central to the Nichols case as the jury watched videos of officers violently kicking and punching Nichols during a January 2023 traffic stop. Nichols’ death on Jan. 7, 2023, sparked a Justice Department investigation, which the Trump administration closed in May. All five officers were fired from the Memphis Police Department.
Prosecutors charged Emmitt Martin III, Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Desmond Mills Jr. and Justin Smith with violating Nichols’ civil rights and witness tampering, among other charges. Martin and Mills pleaded guilty to their charges in August 2024 and November 2023, respectively. Lipman rescheduled all five sentencing hearings to December after the June dates were cancelled.
A jury delivered a mixed verdict in October, finding Beal, Haley and Smith guilty of obstruction of justice, and Haley guilty of all his charges.
Lipman required lawyers for three of the ex-officers to identify by mid-September the charges for the retrial.
Lipman took over the case in June from Norris, who recused himself on June 13 before the officers’ sentencing, The Associated Press reported.
Judge’s clerk victim of crime
According to court records, a person shot one of Norris’ law clerks on Oct. 8, just days after the jury verdict.
Federal prosecutors’ notice stated investigators with the Memphis Police believed a group of minors committed the crime and Norris mentioned the clerk had “reasonable frustration” with the investigation. The FBI and U.S. Marshals Service declined to pursue federal charges due to a lack of federal jurisdiction.
The prosecutors reported Norris accusing one of the five men accused in the Nichols case of being in a gang and responsible for the shooting.
“The U.S. Attorney stated that Judge Norris told the meeting’s attendees that he believed that the intended target of the shooting was the former law clerk who had worked on the case, and who had been seen by one or more of the Defendants during the trial,” Lipman wrote.
Another prosecutor recalled Norris’ refusal to meet with anyone from the police department to give a statement on his clerk’s shooting because he believed the agency to have gang members.
Despite filing the communication notice, federal prosecutors objected to the new trial. They wrote in court papers that there wasn’t any evidence Norris had biases before or during the trial. The officers’ attorneys claimed Norris developed a bias during the trial, which prosecutors said they failed to prove.
“Despite four weeks of trial, weeks of pretrial hearings, and dozens of orders resolving hundreds and hundreds of motions, the defendants have not pointed to a single improper comment by the trial judge before or during trial,” prosecutors wrote.
Attorneys for the ex-officers argued a new trial was necessary as Norris’s repeated belief eroded any semblance of a fair trial.
“There can be no trust in our judicial system if such improper communication and a clearly biased trial judge are allowed,” they wrote.
