NH AG Issues Preliminary Report on Officer Involved Shooting in Hopkinton

The NH Attorney General's office released a preliminary report regarding the investigation into the officer involved shooting of Bryan G. Evans that occurred in Hopkintonon on May 19. The report—which can be read in full here—concludes that based on all the facts and circumstances, NH State Police Trooper Michael Arteaga and New London Police Officer James MacKenna were each justified in the use of deadly force when each officer discharged his firearm at Evans.

After the shooting, the Attorney General Office reported that at approximately 7:00 p.m. on that Friday, a NH State Trooper spotted a stolen vehicle from Vermont driving on I-89.  The adult male driver of that vehicle eventually stopped on I-89 in Hopkinton. Afterwards, there was a confrontation between the driver and several police officers at the scene.  During that confrontation, the driver of the stolen vehicle was shot.  He was treated at the scene and taken to a hospital, where he was expected to recover from his injuries. No law enforcement officers were physically injured during the incident.

The Attorney General's office reports that police officers involved in the incident have been fully cooperative with the investigation and all have been interviewed. The final interview with one of the involved police officers was completed on May 25 and was followed by the release of this preliminary report.

This report is limited and not fully detailed because there are pending criminal charges against Evans for his actions before, during and after the shooting incident. The NH Rules of Professional Conduct, applicable in this case, limit what attorneys may reveal about a pending matter. In particular, NH Rule of Professional Conduct 3.6 states that “(a) lawyer who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated by means of public communication and will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter."

Since there are pending charges against Evans for his conduct before, during and after the incident, certain details are being withheld at this juncture in accordance with the dictates of the above rule. However, once Evans’s criminal charges have concluded, the Attorney General’s Office will issue a fully detailed final report on this officer involved shooting incident.