Complaint filed with police watchdog agency requesting investigation and officer discipline
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Nov. 12, 2026
MEDIA CONTACT: SF Public Defender’s Office | PDR-mediarelations@sfgov.org
**PRESS RELEASE**
SAN FRANCISCO — The San Francisco Public Defender’s Office released video footage today showing that SFPD officers in unmarked vehicles pursued 56-year-old Edwin Adams while he was riding an electric scooter, tackled him, and caused him to fatally strike a bus shelter pole on Oct. 12. The Public Defender’s office also announced it filed a complaint with the city’s police watchdog agency, the Department of Police Accountability, alleging that officers unlawfully chased Adams, used excessive force in tackling him, and that SFPD was dishonest in its comments about the incident to the public. The complaint requests that DPA conduct a full investigation and initiate discipline against officers involved.
“Police chose to pursue Mr. Adams in multiple unmarked vehicles and then violently tackle him from his scooter,” said Zac Dillon, a senior policy analyst with the Public Defender’s Office Integrity team. “SFPD’s public account of this incident was sparse and misleading, omitting the police actions that immediately preceded the collision, which led to Mr. Adams’s death.”
Adams’s attorney, Deputy Public Defender Meenha Lee, added: “Mr. Adams was a father and a brother, and his family is grieving his untimely death. Police pursuits are inherently dangerous. They are supposed to be reserved for situations where the need to intervene outweighs the very real risks, because they can so easily lead to tragedies like this one.”
SFPD told the press that Adams “collided with a street fixture and suffered injury,” but failed to disclose that two unmarked police vehicles had pursued him at high speed and tried to cut him off, and that an officer tackled him from his scooter just prior to the collision. SFPD also said they were trying to arrest Adams because he had a warrant out for his arrest. But they did not mention that the warrant in question was a Sheriff’s Affidavit Warrant (SAW) for allegedly not properly charging an ankle monitor—a nonviolent, administrative allegation. At the time, Adams was on electronic monitoring while facing nonviolent drug charges that he did not have a chance to challenge in court before he died.
Deputy Public Defender Lee learned only after her client’s death that a SAW had been issued. Adams had no other warrants. Prior to this incident, the Public Defender’s Office had repeatedly asked the Sheriff’s Department, which administers pretrial electronic monitoring and issues SAWs, to notify the Public Defender’s Office when SAWs are issued against its clients. The Sheriff’s Department has refused to do so, even though it promptly notifies the District Attorney’s Office. These warrants generally involve technical issues with electronic monitoring, not public safety concerns.
“Had our office been notified of the sheriff warrant, we could have helped him resolve the issue,” said Lee.
The Public Defender’s Office complaint asks DPA to investigate three areas of misconduct:
- Unlawful pursuit: SFPD’s policy (known as a Department General Order or DGO) governing vehicle pursuits (DGO 5.05.055) limits officers’ ability to initiate vehicle pursuits to only two situations: when they have at least reasonable suspicion that a felony has occurred or that a violent misdemeanor has occurred. Neither circumstance applied to Adams.
- Excessive use of force: DGO 5.01 specifies that “an officer’s use of force must be objectively reasonable under the totality of circumstances known to the officer at the time.” Tackling Adams while he was on a scooter without a helmet posed significant danger to Adams, to the officer, and potentially to members of the public in the area.
- Dishonesty: DGO 2.01.03 lays out police general rules of conduct and notes that breaches of honesty are considered misconduct. The Department is quoted as saying Adams “collided with a street fixture and suffered injury” while neglecting to mention any police activity that precipitated the collision.
“High-speed police pursuits of people riding electric scooters can have deadly consequences. Police should not be putting lives at risk over situations that could be resolved without a dangerous pursuit,” said San Francisco Public Defender Mano Raju. “The Sheriff’s Department also should have notified our office about the technical issue with Mr. Adams’s ankle monitor so that we could have helped resolve it safely and humanely. It is tragic and unjust that Mr. Adams lost his life this way. His family deserves answers, and the public deserves a full and accurate accounting of what happened.”
Note: Video footage at normal speed can be viewed at this link.
###