Overview:
Police said a Richmond detective on Thursday shot and killed a man who reportedly had been seen driving recklessly, blocking traffic and threatening other vehicles.
The detective was on his way to work, Richmond police said, in an unmarked car when he stopped to assist the person, whose car was blocking a lane on westbound I-80.
They got into an "altercation" police said, and the detective shot him.
A Richmond police detective on his way to work shot and killed a man on Interstate 80 early Thursday morning after encountering him blocking traffic lanes while “holding a metal object.”
Richmond police released details Thursday evening about the incident, which halted westbound traffic in Hercules near the Interstate 80 and State Route 4 junction for most of the day.
According to police, the fatal shooting occurred at about 7:15 a.m. when a Richmond Police Department plain-clothes detective, traveling westbound on I-80 in an unmarked vehicle, stopped to help a gold Nissan sedan that was blocking the far left lane.
The detective reportedly approached a man standing near the vehicle while holding a metal object. The press release referenced “unconfirmed reports” indicating that the man “may have been swinging the object at passing vehicles before the detective’s arrival.”
An “altercation” broke out during the encounter, and the detective shot the man. Paramedics took him to a local trauma center, where he died. The detective sustained minor injuries and was treated at a local hospital.
The detective and the man’s identity were not released.
The detective, Richmond police said, was not wearing a body camera because detectives assigned to investigative divisions wear business attire and are not required to wear body cameras.
“Because it is currently unclear whether the individual had a weapon in his possession at the exact moment the shooting occurred, California law requires the California Department of Justice to assume the lead investigation,” the press release said. “DOJ’s involvement does not imply wrongdoing and is mandated under these circumstances.”
The Richmond Police Department Office of Professional Accountability (OPA) and the city’s Community Police Review Commission (CPRC) will also investigate the detective’s actions. The CPRC is Richmond’s independent civilian oversight body.
According to Richmond police, before the shooting the CHP had received calls about a gold Nissan being driven recklessly on westbound I-80 in Vallejo at about 6:35 a.m.
“Callers reported the vehicle was driving recklessly, at high speeds, cutting in and out of traffic, and was involved in several collisions,” the press release states. “At one point, callers reported the vehicle’s hood had flown up, obstructing the windshield, yet the vehicle continued to travel.”
Multiple sources who were traveling on the freeway at the time told Richmondside that they reported seeing the man attempting to strike passing vehicles with an object.
The Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office released a statement Thursday afternoon saying that the office is participating in the investigation in accordance with Law Enforcement Involved Fatal Incident (LEIFI) protocol but that “because the incident took place on an interstate highway, the California Highway Patrol has primary jurisdiction over the investigation.”
“The California Attorney General’s Office will lead the legal investigation based on the specific circumstances of the incident,” the DA’s office wrote. “While Assembly Bill 1506 requires the California Department of Justice to investigate officer-involved shootings of unarmed civilians, this particular case does not explicitly fall under that mandate. However, the Attorney General’s Office has assumed the lead role due to the dynamics of the incident.”
Richmond police Sgt. Ben Therriault, Richmond Police Officer Association (RPOA) president, shared a statement with Richmondside late Thursday evening saying that the organization’s “thoughts and prayers” were with the detective.
“An officer stopped to assist a vehicle involved in a traffic collision and, during that encounter, was forced to protect himself and the public,” the RPOA statement reads. “The incident is under active investigation by the Department of Justice and we ask the community to allow that process to proceed based on facts and evidence. The RPOA will continue to support our officers while respecting the integrity of the investigative process.”
Richmond police officers shot to death two suspects in 2025: Jose De Jesus Mendez, 51, on Feb. 4, 2025 and Angel Montaño, 27, on Aug. 4, 2025. In the Mendez case, officers said they thought he was holding a knife. (It turned out to be only a sheath.)
In the case of Montaño, body camera video shows he was shot as he came out of his residence holding kitchen knives in each hand. One of the officers was involved in both shootings, which remain under review by the district attorney.
After the second shooting, the Richmond City Council updated several police department communications policies and instituted a requirement that a press release be issued within 24 hours of an officer-involved fatality.
Anyone who witnessed Thursday’s incident can contact the California Department of Justice at (916) 210-2871.
Really?! It’s 2026, and you’re still using the term “officer-involved shooting” to describe a police shooting? When journalism scholars and outlets like AP have all explained why that type of neutralizing language is inappropriate? I appreciate Richmondside’s investigations into the other recent shootings by Richmond police, but let’s stop with this type of whitewashing verbiage.
https://thegarrisonproject.org/officer-involved-police-violence/
Hi Karen, We agree and we normally avoid this term (you can see our prior stories), but in this case we didn’t have any confirmed details of what happened so until we get the details from a reliable source (versus reporting what other media are saying) we erred on the side of being vague.
A lot of people read Richmondside. It is not good to use bad spelling or the wrong word in a news article. On the story above, it states, “It turned out to be only a sheaf” A sheaf is a bundle of grain stalks…I can’t imagine that is what he was holding. Please make sure you edit these stories better. I think you meant to say, “It turned out to be only a sheath”
Big difference
Good catch Wendy, and we, of course, agree. We were trying to get the news up quickly and made a mistake. Thanks for your eagle eye.