SAN FRANCISCO — In court filings this month, the lawyer suing Concord police over a fatal officer-involved shooting leveled serious allegations against officers: that they shot an Antioch man who was surrendering, sicced a police dog on him, then shot him in the head as he lay on his back.

At the center of the plaintiffs’ narrative is one of the 10 gunshot wounds suffered by 21-year-old Charles Burns in 2013. The bullet entered through the top of Burns’ skull and cut through his brain, lacerating his cerebellum and brainstem. It is an injury forensic experts say would have killed him almost immediately, which contradicts police testimony that Burns raised his head from the ground after all shots were fired.

Have a comment about this? Join the conversation at the Antioch, Brentwood and Oakley Facebook page.

Burns was shot by officers who were attempting to serve a search warrant at an Antioch home as part of a methamphetamine-trafficking investigation centered on Burns and others. Police say that after a brief car chase, Burns — a passenger — ran from his friend’s car. The officers who shot him testified they saw Burns grabbing his waistband and reaching for his ankle while running, and thought he was armed. One officer fired all nine bullets in his gun, the other officer fired twice.

No gun was found on Burns. He had a cellphone, which Concord attorneys say was mistaken for a weapon. Burns’ family sued Concord police in 2014, claiming Burns was killed “intentionally and maliciously.” The city has denied the claims, and the case is headed to trial.

An internal investigation by Concord police found all 11 shots were justified and exonerated both officers of wrongdoing, according to a memo included in the court file.

Peter Johnson, the Burns family attorney, wrote in court records this month that his evidence includes testimony of two confidential eyewitnesses. He told this newspaper he was keeping their identities private for their safety, and declined to comment further. Attorneys representing the city declined to comment as well, and said city officials aren’t supposed to speak on pending litigation.

Reading this on your phone? Stay up to date with our free mobile app. Get it from the Apple app store or the Google Play store.

Related Articles Concord police shooting: Charles Burns’ family attorney demands outside agency take over investigation

Police shooting of Antioch man the subject of coroner’s inquest

Antioch: Father wants justice for son’s death by police officers

Police: Concord police officer shoots, kills man in Antioch The autopsy showed that Burns suffered gunshot wounds to his head, chest, arms and back, as well as several bites from a police dog. The plaintiffs allege that either the dog was sicced on Burns after his death, or that Burns was struck several times by a volley of gunfire, followed by a pause in which the dog mauled him, before an officer fired another round into Burns’ head as he lay on the ground.

Attorneys for Concord police say all 11 shots — including the shot to the head — were fired in a single volley, and that several seconds later, a K9 officer unleashed his dog when he saw Burns attempting to sit up. The officer testified he was driving when the shots were fired, continued a short distance, then parked and got out with his K9. He confirmed over the radio a dog was needed, and saw Burns “back on the ground, eyes faced up, head facing up.” He testified that he released his dog when he saw Burns move.

“I saw his head actually leave the ground,” the officer, Matthew Switzer, testified.

But Dr. Michael Baden — a nationally known forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy of Michael Brown, whose fatal 2014 shooting by police in Ferguson, Missouri, ignited a national controversy over officer-involved shootings — reviewed Burns’ autopsy report and told this newspaper the head shot would have rendered Burns instantly unconscious. He said death would have occurred in seconds.

The location of the wound, Baden said, indicated the gun was pointed at the top of Burns’ head. He couldn’t say for sure, based on the report, where Burns and the officers who fired their weapons were positioned.

“There are many ways you get there,” Baden said. “The shooter could have been standing in a tree.”

A more likely scenario, Baden said, is that Burns was bent over, crouched, or in some other downward position facing the shooter. He cautioned against relying solely on eyewitness testimony to fill in the factual gaps.

“Five people will witness a car accident, and you’ll get five slightly different stories,” he said.

The day of the shooting, a group of undercover Concord officers were briefed about suspected meth trafficking centered at an Antioch home on the 2700 block of Barcelona Circle. A police affidavit for a search warrant says three confidential informants identified Burns as someone who sold large quantities of meth. Officers were told during a briefing that Burns was frequently armed, but it was determined that a SWAT team wasn’t necessary to make the arrest, according to police records.

According to the court file, when they arrived at the house, officers say they saw Burns get into a truck driven by Bay Point resident Bobby Lawrence, which sped off. They chased the truck, and Lawrence, a plaintiff in the suit, surrendered after the truck and police car collided. Officers say Burns began to run, ignoring commands to show officers his hands. They say they saw what looked like the butt of a gun in his hand, and several officers said after the shooting he was holding a cellphone.

Johnson claimed police planted the phone in Burns’ hand, saying he would have dropped it while being shot and attacked by a police dog. In a brief section of a transcript in court filings, a confidential witness is quoted saying he or she saw Burns running with his hands raised. The witness later says he or she ducked behind a car when the shots were fired. The transcript doesn’t include testimony detailing the shooting.

Lawrence, the driver of the truck, gave two police interviews during which officers referred to Burns several times as an “(expletive)hole” and a drug dealer.

Lawrence at one point claimed he wasn’t able to identify the undercover officers as police before the chase began, then later said he did in fact know they were officers, according to a transcript. The lawsuit alleges that the undercover officers failed to properly identify themselves, prompting Lawrence and Burns to flee.

Have a comment about this? Join the conversation at the Antioch, Brentwood and Oakley Facebook page.

The day after Burns was shot, officers searched the Barcelona Circle home and found approximately 1.5 pounds of suspected methamphetamine, a semi-automatic 9 mm handgun and $17,000. Concord attorneys say Burns was affiliated with an obscure Bay Area street gang, but Johnson claims those allegations are simply an attempt to smear Burns.