A Bexar County grand jury Tuesday declined to indict the former University of the Incarnate Word police officer who fatally shot UIW senior Robert Cameron Redus, ending 15 months of uncertainty about whether Cpl. Christopher Carter would face criminal charges.

Carter opened fire on an unarmed Redus, 23, on Dec. 6, 2013, following a struggle in the parking lot of Redus’ off-campus apartment complex.

Carter fired six shots, hitting Redus five times.

Reaction to the grand jury’s decision left the university and Redus’ family divided.

UIW Chancellor Denise Doyle said in a statement it “affirms that Cpl. Carter was acting in accordance with his role as a licensed Texas peace officer.”

Redus’ parents, Valerie and Mickey, were angered and disappointed, said Brent Perry, an attorney representing the family in a wrongful death suit against the university and Carter.

“If (District Attorney Nico) LaHood and the district attorney’s office (are) not going to see that justice is done, then we will,” Perry said by phone. “We believe that if the district attorney’s office had seriously pursued an indictment, there would have been an indictment.”

LaHood said he called the Redus family members when he got word the grand jury had no-billed Carter to tell them the news, keeping a promise he said he made before he took office.

“They were obviously disappointed and upset, and I empathized with that,” he said. “It was frustrating for me as a person because I couldn’t answer some of their questions. The law is very clear and very specific about what can be disclosed and what can’t — my heart told me one thing, but I had to follow the law.”

LaHood said he could not disclose how long it took to present evidence to the grand jury or how long the members deliberated before reaching the decision. Unless new evidence is discovered and presented to a new grand jury, LaHood said, Carter won’t face the possibility of criminal charges.

“The grand jury, in arriving at their decision, clearly gave full consideration to the district attorney’s investigation materials, most of which are confidential,” Doyle’s statement said. “Regardless, the tragic circumstances of the loss of the life of Cameron Redus have affected countless lives. A family has lost their son and a peace officer must live with the decision he was compelled to make. The University continues to extend prayers to all involved in this tragedy.”

The civil wrongful death lawsuit continues to work its way through the court, and Perry said that lack of criminal indictment “neither helps nor hinders” the case. He said that now a decision has been reached, more evidence previously unavailable to them should be released, including witness statements and photographs from the shooting scene.

“We don’t know what was presented to the grand jury and we don’t know who testified to the grand jury,” Perry said. “We don’t know if any recommendation was made to the grand jury, but Christopher Carter shot someone who he knew was unarmed. And officers are not supposed to use deadly force unless someone is in danger, and no one was in danger.”

The Redus family is seeking between $1 million and $26 million in damages in the civil lawsuit.

In general, LaHood said, members of a grand jury are informed of the criminal charge they are considering, though in this case specifically he said the law prevented him from saying what that charge may have been. Neither the accused nor their attorneys are present at the announcement of grand jury findings, he said.

The shooting was one of several officer-involved killings of unarmed people in recent months that garnered national attention and sparked debate about police training and use of force. Unlike incidents in New York and Ferguson, Missouri, the Redus shooting did not raise racial issues, but it took grand jurors here much longer to be presented with the case than in other jurisdictions.

LaHood took office in January after defeating former District Attorney Susan Reed in a November election. Both UIW and the Redus family called for the case to go to the grand jury while Reed was in office, and the delay led to speculation that Reed’s office wanted to avoid a potentially divisive decision before the election.

Redus’ family said their son, who went by Cameron, was an explorer and filmmaker who made friends wherever he went.

Carter, who was on duty, told investigators he started following Redus along Broadway around 1:30 a.m. that December morning because he believed Redus was driving drunk, which was confirmed by the autopsy results.

Carter did not know that he was pursuing a student at the time, but as a licensed peace officer, he was authorized to arrest suspects outside his jurisdiction for serious offenses, including drunken driving, legal experts have said.

A verbal encounter in the parking lot turned into a physical struggle that lasted several minutes.

Authorities have said Redus grabbed Carter’s baton and hit the officer with it before Carter, who was described as much larger than Redus, regained control of it. Redus broke from the officer’s grasp and came at him with a raised fist, and that’s when Carter opened fire, officials have said.

In a recent filing in the civil suit, the family’s attorneys disputed whether Redus ever wrested the baton from Carter and struck him. The lawyers also have argued that Carter lacked probable cause to pursue and arrest Redus.

Audio of the struggle was captured by Carter’s body microphone, but has not been released publicly. During the struggle, Carter told Redus 14 times to put his hands behind his back, three times that he was under arrest and 56 times to stop resisting, Alamo Heights police said in the days after the shooting.

Autopsy results showed five rounds struck Redus — including one in the back at close range — and several shots traveled at downward trajectories.

Supporters of the Redus family said the autopsy contradicted Carter’s claim that Redus was charging him with a raised fist when Carter fired.

Geoffrey Alpert, an expert on police use of force, said in a past interview that officers are trained to fire multiple times until a threat is over. Suspects often duck, spin or turn around as shots are fired, he said, which could explain a shot in the back.

“You shoot until the threat’s removed,” said Alpert, a criminal justice professor at the University of South Carolina. “If it takes one shot or 20, if the guy is still coming at you, you’re still going to keep shooting.”

The Alamo Heights Police Department and Texas Rangers investigated the case before turning it over to the district attorney’s office, which said the FBI was also involved.

Staff Writer John Tedesco contributed to this report.

djoseph@express-news.net

Twitter: @DrewQJoseph