Attorney General To Review 2018 Fatal Shelby Township Police Shooting 

Marisa Jenkins
July 23, 2020 - 12:21 pm
Shelby Township Police Car

(Photo: WWJ/Mike Campbell)


(WWJ) Authorities will be taking a second look at a fatal shooting by police in Shelby Township.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's office announced Thursday that Nessel has agreed to review a 2018 case in which an unarmed Macomb County man was killed by Shelby Township police to evaluate whether charges should have been filed against law enforcement involved in the incident. 

Listen Live Now on WWJ Newsradio 950

Kanwarbir Malhi, 25, was shot by officers from the Shelby Township Police Department after getting out of vehicle in the parking lot of the appartment complex where he lived, on Spring Lane, in the area of W. Utica and Ryan Roads.

At the time, police said Malhi refused to comply with their orders and they believed he may have had a gun on him.

Investigators said Malhi was shot once after “making movements” toward his “jacket pocket.” 

Authorities later determined Malhi was unarmed. 

The Macomb County Sheriff’s Office reviewed the incident and presented its investigation to the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office, which declined to file charges against the officers involved. 

Macomb County Sheriff Anthony Wickersham said his office will cooperate with Nessel as she reopens the case. 

“In light of recent inquiries into our investigation, we welcome the Attorney General’s office to review our investigation, facts and findings that were presented to the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office,” Wickersham said. “We will provide the Attorney General’s office anything they need as we remain open and transparent.” 

Nessel, meanwhile, is pledging transparency and an unbiased look at the matter. 

“As Attorney General I have consistently advocated for a thorough, comprehensive and objective review of all officer-involved shootings, particularly those which result in fatalities,” Nessel said. “This matter will receive an exhaustive review and analysis with an impartial lens and, when completed, our department is committed to transparency in our decision-making process, irrespective of the outcome. Justice demands nothing less.”