An independent forensic audio review has raised new questions about a central claim in the criminal case against a Phoenix trauma surgeon who was shot by police in 2022.
Earshot, a nonprofit organization that specializes in forensic audio analysis, examined body camera footage from the incident and concluded that the recordings do not appear to support officers’ statements that the surgeon fired shots in their direction. The findings add another development to a case that has drawn significant public attention and ongoing legal debate.
Phoenix police and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office declined to comment on Earshot’s analysis.
Analysis
ABC15 asked Earshot to review body camera footage from the three Phoenix police officers involved in the shooting of Dr. Kris Johnson.
According to Earshot, previous forensic investigations involving bullets traveling toward cameras typically produced a distinct “whizzing” sound as projectiles passed nearby.
The organization said it did not detect those sounds in the officers’ body camera recordings.
Earshot stated that the absence of those audio signatures suggests the gunshots were not fired toward the officers. However, the organization also noted an important limitation, explaining that its previous analyses primarily involved higher-caliber rifles rather than the Glock 23 handgun reportedly used by Johnson.
As a result, Earshot said it could not completely rule out differences in the audio characteristics of handgun ammunition.
Case
Johnson faces five felony charges, including four counts of aggravated assault.
According to court records and reporting by ABC15, those charges are largely based on officers’ statements that Johnson fired in their direction during the encounter.
ABC15 reported that its review of police records and evidence photographs did not identify physical evidence showing bullets or bullet impacts behind or beyond the officers that would support those claims.
The criminal case remains pending, and Johnson has pleaded not guilty to the aggravated assault charges.
Shooting
The incident occurred shortly before 11 p.m. on June 30, 2022.
According to Johnson, his wife called 911 after an unfamiliar man appeared outside their home. Johnson said he took his wife’s firearm outside because he believed someone might be attempting to enter the property.
Police officers had already responded to reports involving the same individual elsewhere in the neighborhood.
Johnson has acknowledged firing a single warning shot into the air, saying he did not realize police officers were nearby because emergency lights were not activated and he did not hear officers identify themselves.
Following that shot, officers fired 11 rounds. Johnson was struck in the thigh while running away.
Johnson has consistently denied intentionally firing at police officers.
Evidence
According to ABC15, evidence photographs show that some of Johnson’s gunshots struck the ground.
The report also states that police gunfire damaged a nearby home, walls, a vehicle, and a boat during the incident.
Earshot’s findings are based solely on audio evidence and do not determine criminal liability or replace the court’s evaluation of all available evidence.
| Evidence Reviewed | Reported Findings |
|---|---|
| Body camera audio | No audible bullet “whizzing” detected |
| Police reports | Officers reported hearing bullets pass nearby |
| Evidence photographs | ABC15 reported no documented bullet impacts behind officers |
| Earshot conclusion | Audio does not appear to support shots fired toward officers |
Prosecution
Johnson has publicly stated that he is willing to plead guilty to firing the warning shot.
However, he has said he cannot accept responsibility for aggravated assault because he maintains he never intentionally fired toward officers.
According to ABC15, legal documents indicate prosecutors have not offered a plea agreement that excludes the aggravated assault charges.
If convicted, Johnson could face a lengthy prison sentence and the possible loss of his medical license.
Expert Views
Several legal and policing experts interviewed by ABC15 questioned aspects of the officers’ actions during the incident.
Among the concerns raised were whether officers adequately identified themselves before opening fire and whether those actions contributed to the confusion that followed.
Phoenix Police previously stated that the officers’ conduct was reviewed and found to be within department policy.
Separately, one of the officers involved received supervisory counseling after posting laughing emojis on social media regarding the case. Police confirmed the post and described the counseling as addressing unprofessional conduct.
What’s Next
Court records show Johnson’s trial, originally expected to begin in late July, has been delayed after attorneys requested additional time.
As the case moves toward trial, the newly released forensic audio analysis is likely to become part of the broader discussion surrounding the evidence. Whether Earshot’s findings will be introduced in court or influence the legal proceedings remains to be determined.
FAQs
Who conducted the audio analysis?
Earshot, an independent nonprofit specializing in forensic audio analysis.
What did the analysis conclude?
It said body camera audio did not appear to support shots fired toward officers.
Has Phoenix police responded?
Police declined to comment on the new audio analysis.
What charges does Dr. Johnson face?
He faces five felony charges, including four aggravated assault counts.
Has the trial begun?
No. Court records show the trial has been delayed.
