Fresno Police Officers Shoot Man Who Charged Them With Scissors After a Taser Fails To Stop Him
Fresno Police Shot a Man Holding Kitchen Shears After a Taser Failed. Here Is What the Record Actually Shows.
This is a factual account of a real incident involving real people, one of whom is dead and has a family. It is not a dramatization and it contains no invented dialogue or reconstructed thoughts. Where the police account and the family's account differ, both are presented and neither is presented as settled.
The man who died was Maximiliano Sosa Jr., known as Max, and he was thirty three years old and the father of two young sons.
The incident happened in the early hours of November 4, 2023, outside an apartment in northwest Fresno, California, near Bullard Avenue and Golden State Boulevard.
How it started
The call came from Sosa's estranged wife. According to the released video, she called just after 3 a.m. from the 5500 block of North Dante Avenue and told the dispatcher that her ex was threatening to kill himself.
That is the origin of the entire encounter, and it is worth holding onto, because it means this began as a call for help for a person in crisis rather than as a report of a crime.
Officers arrived and, roughly fifteen minutes later, attempted to make contact with Sosa, who was in the parking lot of the complex in a white Tesla.
According to the released footage, the car was driven toward an officer, nearly striking him. Sosa was then heard on the recording asking whether the officer wanted to play a game, after which he drove off.
That moment matters legally and it complicates any simple reading of the incident. Whatever else is disputed, a vehicle was driven at an officer, and that is a serious act by any standard.
The ninety minutes in between
Officers returned to the apartment and spoke with the woman who had called. They also reached Sosa by phone.
The Fresno Police Department has said that during that phone contact he was hostile, threatened to kill himself, and made threats toward the officers.
The family's attorney, Kevin Little, has characterized the same period differently. He has said that for ninety minutes Sosa expressed that he was in a mental health crisis and that he wanted to die, and that he had not threatened his estranged spouse and had not physically threatened any officer.
Both of those descriptions can be partially true at the same time, and this is the first point where the two accounts genuinely diverge rather than simply emphasizing different things.
The return
At around 4:35 a.m., Sosa came back to the apartment holding a pair of kitchen shears.
The department has said he entered the apartment and began challenging officers, threatening to stab them, and saying he wanted to force them to shoot him.
Portions of that exchange are audible on the released video. He is heard asking the officers whether they have shot anybody before. One officer is heard telling him not to make him do this. Sosa is then heard saying that today is going to be the day.
In an opinion column, the Fresno Bee reported that he also told officers at one point that it does not end well.
Reading those lines, it is difficult to characterize what was happening as anything other than a man in acute crisis explicitly trying to provoke his own death. That is a recognized phenomenon and it is one of the hardest situations any officer encounters.
The Taser, and the shooting
Sosa moved through the apartment doorway toward an officer standing outside.
An officer deployed a Taser at close range. It did not stop him. Police say he then charged the officers with the shears in his hand, and three officers discharged their firearms. He died at the scene.
The department highlighted the shears in his hand with a red circle in the video it released, which is a common practice in critical incident releases and which the family has objected to.
Fresno police did not name the officers involved but said three were placed on leave after the shooting.
Where the accounts diverge
This is the core of the dispute, and it is worth laying out precisely rather than summarizing.
The department's position is that Sosa refused commands to drop the shears, that officers repeatedly attempted to de-escalate, that a Taser was tried first and failed, and that he then charged at officers, leaving them no alternative.
The family's position, through their attorney, is that Sosa held the scissors but never wielded them in a threatening way, was not aggressive toward officers, and was not even looking at the officers when they fired.
Little has also said that the video shows Sosa staggering forward under the effect of the Taser, with his head down and his arms lowered, rather than advancing in an aggressive posture. He has asked how dangerous a person in that condition could be, and whether four officers could not have controlled a man who had just been hit with a Taser.
The family has additionally alleged that the video released by the department was edited in a way that made Sosa appear more threatening than he was, and has demanded release of the complete unedited footage. The department has said the case was under internal investigation.
A related factual dispute concerns how many officers were present. The family has said that the department initially described three officers and that it later emerged there were four.
I want to be careful here. I have not seen the raw footage, no member of the public outside those proceedings has seen all of it, and I am not in a position to adjudicate whether a person moving forward after a Taser deployment was charging or falling.
That distinction is the entire case, both criminally and civilly, and it is exactly the kind of question that video is worse at answering than people assume.
The Taser question
One element of this is not in dispute and is worth understanding on its own terms, because it recurs constantly in these incidents.
The Taser did not work.
This is not unusual. Conducted energy weapons fail to achieve what is called neuromuscular incapacitation for a range of mundane physical reasons. Both probes have to make good contact and they need adequate spread between them, which is harder to achieve at very close range because the probes have not separated far enough.
Heavy or loose clothing can prevent a probe from reaching the skin. A probe can miss. The wires can break. And the effect stops the moment the cycle ends, meaning a subject can be incapacitated for five seconds and fully mobile in the sixth.
Officers are trained on this and know that these devices fail, which is why policy in most agencies treats a Taser as one option among several rather than as a reliable substitute for force.
The uncomfortable implication is that a partial or failed deployment can leave a subject disoriented and stumbling while officers are reading that same movement as an advance. That ambiguity is not hypothetical. It is at the center of this specific case.
The mental health response question
The most substantive policy criticism raised after this death was not about the final four seconds. It was about the ninety minutes before them.
The family and their attorney have argued that officers should have summoned a specialized behavioral health unit to de-escalate a mental health crisis, and that the failure to do so is the mishandling at the heart of their claim.
The Fresno Bee, in a column about the case, noted that the city had allocated 1.2 million dollars toward a mental health response program, that the program did not get off the ground immediately, and that the money went unspent and was transferred into the following fiscal year.
The same column quoted the city's mayor, Jerry Dyer, a former Fresno police chief, saying it was long overdue that officers no longer respond to mental health calls unless a danger is presented to the public.
That is a genuinely important thread and it exists independently of whether the shooting itself was legally justified. A department can be legally in the clear at 4:47 a.m. and a city can still have failed the same man at 3:05 a.m.
Those are two different questions and most public argument about these cases collapses them into one.
What has happened since
Sosa's family filed a wrongful death lawsuit in federal court seeking damages.
Court records show the case Sosa v. City of Fresno, docketed in the Eastern District of California as case number 1:24-cv-01039, was related to an earlier filed case, Zepeda Olivares v. City of Fresno, 1:23-cv-01575, and assigned to District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston in September 2024. The two matters were subsequently consolidated by stipulation in January 2025.
That is a civil proceeding with a lower standard of proof than a criminal case, and its outcome, whatever it is, will not resolve whether the shooting was criminal.
On the criminal side, I was not able to confirm from available public sources how the review of this specific shooting concluded.
A local news item from November 2025 reported that a Fresno police officer would not face criminal charges following a Department of Justice decision, and quoted a plaintiff's attorney whose name appears to be the same attorney representing the Sosa family. I could not verify from that source that the report concerned this incident rather than another Fresno case, and I am not going to assert it does.
Anyone who needs certainty on that point should check current reporting or the relevant prosecuting agency directly, because the answer may have changed since.
How to read a case like this
I want to close with something that is not a verdict, because I do not have one and neither does anyone who has watched a released video.
There are two questions here and they are frequently confused.
The first is whether the officers who fired committed a crime. That question is governed by law that asks what a reasonable officer would have perceived in that moment, with the information available then, in a situation that had already involved a vehicle driven at an officer and a failed Taser deployment at close range. The threshold for criminal liability is high.
The second question is whether this death was avoidable. That question is about the ninety minutes, the unspent program money, whether a trained crisis clinician was available at four in the morning in a city that had decided such teams were long overdue, and whether the system that showed up when a frightened woman called for help was the system that should have.
A person can honestly answer no to the first question and yes to the second. Many of the most useful people working on this issue do exactly that.
What makes these cases so bitter in public is that both sides tend to treat an answer to one question as an answer to the other. If the shooting was lawful, the argument goes, then nothing needs to change. If something needed to change, then the officers must be criminals.
Neither of those follows.
Max Sosa was a thirty three year old father of two who, by the account of his own family, had no criminal record and was going through the worst hours of his life. His estranged wife called for help. Roughly two hours later he was dead in a doorway.
Everything else about this case is contested. That part is not.
A note
This article deals with suicide and with a person in acute mental health crisis, which is heavy material. If any of it lands close to home for you or someone you know, help is available and I would be glad to point you toward appropriate resources.
The released footage is below. If you watch it, watch the ninety minutes of it that are not the four seconds everyone argues about.
Comments (0)
Loading comments...
May You Like

BEST OF WHEN BIKERS FIGHT BACK | KARENS vs BIKERS 2026

Cops Discover Body in Mom's Trunk During Traffic Stop
Woman in Zebra Pajamas Crashes Into a Cop - Then Throws a Tantrum!
Latest Posts
Popular Posts
The Dumbest Arrest We've Ever Posted
Sep 12, 2026



