FirstAlerts

National Guard Shooting of Memphis Man Draws Criticism from Family and Lawmakers

Family attorney and state senators question official accounts of the July 5 shooting of Tyrin Johnson by National Guard members in Memphis.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 27, 2026, 4:37 p.m. ETUpdated Aug 28, 2026, 1:54 p.m. ET
The shooting of by National Guard members in on July 5 has drawn criticism from the family's attorney and state senators, who say it contradicts official accounts. Family attorney Andre Wharton said, "So it doesn't add up." State Senator London Lamar said, "This is disheartening to hear considering their purpose in being in is to reduce homicide and now National Guardsmen have contributed to the homicide rate." State Senator Raumesh Akbari said, "This autopsy tells a different story than what the public was told and that demands an explanation." The Bureau of Investigation is among the agencies that responded, along with the Safe Task Force, the National Guard, and the Police Department.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 428 Aug 2026, 17:54current

    Updated with new autopsy details and family attorney's statement.

  2. Version 328 Aug 2026, 13:53

    Updated with autopsy findings and family attorney's statement.

  3. Version 228 Aug 2026, 04:23

    Updated to reflect the autopsy report showing the man was shot in the back, with statements from the family attorney and state senators.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.