INGLEWOOD — Security appeared heavier than usual at Tuesday’s City Council meeting, with additional personnel stationed throughout the chamber as residents arrived to weigh in on a proposed expansion of police technology, including body-worn cameras.
Some family members and supporters of Bryan Bostic, 37, who died following a police encounter last month, said they believed city staff were seated before the meeting began, limiting space for members of the public.
The meeting, which included approval of a multimillion-dollar public safety technology package, quickly turned into a tense exchange as residents demanded answers in Bostic’s death.
City officials voted to approve the technology package, which includes body-worn cameras, drones, license plate readers and expanded surveillance systems — marking a significant shift for a police department that has long operated without body cameras.
But for many in attendance, the decision came without addressing the central question they say remains unanswered: what happened to Bostic in the moments before his death.
Mayor James T. Butts Jr., a former police chief, framed the proposal as a necessary step toward modernizing public safety in a city preparing to host major global events.
“We have to continue to move to the future,” Butts said, describing the initiative as part of a broader effort to enhance the city’s crime-fighting capabilities.
Police officials said the technology would improve officer response and investigative capabilities, with some components expected to be implemented within two to three months and others rolling out later this year.
But as the discussion shifted to public comment, the tone of the meeting changed sharply.
Family members and community speakers repeatedly pressed city officials for transparency, demanding the release of records, video footage and the identities of the officers involved in Bostic’s arrest.
“Safety without accountability is not safety,” one speaker said. “It’s unchecked power.”
Others questioned why key information had not yet been released.
“We still have no answers,” a family member said, asking when dispatch audio, incident reports and use-of-force records would be made public.
Bostic died after being taken into custody on March 10 near the intersection of Hillcrest Boulevard and Nutwood Avenue. According to family members, he was transported to a police station rather than a hospital and later declared dead.
Authorities have not publicly explained what led to the stop or what caused his death.
Attorneys representing the family have filed a claim against the city and submitted a public records request seeking surveillance footage, officer reports, communications and medical records, as well as the identities of all officers involved.
Audio obtained by the family — recorded by a woman Bostic was speaking to by phone during the stop — appears to capture him responding to officers in the initial moments, repeatedly saying “No, sir,” while also stating, “I don’t have nothing” and “I’m just going to see my mom,” and adding, “I have the paperwork.” Portions of the recording are difficult to make out.
Moments later, a sound can be heard — then a yell.
The sequence has raised further questions among family members about how the encounter escalated.
During the meeting, Butts said the city is waiting on multiple investigations before providing further details, including reviews by the police department, the district attorney and the Los Angeles County Coroner’s Office.
“No one wants to know more than I and the council do what was the cause of death,” Butts said. “It’s our responsibility to sit here, wait, and not make premature comments, but to give comments based on evidence.”
Family members said that explanation does not address their concerns.
They keep talking about toxicology,” said Dawanna Wells, Bostic’s aunt. “But what does that have to do with the excessive force?”
Wells said the family remains focused on what happened during the encounter itself, not just the findings of a coroner’s report.
Bryan Bostic’s cousin, Brother Mohammed, also criticized the city’s response, arguing that officials focused on future technology rather than accountability.
“It’s just a play on words,” he said. “They’re talking about everything except how officers will be held accountable for what happened.”
Mohammed said he believes the city is delaying answers rather than addressing the family’s concerns.
“It feels like they’re just stretching the process out,” he said. “When everything settles, it’ll be business as usual.”
He also pointed to a tense exchange during public comment, when he said the mayor warned him about his tone.
“That felt like a tactic to shut people down,” Mohammed said. “We’re here asking questions.”
Video reviewed by LA Focus appears to show Bostic face down on the pavement as one officer kneels over him and at least two others join in restraining him, while additional officers stand nearby. In later moments, more officers surround him as he remains on the ground.
The footage does not show what led up to that moment or the full sequence of events.
A witness account provided to the family alleges that officers struck Bostic repeatedly and that he appeared unresponsive before being placed in a police vehicle. Authorities have not confirmed those claims.
Several speakers at the meeting argued that the newly approved technology does not resolve the immediate need for transparency.
“New equipment is not an answer to Bryan’s death,” one speaker said. “The truth is.”
For Bostic’s family, the debate over body cameras is deeply personal.
“We just want answers,” Wells said.
Whether the city’s adoption of body cameras will bring greater transparency remains to be seen. But for many in the community, Bostic’s death has already reshaped the conversation around policing in Inglewood — and intensified demands for accountability.
###