That extraordinary imbalance remains one of the central unanswered questions surrounding Cann's death, particularly after a newly completed San Diego County Medical Examiner report revealed information SDPD itself had not publicly disclosed. The report states that the marked police SUV was traveling approximately 50 mph, about 10 mph and 25 percent above the reported 40 mph speed limit, immediately before striking Cann.
SanDiegoVille has repeatedly asked SDPD to identify the officer behind the wheel. The Department has now responded to one piece of the investigation and produced additional records, but it still has not answered that fundamental question.
The Medical Examiner report states that its investigator obtained information on the morning of Cann's death from “Officer Andres, ID 7335.” That reference initially raised the possibility that Officer Andres was the officer driving the SUV and prompted SanDiegoVille to investigate whether the officer could be longtime SDPD Officer Andres Ruiz.
SDPD has now definitively ruled out both possibilities.
“Neither of the officers you mentioned, Andres Ruiz or ‘Officer Andres #7335’, was the officer involved in this incident,” SDPD Communications Manager Ashley Nicholes wrote to SanDiegoVille Wednesday afternoon. “The Medical Examiner's report mentioning ‘Officer Andres’ refers to an officer assisting with the investigation that night.”
Records released Wednesday in response to SanDiegoVille's latest California Public Records Act request identify Officer Andres #7335 as Andres A. Gonzalez-Zuniga. A separate Call for Service record appears consistent with SDPD's explanation, identifying Gonzalez-Zuniga among numerous officers associated with the incident and repeatedly connecting his ID #7335 with investigative and other activity surrounding the scene.
That means neither Gonzalez-Zuniga nor Ruiz should be identified as the officer who struck Cann. SanDiegoVille has found no evidence connecting Ruiz to the collision, and SDPD has now expressly stated that he was not the involved officer.
But the Department's response leaves a remarkably simple question unanswered. Who was?
Nicholes knew exactly what SanDiegoVille was attempting to determine. SanDiegoVille's written inquiries explicitly asked SDPD to identify the officer who was driving the marked police SUV that struck Cann, yet the Department's only substantive response identified two officers who were not behind the wheel without identifying the officer who was.
The City's handling of the accompanying records adds another layer to the transparency dispute. On Wednesday morning, the City closed SanDiegoVille's latest public records request after stating that all responsive documents had been released, while redacting portions under California Government Code sections 7923.600 and 7922.000, citing the law enforcement investigatory files exemption and personal identifying information.
The City identified Capt. Charles Lara as the person who made the decision to redact the records. The records released were sufficient to identify Gonzalez-Zuniga, the officer SDPD says was merely assisting with the investigation, but they still did not publicly identify the officer who was actually driving.
The strange handling of the case began almost immediately after the collision. At approximately 1:30am on June 17, Cann was struck on Linda Vista Road near Goshen Street, adjacent to the University of San Diego campus. SDPD's initial public description did not simply say its officer struck a pedestrian.
According to police, the officer “felt an impact.” SDPD said the officer then turned around and discovered Cann lying in the roadway. The peculiar wording may have accurately reflected what the officer told investigators he experienced. But it raised an obvious question that remains relevant today: if Cann intentionally stepped into the path of an approaching police SUV, as SDPD subsequently concluded, what did the officer see before impact?
There is no SDPD dashboard video that can answer that question. After the City twice reported finding no responsive records for in car or dashboard camera footage, SanDiegoVille pressed SDPD for an explanation. Lt. Cesar Jimenez eventually confirmed that SDPD patrol vehicles are not equipped with dashboard cameras, meaning there apparently is no forward facing police video showing the final seconds before the collision.
Body camera footage has not been released. GPS and Automatic Vehicle Location records have not been released, nor have photographs or other records SanDiegoVille requested that could potentially shed light on the police SUV's movements.
SDPD has also not told SanDiegoVille whether the officer was responding to an emergency, whether emergency lights or a siren were activated, whether electronic vehicle data independently establishes the SUV's speed or whether post collision alcohol or drug testing was performed. And the Department still has not identified the driver.
SDPD moved considerably faster when discussing Cann. Immediately after the collision, Jimenez told reporters that it was “unclear, at this time, why the person entered the roadway.” Approximately a day later, the uncertainty was gone.
“While the circumstances surrounding the collision were initially unclear, the investigation has since determined that the pedestrian intentionally stepped into the path of the police vehicle,” SDPD announced June 18.
Police said evidence and witness statements supported the conclusion that Cann's death was believed to be suicide. That conclusion has now been substantially corroborated by the completed Medical Examiner investigation. The Medical Examiner classified Cann's death as suicide and documented evidence supporting that determination, including communications indicating suicidal intent. SanDiegoVille does not dispute that finding. But a determination that Cann intentionally entered the roadway does not answer every question about the fatal collision.
Cann's intent answers a question about Cann. It does not establish how fast the police SUV was actually traveling, why it was traveling at that speed, whether the officer saw Cann before impact, whether the officer braked, whether the vehicle was responding to an emergency or whether SDPD concluded that its employee's driving complied with California law and Department policy.
The Medical Examiner report has now revealed important information about those questions. According to the report, Cann was walking eastbound across Linda Vista Road at an unmarked location at approximately 1:29am when a marked 2026 Ford Police Interceptor Utility traveling southbound struck him.
The report states that the police SUV “was traveling southbound on Linda Vista Road at approximately 50 miles per hour and struck the decedent.” The reported speed limit is 40 mph. That puts the reported speed approximately 10 mph, or 25 percent, above the posted limit.
The distinction between a reported speed and an independently established speed is important. The Medical Examiner did not conduct an independent collision reconstruction establishing that the SUV was traveling precisely 50 mph.
The report states that its investigator obtained information from Officer Andres Gonzalez-Zuniga, but SDPD now says Gonzalez-Zuniga was assisting with the investigation and was not driving the vehicle. The records released thus far do not establish the original source of the approximately 50 mph figure or whether it came from the driver, another investigator, electronic vehicle data or some other source.
That raises another question SDPD can answer. What does the objective evidence show?
Modern police vehicles can generate or interact with GPS, Automatic Vehicle Location, event data recorder and other electronic information potentially capable of establishing vehicle movement. SanDiegoVille has sought records that could independently establish the SUV's speed, but those records have not been released.
The objective evidence could corroborate 50 mph, establish a different speed or provide additional context explaining the vehicle's operation immediately before impact. Until those records are released or SDPD explains its findings, the public does not know.
The reported speed is particularly noteworthy because just months before Cann died, the City of San Diego published a Comprehensive Speed Management Plan warning residents that seemingly modest increases in speed can determine whether someone survives a collision.
“Vehicle speed is one of the most important factors in whether a crash results in a minor injury or a fatal outcome,” the City's February 2026 plan states. “Even small changes in speed can mean the difference between a survivable crash and a deadly one.”
The City explains that higher speeds increase impact forces while giving drivers less time to recognize danger, react and stop. Those principles do not establish that Cann's death could have been prevented, but they make the speed of a government vehicle involved in a fatal pedestrian collision unquestionably relevant.
So does the location. San Diego had identified pedestrian safety problems along Linda Vista Road near USD years before Cann died. A 2016 City transportation strategy evaluated the corridor near Brunner and Goshen streets and recommended improvements including a high visibility crosswalk and pedestrian activated beacon near the staircase connecting the roadway with the university area. Those recommended improvements were never constructed. Earlier pedestrian planning also documented complaints about vehicles traveling too fast and pedestrians facing long distances between safe crossings.
None of this contradicts the Medical Examiner's conclusion that Cann intentionally entered the roadway. A pedestrian can intentionally enter a roadway while legitimate questions simultaneously exist about the speed and operation of the vehicle that strikes him.
If a civilian motorist struck and killed a pedestrian while reportedly traveling 10 mph above the posted speed limit, investigators would naturally examine the driver's speed, visibility, reaction time, braking, impairment and whether the collision could have been avoided. Investigators would also ordinarily determine whether the driver was impaired through whatever alcohol or drug testing was legally appropriate under the circumstances. Those questions do not become irrelevant because the driver was wearing a badge.
California law can exempt authorized emergency vehicles from certain ordinary traffic rules under specified circumstances. But SDPD has not disclosed whether the officer was responding to an emergency, whether emergency equipment was activated or whether the Department determined that the vehicle's operation complied with applicable law and policy.
For months, SDPD also pointed to the unfinished Medical Examiner investigation when declining to answer SanDiegoVille's questions. Jimenez previously wrote that answering questions while that case remained open could infringe upon the investigation because the Medical Examiner had not yet confirmed the cause of death. That investigation is now finished.
Ironically, it was the Medical Examiner's report rather than SDPD that disclosed the approximately 50 mph figure and triggered SanDiegoVille's inquiry into Officer Andres #7335. SDPD has now corrected SanDiegoVille's interpretation of Andres's role, and that correction is important. But the Department still has not provided the name that matters most.
On October 3, SanDiegoVille sent a detailed written inquiry directly to Jimenez, SDPD communications personnel, Media Inquiry, Internal Affairs, the Watch Commander and the Police Chief's office. Mayor Todd Gloria's office, the City Attorney, City Council representatives and other City officials were also copied. Nobody responded.
SanDiegoVille followed up again October 6 and explicitly gave SDPD another opportunity to respond before publication. On Wednesday afternoon, Nicholes finally answered on behalf of the Department. She unequivocally ruled out Andres Ruiz and Officer Andres #7335. She did not identify the officer who actually drove the SUV.
The City's response to SanDiegoVille's latest public records request arrived unusually quickly. Filed October 6, the request was closed the following morning after the City released responsive records identifying Gonzalez-Zuniga and a redacted Call for Service report.
The Call for Service report provides a detailed record of police activity following the collision. It identifies numerous officers involved in the response and contains entries stretching from approximately 1:29am until well into the afternoon.
But it still does not publicly answer the central question SanDiegoVille has been asking. Who was driving?
There may be perfectly legitimate explanations for individual pieces of this story. “Felt an impact” may simply have been an awkward but accurate description of what the officer experienced, investigative records can lawfully be withheld under certain circumstances, and the reported 50 mph speed may ultimately be explained by emergency circumstances or objective vehicle data.
None of the currently available information establishes that the unidentified officer committed a crime, violated Department policy or could have prevented Cann's death. The approximately 50 mph figure should not be treated as an independently reconstructed speed until evidence establishes exactly where it came from and whether objective data corroborates it. But transparency does not become relevant only after misconduct has been proven.
An SDPD vehicle struck and killed a 21 year old college student. The Department rapidly disclosed its conclusion about the dead student's intentions, while nearly four months later the public still has not been told the identity of the government employee behind the wheel.
There is no dashboard camera. Body camera footage and vehicle location records have not been released, the officer's emergency status has not been disclosed, whether lights and sirens were activated remains unanswered, and the Department has not publicly explained whether objective electronic evidence establishes the vehicle's speed. Now SDPD has responded just enough to establish who was not driving.
If the actual officer was responding to an emergency that explains the reported speed, SDPD can say so. If electronic data establishes how fast the SUV was traveling, the Department can disclose what it shows or explain why that information legally cannot yet be released.
If investigators determined that the officer's driving complied with every applicable law and SDPD policy, the Department can tell the public that as well. And if there is a legitimate legal, investigative or safety reason preventing SDPD from identifying the officer who drove the SUV, the Department can explain it.
Instead, after nearly four months, repeated written inquiries and two public records requests concerning Cann's death, SDPD has finally provided one definitive answer: Andres Ruiz and Officer Andres #7335 were not the officer involved.
The City has even identified Officer Andres #7335 as Andres A. Gonzalez-Zuniga.
The identity of the officer who actually struck and killed Justin Cann remains undisclosed.
SanDiegoVille will update this investigation as additional records or information are released.
“While the circumstances surrounding the collision were initially unclear, the investigation has since determined that the pedestrian intentionally stepped into the path of the police vehicle,” SDPD announced June 18.
Police said evidence and witness statements supported the conclusion that Cann's death was believed to be suicide. That conclusion has now been substantially corroborated by the completed Medical Examiner investigation. The Medical Examiner classified Cann's death as suicide and documented evidence supporting that determination, including communications indicating suicidal intent. SanDiegoVille does not dispute that finding. But a determination that Cann intentionally entered the roadway does not answer every question about the fatal collision.
Cann's intent answers a question about Cann. It does not establish how fast the police SUV was actually traveling, why it was traveling at that speed, whether the officer saw Cann before impact, whether the officer braked, whether the vehicle was responding to an emergency or whether SDPD concluded that its employee's driving complied with California law and Department policy.
The Medical Examiner report has now revealed important information about those questions. According to the report, Cann was walking eastbound across Linda Vista Road at an unmarked location at approximately 1:29am when a marked 2026 Ford Police Interceptor Utility traveling southbound struck him.
The report states that the police SUV “was traveling southbound on Linda Vista Road at approximately 50 miles per hour and struck the decedent.” The reported speed limit is 40 mph. That puts the reported speed approximately 10 mph, or 25 percent, above the posted limit.
The distinction between a reported speed and an independently established speed is important. The Medical Examiner did not conduct an independent collision reconstruction establishing that the SUV was traveling precisely 50 mph.
The report states that its investigator obtained information from Officer Andres Gonzalez-Zuniga, but SDPD now says Gonzalez-Zuniga was assisting with the investigation and was not driving the vehicle. The records released thus far do not establish the original source of the approximately 50 mph figure or whether it came from the driver, another investigator, electronic vehicle data or some other source.
That raises another question SDPD can answer. What does the objective evidence show?
Modern police vehicles can generate or interact with GPS, Automatic Vehicle Location, event data recorder and other electronic information potentially capable of establishing vehicle movement. SanDiegoVille has sought records that could independently establish the SUV's speed, but those records have not been released.
The objective evidence could corroborate 50 mph, establish a different speed or provide additional context explaining the vehicle's operation immediately before impact. Until those records are released or SDPD explains its findings, the public does not know.
The reported speed is particularly noteworthy because just months before Cann died, the City of San Diego published a Comprehensive Speed Management Plan warning residents that seemingly modest increases in speed can determine whether someone survives a collision.
“Vehicle speed is one of the most important factors in whether a crash results in a minor injury or a fatal outcome,” the City's February 2026 plan states. “Even small changes in speed can mean the difference between a survivable crash and a deadly one.”
The City explains that higher speeds increase impact forces while giving drivers less time to recognize danger, react and stop. Those principles do not establish that Cann's death could have been prevented, but they make the speed of a government vehicle involved in a fatal pedestrian collision unquestionably relevant.
So does the location. San Diego had identified pedestrian safety problems along Linda Vista Road near USD years before Cann died. A 2016 City transportation strategy evaluated the corridor near Brunner and Goshen streets and recommended improvements including a high visibility crosswalk and pedestrian activated beacon near the staircase connecting the roadway with the university area. Those recommended improvements were never constructed. Earlier pedestrian planning also documented complaints about vehicles traveling too fast and pedestrians facing long distances between safe crossings.
None of this contradicts the Medical Examiner's conclusion that Cann intentionally entered the roadway. A pedestrian can intentionally enter a roadway while legitimate questions simultaneously exist about the speed and operation of the vehicle that strikes him.
If a civilian motorist struck and killed a pedestrian while reportedly traveling 10 mph above the posted speed limit, investigators would naturally examine the driver's speed, visibility, reaction time, braking, impairment and whether the collision could have been avoided. Investigators would also ordinarily determine whether the driver was impaired through whatever alcohol or drug testing was legally appropriate under the circumstances. Those questions do not become irrelevant because the driver was wearing a badge.
California law can exempt authorized emergency vehicles from certain ordinary traffic rules under specified circumstances. But SDPD has not disclosed whether the officer was responding to an emergency, whether emergency equipment was activated or whether the Department determined that the vehicle's operation complied with applicable law and policy.
For months, SDPD also pointed to the unfinished Medical Examiner investigation when declining to answer SanDiegoVille's questions. Jimenez previously wrote that answering questions while that case remained open could infringe upon the investigation because the Medical Examiner had not yet confirmed the cause of death. That investigation is now finished.
Ironically, it was the Medical Examiner's report rather than SDPD that disclosed the approximately 50 mph figure and triggered SanDiegoVille's inquiry into Officer Andres #7335. SDPD has now corrected SanDiegoVille's interpretation of Andres's role, and that correction is important. But the Department still has not provided the name that matters most.
On October 3, SanDiegoVille sent a detailed written inquiry directly to Jimenez, SDPD communications personnel, Media Inquiry, Internal Affairs, the Watch Commander and the Police Chief's office. Mayor Todd Gloria's office, the City Attorney, City Council representatives and other City officials were also copied. Nobody responded.
SanDiegoVille followed up again October 6 and explicitly gave SDPD another opportunity to respond before publication. On Wednesday afternoon, Nicholes finally answered on behalf of the Department. She unequivocally ruled out Andres Ruiz and Officer Andres #7335. She did not identify the officer who actually drove the SUV.
The City's response to SanDiegoVille's latest public records request arrived unusually quickly. Filed October 6, the request was closed the following morning after the City released responsive records identifying Gonzalez-Zuniga and a redacted Call for Service report.
The Call for Service report provides a detailed record of police activity following the collision. It identifies numerous officers involved in the response and contains entries stretching from approximately 1:29am until well into the afternoon.
But it still does not publicly answer the central question SanDiegoVille has been asking. Who was driving?
There may be perfectly legitimate explanations for individual pieces of this story. “Felt an impact” may simply have been an awkward but accurate description of what the officer experienced, investigative records can lawfully be withheld under certain circumstances, and the reported 50 mph speed may ultimately be explained by emergency circumstances or objective vehicle data.
None of the currently available information establishes that the unidentified officer committed a crime, violated Department policy or could have prevented Cann's death. The approximately 50 mph figure should not be treated as an independently reconstructed speed until evidence establishes exactly where it came from and whether objective data corroborates it. But transparency does not become relevant only after misconduct has been proven.
An SDPD vehicle struck and killed a 21 year old college student. The Department rapidly disclosed its conclusion about the dead student's intentions, while nearly four months later the public still has not been told the identity of the government employee behind the wheel.
There is no dashboard camera. Body camera footage and vehicle location records have not been released, the officer's emergency status has not been disclosed, whether lights and sirens were activated remains unanswered, and the Department has not publicly explained whether objective electronic evidence establishes the vehicle's speed. Now SDPD has responded just enough to establish who was not driving.
If the actual officer was responding to an emergency that explains the reported speed, SDPD can say so. If electronic data establishes how fast the SUV was traveling, the Department can disclose what it shows or explain why that information legally cannot yet be released.
If investigators determined that the officer's driving complied with every applicable law and SDPD policy, the Department can tell the public that as well. And if there is a legitimate legal, investigative or safety reason preventing SDPD from identifying the officer who drove the SUV, the Department can explain it.
Instead, after nearly four months, repeated written inquiries and two public records requests concerning Cann's death, SDPD has finally provided one definitive answer: Andres Ruiz and Officer Andres #7335 were not the officer involved.
The City has even identified Officer Andres #7335 as Andres A. Gonzalez-Zuniga.
The identity of the officer who actually struck and killed Justin Cann remains undisclosed.
SanDiegoVille will update this investigation as additional records or information are released.
Originally published October 8, 2026.