A Chicago police officer who shot and killed an unarmed Black man at an elevated train station in 2003 acknowledged late last year that the shooting was unjustified, contradicting the opinion of department officials, according to sworn testimony he gave in a lawsuit related to the shooting.

Officer Alvin Weems said that after he viewed video images of the March 2003 incident, during which he fatally shot Michael Pleasance at the CTA Red Line's 95th Street station, he realized that the altercation did not happen as he and department officials originally claimed, according to the deposition taken by the lawyer for the dead man's family.

In the December 2006 deposition, Weems also admitted that he did not fear for his life at the time he shot Pleasance, who was involved in a gang-related fistfight at the station.

Despite telling Office of Professional Standards investigators immediately after the shooting that he feared Pleasance would kill him, Weems said in the deposition that he feared only that he might suffer "injury but not serious."

"When I made those statements to OPS, I was doing the best of my recollection," Weems said. "And I was trying to do it as truthful as I can, but I guess I made some mistakes."

In a follow-up question, lawyer Craig Mannarino asked whether Weems believed the shooting was justified, given that he was not in fear of his life or even serious injury.

"It wasn't justified," Weems replied.

Weems, who was assigned to patrol CTA facilities at the time, arrived at the station March 8, 2003 to start his day and found a small group of men fighting. As he tried to pull one of Pleasance's friends off of another man, Weems turned and raised his gun at Pleasance.

Police officials originally said that Pleasance struggled with Weems and tried to take away his gun. A year and a half later, as the judge in the Pleasance family's lawsuit ordered the release of the video, the Police Department revised its story and said Pleasance was approaching Weems, as if to attack him, although no contact was made before Weems shot the man.

City officials declined to comment on the lawsuit, but a spokeswoman for the Law Department said Weems' acknowledgment that the shooting was unjustified was irrelevant, because the Police Department already had determined the shooting was "unintentional." Justification for shootings usually is applied only to intentional shootings, spokeswoman Jenny Hoyle said.

Regarding inaccuracies in Weems' initial statements, Hoyle said, "Weems has explained that the shooting happened very quickly, was very stressful and that he did his best to accurately explain what happened when he spoke to OPS."

Supt. Philip Cline had rejected disciplinary action that OPS recommended against Weems, but on the day the judge released the video, he announced a 30-day suspension. Cline said that the shooting was accidental, that Weems erred in putting his finger on the trigger without intending to fire and that he had been 20 minutes late for work.

The lawsuit is pending.