Officers were inside the Austin Peay station when gunfire outside wounded a man and sent one round through a front window.
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Memphis police officers heard several shots outside their own station before learning that a domestic dispute had erupted at the entrance, leaving a man wounded and a bullet through a precinct window.
The Sept. 6 shooting at the Austin Peay precinct led to the arrest of 24-year-old Brianna Moore on charges of aggravated assault, domestic assault involving bodily harm and reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon. Police say Moore shot a man she described as a former boyfriend during a meeting to return his house keys. The man suffered multiple gunshot wounds to both legs. Moore told investigators she fired only after he assaulted her, according to reports describing the probable cause affidavit.
The danger to people inside the precinct became one of the most consequential facts documented at the scene. Investigators said one bullet traveled through the station’s front window while multiple officers were inside. Police recovered a bullet fragment and four spent 9 mm casings outside. No officer was reported wounded. The available public accounts do not say Moore aimed at the station, and authorities have not publicly alleged in the reports reviewed that she was trying to shoot police. They instead charged her with reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon in addition to the assault counts.
Officers were already close enough to hear the incident unfold. Shortly before 4:30 p.m., police inside the building heard multiple gunshots. A witness then entered the precinct and reported that a man had been shot. That witness described seeing a silver Honda arrive near a black Nissan and a woman exit the Honda from the passenger side. The woman approached the Nissan and began firing at the man, the witness told investigators, before returning to the Honda.
The wounded man did not wait at the precinct for an ambulance, according to the witness’s account. He got into his Nissan and drove away. Police later located him at Methodist North Hospital, where he was being treated for multiple wounds to both legs and was reported in critical condition. The reviewed reports did not publicly identify him or provide a later verified update on his recovery. His departure from the scene meant officers investigating the gunfire had to establish separately where the wounded person had gone.
The man told investigators the confrontation began with an arranged exchange. He said he had gone to the precinct to get his house key from Moore and referred to her as his girlfriend. Once he received the key, he said, he got out of his vehicle and attempted to grab Moore. His statement, as publicly reported, then says Moore shot him. That admission that he tried to grab her is part of the police record and complicates any simple account in which the gunfire occurred without preceding physical contact.
Moore and a passenger gave investigators additional information about that contact. Moore described the man as an ex-boyfriend after a recent breakup. The passenger said Moore approached the man’s vehicle to hand over a key and that the man struck her in the back of the head, knocking off her glasses. The passenger said the man then moved toward Moore again. Moore pulled a handgun from her bra and fired several times, according to that witness. Moore later told police herself that she had shot the man after he assaulted her.
Those statements create an important distinction between what investigators can document as occurring and what remains contested. The shooting itself is not denied in the accounts reported publicly. Moore allegedly acknowledged firing. The man’s injuries, recovered shell casings and recovered firearm provide additional evidence that shots were fired. What remains less clear is the exact conduct that immediately preceded them. The public affidavit summaries do not say whether police found physical evidence confirming the alleged blow to Moore’s head, nor do they describe a judicial finding resolving the competing versions.
The firearm was recovered after officers stopped the silver Honda in the precinct parking lot. Police later searched the car under a warrant and found a black Taurus G3C 9 mm on the front seat. The reporting reviewed does not disclose a final ballistics report tying each casing and bullet fragment to that gun, although the weapon’s recovery formed part of the investigation described in the probable cause account. Local reporting also said two women were initially taken into custody after the Honda was stopped.
The station strike is especially relevant to the reckless endangerment count because the case involves more potential victims than the man Moore is accused of shooting. The round that went through the window entered an occupied public building. Still, the available record requires careful distinction between risk and intent: Police said a bullet penetrated the station, but the reviewed sources do not establish that Moore deliberately targeted the window or the officers behind it. That question should not be answered by inference from the charge alone.
The two remaining charges focus more directly on the confrontation. Police accused Moore of aggravated assault in connection with the shooting and domestic assault involving bodily harm in a case stemming from a relationship between the two. Moore’s description of the man as an ex-boyfriend and his description of her as his girlfriend differ in wording but both indicate a romantic relationship. The reports do not establish the duration of that relationship, the reason for the breakup or whether there were prior police calls involving the pair.
The meeting place might appear to have offered unusual security, but the reports do not say officers were supervising the exchange. The two had apparently chosen the precinct as the place to return keys, yet police inside became aware of the confrontation only when they heard gunfire and a witness came in to report the shooting. There is no indication in the reviewed material that officers had been standing with the pair, that either person had requested a civil standby or that the department had arranged the key exchange.
After Moore was detained, investigators interviewed her. Police said she waived her rights and admitted shooting the man while asserting that he had assaulted her first. That statement may be important later if she raises a claim that her actions were justified, but an arrest-stage affidavit does not decide such a defense. Prosecutors would still bear the burden required in the criminal case, and Moore would be entitled to challenge the state’s evidence. The filing of charges should not be reported as proof that she is guilty.
Subsequent reports put Moore’s bond at $125,000 after an earlier account said a bond had not yet been set. The publicly available material reviewed through Oct. 20 did not reveal a later adjudication, plea or trial result, and no verified update was located on the wounded man’s condition after he was reported critical. The case therefore remains notable both for the disputed physical confrontation that preceded the shooting and for the wider danger created when one of the rounds entered a police facility occupied by officers.
Author note: Last updated October 20, 2026.