A Chicago officer who shot and killed a 19 year old suspect is suing (via counterclaim) the decedent’s estate for trauma. The officer claims that the suspect assaulted him with a baseball bat during the confrontation. It is claimed by the officer that he suffered deeply from the traumatic experience of having the baseball bat nearly miss his head when swung by the suspect. In fact, the officer alleges that the suspect tried to hit him twice, nearly missing on each occasion.
Although what happened during the confrontation has been subject to different interpretations, one things is clear: the officer used deadly force to stop the suspect. Specifically, the officer shot the suspect four times as he (the suspect) lunged towards the officer with a bat. The officer’s use of deadly force prompted a lawsuit by the victim’s family. On behalf of the suspect (Quintonio Legrier), his family seeks damages for his wrongful death. In response, the officer (who is one of the defendants in the original suit) responded by filing his counterclaim for ten million dollars for emotional distress and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
What Really Happened That Day
It is unclear at this point how the confrontation started and what happened during the interaction. Authorities know for certain that the suspect, Legrier, was the person who made the initial 911 call. It appears he and his father called police seeking some sort of assistance. The victim’s father claims he called 911 because his emotionally challenged son was hitting a door with the bat. Then it appears that the officer arrived to the location and immediately requested that Legrier drop the bat. Subsequently, it is said that the suspect swung the bat a few times in the officer’s direction, but while the two had several feet of distance in between them.
The officer responded by using deadly force because he felt that it was the only way to prevent harm by the suspect. Unfortunately, in the midst of subduing the suspect by shooting, the officer also shot and killed a bystander who was in the area. Supposedly, the officer was unable to see the bystander in the area because he was knocked onto his back, and the suspect blocked his view of other people in the immediate area. According to advice from a Sacramento criminal defense lawyer, an officer may generally use deadly force only where he or she believes it’s necessary to defend himself or others from the immediate use of deadly force by the suspect. The only other time where it may be permissible (depending on state law) is where the officer is attempting to carry out an arrest for a felony involving the use (or the attempt) of serious physical injury and the officer forewarns that he may use deadly force.
Why the Case Has Created Controversy
The thought of a cop suing a dead suspect sounds controversial enough. However, there are other aspects of controversy in this case. First, the family has been criticized for quickly filing a lawsuit after the death occurred. The family’s attorney claims that this was done to ensure that all possible pieces of evidence would get preserved. However, the officer involved, and the law enforcement agency have made statements suggesting that the family is just looking for a quick windfall. The officer’s attorney, Mr. Brodsky, even stated that the family shouldn’t be using the lawsuit as a “lottery ticket.
From the opposite side, the family and its attorney claim that the police department is trying to downplay the shooting and blame the victim for what occurred that day. The family’s legal team is also reaffirming their underlying desire to preserve evidence by showing that it has already received several pieces of evidence as it originally desired.
The police department’s internal affairs department is already investigating the situation. It will be using all the available evidence to try to reconcile the different versions of the story. The other victim’s family is also pursuing its own lawsuit against to recover for the death of the innocent bystander. At this point, the case will continue further and we will provide updates on the situation when possible.