If you were a witness and/or have any information regarding the events of June 24th in the parking lot behind Chipotle Restaurant in Studio City (Laurel Canyon & Ventura Blvds), please contact us via email: justiceforzac@gmail.com

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Trial Update Day Seven

All updates are from the United Citizens Against Police Violence page on Facebook.

Champommier Trial Update – Day Seven

(Note: Day Six addendum- US also calls government policy expert (“Policy”) to testify. Plaintiffs’ attorneys call into question the legitimacy of the stop/detention of Citizen by task force members. When asked if Policy had ever mistaken another vehicle for his own when walking through a parking lot, Policy replied, “No. I know my own car”.)

United States calls expert on accident reconstruction who testifies that the skid marks testified to by Plaintiffs’ accident reconstruction expert as being caused by sudden engagement of the braking system by Champommier were actually tire marks caused by acceleration (i.e., of the “burning rubber” type).

The United States rests.

Judge instructs all attorneys as to the parameters of briefs to be generated arguing the points of law involved in the case of Champommier vs. United States of America (It is likely that the applicable standard set out in Graham v. Conner will be one of the aforementioned points of law). 

Interestingly, Judge appears to indicate that the shots fired by Champommier’s killer (DEA Agent) that were subsequent to the first shot (the only bullet to have struck Champommier and the shot responsible for his death) could, under the circumstances of this case, be deemed unreasonable. 

(It appears to this writer a matter of logic that emphasis be placed on the first shot for several reasons: Specifically, related to the instant case, it is the shot that killed Champommier. However, the reasonableness of the first shot is relevant in many deadly force cases involving gunfire because subsequent shots by other officers appear virtually immune to scrutiny, barring conclusive evidence to the contrary, in that they can often be deemed to have been rendered in defense of others by those officers simply saying that they were unsure whether or not that initial shot originated with the suspect. Thus, it appears that in cases where the officer firing the initial shot, and continues shooting, that officer is likely to have all shots scrutinized for their reasonableness.) 

Stay tuned....

No comments: