Trial Update

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

Champommier Trial Update: 

The case of Champommier v. United States of America began on Tuesday, March 26th, and will resume MONDAY, April 1st, at 1:15 PM. The case will be heard in Judge Michael Fitzgerald's Courtroom, 16th floor, rm 1600. 312 North Spring Street in Los Angeles. See Justiceforzac.blogspot.com for more details. Attire is business casual, no flip-flops. Federal court is more formal than state court. You can come and go in the courtroom, at any time. Community involvement is critical in showing the judge that this case matters to the community.

Trial Update Day Four

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

Champommier Trial Update- Day Four

Testimony given by Supervisor (someone in a high/higher position) for Los Angeles area Drug Enforcement Agency operations. Evidence revealed that an encrypted cable/report was sent to the DEA headquarters in Washington, D.C., explaining the events/circumstances surrounding Champommier’s killing by DEA Agent. Cable/Report contained statements alleging that Champommier had received verbal warnings and had been shown law enforcement identification prior to being shot at. Testimony from Day One and Two contradict the assertions in said cable/report since Agent, Deputy, and all law enforcement officials in the immediate vicinity of Champommier’s car testified to not having identified themselves as law enforcement and to not having given verbal warnings prior to shooting Champommier.

Testimony given by expert witness author/researcher who produced the learned treatise often cited by Plaintiffs’ forensic experts. Testimony essentially became bogged down in the minutiae of giving or taking tenths of seconds for unholstering a weapon and whether Agent’s having been bumped into by the operation’s supervisor shortly before perception of Deputy allegedly being struck by Champommier’s car could have disturbed Agent’s focus, thereby adding time to the calculus of the overall time of “perception of events” to “decision to use deadly force” to “mechanical execution of that decision”

Trial will resume Monday afternoon (April 1, 2013). It is anticipated that Champommier's parents will testify.

Trial Update Day Three

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

Champommier Trial – Day Three

Testimony by Deputy: Deputy claims to have been struck by Champommier’s car in the public parking lot on the evening in question (i.e., June 24, 2010, the claimed impetus for use of deadly force on Champommier) when, while crossing a parking lot traffic lane, he had drawn and trained his weapon in the direction of his colleagues who were in the process of detaining Citizen. Testimony put Deputy’s weight at approximately 240 pounds at the time of the encounter. 

(Previous testimony had been given by Plaintiffs’ accident reconstruction expert who gave the opinion that it would be “impossible” for a man the size/weight of Deputy to not have caused some damage to the vehicle’s hood if what law enforcement reported to have happened in fact happened. Testimony also showed that there were no finger or palm prints on the area of the hood that Deputy claimed to occupy) 

Deputy described himself as ending up in a seated position on the car’s hood but was not specific as to whether he got off the hood before or after shots were fired by Agent. Plaintiffs’ counsel examined Deputy, who was presented with the information regarding the alleged injuries suffered from the contact with Champommier’s car. Deputy was apparently placed in the position by Plaintiffs’ counsel of having to admit that medical treatment rendered shortly after the event failed to detect injuries that would be anticipated when one is “rammed” by an automobile- No bruising; no contusions; no lacerations; no broken bones.

Testimony by Agent-Supervisor, described as the supervisor of the “multi-jurisdictional task force”: Agent-Supervisor testified that he has personally attended approximately 50 debriefings held in public parking facilities since Champommier’s killing, indicating that the practice continues to this day. (It would appear to this writer that the public should want this practice abolished or limited to disasters or instances public necessity)

Plaintiffs call expert in law enforcement policies and procedures to testify as to whether the conduct of law enforcement on the night in question aligned with the actual policies and procedures. Witness testified that there was a series of critical and ultimately fatal mistakes made by law enforcement that resulted in Champommier's death. When counsel for the United States asked this witness what action should have been taken when Deputy was struck, policy expert stated that since it was apparent that Deputy was uninjured Champommier’s license plate should have been reported to Los Angeles Police who would have then investigated the matter versus ‘self help’ by undercover agents who would have then been deviating from their mission in order to deal with Champommier.

Stay tuned…..

Trial Update Day Two

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

Champommier Trial Update- Day Two

Morning: Drug Enforcement Agency Officer (“Agent”) alleged to have been responsible for Champommier's killing continued testimony regarding the circumstances surrounding the events of the evening in question, including confirming that no identifying garb was worn by any member of the task force that could have served to warn the public of law enforcement presence in the public parking lot surrounded by several eateries. Agent testified that it is not unusual for law enforcement to use public areas for debriefings following operations but that such debriefings are to be done in a manner which considers protecting the public and, when possible, out of public view.

Agent gave testimony as to his "perception" of the events that included the alleged contact between Champommier's car and pedestrian Deputy Sheriff ("Deputy") that was stated by the Agent as providing the justification for use of deadly force. 

Agent added to testimony given by LAPD detective given on Day One of the trial describing a detention of a person ("Citizen"), whom Champommier had met online the previous night and had gone to the area to meet. While attempting to locate Champommier, Citizen, who had been looking for Champommier’s car, was contacted by agents of the task force for “acting suspiciously” and for allegedly “looking into the cars” belonging to task force members. Agent testified that two members detained Citizen and appeared to have Citizen contained/controlled. At this time, Deputy Sheriff (“Deputy”) approached Citizen, and the two task force members detaining him, with his service revolver drawn and pointing in the direction of not only Citizen but also the two task force members. Agent stated that he did not feel this to have been unsafe or dangerous. 

Shortly thereafter, Agent testified to the contact between Champommier and Deputy. This was observed by Agent from a distance of approximately 8-10 feet beyond Champommier’s car in the direction the car was facing. Agent testified the contact occurred on the extreme driver's side of the car's hood and further described the Deputy as having been lifted in such a way that Deputy was parallel to the height of the roof of the car before landing on his left side on the car's hood with gun still in hand.

However, Agent’s recollection of Deputy’s time on the hood and dismounting from the hood of Champommier’s car was poor and could not be established, despite being within a few feet of both Champommier and Deputy. Agent testified that events “happened so fast” and that there was “no time to think”. Agent testified that Deputy was still on the hood of the car as the car drove past and still fired his weapon in the direction of Champommier and Deputy, allegedly still on the hood of Champommier’s car. 

Agent testified to thinking that shortly after Champommier’s car initially contacted Deputy that Agent had entertained the notion that said contact might have been accidental but that Champommier’s alleged acceleration following the contact with Deputy brought about fear for Deputy’s safety and necessitated use of deadly force. Agent then testified that he felt Champommier intended to injure Deputy and that Agent also feared that Champommier would injure him, despite testifying that he was never in the car’s path.

Coroner testified to injuries sustained by Champommier, stating that a single bullet had entered the left arm, traversing his chest cavity, exiting his right arm.

Plaintiffs called ballistics expert who testified his opinion as to the number of bullets, their trajectories, and the likely scenario by which the shots were rendered and by whom. The amount of time estimated to formulate the need to use deadly force (“perception of need” + “decision to execute”) and the time to mechanically implement the decision to use deadly force (unholstering weapon and discharging it) was estimated to be anywhere from 3-5 seconds. Ballistics expert for the plaintiffs used several position distances occupied by Agent to the position Champommier occupied behind the wheel of his car. This information was then corresponded with the time estimated to execute use of deadly force (i.e., perception + decision + mechanical implementation) to determine that Champommier’s car was either fully stopped or barely moving, but not moving more than 5 m.p.h. at the time of the shooting. (This, of course, stands in stark contrast to law enforcement reports of Champommier’s car traveling at a high rate of speed and, in fact, accelerating into Deputy.)

Lastly, audio recording of Citizen conducted by LA County Sheriff’s investigators and obtained the morning following Champommier’s killing was played. Citizen described having been accosted by an unidentified group of males, describing them as “a bunch of rednecks” that he felt were about to rob him or beat him up. Citizen stated that he was accosted and was initially acting in self defense to avoid what he felt was unlawful contact until a badge was produced, at which point Citizen stated that he “complied fully” with all directives issued. It was at this time that Champommier’s car appeared to make contact with Deputy, whom Citizen described as having “stepped into” the path of the car. Citizen stated that he thought the driver, whom he did not know to be Champommier – the person he was there to meet- was simply trying to escape an apparently dangerous scene consisting of plainclothes law enforcement agents with guns drawn and who were, essentially, indistinguishable from gangsters. Citizen repeatedly stated that video cameras must have recorded the events and would corroborate his version of events as truthful.

To be continued.....

Trial Update Day One

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

Champommier Trial -- Day One

Champommier's case, like that of DJ Henry, Joey Pinasco, and several others, involves the car-as-deadly-weapon scenario, as one of the fundamental issues involved in justification for the use of deadly force.

The day began with eye and ear-witness testimony as to the general congestion of the area on that Thursday evening, June 24, 2010 at 9:30 PM, the general number of shots heard, the fear felt by passersby by the actions of the shooters, all in plainclothes and without discernible identifying information as law enforcement agents. A picture of chaos in the public parking lot where Champommier was killed emerged. The issue of policies and procedures utilized by the "multi-jurisdictional task force" was also scrutinized by plaintiffs' attorneys.

The plaintiffs called their forensic accident reconstruction expert who testified to the broken glass pattern and the skid marks. His opinion was to conclude that Champommier had hit the brakes, most likely to avoid injuring the deputy that ran into the path of Zac's car and that the shot that killed Champommier, which followed shortly after, was rendered while Champommier's car was in a position of being either at a full stop or, at a maximum, going no more than 5 miles an hour. Forensic evidence put on by the plaintiffs showed that Champommier's car then sped away after he had been fatally shot through his driver's side window, when he succumbed to that gunshot wound a short distance later.

Stay Tuned

The plaintiffs' forensic expert also disputed the official account (see LA County Sheriffs Log 160, dated June 25, 2010) which described the sheriffs deputy that Champommier allegedly "rammed" as having been essentially tossed into the air by the impact and landing on the hood as "impossible" since there was no physical evidence that an over 240 lbs. man had damaged the hood of Champommier's car in any way. Not a dent, not a palm or finger print, not one bit of evidence that a 240 lbs. man had made contact with Champommier's car, one the apparent bases for use of deadly force against Champommier (i.e., defense of others).

The plaintiffs' forensic expert also alleged that evidence had been tampered with. Pictures of the shattered driver's side window glass taken both the evening of the shooting and the following day showed that a rivet that had allegedly been dislodged when Champommier's car finally crashed after he lost consciousness had been "placed" among the shattered glass of the driver's side window. The rivet was not seen among the glass on the pictures taken in the evening but was seen in the photos taken the following morning.

Lastly, the DEA agent responsible for Champommier's killing was called to the stand. He had to pass in front of Champommier's mom, Carol, on the way to the witness stand. This writer will not attempt to describe the scene since there are no words. 

Champommier's killer will be first on the stand tomorrow. Not only will the car-as-deadly-weapon scenario be scrutinized as a legal justification for using deadly force, but Champommier's killer will likely be scrutinized as to whether or not he acted as a reasonable officer under the circumstances in using deadly force.

The time has come

In the matter of Carol Champommier vs. The United States of America, et al....

The trial begins next week.  This trial will be tried by a judge as the case has been brought before the Court under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). That Act mandates a bench trial. This means a jury will not be deciding if these DEA Agents were negligent and reckless when they shot and killed Zac.

As this will be a bench trial, it should go very quickly. According to estimates, it should take about seven days in total. Opening statements should start on the first day of trial and then testimony will follow pretty quickly. Likely, the civilian witnesses will testify followed by the shooters and then the experts, although the schedule is not yet firm.

We would like to encourage as many of Zac's friends to attend in a show of support for Zac and Carol. Here are the details:

When: Tuesday, March 26th

Time: 8:30 a.m.

Where: 312 North Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90012-4701,
16th floor, room 1600.

The Honorable Judge Michael Fitzgerald will be presiding.

Directions

Approaching Downtown on the Northbound 101 Freeway:

Travel north on the 101 Freeway. Exit on Alameda Street and turn left. Go two blocks and turn right on Temple Street. Go two blocks and make a right on Main Street. Courthouse is on your left hand side.

Approaching Downtown on the Southbound 101 Freeway:

Travel south on the 101 Freeway. Exit on Temple Street and turn left. Go four stop lights to Spring Street. The courthouse is located on the northeast corner of Temple and Spring Street.


Parking:

One hour metered parking is available on Temple Street between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.

There are also parking lots available at the following locations:

Spring St. and Arcadia St. (one block from courthouse)
Main St. and Arcadia St. (one block from courthouse)
Los Angeles Mall Parking Lot - Los Angeles St. and Temple St. (underground parking, enter on Los Angeles St., across the street from courthouse)
Main St. and Macy St. (across from Olvera Street, 2 blocks from courthouse)

Metro Information:

Ride Metrolink Ventura County Line [UNION STATION] heading south

From: CHATSWORTH STATION/10046 OLD DEPOT PLAZA RD Leaves: 07:02AM
To: UNION STATION/800 N ALAMEDA ST Arrives: 07:50AM

Pay $9.25 + keep Media for next vehicle *METROLINK tickets must be purchased BEFORE boarding *, Monthly Pass: $243.25

Ride Metro Rail Red Line [NORTH HOLLYWOOD STATION] heading west
From: UNION STATION Lv: 07:57AM
To: CIVIC CENTER STATION Ar: 07:59AM

Additional Information
Total cash fare = $9.25
Trip time is about 57 minutes.
Trip distance is about 29.24 miles.
*All times are approximate. Traffic and weather can cause delays.
Please allow extra time for boarding and alighting.

Web Links:

United States Courthouse--Spring Street

Metrolink

2013

On Saturday, December 29th, local NBC affiliate KNBC published a report on their website about the upcoming court case filed by Zac's mother, Carol, against the United States Government for the wrongful death of her son.

It would seem the story the Sheriff's department, as well as the DEA, concocted regarding the events of that night were just that... all fabrications.

"The nature of [Champommier's] aggressive actions - actually hitting the deputy - that is not someone who is without some degree of fault," Sheriff Lee Baca said.

Apparently, not so much, Sheriff Baca. He did nothing wrong. You said as much to his mother. Without waiting for any official report, Sheriff Baca felt it appropriate to slander a dead young man who was killed by the very deputies who should have been protecting him, just hours after they gunned him down. 

As for Zac intentionally aiming for a deputy? According to the KNBC report, a witness reported seeing a deputy hopping over the front of Zac's car, not making it to the other side and sliding off, during an altercation with someone else in the parking lot. 

Starsky and Hutch fail.

Officers reported that Zac was traveling at a speed of 38 m.p.h. through the parking lot where he was shot. Again, not so. Accident reconstruction experts for both sides of the lawsuit agree: Zac was not traveling any faster than 13 m.p.h., maybe even less, but they settled on 13 for the magic number. So the story of Zac racing into a group of law enforcement officers in an attempt to mow them down was simply a fairy tale. One of many woven that night.

You can finish reading the rest of the KNBC piece here.

Trial Update

Due to scheduling conflicts, the trial date for Champommier vs. United States of America has been rescheduled from November 6, 2012 to March 26, 2013.

There have been many of Zac's friends who were planning on traveling to Los Angeles from other places around the country for the trial and we'd like to let as many of these know so that they may adjust their plans accordingly.

*****

It's going to be an explosive atmosphere once the major points of contention (READ: THE LIES) are finally shown under the light.

Take for example the claim that Zac had raced, zoomed, propelled, accelerated, pick any of these words, into a group of law enforcement officers with his car, essentially turning his car into a murderous weapon according to Sheriff Lee Baca. But wait... what's this:

Experts for both the plaintiff and the defendants conducted a meticulous investigation into the evidence at the scene and taken from Zac's car.

The expert examiners for the Champommier family agreed to the accept the speed the defense examiners had concluded Zac was traveling through the parking lot that night, allowing a plus or minus factor of +-2 mph; so then... what was the speed Zac car's was traveling when he scared these seasoned law enforcement agents from the DEA, Sheriff's department and Police department into drawing their weapons and killing him instantly?

You won't believe it once you hear it -- MARCH 26, 2013.


Although, I might not be able to wait that long to tell you.

In Memorium -- Zac Champommier

 Today marks the two-year anniversary of Zac's death. We remember it as if somehow it had happened only yesterday. Over the course of two years, so much has changed, so much has been learned. And it is as we have always suspected. In fact, the truth is more horrific than we could have imagined.

There will be a candlelight vigil tonight to remember Zac. Please join Zac's family and friends at the corner of Ventura Blvd and Laurel Canyon between 8:45 and 9:00 pm. From there, we will walk to the parking lot behind the Chipotle restaurant. Candles will be provided for you, or you can bring your own.

If you do the social media thing, right click to save any of the images of Zac here or use the image at the top left hand sidebar and then upload the picture as your Facebook profile pic or Twitter avatar in memory of Zac and to raise awareness about his death and the circumstances surrounding it.

His mother is moving forward with her demand for accountability. Unless something's changed and no one sent me the memo, you don't get to shoot down our children in parking lots for no damn reason and not expect to be accountable. Especially if your job is to protect our children. This simply cannot be allowed to ever happen again. Changes must be made. New policies implemented. People must be held to answer for every life needlessly, recklessly, thoughtlessly taken, and for every lie told thereafter.

Re: Champommier v. United States of America, a trial date of November 6, 2012 has been set. The location of the trial is as follows:

Court: Edward R. Roybal Federal Building 
255 E. Temple Street Los Angeles, Ca 90012 
Room: 790 
Date: November 6, 2012
Time: 9:00 a.m.

We'll keep you updated on the trial as soon as we learn any new information.

20

Today marks what would have been, what should have been, Zac's 20th birthday.


Every day was like a party, when Zac was there. He knew how to bring the fun.




Happy Birthday, Zac.

Happy Birth Day, Carol.

We love you.

Dia de Los Muertos

Many of us are remembering Zac today, and are taking a look back at his altar from last year's Dia de Los Muertos celebration inside Hollywood Forever Cemetery.

He was with us all day.

It's a start

First this:

 

Now this from KTLA news:

District Attorney Tony Rackauckas announced at a news conference that he's charging Officer Manny Ramos with one felony count of second-degree murder and one felony count of involuntary manslaughter. He faces a maximum of 15 years to life in prison if convicted.

Officer Jay Cicinelli is charged with one felony count of involuntary manslaughter and one felony count of use of excessive force, Rackauckas said. Cicinelli faces a maximum of 4 years in prison if convicted.

Both were set to be arraigned at 2 p.m. Wednesday.

"Police officers have the right to use reasonable force in the performance of lawful duty. But citizens have the right to self defense , even against the police," Rackauckas said while detailing the July 5 incident.

According to Rackauckas, Officer Ramos lifted his fist at Kelly Thomas and told him he was "getting ready to 'f' him up."

Ramos grabbed his baton, causing the 37-year-old Thomas to put his hands up in a defensive manner, and ordered him to the ground.

Officer Ramos swung his baton, chased Thomas and punched him "several times in the left ribs after tackling him to the ground," he said.

Ramos put his hand over Thomas' neck and pinned him to the ground, using his body weight, as other officers responded to the scene, Rackauckas said.

Arriving officer Joe Wolfe responded by using force after receiving a call for help from officer Ramos. There was no evidence to suggest he knew what had transpired prior to the call for help, Rackauckas said.

Officer Cicinelli arrived and kneed Thomas twice in the head and shocked him with a Taser 4 times, he said, adding that the fourth time included deploying taser darts into Thomas. Cicinelli then used the head of the taser to strike Thomas in the face 8 times while he was pinned to the ground by other officers, he added. Thomas, who had screamed out for help, fell silent while being beaten, Rackauckas said.

We can only hope this leads to closer scrutiny in all law enforcement-involved killings, and maybe perhaps another look by the DA at Zac's case.

Anniversaries

carol and zac, at his graduation from granada hills charter high school, one year ago

It was a year ago that Zac Champommier and his family and friends celebrated his graduation from Granada Hills Charter High School. Zac had so many friends there and that was such a happy night for all of them.

Two weeks after this picture was taken, Zac was shot and killed by people who had been tasked to protect and to serve him, and yet in the end, they not only failed to protect Zac... they were responsible and culpable for everything that happened that night. All of it.

His family and friends would like to spend the anniversary of his death together. The entire communities of Granada Hills (where Zac went to school), Porter Ranch (where Zac lived) and Studio City (where Zac was killed) are invited to join us as we celebrate his life.

We will meet on Friday, June 24th at the corner of Laurel Canyon and Ventura boulevards from 5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.

Zac's mother Carol is planning a butterfly release, similar to the one at Zac's memorial service.

Everyone is welcome.  Even if you only know Zac from reading this blog, you are welcome to come, because now you are a FOZ (Friend of Zac) and now you know what a wonderful person, son, relative, friend, and loved loved loved member of his community that he was; that he is.... that he'll always be.

Zac's Excalibur

The official complaint has been filed against those responsible for the death of Zachary Champommier.

From the LA Weekly:

Despite the official reports, which claimed Champommier drove his car into a sheriff's deputy, causing officers to open fire, Champommier's family says the teen was shot without provocation or justification.

Champommier's mother, Carol, is now suing the DEA, LAPD and LA County Sheriff's Department in federal court for wrongful death.

According to the lawsuit, first reported by Courthouse News Service, Champommier was in his car waiting for a friend when he saw officers detain someone. When Champommier began to drive away toward the parking lot exit, he was fired upon.

Champommier "was unarmed, had not threatened the agents/officers, did not pose a threat of death or serious physical injury," states the lawsuit. The officers "proceeded to use unreasonable, unnecessary and excessive force, firing multiple bullets and killing" Champommier.

From the Complaint:

As is detailed herein, Defendants.... shot and killed the Decedent without justification, in contravention of proper police procedures, and by use of excessive and unnecessary force. Such conduct violated Decedent's right to be free of violations of his constitutional rights under the law.

[snip]

By the actions and omissions described above....depriving Plaintiff and Decedent of the following clearly established and well-settled constitutional rights protected by Amendments to the US Constitution:

a. the right to be free from unreasonable seizure as secured by the Fourth Amendment

b. the right to be free from excessive and unreasonable force in the course of arrest as secured by the Fourth Amendment;

c. the right to be free from the unreasonable use of deadly force as secured by the Fourth Amendment;

d. the right to be free from deprivation of life without due process of law as secured by the Fourteenth Amendment;

e. the right to equal protection of the law as secured by the Fourteenth Amendment;

f. the right to be free from a police cover-up of the use of excessive police force through the filing of false and misleading incident investigation reports.

click image to enlarge

You can read the rest of the official complaint here.(pdf file)

We'll see you in court.

Hope sees a star

A special tribute from one of Zac's many friends:


The Wrong Individual -- by: Anjuli Ayesa del Castillo Roces

Zachary Champommier

January 21, 1992 - June 24, 2010

“In the night of death, hope sees a star, and listening love can hear the rustle of a wing” -Robert Ingersoll

~~~~~~~~~~~~

If we knew who Death would take next, would the world become a more respectful and loving place? Because people would know who is to leave, would truth and peace be said and emerge from that forlorn piece of knowledge? It is so random who He chooses next…

A friend said to me, when a good person is taken from us far too soon, it only means that God needed more angels in Heaven. I also heard that once Death has claimed his prey, that the soul lingers among its loved ones for a week to say last goodbyes in their dreams… I want this “knowledge” to comfort me, and be true.

Unfairness shows its wretched, forsaken face when Death claims the wrong individual. To me and to those who feel the loss where love once was, see it only as the wrong capture. Not only for their youth do we think it’s unfair but, the loss of authenticity that individual brought to us is what makes our hearts ache the most. Tears can only provide so much release— a release much needed, but sometimes never enough.

We are not just slabs of meat on this planet and yet we die like we are. When we are given Life, we are given the guarantee of being the only existing version of us. Forget the look-alikes, the twins, the people that “think” like us! The combination of our being, who we are, makes us the lone, unique fingerprint that is here today. If we die like NOTHING, then we should LIVE otherwise.

When Death takes those we love, the feeling of loss surmounts to this heightened spreading of emptiness that slithers through the body. This snake evolves and swallows all that used to whole within us! Knowledge is what makes us grieve. The knowledge of a fallen… or taken, is what makes water seep from the eyes and blood suddenly race through your veins. Knowledge of the fact that that one version of life, that matchless fingerprint, has forever disappeared from the Universe.

Zac, you said, “Happiness is the driving force of all our actions. Whether we believe it or not, whether we face it or not. No matter the opposition, I believe happiness to be the one true meaning of life, no matter where we find it”. All those that miss you can’t be “happy”—Not without you. Zac, you were that matchless fingerprint. And now, we suffer from the knowledge that you were ripped from our arms far too soon.