Man shot 6 times by police to file suit against Phoenix

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bula

Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
927
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
Man shot 6 times by police to file suit against Phoenix
Homeowner mistakenly targeted by officer seeks $5.75 mil
by Ofelia Madrid - Mar. 18, 2009 12:00 AM

The Arizona Republic
A man mistakenly shot six times in his home last September by a Phoenix police officer filed a notice of claim against the city Monday seeking $5.75 million in damages for himself and his family.

Phoenix Officer Brian Lilly shot Tony Arambula on Sept. 17 after Phoenix police responded to an early evening call about an intruder in Arambula's central Phoenix home, the claim states.

A Phoenix police spokesman declined Tuesday to comment on any aspect of the shooting or the pending litigation, but confirmed that Lilly had returned to work after being placed on temporary administrative leave.

The notice of claim filed by Michael Manning, Arambula's attorney, names the city, its police department, Lilly and two other officers. Manning has successfully sued local police agencies in the past over use of excessive force.

Arambula accuses Lilly and the department in his claim of recklessly using excessive force against him and trying to “callously cover it up.” Arambula, 35, gave this account on Tuesday:

The evening of the shooting, Arambula was sitting on his couch watching cartoons with his 2-year-old son when shots were fired through his living room window. Thinking it was a drive-by shooting, he grabbed his son and crawled away from his window.

His wife, Lesley, ran from a bedroom to see what was going on. Arambula handed the 2-year-old to her. By that time, an intruder – later identified Angel Anastacio Canales – had broken in through the living room window.

With a 9 millimeter gun in his hand, he ran into his 12-year-old son's room.

Tony Arambula, a licensed gun owner, grabbed his own gun and followed Canales into the bedroom. His son was hiding in the closet. Canales was trying to crawl underneath the boy's bed.

Holding the intruder at bay, Arambula ordered Mathew to find his mother and call 911. Arambula also called 911, telling the operator that he was holding the man at gunpoint.

Meanwhile, officers already chasing Canales arrived in the Arambulas' backyard. Lesley and her boys were outside. “I told them my husband was inside, he was the one with the gun,'' she said Tuesday. She pleaded, “Please don't shoot.”

The officers entered the house with a shout of “Police!” Almost immediately, Lilly shot Tony Arambula in the back, spinning him around. Three more shots were fired at him, one hitting him in the arm. When Arambula fell to the floor, the claim asserts, Lilly shot him two more times.

The shot in back left a gaping exit wound in Arambula's abdomen that was large enough to fit an eight-ounce cup, the claim charges. That's when Arambula told Lilly he'd shot the wrong man. There was an eerie quiet, Arambula recalled.

Later, in his Internal Affairs interview, Lilly admitted firing at Arambula without any verbal warning, according to the claim. A tape of the 911 call cited in the claim quotes Lilly as telling his supervisor moments later, “We (expletive) up.”

Sgt. Sean Coutts asked Lilly where Arambula's gun was when he fired.

“I don't know,'' Lilly responded, according to the claim. “I heard screaming and I fired.”

Coutts reportedly responded, “That's all right. Don't worry about it. I got your back….We clear?” according to a transcript reproduced in the claim.

Canales was apprehended peacefully.

Arambula's eyes filled with tears Tuesday as he described officers dragging him outside by his left leg. He said he pleaded with officers not to let his family to see him die.

“I was pretty sure I wasn't going to make it,” he said.

A hospital stay of almost a week was followed by two months of at-home care. Today, he wears a brace on his left hand and there are two metal brackets holding his arm to his hand. Doctors have told him that he will have pain for the rest of his life.

Arambula said Tuesday that he did everything he was supposed to in that situation.

“I would have loved if they would have told me to get on the floor and drop to my knees,” Arambula said. “To not have given me any opportunity to not get shot, it's confusing. I pray that this never happens to another family.”

The only Police response to date has been that they were "justified" as Officer Lilly was fearful for "his" life.
 
Personally, I hope any armed altercation I am ever going to be in, has NO 'police' anywhere near, or showing up, untill well after I have resolved it.


Idiots...


Definitely, there are many people who lack the intelligence and emotional maturity, to be allowed firearms.
 
Man, I wonder when PDs are going to start weeding out these "fearful" cops so more innocents don't get shot up... Job application should ask: If you are a scardycat check the box below.

BOO!!>> BANG, BANG, BANG.......... BANG, BANG....BANG!....oops
 
Some people shouldn't be cops. That was one of them. I'd have sued for a lot more than that after such an inexcusable screwup. And just think, had he shot the guy (and he would have been justified to do so, not knowing immediately if his son was still out in the room or safe), he'd have set his gun down before then and wouldn't have gotten shot. Arizona is a castle doctrine state, no duty to retreat, and you can use deadly force if you feel threatened. This met all the criteria for him to shoot the intruder down; even if he had to shoot him in the back, it would have been legal because he was imminently threatening his son.
 
It doesn't sound good for the police officer.

But we only heard one side of the story. I'd like to hear all the other sides.

I wonder if they will get deposition from the suspect Canales, who was an eye witness.
 
A tape of the 911 call cited in the claim quotes Lilly as telling his supervisor moments later, “We (expletive) up.”

That must sound like the sound slot machines in Vegas make when they payoff the jackpot.
 
How dare you! These people put their lives on the line every day for your benefit! Anybody could mistake a guys' back for handgun pointing at him.

Now that gooooooood satire, right there! :D

Oops. This one is going to hurt them, and it should. It should also be a reminder to ALL of us who carry, that you are responsible for ALL lead that you launch, and you better know who you are shooting and why you are shooting them.

Yep, +1. How about $5 million for injuries for the rest of his life, and $10-$20 million more in punitives if an attempt to cover-up is proven.
 
Sadly this is why you shoot and don't try to restrain, because some no nuts cop might shoot you in the back out of cowardice and incompetence even though the wife had told them "hey my husband is holding the bad guy at gun point, please don't shoot."

Hopefully these cops have to pay for the rest of their lives. Going to have to wait to call 911 till after I resolve it myself so I don't get shot in the back by the 'authorities'.
 
It's tragic to commit a negligent act that injures someone and an outrage to try to hide it.


qft

and there are at least 2 cops who get gigged for this. shooting wrong guy negilgent but at least i can wrap my mind around how it happened not so with "i've got your back" and a coverup.
 
I decided long ago that, unless I have the drop on an intruder and there's no way he could quickly get out of my field of fire or to a room with other people / weapons, I'm firing. It's just too risky to try to surrender someone. You're left trying to ensure the intruder drops his weapon, and with police storming into your house with you armed and holding a still-dangerous intruder who could take advantage of a momentary distraction to reach for a weapon. I will do whatever I have to do to protect my life and my family, and that means I would almost always have to pull the trigger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top