TexasCHLforum.com

Man Shot Dead by Police While Watering Neighbor's Lawn

http://www.realfarmacy.com/man-shot-dea ... bors-lawn/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well isn't that special? And "they" wonder why we are losing trust.

Misleading title IMO but whatever...

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/04 ... t-20130405

Family of man killed by Long Beach officers awarded $6.5 million

Doug Zerby was gunned down by two police officers who mistook the hose nozzle he was holding for a gun. The officers are held personally liable for $5,000 each.

I really hope there is more to it than these simple posts. Like he was asked to put the spray nozzle (gun) down.
If not, two officers clearly made a big mistake. It'll be interesting to see what the consequences are or aren't....

I can't imagine a worse error in judgment.. I really hope that is all that is is... A really, really, horrible mistake.

Wasn't there any water coming out of the nozzle? How did the neighbor not see that? That would have prevented the whole thing. The neighbor wouldn't have even called the police. Why wasn't he spraying the water when the police approached?

cb1000rider wrote:I really hope there is more to it than these simple posts. Like he was asked to put the spray nozzle (gun) down.

From the LA Times article:

Attorneys for the family presented evidence during the trial that the officers did not attempt to identify themselves to Zerby, nor did they order him to drop his weapon or even make him aware they were there. They argued the evidence showed it was a case of contagious fire, in which one officer fired by mistake, prompting the other officer to shoot based on the belief he was under fire.

C-dub wrote:Wasn't there any water coming out of the nozzle? How did the neighbor not see that? That would have prevented the whole thing. The neighbor wouldn't have even called the police. Why wasn't he spraying the water when the police approached?

I saw nothing about a hose....I'm thinking he was sitting on stairs playing with nozzle ! ! Sort on "Dry Firing"

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?secti ... id=9054853" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

According to Mardirossian his legal team was able to disprove police allegations that Douglass Zerby had pointed the water nozzle at officers, as if he were aiming to fire a gun.

"And part of the proof is pretty simple, because the shots from the shotgun struck Douglass right in the chest and they killed him," he said. "And if he were holding the nozzle...the water nozzle would have been shot, his hands would have been shot, and they were completely pristine, there was no damage to them."

According to Mardirossian his legal team was able to disprove police lies that Douglass Zerby had pointed the water nozzle at officers, as if he were aiming to fire a gun. (there, fixed it)

Steve James, the president of the Long Beach Police Officers Association said of the verdict: "It's very disappointing. The Officers were dispatched to a call about a man with a gun, they arrived and saw what they thought was a gun, they saw a man point a "gun" at them, and the jury found that they don't have the right to defend themselves. That's concerning, not just in this case, but for Police Officers across the country."

What's really "concerning", is the possibility that he actually believes what he said. Can you imagine the response if a private citizen tried to justify a wrongful shooting using that type of logic.

This also happened in Florida a while back.

Someone needs to tell these drunks to quit playing with hose nozzles.

Someone needs to tell the cops to keep a safe distance. stay behind cover, bring binoculars and a loudspeaker.

VoiceofReason wrote:http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?secti ... id=9054853

According to Mardirossian his legal team was able to disprove police allegations that Douglass Zerby had pointed the water nozzle at officers, as if he were aiming to fire a gun.

"And part of the proof is pretty simple, because the shots from the shotgun struck Douglass right in the chest and they killed him," he said. "

And if he were holding the nozzle...the water nozzle would have been shot, his hands

would have been shot, and they were completely pristine, there was no damage to them."

According to Mardirossian his legal team was able to disprove police lies that Douglass Zerby had pointed the water nozzle at officers, as if he were aiming to fire a gun. (there, fixed it)

Tragic incident no doubt. I do have questions that these articles do not elude to. From an investigator stand point if I was working this case the part I quoted doesn't mean much in itself without seeing the entire investigation and forensics on this case. Why, because in that limited story we do not know if the 1st shot missed as there were several shots fired. That could cause the deceased to react to include drop the nozzle, which would mean it wasn't hit by the buck shot. In reading the deceased was hit once, and there were several shots fired by two officers that is something to think about. The time of the 911 call is 4:40 PM, in December. We don't know what time the officers when on scene and what time the shooting went down. My point there is that it may have been low light or dark conditions when this went down making it harder to see. The article also indicates that he was drunk at the time of this incident. Unfortunately drunks can do stupid stuff and it could be possible he was being stupid with the nozzle and intentionally pointing at the cops like they stated because he thought it was funny. I had a drunk once point a lighter at me so I know stuff like that happens. I hope the family and officers can move on with their lives after that tragedy. I know no officer wants to learn they shot an unarmed person.

gigag04 wrote:Misleading title IMO but whatever...

I had a different picture in mind when I thought of a drunk watering the lawn.

This story was posted and discussed here almost three years ago - viewtopic.php?f=83&t=40410&hilit=Doug+Zerby" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The police department has already been found liable and the plaintiff's have been awarded $6.5 million by a jury in the civil suit. http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_22 ... ated-civil" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

texanjoker wrote:Tragic incident no doubt. I do have questions that these articles do not elude to. From an investigator stand point if I was working this case the part I quoted doesn't mean much in itself without seeing the entire investigation and forensics on this case. Why, because in that limited story we do not know if the 1st shot missed as there were several shots fired. That could cause the deceased to react to include drop the nozzle, which would mean it wasn't hit by the buck shot. In reading the deceased was hit once, and there were several shots fired by two officers that is something to think about. The time of the 911 call is 4:40 PM, in December. We don't know what time the officers when on scene and what time the shooting went down. My point there is that it may have been low light or dark conditions when this went down making it harder to see. The article also indicates that he was drunk at the time of this incident. Unfortunately drunks can do stupid stuff and it could be possible he was being stupid with the nozzle and intentionally pointing at the cops like they stated because he thought it was funny. I had a drunk once point a lighter at me so I know stuff like that happens. I hope the family and officers can move on with their lives after that tragedy. I know no officer wants to learn they shot an unarmed person.

I think the point they were making was that IF he was pointing the nozzle at the officers "like he was aiming a gun"...and he was shot in the chest with a shotgun blast...then he would have been facing them, and his hands and the nozzle would have been in front of him to be aiming it like a gun at them, BUT his hands were not hit by the shotgun pattern. It is POSSIBLE he dropped the nozzle after hearing the first shot...which according to the officers was an accidental discharge by the officer with the pistol, but if so then the claim that he was "aiming it at them like gun" when the officer with the shotgun opened fire was not accurate. Most likely, it all happened so fast, they couldn't recall the exact sequence of events once the shooting started, but that doesn't excuse their actions. The FACT is, they shot before they KNEW what the real situation was, and an unarmed man was killed because of their mistakes. The jury obviously reached that conclusion also.