PDA

View Full Version : Cop who was shot in the face loses suit against Glock


The Punisher
07-16-2010, 2:01 PM
Are you kidding me? A LEO who is well versed in firearm safety, has the audacity to attempt to sue Glock because his 3 year old son got a hold of his gun and accidentally shot him.

http://www.ocregister.com/news/gun-258109-angeles-shot.html

1911su16b870
07-16-2010, 2:07 PM
http://www.ocregister.com/news/gun-258109-angeles-shot.html

Cop shot by son loses suit against gun makerBy JON CASSIDY
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

A retired Los Angeles police officer who sued a gun maker after his 3-year-old son shot him had his lawsuit dismissed Friday by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge. Enrique Chavez, now 39, of Anaheim, was off-duty when he was shot on July 11, 2006, while driving his Ford Ranger near Harbor Boulevard and La Palma Avenue. His son, who was not in a car seat, got a hold of the father's .45-caliber Glock while sitting in the back seat and shot him in the back, according to police reports.

Chavez was left paralyzed from the waist down. In July 2008, he sued Glock, alleging that the gun's safety was "non-existent or ineffective." In addition, the suit alleges negligence on the part of Uncle Mike's, the company that made the gun's holster; Turner Outdoorsman, the store where he bought the holster; and the Los Angeles Police Revolver and Athletic Club, where the officer purchased the gun. In dismissing the suit, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Kevin C. Brazile cited an "exhaustive review" of the gun's safety conducted by the Los Angeles Police Department before a purchase. Chavez's attorney, Ian Herzog, argued that the LAPD review doesn't mean the gun is actually safe. "If you're correct about that, it amounts to a revolution in products liability," Herzog told the judge. Herzog argued that a jury should have been allowed to make that decision. The defense had argued that Chavez admitted he forgot the gun was in the back seat when he put his son in the truck. Brazile also dismissed the portion of the suit directed at the holster manufacturer and seller. "There's nothing inherently dangerous about the holster," the judge said. "It's the gun that's dangerous."

City News Service and staff writer Michael Mello contributed to this report.



The only dangerous thing was leaving a loaded firearm around a 3 year old. Bad situation all around...sorry for Mr. Chavez, happy that the 3 year old didn't shoot himself.

Dirtbiker
07-16-2010, 2:08 PM
He was shot in the back.

This guy however left his holstered firearm in the back seat of a car with his child who was not in a car seat.

Yep, it's the guns fault.

rkt88edmo
07-16-2010, 2:09 PM
His son, who was not in a car seat, got a hold of the father's .45-caliber Glock while sitting in the back seat and shot him in the back, according to police reports.
snerk
Did he get charged with allowing a child to access his firearm or for transporting unsecured in a car? (I suppose he gets out of transporting unsecured as an LEO?)

HiPower823
07-16-2010, 2:11 PM
It is absolutely EFFInG ridiculous that a police officer with firearms training would a. Leave a firearm in reach of a small child and b. Then sue the maker of the firearm the holster and the seller as if it was their fault.. lol just OMG

Cali-Shooter
07-16-2010, 2:14 PM
At least this moron lost the suit, and his gunshot would is a painful lesson of firearms safety (esp. child proofing).

Alexthewelder
07-16-2010, 2:21 PM
what an idiot.

geeknow
07-16-2010, 2:22 PM
While I am sorry for the negligence that caused this officer to have been shot accidentally, the negligence was his.

1. he could have buckled his kid in. restrained kids tend not to wander the back seat.

2. unsecured, loaded firearm = wtf?

the necessary, legal precautions for EITHER would have saved him this grief. taking BOTH precautions, as prescribed by LAW would have certainly saved him.

poor kid, hanging this on him/her at that age.

:(

Aldemar
07-16-2010, 2:23 PM
Wonder if he is now on a 100% disability pension. This is a bad scene no matter how you look at it. At least he got shot instead of his son. All he would have had to do is have his son in a car seat as required by law.

'Stupid Is As Stupid Does'

cpt_majestic
07-16-2010, 2:24 PM
Nobody to blame but himself, he's lucky it wasn't worse, bad situation all around

TimRB
07-16-2010, 2:33 PM
It just goes to show that he was the only one in the car professional enough to carry the gun.

Tim

evidens83
07-16-2010, 2:33 PM
what an idiot.

To say the least :eek: It could have been much worse. Luckily his kid is OK.

RobG
07-16-2010, 2:38 PM
His son, who was not in a car seat, got a hold of the father's .45-caliber Glock while sitting in the back seat and shot him in the back...
The defense had argued that Chavez admitted he forgot the gun was in the back seat when he put his son in the truck.
Yea, and its all someone elses fault. What a moron:rolleyes:

Cali-Shooter
07-16-2010, 2:42 PM
It just goes to show that he was the only one in the car professional enough to carry the gun.

Tim

*chuckle* :D

RobG
07-16-2010, 2:45 PM
Maybe the kid thought he was grabbing his Pops tazer:43:

winnre
07-16-2010, 2:53 PM
Sounds like the gun worked perfectly. I see no lawsuit.

nick
07-16-2010, 2:56 PM
snerk
Did he get charged with allowing a child to access his firearm or for transporting unsecured in a car? (I suppose he gets out of transporting unsecured as an LEO?)

That was my second thought, as well. The first one was "what a moron".

Now, does he get to pay Glock's, Turner's, Uncle Mike's, and the gun store's legal fees?

stitchnicklas
07-16-2010, 3:02 PM
darwin almost worked

caldude
07-16-2010, 3:40 PM
darwin almost worked

Unfortunately, he's already a breeder. Unless the kid was smart enough to realize that Dad's a loser.

jmancini
07-16-2010, 3:42 PM
I suppose the DA didn't file charges against him for letting a minor access his weapon because he's now paralyzed. He's sort of already been punished.

Stupid hurts.

Rob454
07-16-2010, 3:57 PM
It is absolutely EFFInG ridiculous that a police officer with firearms training would a. Leave a firearm in reach of a small child and b. Then sue the maker of the firearm the holster and the seller as if it was their fault.. lol just OMG

If WE did the same exact thing that LEO did i can pretty much guarantee you there would be charges. As for suing Glock, Turners and the holster maker yeah makes perfect sense ( if you are a liberal). I mean you gotta blame someone else because sure as hell it cant possibly be your fault. I know the guy was a LEO but being a LEO does not make you automatically smart and careful or a responsible for you won actions adult.

San FranPsycho
07-16-2010, 4:02 PM
Sounds like the gun worked perfectly. I see no lawsuit.

ahah! brutal! +1!!

leelaw
07-16-2010, 4:02 PM
Good, he should have lost. I hope Glock seeks lawyers fees.

NorCalMama
07-16-2010, 4:11 PM
The only things I can think of are-"THANK GOD the little boy was alright and that he lost the suit." One of the few times things work out well in the end! Not saying what happened to the guy was good, but in reality the cop should have damn well known better. And wtf is he thinking not having the 3 year old in a proper seat?! That unto itself is cause for alarm.

TurboChrisB
07-16-2010, 4:26 PM
Joe Citizen would have been cited for not having the child secure and most certainly for child endangerment and or other charges...

Josh3239
07-16-2010, 4:28 PM
I think my Glock is defective! It hasn't shot me in the back! Oh wait, it is a safe handgun the DOJ says so. :rolleyes:

socal-shooter
07-16-2010, 4:34 PM
dumb cop should be charged w/child endangerment

and 1st degree dumbassedness

Fjold
07-16-2010, 4:34 PM
I wonder if the outcome would have been different if as an LEO he had purchased an off-roster gun? Then he would have been dealing with a gun that was not recognized by the State as a "Safe" handgun.

DisgruntledReaper
07-16-2010, 5:51 PM
What a douche-seems like a closeted litigious liberal to me...all is fine and dandy til HE EFFS UP and has no agency, 'perp' or 'civilian' to blame for his injuries EXCEPT for his son....then it 'I AM SUING EVERYONE' for my incompetence ....it's all your fault!-cry whine,sniffle.

I think he should have taught his son 'proper trigger finger control when handling a firearm....'

now the judge-'its the gun that dangerous'----Fail and a Douche on this BUT at least he did see the BS in the guy's case and said -'uh uh,no ones fault but your own for being an idiot'-case dismissed-NEXT!!

kellito
07-16-2010, 6:14 PM
He should be treated the same as any other moron that would do this, and by that I mean charged with a crime. Thank god the child was not hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ArkinDomino
07-16-2010, 6:28 PM
How dare that pesky Glock shoot somebody like that? Wasn't it taught not to let itself be handled by young curious hands?

Joe
07-16-2010, 6:30 PM
He's an idiot

winnre
07-16-2010, 6:33 PM
Reminds me of Maggie shooting Mr. Burns.

loudninja
07-16-2010, 6:38 PM
stupid hurts.

Cool Hand Luke
07-16-2010, 6:48 PM
I was reading the LA Times article back when the shooting occurred in 2006.


http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jul/12/local/me-kidcop12/2

Nevertheless, Chavez is the third Los Angeles area police officer to be shot by a relative with his or her service weapon in recent weeks.


Where do they get these guys? :rolleyes:

aermotor
07-16-2010, 6:52 PM
I suppose the DA didn't file charges against him for letting a minor access his weapon because he's now paralyzed. He's sort of already been punished.

Stupid hurts.

Agreed :D

Gryff
07-16-2010, 6:59 PM
Lawsuit whore. Notice how he sued EVERYONE even remotely associated with the gun? I'm surprised he didn't include the ammo manufacturer for creating non-discriminating projectiles.

This is the sort of thing that should get lawyers disbarred if they take on too many of these cases.

JTecalo
07-16-2010, 7:19 PM
Why didn't he sue Ford, Lord knows they should have anticipated gunshots from the back seat and at least offered a kevlar seat option

audihenry
07-16-2010, 7:36 PM
It is absolutely EFFInG ridiculous that a police officer with firearms training would a. Leave a firearm in reach of a small child and b. Then sue the maker of the firearm the holster and the seller as if it was their fault.. lol just OMG

Just because he's a cop does not make him an upstanding citizen. There are idiots everywhere.

turbogg
07-16-2010, 8:01 PM
Joe Citizen would have been cited for not having the child secure and most certainly for child endangerment and or other charges...

Ain't that the truth!

308SASS
07-16-2010, 9:09 PM
just amazing.

joedogboy
07-16-2010, 9:45 PM
I thought that the gun owner is civilly and criminally liable for any shooting that occurs when they don't have their gun properly secured?

Where was his trigger lock? Where was his locked container?

If it doesn't apply to this idiot cop, the 14th Amendment says it can't be applied to any of us.

joedogboy
07-16-2010, 9:51 PM
It sounds like he was working as a cop (but off duty) when he managed to break several laws, as well as fundamental safety rules. It also sounds like he is now "retired" - as in "collecting a pension" - why should the taxpayers be paying a pension for this idiot?

halifax
07-16-2010, 10:28 PM
Of course this isn't about fault, but about who will pay. He should also have sued his department for forcing him to carry a firearm. That would make more sense.

Bill Carson
07-17-2010, 3:11 AM
Lawsuit whore. Notice how he sued EVERYONE even remotely associated with the gun? I'm surprised he didn't include the ammo manufacturer for creating non-discriminating projectiles.

This is the sort of thing that should get lawyers disbarred if they take on too many of these cases.

He went all Willie Shoemaker.

VictorFranko
07-17-2010, 5:41 AM
He went all Willie Shoemaker.

:rofl2::rofl2:

Stupidity should be painful.

The Punisher
07-17-2010, 7:38 AM
It is absolutely EFFInG ridiculous that a police officer with firearms training would a. Leave a firearm in reach of a small child and b. Then sue the maker of the firearm the holster and the seller as if it was their fault.. lol just OMG

Might as well include the manufacturer of the vehicle that the gun was transported in.:rolleyes:

creampuff
07-17-2010, 7:39 AM
How does one sue a company for making a product that actually works and performs the way it is suppose to?

If I cut my finger on a knife can I sue them for making it sharp?

PatriotnMore
07-17-2010, 7:48 AM
I wonder if the outcome would have been different if as an LEO he had purchased an off-roster gun? Then he would have been dealing with a gun that was not recognized by the State as a "Safe" handgun.

I wonder if he would have had better luck by suing the state for authorizing a handgun which is unsafe for children, as in, no external safety.

Juice5610
07-17-2010, 11:00 AM
Once again I have ZERO sympathy for morons. I'd give that ******* a piece of my mind for leaving a loaded weapon within the reach of a 3 year old child. I also cant believe we are forced to pay for this idiots pension

norcal.xd
07-17-2010, 11:57 AM
thats dumb..... if you leave your car running to go inside a store and your kid puts it in gear and runs over people the kid isnt to blame and sure as he## aint fords fault. its the parents fault because they should know what and where their kids are at all times. he's a cop that leaves his gun laying around his back seat, at least accessible for his kid to get.

GuyW
07-22-2010, 12:31 AM
It just goes to show that he was the only one in the car professional enough to carry the gun.

Tim

^ LOL!

The Fugitive
07-22-2010, 1:25 AM
It just goes to show that he was the only one in the car professional enough to carry the gun.

Tim

lol

glock 4 tay!

Coltlover
07-22-2010, 4:07 AM
Classic to blame someone else for your own stupidity.

The Director
07-22-2010, 8:40 AM
I thought that the gun owner is civilly and criminally liable for any shooting that occurs when they don't have their gun properly secured?

Where was his trigger lock? Where was his locked container?

If it doesn't apply to this idiot cop, the 14th Amendment says it can't be applied to any of us.

YES! If you allow your firearm to fall in the hands of an unuathorized person (child), and it causes death or great bodily injury, that's a 1st degree offense (FELONY).

If the discharged round doesn't hurt anyone, but does property damage, second degree (misdemeanor)

This guy is guilty of a felony! Plain as day.

N6ATF
07-22-2010, 9:16 AM
Felony stupid, since he got himself shot.

dixieD
07-22-2010, 10:08 AM
I hope that Glock recovers attorney's fees.

Kodemonkey
07-22-2010, 10:33 AM
Here is the part about keeping it away from a child:

12035(b) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (c), a person commits
the crime of "criminal storage of a firearm of the first degree" if
he or she keeps any loaded firearm within any premises that are under
his or her custody or control and he or she knows or reasonably
should know that a child is likely to gain access to the firearm
without the permission of the child's parent or legal guardian and
the child obtains access to the firearm and thereby causes death or
great bodily injury to himself, herself, or any other person.

let's look at the section C shall we...

(c) Subdivision (b) shall not apply whenever any of the following
occurs:
<snip>
(5) The person is a peace officer or a member of the armed forces
or National Guard and the child obtains the firearm during, or
incidental to, the performance of the person's duties.

Looks like he gets a pass on that one, if he was taking his kid around for something official. Other than that, I don't think so

But I also wonder if he would be guilty of this:

12034
(b) Any driver or owner of any vehicle, whether or not the owner
of the vehicle is occupying the vehicle, who knowingly permits any
other person to discharge any firearm from the vehicle is punishable
by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year or in
state prison for 16 months or two or three years.


All in all, I thought the laws were in place to protect the children. This guy endangered a small child due to his negligence. I don't care if he is paralyzed or not, he should be prosecuted.

J-cat
07-22-2010, 10:47 AM
How does one sue a company for making a product that actually works and performs the way it is suppose to?

If I cut my finger on a knife can I sue them for making it sharp?

No, but you can sue them for not warning you it's sharp. Why do you think Ruger has a warning label stamped on all their guns?

GuyW
07-22-2010, 11:29 AM
It would be a great public service if this bum's public pension was removed via a public interest lawsuit.

I don't care if he ends up in the gutter...he worked hard for it...

,

humgunner
07-22-2010, 1:45 PM
This guy was a cop? That's scarry.

So lets say my car just got hit by a Ford Taurus. Lets say it's a hit and run and I know who owns the Ford and where he lives. I call the cops and this cop shows up. What does he do? Does he contact the driver of the Ford and arrest him for hit and run? Or does he tell me it's Ford's fault and I need to sue Ford?

This guy is clearly a liberal. He doesn't belive in personal responsibility.

BNuge
07-22-2010, 2:08 PM
He should also sue the mother of his child, for bringing that cold-blooded attempted murderer into this world.

HUTCH 7.62
07-22-2010, 2:09 PM
That's a Glock owner for you.:D

N6ATF
07-22-2010, 2:31 PM
He should also sue the mother of his child, for bringing that cold-blooded attempted murderer into this world.

LMFAO :43:

joedogboy
07-22-2010, 2:56 PM
Here is the part about keeping it away from a child:

12035(b) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (c), a person commits
the crime of "criminal storage of a firearm of the first degree" if
he or she keeps any loaded firearm within any premises that are under
his or her custody or control and he or she knows or reasonably
should know that a child is likely to gain access to the firearm
without the permission of the child's parent or legal guardian and
the child obtains access to the firearm and thereby causes death or
great bodily injury to himself, herself, or any other person.

let's look at the section C shall we...

(c) Subdivision (b) shall not apply whenever any of the following
occurs:
<snip>
(5) The person is a peace officer or a member of the armed forces
or National Guard and the child obtains the firearm during, or
incidental to, the performance of the person's duties.

Looks like he gets a pass on that one, if he was taking his kid around for something official. Other than that, I don't think so

But I also wonder if he would be guilty of this:

12034
(b) Any driver or owner of any vehicle, whether or not the owner
of the vehicle is occupying the vehicle, who knowingly permits any
other person to discharge any firearm from the vehicle is punishable
by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year or in
state prison for 16 months or two or three years.


All in all, I thought the laws were in place to protect the children. This guy endangered a small child due to his negligence. I don't care if he is paralyzed or not, he should be prosecuted.

Section C 5 clearly violates the 14th Amendment. The law is thus unconstitutional, and can't be applied to any other citizen.

Also, since he was clearly violating department policy and behaving in a manner that violates every rule of common sense, the department should waive his special privileges in this case - since keeping a loaded firearm unsecured in his back seat is most definitely NOT part of his duties.

Give the ******* two options:
1) he takes full responsibility for his criminal negligence and stupidity.
or
2) he lets his kid go up for attempted murder.

dadoody
08-11-2010, 4:56 PM
I can't believe this idiot followed through on trying to sue everyone else for HIS OWN stupidity AND hasn't been prosecuted himself.

I don't care if he's paralyzed now, he should have been prosecuted.

Beelzy
08-11-2010, 5:21 PM
Why do you think Ruger has a warning label stamped on all their guns?

I thought it was because Bill Ruger lacked testicular fortitude. (May he RIP.)

Fate
08-11-2010, 5:51 PM
THIS STORY IS FULL OF WIN! (for Glock that is!) :D

ElCUBANO
08-11-2010, 6:28 PM
Lucky the kid wasn't a better shot

Napalm Bulldog
08-11-2010, 6:48 PM
If I was Glock I would sue him for slander and why isnt the DA of los Angeles filling child endangerment charges against the officer. If it was one of us you know they would. Oh I forgot there too busy safe housing illegals who dont pay taxes!

mzimmers
08-11-2010, 6:58 PM
What a bizarre story. I know little about Glocks, but if it's true as another poster said that they don't have safeties, then this guy was just out-of-his-mind with stupid. I don't think a 3-year-old could load a magazine into a pistol, and I'm just about positive he couldn't rack the slide.

So, this means the cop left a loaded, chambered pistol with no safety within reach of a small child. In a car. Out of his view.

Sometimes, the word "wow" just doesn't seem sufficient.

Colt-45
08-11-2010, 7:03 PM
dumb cop should be charged w/child endangerment

and 1st degree dumbassedness


:rofl: :rofl2:

GoingPro
08-11-2010, 8:12 PM
they should take his badge away for not using his brain. imagine all the other dumb stuff he does.

Ron-Solo
08-11-2010, 10:29 PM
It sounds like he was working as a cop (but off duty) when he managed to break several laws, as well as fundamental safety rules. It also sounds like he is now "retired" - as in "collecting a pension" - why should the taxpayers be paying a pension for this idiot?

If he paid into the retirement system and was vested, he is entitled to his pension. Depending on how many years he had on, it may be little to nothing.

I am with LASD and we become vested after 10 years, but the allowance is not enough to live on. I am still active and have 32 years on. If I got hurt off duty where I could no longer perform my duties, I would be able to retire and receive my pension. I earned it and have paid into it since 1978.

The decision to dismiss the case was the correct on by the judge. I know this judge on a professional basis. He is fair and open minded. He is not anti-gun in my opinion. He has integrity. Guns are dangerous, IF not used and stored properly. Violate basic safety rules and it can have tragic results, as it did in this case.

People are rarely prosecuted for negligent storage of a firearm, LE or general public. The circumstances and the amount of suffering already incurred are taken into account before the DA files charges.

This guy will be in a wheelchair for the rest of his life, he lost his job, and his son will have to live with the fact that he put is father in the chair. The father will have to live with the fact he put his kid in this situation.

I think there has been enough suffering here.

joedogboy
08-12-2010, 12:36 AM
I think there has been enough suffering here.

He is just lucky that his son didn't shoot himself or an innocent bystander.

When he filed the lawsuits, he upped the ante. If he had just been grateful to get out of his criminal negligence with an injury to himself (rather than the murder of another human being), I might agree that there had been enough suffering - but this bozo wanted to create more suffering by suing everyone who he could possibly blame for his own criminal negligence. At this point, he should be charged with the crimes that he committed, and count himself lucky that arrogance and stupidity are not criminal offenses.

If LAPD wants to have the taxpayers give the pension to his wife and kid while he sits in jail, that is between them and the taxpayers.

Seesm
08-12-2010, 4:03 AM
That is for sure terrible... Just have to wonder what kind of person he is that would do such a thing... (leaving his gun for his kid to handle and then sueing for his own stupidity)

I am sad he is paralized ..happy his kid is ok... But seriously? The guy is just trying to cheap society... Lame sauce.

Be a man and accept what YOU did to yourself... Glad the judge had the right mind to drop it all.

stylett9
08-12-2010, 11:55 PM
Lawsuit whore. Notice how he sued EVERYONE even remotely associated with the gun? I'm surprised he didn't include the ammo manufacturer for creating non-discriminating projectiles.

This is the sort of thing that should get lawyers disbarred if they take on too many of these cases.

LOL:rofl2:

dg29
08-13-2010, 7:34 AM
Yeah it's always someone else at blame. The mindset of not being responsible for for own actions never ceases to amaze me in this world today. I can only hope that he is mandated to compensate Every last penny that Glock, Turners and the holster manufacture had to spend in legal fees. The only bad part of this story is that his son now has to grow up living with knowing that he had played a part in this incident that has left his father in this condition. Maybe when his son turns 18 he can attempt to sue him?
Accidents the majority of the time don't just happen, they are usually a series of bad decisions resulting in what some would like to label an accident.

glbtrottr
08-13-2010, 8:03 AM
Nah - the guy was celebrated like a folk hero, the department rallied around getting him money, he went on a 90% pension, and went on to work full time while receiving pension benefits, making a little more coin than when driving a beat - all while trying to get a little more from Glock and Uncle Mike's. HE's APPEALING - This isn't OVER.

He sued Uncle Mike's and Turner's for negligent design of a holster.

He should have been arrested for child endangerment. He wasn't.
Negligent transport of a firearm. Nope, he wasn't.
CHild services should have taken the kid away from Enrique and Lenore for child endangerment.
Wait. The DOUBLE STANDARD. LEO's, please feel free to chime in.


What if this had happened to me and my 3 year old? Would I have received a pension, had a barbeque in my honor, had been paid 90% pension benefits, and more?

I get his tragedy, but admit he was an ashat for having his .45 accessible to his son, arrest him, convict him, and quit the DOUBLE STANDARD. I am tired of LEO's thinking that by pinning on a brass pass, it gives them exclusion from just about ALL LAWS.

"RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF TO REVIEW DISABILITY PENSION OF ENRIQUE H. CHAVEZ AND
POSSIBLE BOARD ACTION
Mr. William Raggio, Chief Management Analyst and Ms. Tina Zipper, Senior Management Analyst I,
Pensions Division presented the matter. Ms. Zipper reported the history of Mr. Chavez' disability case and his
current employment status. She stated that staff recommends the Board review Mr. Chavez' disability status
and his file be updated with current medical and employment records. The Board discussed the matter of
reviewing the case. Mr. Raggio indicated that staff did not receive complaints against the member. Staff
learned of the member working full time through a normal request for reciprocity information. It is not usual
for staff to learn of a 90% disability pensioner working full time, therefore brought it to the Board's attention.
Commissioner Carter recalled that LAPD did not have a position for the member. Ms. Corina Lee, Vice
President, Police Protective League verified that LAPD did not have a position for the member.
Commissioner Hansell moved that the Board accept staffs recommendation to review the status of
Mr. Enrique Chavez' disability case and his file be updated with current medical and employment records,
which was seconded by Commissioner Juarez and failed by the following vote: ayes, Commissioners Hansell
and Juarez - 2; nays, Commissioners Carter, Diannitto, von Voigt and President Aliano - 4. Commissioner
Juarez participated via teleconference."

Officer Enrique Chavez' BBQ Fundraiser and Blood Drive

Los Angeles: A fundraiser is planned in support of Police Officer Enrique Chavez, who was seriously wounded in an accidental shooting on July 11, 2006.

On Thursday, July 20, 2006, Officer Chavez had surgery and a metal rod was placed in his spine. As result of this unfortunate accident, Officer Chavez will be paralyzed from the waist down.

The Media is invited to attend the event. Any advance promotion of this event is greatly appreciated.

Mrs. Chavez will be at the event to thank the officers and the community for all the support given to her family.

This is truly a family event with entertainment and children activities. All proceeds raised will go to the Blue Ribbon Fund Account or Los Angeles Police Federal Credit Union for Officer Enrique Chavez. The money will be used for his rehabilitation and acclimation to his injuries.

Friday, August 4, 2006
BBQ Fundraiser
10:00 a.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Blood Drive
11:00 a.m.- 4:00 p.m.
Los Angeles Police Academy
Picnic Area
1880 North Academy Road
Los Angeles, CA 90014

"Blue Ribbon Trust Account for Officer Chavez"
C/O Steve Getzoff,
17404 Ventura Boulevard
Encino, CA 91316

Los Angeles Police Federal Credit Union
Po Box 10188
Van Nuys, Ca 91410
Attn: Officer Enrique Chavez Trustee Donation Account
If you have any questions, please call Media Relations Section at 213-485-3586.

Ed_in_Sac
08-13-2010, 8:21 AM
Surprised his lawyer didn't sue the bullet manufacturer on his sons behalf for not being effective when shot through a car seat. Hey, are there warning labels for that on the box, and are they in 3 yr old language???

Not making fun of the man's circumstances they are unfortunate, but the lawyers who get people to sue for this _rap are a good reason to legalize belt fed fully auto weapons!

J-cat
08-13-2010, 8:38 AM
I don't think a 3-year-old could load a magazine into a pistol, and I'm just about positive he couldn't rack the slide.

So, this means the cop left a loaded, chambered pistol with no safety within reach of a small child.



I wonder if the child pulled the trigger in the first place. I doubt a 3-year-old has enough grip strength to hold a Glock an reach arround the trigger. I know adult females that cannot.

MaxPower
08-13-2010, 8:56 AM
So glad that this case got tossed. This is right up there with the McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit. Makes me sick.

"I'm an idiot, so someone better pay me!"

Yuck.

joedogboy
08-13-2010, 1:49 PM
Nah - the guy was celebrated like a folk hero, the department rallied around getting him money, he went on a 90% pension, and went on to work full time while receiving pension benefits, making a little more coin than when driving a beat - all while trying to get a little more from Glock and Uncle Mike's. HE's APPEALING - This isn't OVER.

He sued Uncle Mike's and Turner's for negligent design of a holster.

He should have been arrested for child endangerment. He wasn't.
Negligent transport of a firearm. Nope, he wasn't.
CHild services should have taken the kid away from Enrique and Lenore for child endangerment.
Wait. The DOUBLE STANDARD. LEO's, please feel free to chime in.

As a retired LEO, I am appalled at the failure of the justice system in this case. The suit was clearly malicious, and the man is a fraud - he needs to be investigated regarding receipt of his pension, since his injuries are a direct result of his own criminally negligent behavior, and had nothing to do with performing his duties as an LEO.
Further, his agency should be required to store the "duty" firearms of all off duty officers, since the department has clearly failed to provide adequate training or supervision in personal firearms safety. The officers need to clear them and turn them in, after clocking out from their work shift, and should have to be issued their firearms, and load and holster them in a safe, supervised area.

Mad Scotsman
08-13-2010, 5:51 PM
Thank God the boy is all right. What a moron.

Johnny.B.Good
08-14-2010, 1:30 PM
As a retired LEO, I am appalled at the failure of the justice system in this case. The suit was clearly malicious, and the man is a fraud - he needs to be investigated regarding receipt of his pension, since his injuries are a direct result of his own criminally negligent behavior, and had nothing to do with performing his duties as an LEO.

+1

I am certain that the man in question knows it is BS to try and blame anyone but himself for the shooting, and was just hoping to scare the defendants into settling with him to make the suit go away. Disgusting.

I feel sorry for the child that pulled the trigger (if that is what happened), as he will probably feel some guilt over the shooting for life even though it is 100% on his father.

SnWnMe
08-14-2010, 8:14 PM
At least we can console ourselves with the knowledge that he only bred once.

hawk81
08-15-2010, 12:32 PM
This moron should be in jail for wreckless endangerment of a child.

windrunner
08-15-2010, 12:58 PM
Paralyzed and dumb is no way to go through life.


http://www.functionalhandstrength.com/images8/john_wayne.gif