Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Lawsuit Dismissed
The story below tells the outcome of the Sammy Galvan wrongful death lawsuit
Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Lawsuit Dismissed
What Went Wrong?
By Mike Rhodes
On March 14 a Federal jury delivered their verdict in the Sammy Galvan wrongful death lawsuit. The jurors unanimously agreed to dismiss the lawsuit, agreeing with the defense that the officers who shot and killed Sammy Galvan, were justified and did so because they believed their lives were in danger. The assault and battery charges against the Modesto Police Department, for their treatment of Sammy’s father, were also dismissed.
In his final arguments, Modesto Deputy City Attorney James Wilson told the jury his version of what happened at the Galvan home on August 22, 2004. Wilson said that police work “routinely involves stupefying hours of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror.” He used that framework to set the scene of a domestic disturbance call gone horribly wrong. Wilson said that when the police were called by Susan Galvan, Sammy’s mother, officers Lyndon Yates and Mirl Morse were dispatched to the scene.
According to Wilson, when officers Yates and Morse arrived at the backyard cottage that Sammy lived in, they shined their flashlights through the open front door. They saw Sammy laying on his bed (it was 1 AM in the morning) and when the lights hit him he stood up. The officers said he had a knife in each hand and began to move towards them in an aggressive manner. Wilson said Sammy was told to “drop the knife” and seconds later officers Yates and Morse fired eight rounds. Four out of eight 45 caliber hollow point bullets hit and killed Sammy Galvan. Hollow point bullets, if used by the military in a time of war, would be a violation of the Geneva Convention.
Attorneys for the Galvan family argued that things did not happen as the defense claimed. Walter Riley, in his closing statement, said the shooting was “not a lawful use of force.” Riley argued that Sammy Galvan did not present an immediate threat to the officers and they should have used less than lethal force to deal with the situation.
The defense (City of Modesto) claimed that Sammy Galvan was about to throw one of the two knives they said he held. An expert witness, brought in by the Galvan family’s attorneys, testified that Sammy could not have been throwing a knife. This testimony was based on the autopsy report which showed where he was shot and the trajectory of the bullets in his body. Wilson countered that “all they (police officers) had to do is to reasonably believe that this deadly threat is about to come to fruition, to act as a police officer.”
Wilson also presented a new theory during his closing argument that the officers were acting to prevent a “hostage situation” from occurring. He claimed that Yesenia Perez, Sammy’s girlfriend, was in the room and they were afraid that Sammy might take her hostage. There had been no evidence in the trial to suggest such a scenario.
In his final arguments Riley discredited officer Yates testimony that he saw Sammy move his left leg back and assume a fighting stance by pointing out that Yates could not see Sammy’s feet because there was a table and TV in front of him. Riley said that even if, as the defense argued, that Sammy said “Shoot me Mother Fucker, Shoot Me Mother Fucker” that you can’t kill someone because they say that. Yesenia Perez, who was in the room at the time, testified that Sammy never said anything. Is it possible that Sammy was awakened in the middle of the night, thinking someone was breaking into his house, and he grabbed a knife for self protection? The jury didn’t think so.
Riley also argued that the crime scene had been disturbed and it was impossible to determine where things ended up after the shooting. A number of people I talked to believed the police planted the knives to justify the shooting. Wilson said that was not true and that Sammy took the knives from the kitchen and was laying with a knife in each hand, waiting for the officers to arrive. But, Wilson also admitted that the crime scene had been disturbed. “These things happen,” he said.
The only person Wilson called for the defense was officer Yates who talked about the knives he said were in Sammy’s hands. Yates said Sammy had a knife with an 8 inch blade and a black handle in his right hand and a brown handled knife with an 8 inch blade in his left. Officer Yates saw this detail in a poorly lit room, within seconds, when he thought his life was in danger, and in spite of the fact that the handles (if he was holding them) were covered by Sammy’s hands. Yates in previous testimony claimed Sammy was 5 feet away from him when he was shot. However, unless officer Yates had entered the cottage without a search warrant, he had to be at least 10 feet from Sammy when he shot him to death. How could Yates have been so certain about the color of the knife handles, yet so wrong about his distance from Sammy? Several people I spoke with said they thought he was lying.
Walter Riley asked Yates why he had refused to give a statement on the shooting to either the Modesto Police Internal Affairs Department or to Detective Blake, who was investigating the shooting for the Modesto PD. Yates said he refused to cooperate in the investigation on the advise of his legal counsel. He said “it was under advisement by my attorney not to give a statement.”
The jury rejected the evidence provided by the Galvan legal team and unanimously returned a verdict in favor of the city. Why did that happen and what does it mean for future police accountability cases in the Central Valley?
Several observers of the trial were pessimistic about the outcome of the trial. They said that the jury pool in the Federal Court system (particularly in Fresno) is very conservative. At least 15 out of the 20-25 people in the jury pool had law enforcement connections - family members were police officers, they worked in one of the many valley prisons, etc. There was not one black person in the jury pool. Furthermore, they observed, that it is very difficult to get a jury to believe a poor Latino family (like the Galvan’s) and not believe police officers who have extensive training in how to testify in a courtroom.
According to Aggie Rose-Chavez, another member of the Galvan family’s legal team, the verdict will not be appealed. In fact, Rose-Chavez says she expects attorneys for the defense to get a legal order to force the Galvan family to pay for all the City of Modesto’s legal expenses in this case. If that happens, it will certainly send a message to poor families to think twice before you stand up for your constitutional rights.
For more information, see:
Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Trial Comes to Fresno
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/22/18474152.php
Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Lawsuit Gets Under Way in Fresno (Day 1) http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/10/18484955.php
Day 2 in the Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Trial
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/11/18485128.php
What Went Wrong?
By Mike Rhodes
On March 14 a Federal jury delivered their verdict in the Sammy Galvan wrongful death lawsuit. The jurors unanimously agreed to dismiss the lawsuit, agreeing with the defense that the officers who shot and killed Sammy Galvan, were justified and did so because they believed their lives were in danger. The assault and battery charges against the Modesto Police Department, for their treatment of Sammy’s father, were also dismissed.
In his final arguments, Modesto Deputy City Attorney James Wilson told the jury his version of what happened at the Galvan home on August 22, 2004. Wilson said that police work “routinely involves stupefying hours of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror.” He used that framework to set the scene of a domestic disturbance call gone horribly wrong. Wilson said that when the police were called by Susan Galvan, Sammy’s mother, officers Lyndon Yates and Mirl Morse were dispatched to the scene.
According to Wilson, when officers Yates and Morse arrived at the backyard cottage that Sammy lived in, they shined their flashlights through the open front door. They saw Sammy laying on his bed (it was 1 AM in the morning) and when the lights hit him he stood up. The officers said he had a knife in each hand and began to move towards them in an aggressive manner. Wilson said Sammy was told to “drop the knife” and seconds later officers Yates and Morse fired eight rounds. Four out of eight 45 caliber hollow point bullets hit and killed Sammy Galvan. Hollow point bullets, if used by the military in a time of war, would be a violation of the Geneva Convention.
Attorneys for the Galvan family argued that things did not happen as the defense claimed. Walter Riley, in his closing statement, said the shooting was “not a lawful use of force.” Riley argued that Sammy Galvan did not present an immediate threat to the officers and they should have used less than lethal force to deal with the situation.
The defense (City of Modesto) claimed that Sammy Galvan was about to throw one of the two knives they said he held. An expert witness, brought in by the Galvan family’s attorneys, testified that Sammy could not have been throwing a knife. This testimony was based on the autopsy report which showed where he was shot and the trajectory of the bullets in his body. Wilson countered that “all they (police officers) had to do is to reasonably believe that this deadly threat is about to come to fruition, to act as a police officer.”
Wilson also presented a new theory during his closing argument that the officers were acting to prevent a “hostage situation” from occurring. He claimed that Yesenia Perez, Sammy’s girlfriend, was in the room and they were afraid that Sammy might take her hostage. There had been no evidence in the trial to suggest such a scenario.
In his final arguments Riley discredited officer Yates testimony that he saw Sammy move his left leg back and assume a fighting stance by pointing out that Yates could not see Sammy’s feet because there was a table and TV in front of him. Riley said that even if, as the defense argued, that Sammy said “Shoot me Mother Fucker, Shoot Me Mother Fucker” that you can’t kill someone because they say that. Yesenia Perez, who was in the room at the time, testified that Sammy never said anything. Is it possible that Sammy was awakened in the middle of the night, thinking someone was breaking into his house, and he grabbed a knife for self protection? The jury didn’t think so.
Riley also argued that the crime scene had been disturbed and it was impossible to determine where things ended up after the shooting. A number of people I talked to believed the police planted the knives to justify the shooting. Wilson said that was not true and that Sammy took the knives from the kitchen and was laying with a knife in each hand, waiting for the officers to arrive. But, Wilson also admitted that the crime scene had been disturbed. “These things happen,” he said.
The only person Wilson called for the defense was officer Yates who talked about the knives he said were in Sammy’s hands. Yates said Sammy had a knife with an 8 inch blade and a black handle in his right hand and a brown handled knife with an 8 inch blade in his left. Officer Yates saw this detail in a poorly lit room, within seconds, when he thought his life was in danger, and in spite of the fact that the handles (if he was holding them) were covered by Sammy’s hands. Yates in previous testimony claimed Sammy was 5 feet away from him when he was shot. However, unless officer Yates had entered the cottage without a search warrant, he had to be at least 10 feet from Sammy when he shot him to death. How could Yates have been so certain about the color of the knife handles, yet so wrong about his distance from Sammy? Several people I spoke with said they thought he was lying.
Walter Riley asked Yates why he had refused to give a statement on the shooting to either the Modesto Police Internal Affairs Department or to Detective Blake, who was investigating the shooting for the Modesto PD. Yates said he refused to cooperate in the investigation on the advise of his legal counsel. He said “it was under advisement by my attorney not to give a statement.”
The jury rejected the evidence provided by the Galvan legal team and unanimously returned a verdict in favor of the city. Why did that happen and what does it mean for future police accountability cases in the Central Valley?
Several observers of the trial were pessimistic about the outcome of the trial. They said that the jury pool in the Federal Court system (particularly in Fresno) is very conservative. At least 15 out of the 20-25 people in the jury pool had law enforcement connections - family members were police officers, they worked in one of the many valley prisons, etc. There was not one black person in the jury pool. Furthermore, they observed, that it is very difficult to get a jury to believe a poor Latino family (like the Galvan’s) and not believe police officers who have extensive training in how to testify in a courtroom.
According to Aggie Rose-Chavez, another member of the Galvan family’s legal team, the verdict will not be appealed. In fact, Rose-Chavez says she expects attorneys for the defense to get a legal order to force the Galvan family to pay for all the City of Modesto’s legal expenses in this case. If that happens, it will certainly send a message to poor families to think twice before you stand up for your constitutional rights.
For more information, see:
Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Trial Comes to Fresno
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/22/18474152.php
Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Lawsuit Gets Under Way in Fresno (Day 1) http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/10/18484955.php
Day 2 in the Sammy Galvan Wrongful Death Trial
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/11/18485128.php
For more information:
http://www.fresnoalliance.com/home
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Parents wanted $3 million
By SUSAN HERENDEEN
sherendeen [at] modbee.com
last updated: March 15, 2008 08:26:12 AM
* Police shooting trial goes to court
Two Modesto police officers bear no liability in the death of Sammy Galvan, who was shot eight times when the authorities responded to a domestic dispute in his home 3½ years ago, a federal jury said Friday.
Jurors deliberated for less than one day, then unanimously returned a verdict in favor of the city as the five-day trial wound to a close in U.S. District Court in Fresno. Because of its no-fault finding, the panel did not consider the question of damages for Galvan's parents, who sought $3 million.
Susan and Ramon Galvan alleged in their wrongful death lawsuit that the officers used excessive force when they confronted their 22-year-old son, who was lying on his bed when police shined their flashlights into a darkened cottage behind his parents' home on West Roseburg Avenue.
The officers said they opened fire because Galvan jumped out of bed, assumed a fighting stance while holding a knife and advanced toward his girlfriend in a threatening manner, yelling, "Shoot me, (expletive)."
'Reactions were split second'
City Attorney Susana Alcala Wood said the verdict shows that the officers responded appropriately in a difficult situation.
"Their reactions were split second in response to the threat that they perceived to Sammy Galvan's girlfriend," she said, noting that the city made no settlement offers as the case proceeded to trial.
Neither the Galvans nor their attorney, Walter Riley of Oakland, could be reached for comment.
The Modesto police were not available for comment.
Galvan was killed about 1 a.m. on Aug. 22, 2004, after his mother called 911 asking for help with a family dispute. She was concerned because her son and his girlfriend, Yesenia Perez, had a loud argument after they returned home from a party.
Officers Lyndon Yates and Mirl Morse agreed to talk to the couple.
All was quiet when the officers approached the detached cottage where Galvan lived.
According to court records, the city contends that the officers yelled, "Modesto police," as they shined their flashlights through an open doorway, but the Galvans questioned whether such an announcement was made.
Moments later, the officers were firing into the cottage.
One of the officers dragged Perez, who had been at the foot of her boyfriend's bed, outside. Backup officers tackled Ramon Galvan, who was standing near his home because he had been told to keep his distance.
Father's claim also rejected
Both sides agreed Perez yelled, "Don't do it," to Sammy Galvan just before the officers shot him. The city claimed Galvan was threatening his girlfriend and the officers. The Galvans claimed their son was not given a chance to comply with the officers' orders.
Jurors rejected the wrongful death claim brought by the Galvans. They also rejected Ramon Galvan's claim that officers were unnecessarily rough, leaving him with a shoulder that was broken in three places.
Only eight jurors are needed when civil cases come to trial in federal court, Wood said, and they were unanimous.
The jury did not hear about previous contacts between the police and Sammy Galvan because Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill said the trial would proceed in two parts, beginning with liability and proceeding to arguments about damages if needed.
In the end, the question of money was moot.
Bee staff writer Susan Herendeen can be reached at sherendeen [at] modbee.com or 578-2338.
By SUSAN HERENDEEN
sherendeen [at] modbee.com
last updated: March 15, 2008 08:26:12 AM
* Police shooting trial goes to court
Two Modesto police officers bear no liability in the death of Sammy Galvan, who was shot eight times when the authorities responded to a domestic dispute in his home 3½ years ago, a federal jury said Friday.
Jurors deliberated for less than one day, then unanimously returned a verdict in favor of the city as the five-day trial wound to a close in U.S. District Court in Fresno. Because of its no-fault finding, the panel did not consider the question of damages for Galvan's parents, who sought $3 million.
Susan and Ramon Galvan alleged in their wrongful death lawsuit that the officers used excessive force when they confronted their 22-year-old son, who was lying on his bed when police shined their flashlights into a darkened cottage behind his parents' home on West Roseburg Avenue.
The officers said they opened fire because Galvan jumped out of bed, assumed a fighting stance while holding a knife and advanced toward his girlfriend in a threatening manner, yelling, "Shoot me, (expletive)."
'Reactions were split second'
City Attorney Susana Alcala Wood said the verdict shows that the officers responded appropriately in a difficult situation.
"Their reactions were split second in response to the threat that they perceived to Sammy Galvan's girlfriend," she said, noting that the city made no settlement offers as the case proceeded to trial.
Neither the Galvans nor their attorney, Walter Riley of Oakland, could be reached for comment.
The Modesto police were not available for comment.
Galvan was killed about 1 a.m. on Aug. 22, 2004, after his mother called 911 asking for help with a family dispute. She was concerned because her son and his girlfriend, Yesenia Perez, had a loud argument after they returned home from a party.
Officers Lyndon Yates and Mirl Morse agreed to talk to the couple.
All was quiet when the officers approached the detached cottage where Galvan lived.
According to court records, the city contends that the officers yelled, "Modesto police," as they shined their flashlights through an open doorway, but the Galvans questioned whether such an announcement was made.
Moments later, the officers were firing into the cottage.
One of the officers dragged Perez, who had been at the foot of her boyfriend's bed, outside. Backup officers tackled Ramon Galvan, who was standing near his home because he had been told to keep his distance.
Father's claim also rejected
Both sides agreed Perez yelled, "Don't do it," to Sammy Galvan just before the officers shot him. The city claimed Galvan was threatening his girlfriend and the officers. The Galvans claimed their son was not given a chance to comply with the officers' orders.
Jurors rejected the wrongful death claim brought by the Galvans. They also rejected Ramon Galvan's claim that officers were unnecessarily rough, leaving him with a shoulder that was broken in three places.
Only eight jurors are needed when civil cases come to trial in federal court, Wood said, and they were unanimous.
The jury did not hear about previous contacts between the police and Sammy Galvan because Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill said the trial would proceed in two parts, beginning with liability and proceeding to arguments about damages if needed.
In the end, the question of money was moot.
Bee staff writer Susan Herendeen can be reached at sherendeen [at] modbee.com or 578-2338.
Come see what some (fake neighborhood protection group in Modesto) thinks of us.
Oh, watch out...I may come for your CHILDREN!
http://laloma.net/about.html
Oh, watch out...I may come for your CHILDREN!
http://laloma.net/about.html
For more information:
http://laloma.net/about.html
Sorry,
here we go!
http://laloma.net/crime.html
My favorite is their "security" section.
Oh yeah......thats will be the solution (sarcasm).
here we go!
http://laloma.net/crime.html
My favorite is their "security" section.
Oh yeah......thats will be the solution (sarcasm).
For more information:
http://laloma.net/crime.html
Wow, the pigs get away with murder once again. Tragedies like this are very sad. We should not stand for this type of abuse. An innocent young man is dead and the murderers get to go on with there daily lives as if nothing ever happened.
Stop Police Violence
For more information:
http://roastapig.blogspot.com/2008/04/mode...
stop stealing pets and return the ones you stole
this has nothing to do with the article, and furthermore, what the heck are you talking about?????
If someone threatened me with two 8-inch knives, I'd be awfully tempted to shoot them, too. Knives can be thrown quite accurately, obviously. If this guy had not threatened with knives, nor lived by violence in the first place, he would still be alive today. I don't blame the police for defending themselves, but I do want them to be less trigger happy, as well. They should perhaps have used another method, first, but then I wasn't there, so don't know if that were possible, or not. The courts had to decide that, and they did. Obviously, anesino doesn't believe in that because violence against others is okay, just as long as it isn't the other way around in self-defense.
I also notice here that freedom of speech is not allowed. There are several comments not in agreement with this missing. Guess this one will go, too. You guys here should really get another hobby. There is always the other side of the story, which you won't report.
I also notice here that freedom of speech is not allowed. There are several comments not in agreement with this missing. Guess this one will go, too. You guys here should really get another hobby. There is always the other side of the story, which you won't report.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$70.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network