Menifee woman files wrongful-death lawsuit against Carlsbad, police sergeant

By: SCOTT MARSHALL - Staff Writer

CARLSBAD -- A fatal shooting by a Carlsbad police officer has resulted in a wrongful-death lawsuit against the city, the police department and Sgt. Mickey Williams, who fired the shots.

Dedria Cox of Menifee, the mother of Trevell Dashan Williams, 23, of Temecula, is asking for an unspecified amount of money in damages in the lawsuit, filed Jan. 4 in the Superior Court in Vista.

Trevell Williams was shot twice in the abdomen about 1:40 p.m. Dec. 27, 2005, on the shoulder of Interstate 5, south of Carlsbad Village Drive. He died later at Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla.

Police said Sgt. Mickey Williams -- the department's Officer of the Year in 2001 -- shot Trevell Williams after he continued moving toward the sergeant with a screwdriver in his hand.

Reached by telephone Monday, Cox declined to comment on the lawsuit until she has spoken to an attorney. The lawsuit indicates that Cox filed the case without a lawyer.

A Carlsbad police spokeswoman referred questions to the city attorney's office. City Attorney Ronald Ball said he had not seen the lawsuit yet and could not comment on it.

District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, whose office reviews all officer-involved shootings in the county, concluded that the police sergeant was justified in his use of deadly force against Williams and would not face criminal charges. The district attorney's review, which was released by Dumanis last summer, does not address whether the sergeant or the city face liability in connection with a civil lawsuit.

The lawsuit contains no detailed allegations about what occurred, but alleges wrongful death and excessive use of force.

"Trevell Williams is my oldest (first born) child," Cox wrote in the lawsuit. "He wanted a career in culinary arts, music and fine arts. He was an asset to his family and community."

An obituary for Williams published Jan. 8, 2006, said he attended Vista High School and played on varsity football teams that won CIF titles in 1997, 1998 and 1999.

The letter Dumanis wrote July 19, 2006, to Carlsbad police Chief Thomas Zoll to inform him of her decision in the case presented a different picture of Trevell Williams based on court documents, Riverside County sheriff's records and the investigation of the shooting.

Dumanis wrote that just five days before the shooting, Trevell Williams' mother reported to Riverside County sheriff's officials that her son had hit her with his fists, "resulting in scratches to her arm and a broken nose."

Six months before the shooting, Trevell Williams' mother sought a restraining order against him, writing that "her son was out of control" and citing "violent incidents during June and July," Dumanis wrote.

Dumanis also wrote that toxicology tests done with Trevell Williams' autopsy showed he had a blood alcohol level of .11 percent. The legal driving limit is .08 percent.

On the day of the shooting, the sergeant heard reports over his radio about police looking for Williams in connection with an incident that occurred about 12:40 p.m. in which a rock was thrown at a postal vehicle on Adams Avenue in Carlsbad, shattering the right front window, Dumanis wrote.

The sergeant found Williams walking north on the southbound shoulder of I-5 south of Carlsbad Village Drive. The sergeant said he ordered Williams to sit down on the ground because Williams was "an assault with a deadly weapon suspect," but Williams continued to walk toward the sergeant, Dumanis wrote.

Williams did not comply with repeated orders to sit down, then pulled a flat-head screwdriver from his pants pocket and kept walking at the sergeant, who had taken his gun out and pointed it at Williams, Dumanis wrote.

The sergeant walked backwards and Williams continued walking toward him, yelling "I'm not stopping," and a profanity as the sergeant continued to yell at him to stop, Dumanis wrote.

When both men were beside the sergeant's patrol car, the sergeant believed Williams "could easily close the distance," and fast-moving traffic prevented the sergeant from going in that direction, Dumanis wrote.

Dumanis wrote that the sergeant shot Williams twice in the abdomen because he believed Williams wanted to stab him. One passing motorist described seeing the sergeant walking backward, and another saw Williams about four feet away from the sergeant when shots were fired, Dumanis wrote.

"Sergeant Williams was confronted by an individual who chose to approach him directly while armed with a potentially deadly weapon, even after being repeatedly ordered to stop," Dumanis wrote. "Sergeant Williams was not required to wait and see if Mr. Williams would actually try to stab him. His actions under the circumstances confronting him were reasonable, and his use of deadly force was justified."

-- Contact staff writer Scott Marshall at (760) 631-6623 or smarshall@nctimes.com.

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/01 ... 1_8_07.txt

Previous articles:

Obituaries - 1/08/2006

Deadly force issue in question after shooting of Temecula man

Carlsbad police identify officer, victim in shooting

Police fatally shoot pedestrian on Interstate 5 in Carlsbad

Comments On This Story

Note: Comments reflect the views of readers and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff.

bill wrote on January 08, 2007 11:37 PM:"If he was such an "asset to the community" he would have stoped and dropped the screwdreive when the Police instructed him to do so. Most "normal" and law abiding citizens respect the police and would follow their commands. This lawsuit is just spite against the wonderful men and women in uniform."

Ulrich wrote on January 09, 2007 2:05 AM:"What is wrong with police? Do they forget they have a baton? Surely, a baton yielding police officer could defend himself against a young man approaching with a screw driver. Unless, of course, we are talking about a coward who chose to pull a gun rather than engage in hand to hand combat. "

John wrote on January 09, 2007 5:50 AM:"Who does this Woman think she is? The man attacked or threatened a Police officer with a deadly weapon, He should have been filled with lead.Drunk or not.Its time to change the law so if theese BS lawsuits lose, the person of Jurresdiction can countersue to recover their defense money.Either from the Perp,or the Lawyer who dreams up this garbage. Maby than it might slow down.Lawyers must be held accountable.Teach your kids to respect the law."

Pleez! wrote on January 09, 2007 6:44 AM:"Sounds to me like this mother wants to "profit" from her sons death. He beat her? She gets a restraining order against him? Then she said he was an asset to her family? Unbelievable!"

Ralphie wrote on January 09, 2007 7:44 AM:"Shot in the stomach! What a painful way to die! String up that officer! Give the mother what she wants! Enough police brutality!"

Not amused wrote on January 09, 2007 8:54 AM:"Isn't it strange how in life, this person was described by his mother, as having seriously injured her, had a TRO against him, and was accused of violent acts, and was out of control. In death, he was now, according to his mother, an asset to the family and the community? That must be the reason for the restraining order, right? Well the question that would seem to pop up to many would be, which version is truthful? I tend to beleive that many would lean towards her description of him when he was alive and not yet worth money. Here comes the California civil law suit game, spin the wheel and the taxpayers pay. Makes me wonder what led this unfortunate youthful man down this tragic trail to his eventual death. I am sure that the sergeant also did not start his day, or any shift for that matter thinking he would really have to end a life while defending his own. Waiting to get stabbed before defending oneself is not in any job desrciption, not even a cop's. Good luck, the system is flawed, and needs lots of work to attain a fair balance."

actually Bill . . . . wrote on January 09, 2007 9:02 AM:"I do not think it is spite against the uniform, rather it is a mothers denial and grief. Denial that her son was a total screw-up. This denial starts at a young age and unless these kids get some moral direction the net result becomes prison or death. MAKE YOUR KIDS RESPONSIBLE, don't make excuses for them."

Pete Nice wrote on January 09, 2007 9:30 AM:"Why does one get out of a car with a weapon in hand when the cops pull you over? Not too smart."

esteban wrote on January 09, 2007 9:55 AM:"Ulrich...can I have your phone number so when I'm confronted by an armed insane man, I can call you to save me with your mind blowing self defense techniques???? Thanks."

Shauni wrote on January 09, 2007 9:59 AM:"I agree that the victim was wrong for approaching a police officer with a screw driver and not following their commands, but the cops should have used non-lethal force, i.e. pepper spray, rubber bullets/bean bag bullets or at least shot him in the leg or somewhere that would not prove fatal. "

Tina wrote on January 09, 2007 10:02 AM:"....and he couldn't shoot him in the leg to wound not kill because.......I don't think that this young man was the upstanding citizen his mother now wants the courts to believe...but unless he had a gun pointed at the officer, the objective should've been to wound and disarm, not shoot to kill. The officer could've easily fired a warning shot and/or shot him in the leg or shoulder. That's what all the firing ranges are for right?..for target practice? I don't think this young man should've been doing what he was doing, but I don't think his actions were life threatening to the officer who was matching a screw driver with a loaded gun. "

anon wrote on January 09, 2007 10:11 AM:"People shouldn't be afraid of terrorists; they should be afraid of our local police force who have been given the power (by Bonnie Dumanis, police chiefs, and mayors) to EXECUTE. Most of us are put in harm's way every time we venture out onto the roads nowadays. Does that give us license to kill? If someone looks suspicious when you're walking down the street, is it acceptable to pull out a gun and shoot them dead because they frighten you? NO! We should not tolerate this kind of behavior from anyone, particularly civil servants who are armed and have been trained to use other means of restraint. WAKE UP SAN DIEGO!"

Ed wrote on January 09, 2007 10:23 AM:"It's interesting that after the mother reports to police and the courts that her son is out of control, that she is alleging excessive use of force. Out of control with mom pretty much means out of control with society. The only person at fault here is this kid's and his alone..."

To Ulrich wrote on January 09, 2007 10:30 AM:"Criticize the police all you want, but, keep in mind that they are there to respond to and investigate crime, and to arrest criminals. I challenge you to find where it says police are obligated to be beaten, stabbed, ran over, or even shot without being allowed to protect themselves. You must be a baton or self-defense expert to know how to disarm and subdue a person with a stabbing weapon without getting yourself cut or killed in the process. Maybe you should contract yourself to police departments to show them how they can keep from having to simply shoot lunatics trying to kill others. Police cowards? I think I might be afraid of a lunatic trying to stab me too."

To Ulrich wrote on January 09, 2007 10:41 AM:"You sir, are totally ignorant and evidently have no real world erperience with street violence thrust upon you. I would like to see you in hand to hand combat where your adversary possesses a screwdriver and has intent to harm. Don't stick your nose into anything that you have absolutely no clue about..."

Mimi wrote on January 09, 2007 10:42 AM:"I guess I'm not sure what a wrongful death suit is all about. What does it mean? What check list is filled in to make a wrongful death? Maybe an attorney reading this article could fill us in. I've found that in California it is hard to show wrong on anyones part except the victim or let's say the person harmed, anyone contributing seems to be exonerated. Bars overserve, the patron leaves and dies in a car accident and only the patron is at fault, the bar contributed but nothing happens to them and the state condones it. O.J. lost a wrongful death lawsuit and I don't know how since the courts cleared him of murder and who am I to say he is guilty, after all that is what a jury is for. Please help me understand."

Gary in Winchester wrote on January 09, 2007 10:44 AM:"Ulrich, how dare you call a highly decorated Police officer a coward. He does the things I KNOW you would not do. I think you speak out of ignorance and maybe you need to go down to your local Police Station and do a ride along so you can really see the world through those who Serve and Protect you and your family."

esteban wrote on January 09, 2007 11:53 AM:"Well, if the mother can sue the cop for defending himself, then the cop should be able to sue the mother for giving birth to the person who caused him emotional trauma from being assaulted with a deadly weapon. Makes perfect sense."

Had it coming wrote on January 09, 2007 12:06 PM:"I would have shot him too."

You must be right wrote on January 09, 2007 12:45 PM:"The cops should just stand there and make sure these thugs are gonna hurt them before they defend themselves. They should play hand to hand combat with thugs and risk getting hurt to make sure the naughtly little boy doesn't get hurt. What would you have to say about paying that officers disability for the next 30 years when he takes a screwdriver to the lung? You people are unbelievable!"

Bob wrote on January 09, 2007 12:46 PM:"Astonishing that this is even an issue. Any human being has the right of self-defense if he/she feels threatened. If aggressor A appears to be ready to attack victim B with a knife, and victim B picks a rock and hurls it at aggressor A, who subsequently and perhaps inadvertently dies, that isn't "wrongful death," that's called self-defense. And if victim B happened to be an armed police officer, aggressor A is also guilty of criminal stupidity. The mother, who apparently has a case of largess-induced amnesia, needs to face a little reality about her "community asset." Look up "but for" in a legal dictionary: but for the dead man's actions, he would still be alive to serve his mother's restraining order."

obvious wrote on January 09, 2007 1:49 PM:"To Ms. Cox, Why did you file a domestic violence complaint against your son in June of 2004? TRO? Move out order? July 2005 - contributing to the delinquency of a minor, furninshing alcohol to a minor? Sounds like a real asset to the community. The "man" was not a child and you definately do not stand to get something for nothing in this situation."

Add Your Comments or Letter to the Editor

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/01 ... 1_8_07.txt