SEATTLE (AP) - The Washington State Court of Appeals has reversed itself and reinstated a wrongful-death lawsuit against the King County Sheriff’s Office over the 2016 fatal shooting of a 23-year-old pregnant mother of three by deputies asked to check on her welfare.
The Seattle Times reports a three-member panel of judges from Division One of the Court of Appeals panel found that the trial judge erred in dismissing the claim based on a state law that prohibits people who were engaged in the commission of a felony from filing state personal injury claims. The Sheriff’s Office said Renee Davis had a handgun and pointed it at the deputies, which amounted to felony assault and precluded her survivors from filing a wrongful death claim.
However, the Court of Appeals on Monday rejected that argument, saying a jury should be allowed to decide whether Davis actually had the intent to injure anyone - a requisite element to prove assault.
Evidence developed during an investigation and inquest showed that Davis, a member of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, was suicidal, suffering from a mental crisis and that a handgun found near her body was unloaded.
According to testimony, she stated, “It’s not even loaded” as she slumped over and fell off the bed after the deputies shot her.
Moreover, there was conflicting testimony over where the gun was located and whether one of the deputies moved it after the shooting.
The same panel of judges had rejected Davis’s appeal in October. The court reversed itself on a motion by Davis’ attorneys, and remanded the case to trial in King County Superior Court.
One of Davis’ attorneys, Gabe Galanda, called the ruling “great news.”
“Renee needed a welfare check. Instead, two sheriff’s deputies shot her dead,” Galanda said in a statement.
Ted Buck an attorney representing the King County Sheriff’s Office and the deputies involved, said the appellate court “appears to have overlooked” an admission by the plaintiffs that Davis pointed the weapon at the officers intending to force them to shoot her.
“The law is clear that officers are justified in using deadly force where they perceive an imminent risk of death or significant bodily harm to themselves or others,” Buck said.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.