Facts

On January 8, 2018, deputies from the Morongo Basin Sheriff's Station responded to a report of suspicious persons running through multiple backyards, dressed in all black, and carrying an object in a tan blanket. The deputies located Daryll Speer and an unidentified woman. Speer was armed with a shotgun and refused commands to drop the weapon. During the confrontation, one of the deputies shot Speer.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that he was rendered a paraplegic from armpits down because he was shot in the back by a deputy sheriff who overreacted. Plaintiff maintained that he never turned and pointed a shotgun at the deputies contrary to what the deputies claimed. Plaintiff indicates he was never given a verbal warning by the deputy that he was going to shoot. Plaintiff asserts that the deputy shot him because he was overly excited.

Plaintiff's expert, Roger Clark indicated the deputies' actions were unreasonable and excessive even if plaintiff was turning with his gun at the time he was shot.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants contended that, while a deputy used lethal force, it was necessary because plaintiff turned toward his partner with a shotgun. Contrary to plaintiff's statement, that he was just struggling to walk up hill in soft dirt, the deputy indicated plaintiff definitely turned.

Defense expert, Edward Flosi, testified that the deputies acted appropriately and reasonably at the time of the shooting. The ballistics testing proved plaintiff was turning even if it was a slight turn.

Settlement Discussions

At the time of trial, plaintiff demanded $15 million. Prior to trial, plaintiff's demand was $7 million. Defendant offered $100,000 before trial.

Injuries

Plaintiff is paralyzed from the armpits down. He is in constant pain. He has pressure sores; decubitus ulcers; ongoing urinary tract infections; renal stones; a neurogenic bladder and bowel; impotent; loss of muscle tissue; depression, issues of spasticity and autonomic dysreflexia.

Result

Jury verdict in favor of defendants.

Other Information

Plaintiff asserted number of circumstantial facts. Plaintiff showed the jury that the shotgun, after the incident, was pointing the opposite way from where the deputy said the gun was pointed. Plaintiff showed that the deputy was offset behind plaintiff 30 degrees to his right, yet the bullet hole he claimed, was in the middle of his back. Plaintiff pointed out he had never threatened anyone with the gun on the day of the incident before he was shot. Plaintiff indicated that if he had turned to his right why wasn't he shot in the front instead of the back since the deputy was offset. Plaintiff claimed the gun was hidden and wrapped in a blanket but the deputy indicated he could see the barrel of the gun. Plaintiff testified it would be difficult to pull the trigger since the blanket covered the trigger.

Deliberation

10.5 hours

Length

Four days