Las Vegas Sun

By Jon Ralston · March 11, 2008 · 4:41 PM

The Henderson police finally released that report on the traffic stop of the Albanian man that unleashed a chain of events that resulted in his wife being shot in front of him and their children. The report mentions the traffic infractions he was accused of but not the shooting! Read it at right.

And below is some of what the family's attorney, Jim Jimmerson, had to say on "Face to Face" on Tuesday:

We hired an investigative forensic pathologist who performed an independent autopsy before the lady was buried. Her information as reported to myself, we have not seen a written report, was that the trajectory of the bullet strongly indicates that Deshira was on her knees or sitting in an Indian-style position at the time she was shot.

We have autopsy pictures which show the bullet grazing the arm that is up and entering the center mass of the abdomen, which is the fatal wound.

We've offered five witnesses to the Henderson Police Department to interview, witnesses who have markedly differed from the position taken by Police Chief Perkins in his press conference he gave on the 21st of February.

The police chief in one statement during this press conference tells all of us that this is the middle of an investigation, that the investigation specifically is not complete. Then you have the segment you just ran, in which he acts more like a police union representative than the chief of police for the City of Henderson. If the investigation is not complete, how is he rushing to the defense of this officer? At the very least, those comments are premature. At the worst, they're foolish.

I believe we need to follow some common sense. Here's a lady who the police had spoken to, who had been summoned to the scene by her husband and by a police officer. They were waiting for her to arrive. She comes out of the right side of the ice cream truck, which is closer to the curb, with her two children, 11 and five. She has three children, but two were with her, 11 and five. She's ordered down to the ground by the police. She's waving her hands. She's scared. There are four officers with their guns drawn, and the police chief is contending she's lunging at them with a knife.

They had already Tasered her when she was the ground. If the forensic evidence demonstrates in fact that she was on her knees or at the worst starting to stand up, when you have four police officers who have been trained as Police Chief Perkins said to not approach someone with a weapon... even if she had a weapon, she was no threat to these individuals.

Five independent witnesses have told us that the children... that the police asked the children to be released, that she moved to push the children away. They wanted to stay with their mom. Only after the children were put aside near an electrical box, were they taken away.

One of the major issues then is whether police had to rescue them, their version, or in fact they were holding on to mom, and it was mom who had to encourage them to move away.

Five individuals who we've spoken to, who have spoken we believe to the police, have contradicted that important factor.

Whether or not she was standing versus whether or not she was on her knees is a crucial point, because if someone's on their knees, whether they have a knife or not, they are not in a position to harm a police officer who's been trained.

In that press release, (we) were told this occurred because of a language barrier, the Albanian language the police could not understand. Now in the press conference, Police Chief Perkins said there was no language barrier whatsoever. So, you have two ways of looking at it. Was he correcting an erroneous press release that his own officers gave on the day of the shooting? Or, was he starting to take actions to recognize that if they couldn't understand each other, maybe they weren't issuing suicidal thoughts. Maybe they weren't communicating, and maybe there was no basis for the shooting of this woman.

The press release issued on February 12th only describes her action as an aggressive movement. Now, three weeks later, we have this statement that we received today that there was an attack of an officer. Completely different story.

(The police report says) Deshira was in an altercation. Now, she's in a fight. When the initial report was just an aggressive movement toward an officer.

Does it make any sense that the lady who brought her children to the scene is now going to try to commit murder of her children? Are we kidding?

When was the last time you or I were arrested for blowing a stop sign? Or for going 39 in a 15? Or for going to your wife after she's been shot by a police officer? What's not clear here, intentionally I submit not clear, they don't tell us when is he seeking to talk to his wife? Is it before or after the police shot her?

It's just not right for anybody to say, 'I don't want to try this case in the media.' But, oh by the way, let me hold a press conference and let me issue a press release.

Five witnesses saw no knife. One witness saw a knife. There are police who say they saw a knife, although I've never been provided their witness statements and won't be provided those statements, I'm told, until the coroner's inquest is completed.

(on where the witnesses were in relation to the incident)

Seven yards, ten yards, 14 or 15 yards. In some regards, maybe 20 yards. But, that close.

Jon: They had a good view. Were they obstructed views?

Jimmerson: Four out of five were not obstructed. One was obstructed by police vehicles.

I've spoken to the deputy district attorney who will be handling this. He indicates to me that he will be fair by virtue of the expansion of the hearing to two days. It may very well be he will include some of those witnesses. But, whether he does so or not is up to him. Number two, the question is his. They can be hardball questions, which I doubt. They can be softball questions, which we've seen lots of times in these types of proceedings. That's the criticism of the coroner's inquest proceedings to begin with. It is all too often perceived by the public to be a rubber stamp. We hope this case would be the exception.

(on $50,000 governmental cap on damages)

What the remedy would be beyond a state court case would be a federal civil rights violation lawsuit filed in federal court, where you're not constrained by the limits of $50,000 you or I are talking about.