Trial over man, 18, shot dead by deputies in 2006 goes to jury
WASHINGTON COUNTY, Ore. - The wrongful-death civil trial of Tigard teen Lukus Glenn, who was shot and killed by sheriff's deputies during a standoff in 2006, is now in the hands of a jury.
Closing arguments wrapped up Wednesday in the civil trial.
In September of 2006, Glenn's mother, Hope Glenn, called 9-1-1 fearing for her son's safety and for those around him. "He just keeps threatening to kill everybody," she was heard saying during the call.
Glenn, 18, was armed with a knife. He was hit with six beanbag rounds before Washington County Sheriff’s Deputies fired their service weapons, hitting him eight times, when they said he refused to surrender.
According to Washington County Sheriff Rob Gordon, Glenn was hit by the beanbag rounds and then with live rounds in the space of 8 seconds.
Gordon said in 2007 summary of the incident that the time frame was an "appropriate amount of time to allow the beanbag rounds to be effective."
In 2008, Glenn's mother filed a federal wrongful death lawsuit seeking $5 million.
An autopsy after the incident showed Lukus had a blood alcohol content of .18. No other drugs were found in his system.
Neighbors told KATU-TV that Glenn played football at Tigard High School. He also played soccer and was on the track team.
The police gave him more than a fair chance. Â Just another lawyer doing what they do best. Â Get as much money as they can even when they and their client don't deserve it.
Do a search on 21 foot rule regarding knives
 or go to http://www.21footrule.com/ and read. There is a lot of information regarding this. If the police had not reacted they would possibly sued for not saving someone. Too many Monday morning quarterbacks. The courts will decide what happens from here. As mentioned my many, this was preventable...by the family.
>'The courts will decide what happens from here.'
Â
Unfortunately, no they wont. A jury will. That's the reality behind civil (AKA 'tort') lawsuits. It's not about what's right or justified, it's about what the attorney can convince a majority of the jury of.
The teenager was murdered by Washington Co. sheriff deputies. Â
Â
OK... Glenn was drunk, and had a knife. But he was so drunk he could barely move; his knife was tiny. Moreover, he wasn't threatening the police. The very reason his mom called police was because he was threatening to kill himself with the knife. Â
Â
Other inconvenient facts: 1) While claiming concern for the safety of those in the house, shooting endangered those same people. A cardinal rule of firearms safety: ensure the background is safe. Some of their shots hit the house. 2) The officers were carrying a variety of less-lethal weapons. Since there was no indication that he had a firearm, and he was stumbling drunk, going the other way, the officers could have dropped him easily without lethal force.   Â
Â
If the family "wins", they've still lost.
The cops need to stop killing people!
 @August100Â
Â
You can tell that to police when someone is going to shoot you or gut you like a deer.
Â
As for me and mine, if someone is threatening me, police have permission to drop the bad guy like a sack of potatoes and you won't hear me complaining.
If you don't want a loved one killed by police don't call 911 and tell the dispatcher that your loved one wants to kill people.
Â
They hit him with 6 bean bag rounds and that didn't seem to get his attention.
Â
Sorry for your loss mom but he was dangerous even by your own admission.
 @RalphCramden Not only that, but the article said  "An autopsy after the incident showed Lukus had a blood alcohol content of .18. No other drugs were found in his system."Â
My question is where did he get the alcohol? Maybe the family needs to sue the person who provided his the alcohol. Could it be that he got it from the family home?
 @BarbWireÂ
Â
This incident started at least a decade ago when the kid was being raised. It's not common for kids to have issues overnight and this had been going in for a while.
Cost/benefit analysis. The supplier (older friend/parent) likely doesn't have as deep of pockets as the Washington Co. No lawyer would have taken the case. As it is, there's a 50/50 shot at a big payday for the lawyer.... oh, yeah... and the mourning family too.
Respect your right to have, and voice, your opinion. I couldn't disagree more.
Â
>'Too many facts against against the cops.'
Â
What, specifically, are these 'facts against the cops'?
Â
>'Â Sure he may have had a small pocket knife.'
Â
Exactly what size knife does one need to become a very real, tangible threat to the saftey of others?
Â
Moreover, his own parents who called the police to the scene. They, apparently, DID feel he was a threat.
Â
So, we've got a parent who felt he was a threat to their saftey, and we've got a dozen sworn police officers who felt he was a threat....
Â
And, we've got the armchair quarterbacks who come on forums and make presumptions based on speculation and theorheticals.
Â
Personally, I'd tend to side with those who were there. But, that's just me.
@MarkKpic,,,, I hope the family wins. Too many facts against against the cops. Sure he may have had a small pocket knife, but I understand those tasers can diable a person from 20 feet.
The only reason it's even being heard by a jury is because it's a rich white family.
Â
As terrible as the outcome is, Mom was obviously right in fearing her son's drunken threats. He had voiced his intent, he had the means, and he was acting them out when he was killed.
Â
If the cops had failed to act in time and he had killed Mom or Dad, the family would probably be suing anyway.
Â
Cops aren't headshrinkers. The family failed to get him the psych help he needed, and it reached a crisis. That's not the fault of our brave and professional WashCo deputies.
I guess I'm missing something here. It seems like Police these days are incapable of resolving conflicts and subduing suspects without shooting them full of holes.Â
True, I don't know all the facts but that's what the courts are for. This Mother called Police to help. I doubt that the source of solution she had in mind was to kill her son in cold blood.Â
This kid was drunk and only had a knife. I'm wondering why, after only a brief, 8 second delay shooting this kid with beanbag rounds, the Cops decided to throw in the towel and just kill him.
I don't see how this is a frivolous civil suit at all. Yes, this kid was stupid. But Police had other options besides just gunning him down.
A A, I am sure we hear about all the times police help someone and don't shoot them.
Â
How many thousand of incidents with police do not end in a shooting? More than we can count.
Â
Sad story, true. Media likes to report on the bad parts of life because it sells.
@ a a.... I agree.
Give us your address. We will send a drunk guy over with a knife and he will be threatening to kill you. If you are happy with the police trying to talk to him instead of end the threat good for you.
 @a a Because after hitting this drunk kid who was threatening the kill people with beanbag rounds he was heading back into the house with the knife in hand.  By the police doing their job they possibly saved the lives of his innocent family
@a a  If you read the story, you would not be missing anything (except perhaps a sufficient IQ to understand). Police used their other options, which did not work, hence the use of deadly force. Pay attention!
 @a aÂ
Â
It's clear that you have no idea what you are talking about and more than likely you don't want to actually know what transpired or understand why the kid was shot.
Â
Because of the terminology you use like "incapable, "kill her son in cold blood", "shooting them full of holes", "throw in the towel and just kill him", "gunning him down", and so on it makes it pretty clear you hate cops.
Eight seconds was a "reasonable amount of time" between shooting with beanbags & then live ammo? Highly intoxicated people just can't react as quickly as sober people.
I'm not advocating the lawsuit but I can understand what the parents are thinking. Obviously I wasn't there & don't know exactly what took place but it seems to me to be a rather short period of time.
Have you ever been hit with a bean bag fired from a gun? I haven't but I have seen the bruises they cause. It would stop a normal person who isnt under the influence of alchol or drugs.
One bean bag round would be enough to put me to the ground in split second. I would beat the bean bag to the ground.
It takes a human just over a second to cover 10 yards. He could have covered most of a football field in 8 seconds. How many people could he have stabbed and killed in that time?
Â
If the police did nothing and this nut killed his family there would be a lawsuit for not killing him when they had a chance.
Loser pays for defense.
Â
The UK has this and it prevents people from filing "vanity" suits or ones where there is no reason or hope of winning.
Â
We need that in the US. This might prevent stupid from trying the "suit" lottery.
Â
'loser pays' would eliminate about 90% of tort lawsuits filed in this country.
Â
...it would also put groups like the ACLU out of business, which is why it's unlikely to ever come into existance.
another stupid civil suit...what a waste of time and money.
Rediculous waste of tax dollars. Hope and Brad Glenn should be ashamed of themselves.
This comment has been deleted
 @Tom "dogboy" Collins  @2012 What the media only telling the half of the story they agree with no... tell me its not true... let's just hope the Democratic bought off media system doesn't get Mr "catch me if you can" reelected again.