Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

sponsored by
News


Questions still linger after inquest ruling

Critics cite contradictory testimony in review of Henderson police shooting

Two days of testimony, more than two dozen witnesses, and still there are unanswered questions about the Henderson police shooting of 42-year-old Deshira Selimaj, critics said.

Was Selimaj sitting, crouching or standing when she was shot? Did she have a knife? And did the 23-year-old police officer fully disclose who he talked to about the incident?


Most Popular Stories
  • Traffic accident claims life of longtime, successful lawyer
  • NORM: Buchanan called 'larger than life'
  • One motorcyclist killed, another critically injured in accident
  • THE FACES OF JOBLESSNESS: Family had to get help for first time
  • NORM: Marie Osmond, manager battling
  • Nurseries fence out day laborers
  • Second person dies after being restrained by police
  • NORM: Agassi reveals bad vibes with Shields
  • North Las Vegas motorcyclist killed in collision while racing, police say
  • Las Vegas police make arrest in 2008 slaying




  • "I'm not proposing to know the answers, but that proceeding didn't provide the answers," said Gary Peck, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada. "It was a sham."

    A coroner's jury unanimously found the officer, Luke Morrison, justified in shooting and killing Selimaj on Feb. 12. But it didn't quell criticism of the coroner's inquest process or speculation about the incident that prompted it.

    The ice cream truck driver had come to the aid of her husband, who had been pulled over by police for traffic violations. Morrison said he shot Selimaj once as she raised a knife in the direction of another officer who had unsuccessfully attempted to subdue her with a stun gun.

    Selimaj family attorney Jim Jimmerson said Saturday there was ample evidence that Selimaj was not standing up and lunging at officers, as several Henderson police officers testified.

    The gunshot wounded the inside of the 5-foot-2-inch woman's left forearm, passed through the rib cage and exited her back, near the hip.

    Couple that with the fact that Morrison, who Jimmerson said is "not a tall man," was 10 feet away, as the officer testified, and "that trajectory would confirm that she was on the ground or very close to the ground."

    But the coroner who performed her autopsy said he couldn't determine where the woman was when she was shot.

    There also was contradictory testimony by Morrison about whom he had talked to about the shooting.

    Through a question submitted by the Selimaj family, Morrison originally was asked whether he had spoken to anybody besides police and his family about the incident. He said he had not.

    But later, one of the assistant district attorneys asked Morrison whether or not he had spoken to him and the other assistant district attorney about it.

    "Yes, I did," Morrison said.

    The Selimaj family also submitted questions asking Morrison whether he had sent text messages to other people notifying those people that he was the officer involved in the shooting.

    However, hearing officer Rodney Burr refused to ask Morrison the questions.

    Jimmerson claimed Saturday that Morrison had contacted people other than those he mentioned on the stand, and that Morrison had done so in the form of text messages. Jimmerson said he wasn't "at liberty to say" how he knew about the messages and to whom those messages were sent.

    Coroner's inquests are held in Clark County whenever someone is killed by a police officer. Representatives of the district attorney's office conduct the nonadversarial hearings and are required to act as a "neutral presenter of facts."

    A representative of the family is not allowed to cross-examine witnesses, however, and is allowed only to submit questions in writing to the hearing master, who decides whether to ask them.

    Peck and Jimmerson found the assistant district attorneys anything but "neutral."

    "Anyone who watched that proceeding saw that there was a constant barrage of obviously biased, leading questions being asked of all the witnesses," Peck said.

    Jimmerson said "the prosecutor, sometimes more than the witness, ... was adjusting the answers to the questions." For example, assistant district attorney Christopher Lalli asked Morrison, "What do you think would have happened if you did not fire your gun?"

    "Officer (Anthony) Pecorella would have gotten stabbed, possibly killed," Morrison said.

    Jimmerson called such questioning "speculative" and said it could be thrown out in a court of law.

    The process also left a bad taste in the mouth of Maria Saltonstall, who witnessed the shooting and told jurors Friday that she didn't see Selimaj wield a knife.

    "I really don't have that much faith in that system," she said Saturday. "I really don't."

    Henderson police Chief Richard Perkins praised the process, however, and said it was far better than the previous system, in which a district attorney heard the evidence and made the decision in private.

    "It's important for us to always remember that this was tragic," Perkins said. "An officer never, ever wants to have to do this in his career."

    Review-Journal writer Carri Geer Thevenot contributed to this report. Contact reporter Lawrence Mower at 702-383-0440 or lmower@reviewjournal.com.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 58 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    TimB wrote on April 22, 2008 12:02 AM: What happened to an officer using a billy club? A club against a depressed 5'2 woman holding a knife would be a piece of cake. If the woman, as the police said was kneeled down. One swing to her clavical would incopacitate that arm. What happened to officer training??? Seems Vegas politicians, city officials and law enforcement leaders are too busy corrupting the town then to properly teach law enforcement self defense techniques one learns at the BASIC acadamy. But oh...these same cops dont have a code of ethics either, that is passed down from their hire-ups.


    Report abuse

    Wraith wrote on April 14, 2008 11:20 AM: Morrison is not only an utter and complete PANSY who should wear a skirt to work, but he is also someone who will have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life. All humans believe in Karma in way or another. He knows full well that his murder will come back to roost one day very soon. When your job involves placing yourself in the line of fire daily, then murdering a mother in cold-blood in front of her small children is a pretty darned STUPID thing to do.

    Then when Karma gets a hold of him, he's got God to deal with in the next life. Sucks to be you, eh Ms. Luke Morrison?


    Report abuse

    rebel22 wrote on April 14, 2008 09:23 AM: Morrison is a PANSY.


    Report abuse

    Alex wrote on April 14, 2008 12:05 AM: Hey, "Death from above" YOU ARE A JOKE.


    Report abuse

    Alex wrote on April 13, 2008 06:56 PM: An oxymoron is actually a contradication in terms. AND YOUR POINT WAS??


    Report abuse

    Henderson's Finest wrote on April 13, 2008 06:46 PM: What an oxymoron that is. No, ZZZZZ, we aren't talking about you.


    Report abuse

    Alex wrote on April 13, 2008 06:46 PM: Hey, ZZZZ I'm sure you aware that sometimes when a person is in the mist of writing a post, that another post comes on. By the time your own, or my own for that matter is complete, the answer to one's question is already there. By BAD! :) I just think I may be misunderstood sometimes with my "Wierd" sense of humor. Please note another recent post of mine, timed at 5:49 PM.


    Report abuse

    Alex wrote on April 13, 2008 06:25 PM: Wow, have some of you people got it wrong! A LOCAL coroner's inquest is no where near a FEDERAL Grand Jury. FEDERAL Grand Juries are there to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed to a FEDERAL trial on Federal charges, no local ones. I personally would not confront a Federal Agent any more than a LOCAL Officer. However, I do feel my chances of surviving any confrontation of either, my best bet would be with the FEDERAL Officer.


    Report abuse

    ZZZZZ wrote on April 13, 2008 06:12 PM: I was refering to the post by "Henderson Clowns". I didn't insult anyone, or try to. Please read the prior posts if you can possibly manage that task. (you were not insulting me, right?)


    Report abuse

    vp wrote on April 13, 2008 06:09 PM: Henderson Clowns,

    I guarantee you that my house is way bigger and better than yours. I don't even have to see your house to know that. Seriously, I have a super nice house. I did read the article you're talking about and if it's true, then you get rid of the 3 officers involved. To be honest, it sounds like a barfight that went bad. You can't paint every officer with the same brush. The actions of a few should not reflect negatively on those officers that only want to serve and protect. Some people automatically assume that no officer involved shooting is justified. I say that's wrong, the majority of the police officers are upstanding. You can't run around in public waving knives and threatening people. It's one less nut on the street as far as I'm concerned. I'd really like to know that Mr. Selimaj is no longer selling ice cream here. He's already amassed 2 battery charges on children. I'd like harsher penalties for child batterers if it's not too much to ask. How do you still get to sell ice cream when you've been charged with assaulting two of your minor customers?


    Read All Comments