Sheriff's office releases video of Danville police fatal shooting | News | PleasantonWeekly.com |

News

Sheriff's office releases video of Danville police fatal shooting

Video snippets show deputy opening fire on driver trying to elude police in 2018

After more than a year, an investigatory video depicting Danville’s first fatal police shooting in more than 17 has been released to the public.

The video shows Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Deputy Andrew Hall shooting 33-year-old Newark resident Laudemer Arboleda to death at close range, while Arboleda was attempting to evade police in his car near downtown Danville on Nov. 3, 2018.


Danville Police Department logo.
The 24-second video -- two snippets of footage captured by both Hall’s body camera and a second officer’s dashboard camera -- depicts Danville police attempting to box in Arboleda’s vehicle at the intersection of Front Street and Diablo Road, briefly stopping Arboleda. (The sheriff’s office provides police services for the town of Danville by contract.)

When Arboleda attempted to drive around and through the blockade, Hall can be seen exiting his cruiser and running toward a gap in two police cars where the Newark man was attempting to drive away, according to the video.

When the vehicle was only a few feet away, Hall began to backpedal away and fired approximately 10 shots into the vehicle as it drove toward and then by him, according to the video. Arboleda was pronounced dead at a local hospital later that morning.

Hall’s body cam footage does not show Hall using verbal commands at Arboleda immediately before or during the time of the shooting.

The video was obtained by the news coalition California Reporting Project last week in response to a public records act request, according to Bay City News Service. Viewer discretion is advised as the video obviously contains graphic imagery and is available online now.

The town has since been presented with a wrongful-death claim by Arboleda’s family, who say that not only did police follow the 33-year-old without justification, but that Hall fired upon him unnecessarily as he attempted to slowly drive past officers.

The claim -- which was submitted by the Law Offices of John L. Burris -- further alleges that Arboleda’s skin color may have factored into Hall’s decision to use lethal force. Arboleda was of Filipino descent.

In a statement released shortly after the claim was filed, Contra Costa County Sheriff David Livingston defended the deputy, saying the case involved “a dangerous and reckless person trying to run down and murder a police officer.”

Police officials reported at the time that on the day of the shooting, the department received a call from a resident reporting that a suspicious man -- who was later identified as Arboleda -- was seen walking around a neighborhood with bags in hand.

Police say Arboleda immediately tried to flee toward downtown after police made contact and in the ensuing pursuit pulled over twice as if he was going to surrender, but proceeded to drive away when officers got out of their vehicles, ignoring officers commands to stop.

This marked the town’s first officer-involved shooting since 2001, according to Danville officials.

What is democracy worth to you?
Support local journalism.

Comments

20 people like this
Posted by John
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 10, 2019 at 10:02 pm

Good. Thank you to those men and women who put their lives on the line to protect us from people like this. Thank you DPD


5 people like this
Posted by Bill
a resident of Dublin
on Dec 11, 2019 at 11:35 am

Disgusting that the police lied and said he tried to run over the officer. That's plainly not true, and he should not have been shot.


3 people like this
Posted by Alternative Video Site
a resident of Apperson Ridge
on Dec 11, 2019 at 11:29 pm

YouTube pulled the video, as of 12/11/19 23:19
No reason given except that the account has been closed.

Footage can sort of be seen at site below, but critical area is blurred out.
Web Link

Clearly the criminal attempted to escape by driving toward where the officer was standing. Criminal made a poor judgment call and exercised his right to run over an arresting officer. He may not have possessed such a right. Courts will now get to decide if he had the right.


6 people like this
Posted by Police state
a resident of Birdland
on Dec 12, 2019 at 8:42 am

The guys was just murdered. Gunned down. We need to take these weapons away from police. They should be handled like England.


28 people like this
Posted by Thruth
a resident of Birdland
on Dec 12, 2019 at 4:07 pm

To those who feel this was murder you must be blind. If the driver had stopped he wouldn’t be dead ...plain and simple. Follow the law and you won’t get shot.


3 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Dec 12, 2019 at 5:47 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I have some questions. Could tires have been shot instead? Was there a warning shot? Could the officer have moved in time to be safe? Why was there a space the person thought they could drive through? What were the possible alternative approaches? I won’t disagree the person made a decision to flee (a very bad decision), but I worry when the consequence always seems to be someone is dead. I certainly would not have wanted it to be the officer either.


18 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 12, 2019 at 7:18 pm

James Michael is a registered user.

"We need to take these weapons away from police"...and all I can say to that statement is ARE YOU INSANE! OR JUST BEING PROVOCATIVE.


7 people like this
Posted by Peace
a resident of Bonde Ranch
on Dec 12, 2019 at 8:31 pm

I tend to agree. Way to many police shootings Maybe if they were unarmed they would communicate better defusing things. The guy wasn’t even armed.


22 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 12, 2019 at 9:47 pm

James Michael is a registered user.

THIN BLUE LINE...and that's all you have in a sanctuary open border state. The "guy was armed with a vehicle, you dreamer.


20 people like this
Posted by John
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 13, 2019 at 8:11 am

Kathleen- & others - Really? Maybe the officer should have just held up his hand and shouted “stop in the name of the law”!!
You have a person with a deadly weapon (vehicle) purposely trying to run the officer over, with CLEAR intent to injure or kill and you think they should have shot out the tires? Even with video proof you fail to asses the situation accurately.

The dead felon refused to stop for the police who are armed. What chance do you think an unarmed citizen will have against the deceased felon?

Think about it. All actions have consequences ... some more permanent to than others. I’ll say it again “good”.


10 people like this
Posted by MichaelB
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Dec 13, 2019 at 8:15 am

MichaelB is a registered user.

"We need to take these weapons away from police"...and all I can say to that statement is ARE YOU INSANE! OR JUST BEING PROVOCATIVE."


It IS insane. So called progressives revealing themselves...again. Criminals are just victims of an "unjust" or "unfair" society,there are no standards of behavior/conduct, guns "cause" violence, and self defense is backward and barbaric.


10 people like this
Posted by MichaelB
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Dec 13, 2019 at 8:18 am

MichaelB is a registered user.

"I have some questions. Could tires have been shot instead?"

I have an answer. Cars still move/can be driven on underinflated and/or flat tires.


5 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Dec 13, 2019 at 9:12 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

John, explain why anyone on either side would have to die. My interest in cases like this is that everyone lives, officer and perp. I acknowledged the guy made a bad decision. Just don’t know why letting him run wasn’t an option. We have a justice system for the rest.

MichaelB, but not so far and fast that he couldn’t have been caught. And, yes, maybe the result would have been the same.

I just fear we are becoming too complacent about the “stop, bang (10 times in this case), or I’ll shoot” approach.


17 people like this
Posted by CWM
a resident of Stoneridge
on Dec 13, 2019 at 10:29 am

Kathleen, If the bad guy does what he is asked to do then none of this happens. He is alive and faces the justice system. In fact this is exactly what happens thousands of times each day in this country. I'm tired of people blaming the police for every shooting they are involved in. What all of these incidents have in common is the dead guy didn't do what he was asked to do or they just flat out did something that was stupid. Sometimes people make bad decisions and they pay for it. Would it make you feel better if the officer didn't shoot (or shot the tires like in the movies), and the guy fled in the vehicle only to hit and kill a mom and her two children crossing the street two blocks away. What would you say to that? It was the mom's fault for not watching for speeding cars? Maybe the officer should have ended it when he had the chance. Unfortunately Kathleen you live in a fantasy world where all people are good, but in fact there are people out there that would cut you throat and not think twice about it.


18 people like this
Posted by Jennifer
a resident of another community
on Dec 13, 2019 at 11:09 am

The police shoot to STOP A HREAT. And a vehicle weighing several toms IS A THREAT. If you don't want to get shot, COOPERATE WITH THE POLICE. It really is that simple. If you don't understand this, you're stupid.


20 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 13, 2019 at 11:12 am

James Michael is a registered user.

"...explain why anyone on either side would have to die."

They wouldn't...just do what you are told. The police are in charge. And I'm sure you can appreciate this, Kathleen...just like the teacher is in charge of the classroom...and yes I know that the classroom is not a life and death situation, but if there isn't someone in charge then there is just anarchy. The teacher is also an authority figure just like the police.


15 people like this
Posted by Jennifer
a resident of another community
on Dec 13, 2019 at 11:15 am

I would think that all these police shootings, people would learn to cooperate with the police. They obviously don't care. If you follow the law, cooperate with police you won't get shot. And this has NOTHING to do with RACE. The fact that the family hired Burris - the family loses all credibility. Their son was shot because he had NO RESPECT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. Deal with reality, and get out of denial.


4 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Dec 13, 2019 at 11:34 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Ok many people, I stated the guy made the wrong choice. I don’t think 10 shots were necessary. And it appears (a guess on my part) it was shoot to kill, not shoot to stop. As to the mom and kids, I also said I wanted no one hurt—officer, perp, kids, moms, dads, other innocents.

There is, however, room for questions and maybe, just maybe, some changes needed in the level of force used. We should ask those questions and know the answers from police departments. It is part of our duties to ensure our safety. These are people with guns and power. It’s okay to have some thoughtful consideration of these events. What could they do differently, do better, or change?

Teachers are authorities and manage classrooms even though they long ago lost the right of corporal punishment. Yet they manage anyway. I don’t think I’d advocate to remove weapons from the police, but I certainly will advocate for a rethink here and there.


26 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 13, 2019 at 11:44 am

James Michael is a registered user.

Criminals and law breakers started this trend of anti-police sentiment and it works to their benefit to have average citizens question law enforcement. Let him run as an option and the justice will prevail...ya, sure. All I can say is...THANK GOD FOR THE THIN BLUE LINE.


Like this comment
Posted by CWM
a resident of Stoneridge
on Dec 13, 2019 at 11:55 am

Every law enforcement department in the United States has a shooting review board who reviews EVERY incident where a weapon has been discharged. they look at it from all angles to ensure that all policies were followed and what they could have done better. The issue is that if people would do as asked when contacted by the police instead of doing dumb things there would be a lot less need for review boards and eliminate Monday Morning Quarterbacking from people who have not idea what police work entails.
Kathleen, I see you live in Pleasanton, why don't you contact the PPD and ask them if you could take a ride a long with one of their officers for a shift. Perhaps even go through their "Shoot/Don't Shoot" scenarios. At the end of the day you may have a better understanding of what the officers deal with on a daily basis and learn to appreciate what they do for you and the community.


3 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Dec 13, 2019 at 12:20 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I do appreciate the police and understand the danger they face in protecting us. There was an officer in our family. The review boards, if only officers who are not independent of the department, are questionable to me. Our mayor/city council does not receive reports on complaints filed about officers/incidents (unless there is a lawsuit, and sometimes not until they approve a settlement). There is no independent (does not have to be citizens) oversight. So if the council doesn’t know and there’s no independent oversight and a concern receives only internal review—I’m slightly skeptical of that side of the thin blue line. Mind you, I don’t blame those out in patrol cars doing their jobs. This is a question of the transparency of the hierarchy to the community.


15 people like this
Posted by CWM
a resident of Stoneridge
on Dec 13, 2019 at 2:01 pm

I do not think any department conducts just an in-house shooting investigation any longer. The larger departments have citizen review boards but the smaller ones like Pleasanton may not. Almost all shooting reviews include at least the District Attorney's office. If it is a questionable shooting the State Attorney General's office and/or the FBI have been known to be brought in.

"Our mayor/city council does not receive reports on complaints filed about officers/incidents" - not sure what you mean here. I thought we were talking shootings and I'm sure they are updated immediately when there is an officer involved shooting. If someone makes a complaint that an officer was "rude" to them, then they probably don't get briefed on that, nor should they spend their time micro managing any department.

It's one thing to have an officer in the "family" and another to actually be there when they do their job and see how fast situations evolve. The "Shoot/Don't Shoot" scenarios are quite enlightening if they will share that part of the training. It will at least give you the perspective of what really happens in real time.

Anyway, we are getting away from the start of this, do as the officer asks, don't do stupid things and you won't get shot!!! It's really pretty simple.


19 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 13, 2019 at 7:05 pm

James Michael is a registered user.

The Pleasanton Police Department is offering a 15 week "Citizens Police Academy" course beginning on 1/23/2020 just in case some of you might want to get a better insight into what really goes on.


2 people like this
Posted by Just asking
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 17, 2019 at 4:56 am

First off none of you know what's in his mind. Trying to intentionally murder a cop or trying to get away. You dont and cant know that. Get your money back from your mind reading course. You got ripped off. Second the video speaks for itself. The police officer was not in danger. He ran around his car and put himself in that position and was not in front of the car bit beside it. The driver was clearly not a threat to him or anyone else. Not speeding. Not driving crazy. Not driving AT the officers. Oh yea and according to the constitution not a criminal. It seams to me you could have followed this fool till he ran out of gas. What I saw was an out of control cop whose life was not in danger unload his weapon. If we want to read minds in would say the coo committed murder. An I intentional act of taking someone's life. Now some may defend the cop but it dint change the definition of murder. Your welcome for the free education. Hope your pulled over next misinterpret what the cop says an she shoots you for fear of his life or better yet your son or daughter. Then you might understand. This at that point was not needed.


11 people like this
Posted by Me Too
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 17, 2019 at 10:38 am

@just asking - I think you watched the wrong video.


11 people like this
Posted by CWM
a resident of Stoneridge
on Dec 17, 2019 at 11:32 am

Just Asking wrote;
"It seams to me you could have followed this fool till he ran out of gas."
You are the fool!!! Yes, lets follow this guy at say 60MPH on city streets as he runs stop signs and red lights just to see how many lives we can put in danger. Perhaps we can get a pedestrian hit or at least a few cars. Makes sense to me. Because people today make up excuses for why a bad guy did bad things, the respect for law enforcement has dropped to an all time low which is not good for the rule of law. Again, don't do stupid stuff and bad things won't happen to you.


Like this comment
Posted by Real Video
a resident of Castlewood
on Dec 17, 2019 at 8:27 pm

SF Chronicle has the full detailed video from two angles. From what I can see, the officers foot was under the front right tire of the vehicle, and maybe touched by the wheel itself as he went from full forward motion running around the back of his vehicle to suddenly having to back pedal when the car came through the opening. This all happens in 4 seconds:
:08 seconds: perp vehicle is stopped in front of officer's car
:08 seconds: Officer exiting his vehicle,
:09 Officer still exiting vehicle, perp starts going around/in between two police cars
:10 Officer has exited vehicle and is taking his first step toward back of his car
:11 Officer rounding back of his vehicle and runs into path of oncoming perp
:12 Officer stops and is faced with moving car and shoots and backpedals all at once. Watch officers foot disappear under tire and then reappear.
Web Link


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


To post your comment, please login or register at the top of the page. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.

All your news. All in one place. Every day.

Big money pouring into Livermore referendums
By Tim Hunt | 10 comments | 1,796 views

You Can Help: Scents and Migraines
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 719 views