Wino?: ?no? LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT OFFICE 5% ?31 BUREAU OF FRAUD AND CORRUPTION PROSECUTIONS f, JUSTICE SYSTEM INTEGRITY DIVISION In ?1 LACEY 0 District Attorney SCOTT K. GOODWIN 0 Director *0 Log is? SHARON .1. marsumoro 0 Chief Deputy District Attorney JOSEPH P. ESPOSITO 0 Assistant District Attorney June 5, 2014 Captain Duane Ham's Homicide Bureau Los Angeles County Sheriff?s Department 5747 Rickenbacker Road Commerce, California 90040 Re: J.S.I.D. File #13-0340 LASD File #013-05809-0261-013 Dear Captain Harris, The Justice System Integrity Division of the Los Angeles County District Attorney?s Of?ce has completed its review of the May 1 l, 2013, fatai shooting of Rigoberto Arceo by Los Angeles Sheriff?s Department (LASD) Deputy Luis Mendoza. We have concluded that Deputy Mendoza acted in lawful self-defense. The District Attorney Command Center was noti?ed of this incident on May 11, 2013. The District Attorney Response Team (DART), comprised of Deputy District Attorney Geoffrey Rendon and Senior Investigator Mike Moursalian, responded to the scene, was given a and participated in a witness interview. The following analysis is based upon reports, photographs, and recordings submitted to this of?ce by LASD Homicide Investigator Tim O?Quinn. The analysis also includes review of a cellular phone video recorded shortly after the shooting. The voluntary statement of Deputy Mendoza was considered as part of this analysis FACTUAL ANALYSIS On May 11, 2013, at approximately 9:49 pm, LASD East Los Angeles Station received a 9~l?1 call of a disturbance involving a group of people on Elizabeth Street in the City of Cudahy. The caller stated that one of the individuals was armed with a ?rearm. Communications broadcast a ?man with a gun? call. The armed suspect was described as a male Hispanic, with a light- colored t-shirt and dark pants. An LASD Aero Bureau Unit responded to the location and ?ew overhead. . CEara Shortridge Foltz Criminat Justice Center 210 West Temple Street Los Angeies, CA 90012?3210 (213) 974-3888 Fax: I213) 620-1208 nu lawman-unu- Captain Harris June 5, 2014 Page 2 of I 1 Statement of Deputy Lonnie Deck, Jr. Deputy Lonnie Deck, Jr. was positioned as an observer in the Aero Bureau helicopter, which was piloted by Deputy Clint Hughes. Utilizing a searchlight, Deck illuminated the area and saw a large group of people congregated in front of a residence. Shortly after illuminating the area, Deck observed a male and a female walk away from the group and enter a dark-colored minivan. The female, later identi?ed as Maria Arceo, entered the front driver?s seat. The male, later identi?ed as Rigoberto Arceo, entered the front passenger seat. Deck broadcast his observations and continued to monitor the minivan, which traveled westbound on Elizabeth. From the air, Deck saw a marked patrol unit, driven by Deputy Luis Mendoza, catch up with the minivan as it traveled northbound on Otis Avenue, approaching Clara Street. Mendoza did not activate the patrol vehicle?s lights or sirens, but followed a short distance behind the minivan. Deck heard Mendoza broadcast that he was going to wait for backup units before activating lights and sirens. The minivan turned westbound onto Walnut Street, from Otis. Mendoza remained a short distance behind. After passing several houses, the minivan suddenly pulled to the curb. Mendoza was approximately one vehicle length behind the minivan and still had not activated his lights or sirens. Deck used the searchlight to monitor the situation on the ground. Deck saw the passenger door of the minivan open. A large tree blocked Beck?s View of the street and he was unsure whether Mendoza exited the patrol car. As the helicopter orbited, Deck heard a ?deputy involved shooting? call. A moment later, as his view of the street cleared, Deck saw Arceo lying on the ground near the rear of the minivan. Deck advised responding units that the female was still inside the vehicle. Statement of Deputy Clint Hughes Deputy Hughes was piloting an Aero Bureau helicopter, with Deputy Deck, Jr., when he heard a ?man with a gun? call. Hughes flew to Elizabeth Street, where he observed a group of people standing in front of a residence. Deck illuminated the area with a searchlight and Hughes saw an individual who matched the suspect description given in the radio call. The male, along with a female, entered a nearby minivan and drove away. A patrol car pulled behind the minivan, which traveled to Walnut Street. The minivan pulled to the curb. Hughes put the helicopter into an orbit around the location and, almost immediately, heard a ?deputy involved shooting? call. Hughes? view of the incident was temporarily blocked by large trees. As his view of the street cleared, Hughes saw Arceo lying on the ground behind the minivan. A deputy, later identi?ed as Mendoza, was standing nearby. have?) Captain Harris June 5, 2014 Page 3 of 11 Statement of Deputy Luis Mendoza Deputy Mendoza was on patrol, driving alone, in a marked patrol car and was assigned a ?person with a gun? call on Elizabeth Street. Dispatch indicated that there were two male Hispanics involved and that one of the males may have discarded a firearm. Mendoza traveled towards Elizabeth Street and heard Aero Bureau broadcast that they were at the location and a man matching the description of the person with'the gun left the location with a woman. The two individuals entered a van and drove away. Aero Bureau informed Mendoza that the vehicle containing the possible suspect was traveling westbound on Elizabeth Street, then northbound on Otis Avenue. Mendoza arrived and saw that the vehicle was a dark~colored Toyota Sienna minivan. Mendoza followed the minivan, but did not activate the lights or sirens of his patrol car. The minivan continued northbound on Otis, then westbound on Walnut Street. Mendoza followed a short distance behind. Mendoza was waiting until an additional police unit arrived before activating his vehicle?s lights and siren. The minivan quickly pulled to the curb and a man, later identi?ed as Rigoberto Arceo, immediately exited the front passenger door. Mendoza rapidly stopped his vehicle and turned on the overhead rotating red and blue lights. Arceo was walking quickly towards the rear of the minivan, in the direction of Mendoza?s vehicle, which was stopped behind and to the left of the minivan, a few feet from the rear driver?s side bumper. Mendoza stepped out of the driver?s side door of the patrol vehicle, drew his department-issued 9mm Beretta semiautomatic handgun and yelled at Arceo, ?Get back inside the car! Get back inside the car!? Arceo continued to walk towards the back of the minivan. Mendoza could see the top of Arceo?s head, but could not see his torso, arms or legs, which were blocked by the minivan. Due to the nature of the original call, Mendoza believed Arceo was possibly armed with a weapon. Mendoza felt that Arceo might ambush him, considering how abruptly the minivan stopped. Mendoza moved to the front of the patrol car and ordered Arceo to, ?Get on the ground!? Mendoza repeated the command approximately three to four times. Arceo was breathing heavily and replied, ain?t doing shit!? Arceo had a blank stare on his face and was moving aggressively. Areeo clenched both fists and began to raise his arms in front of his body. Mendoza was pointing his service weapon at Arceo, who closed to within mere feet of Mendoza. Mendoza believed Arceo was going to attempt to take his ?rearm. In fear for his life, Mendoza ?red a single shot at Arceo. Arceo fell to the ground, on his back. Mendoza turned Arceo over and handcuffed his hands behind his back. Arceo was moving from side to side and Mendoza placed a knee on Arceo?s back. Mendoza requested medical assistance for Arceo. Captain Harris June 5, 2014 Page 4 of I I A male Hispanic approached from the west. The man appeared agitated and Mendoza heard him say, . .my brother.? Additional units arrived shortly thereafter, took control'of the scene and assisted in further investigation. Statement of Hector Zendejas Hector chdejas told Deputy M. Ortega that he was attending a barbeque at a residence across the street from the location of the shooting. Zendej as was inside the open garage of the residence and heard the sound of a helicopter overhead. Zendejas stepped out of the garage and heard a deputy state, ?Dorft move, let me see your hands!? The deputy was standing on the passenger side of a patrol car. The driver of the minivan placed her hands outside the driver?s side window. Zendejas saw Rigoberto Arceo walking towards the deputy with his hands in the air. Zendaj as heard a gunshot but did not see the actual shooting. After hearing the shot, Zendejas saw the deputy Arceo and pull him to the rear of the minivan. Ortega?s interview of Zendejas was conducted at the scene of the shooting. Ortega responded to the scene and was assisting with locating witnesses. Ortega saw a large group of people standing in front of 41 14 Walnut Avenue. People within the group were yelling Obscenities at several deputies, including, ?That?s bullshit, he didn?t do anything wrong.? Ortega attempted to calm the group and told them that each person would be interviewed. At that time, Zendejas opened the front gate of the property and spoke to Ortega. Ortega noted that Zendej as was inconsistent in his statement, alternatively placing Mendoza on the driver?s side and passenger?s side of the patrol vehicle. Recently, Zendejas failed to appear for a deposition in an associated civil case ?led by Arceo?s family. Based on statements of another witness, it appears that Zendejas did not witness the actual shooting and may have simply recited statements he heard from others. Statements of Adolfo Lopez, Jr. and Priscilla Campos A few days after the shooting, investigators contacted residents near the shooting location in an attempt to locate additional witnesses. Adolfo Lopez, Jr. and Priscilla Campos stated they had witnessed the shooting. Lopez stated that he had been inside a garage, drinking and playing cards, along with 2930 people, at the time of the shooting. Lopez repeatedly told the investigators that, ?He (Mendoza) shot him for no reason.? Lopez claimed to have seen the shooting, but stated that his attention was ?rst drawn outside by ?the shot.? Lopez stated that Arceo and his sister had just gotten into the minivan prior to the shooting. Arceo was shot on the grass, next to the van and was dragged into the street by Mendoza. Captain Harris June 5, 2014 Page 5 of Lopez was evasive and, at times, willfully untruthful. Despite claiming that there were 20-30 people at the residence at the time of the shooting, Lopez refused to provide the investigators with the names or contact information of other potential witnesses. At one point, Lopez claimed that someone had taken video of the shooting, but later told investigators that there was no video and he had just ?made it up.? Lopez admitted to being a longtime alcohol and drug user. Lopez? statement to investigators was replete with material inconsistencies and was clearly based on information that he did not personally observe. Lopez did not speak to deputies on the night of the shooting. As investigators were interviewing Lopez, Campos arrived. Campos walked up to the investigators and Lopez and stated that she was Lopez? sister. She told the investigators that Lopez was ?just a drunk" and ?doesn?t know what he?s talking about.? She stated that she saw the entire shooting but refused to talk to the investigators, and said she would only talk to an attorney representing Arceo?s family. Campos pointed across the street to where some of Arceo?s family members were standing. Campos was recently deposed in the civil law suit ?led on behalf of Arceo?s family. Campos admitted refusing to speak to the investigators and claimed that she was ?in shock? from what she had seen. Campos stated that she was with her boyfriend, Zendejas, and his family, standing in the kitchen of a nearby residence. Campos heard a helicopter overhead and saw a spotlight illuminate an area outside. Campos exited the residence and saw a blue van under the spotlight; a sheriff?s patrol vehicle was parked directly behind the van. A deputy was standing outside the Open driver?s side door of the patrol vehicle with his gun pointed at the van. CarnpoS? vantage point was from across the street, behind the deputy. Campos saw Arceo arrive at the rear passenger corner of the van. Arceo?s hands were in the air. As soon as Arceo came into view at the corner of the van, the deputy fired a single shot. Arceo fell to the ground. Campos could not hear if anything was said by either Arceo or the deputy prior to the shooting. According to Campos, Arceo never lowered his hands nor reached towards the deputy. Campos could not identify any other persons who witnessed the shooting, but acknowledged that there were several other people present at the location when the incident took place. During the deposition, Campos viewed a video captured by Zendejas on his cell phone. Throughout the video, unidenti?ed persons can be heard cursing at and taunting the deputies who arrived at the location. Statement of Maria Complido Maria Cumplido placed the initial 9-1-?1 call regarding the incident on Elizabeth Street. Cumplido called the police after hearing a altercation involving a group of people that followed a physical ?ght between two males. Cumplido?s father had seen one of the males Captain Harris June 5, 2014 Page 6 of i i throw what appeared to be a handgun onto a grassy area at the location.1 Cumplido and her father retreated into the interior of their residence and did not see anything further, but remained on the phone with the 9-1-1 operator until the police helicopter arrived. Statement of Maria Arceo During the day of May 11, 2013, Maria Arceo and her parents traveled from Bakers?eld to East Los Angeles in Arceo?s grey Toyota Minivan. The group arrived at Rigoberto Arceo?s home on Walnut Street for a Mother?s Day gathering. At approximately 8:00 pm, Ms. Arceo?s brother, Alfredo Arceo, left the residence and went to his girlfriend?s apartment on Elizabeth Street. Alfredo Arceo returned to the Walnut residence and spoke with Rigoberto Arceo. Alfredo Arceo later told Maria Arceo that he had been involved in a physical altercation with his girlfriend?s ex? husband, who was at the apartment complex on Elizabeth Street. Maria and Rigoberto Arceo drove to Elizabeth Street to speak to Alfredo?s girlfriend, to make sure that it was safe for Alfredo to return to the apartment without any further incidents with her err-husband. The exuhnsband and some of his family members were at the Elizabeth Street apartments when Maria and Rigoberto Arceo arrived. The err-husband challenged Rigoberto Arceo to a ?ght and asked that Alfredo return to ?nish their altercation from earlier. Aloud and heated confrontation. occurred, including the exchange of profanities, between Rigoberto Arceo and the err?husband and his family. Maria Arceo saw children crying and neighbors coming out of their residences. She did not see any people armed with weapons, including Rigoberto Arceo. The arguing continued for approximately 20 minutes. At one point, the ere-husband was provoking Rigoberto Arceo, who was about to unzip over a fence to confront the err-husband. Both men continued to yell at each other, saying, ?You don?t know who you?re talking to.? Maria Arceo pulled Rigoberto Arceo away, towards the minivan. The etc-husband?s family also began to diaperse. At the same time, a helicopter arrived overhead and illuminated the area with a spotlight. Maria and Rigoherto Arceo re?entered the minivan and drove back to Walnut Street. Maria Arceo was in the front driver?s seat; Rigoberto Arceo was in the front passenger?s seat. The helicopter continued to follow their vehicle and Maria Arceo assumed that someone had called the police. Maria Arceo continued to drive to Walnut, trying to get to where the rest of her family was. Rigoberto Arceo was worried, upset, and agitated during the drive and expressed that they needed to contact Alfredo Arceo?s parole of?cer to get Alfredo Arceo out of the area. Upon arriving on Walnut Street, Maria Arceo pulled the vehicle to the curb, a short distance from Rigoberto Arceo?s residence. From behind her, Maria Arceo saw ?ashing red and blue lights from a police car, which she had not previously seen. 1 Investigators Spoke to an apartment manager at the location who recalled that, the day after the altercation, an unknown person located a black cell phone in the area where Cumplido?s father believed he had seen a gun thrown. Captain Harris June 5, 2014 Page 7 of ll Rigoberto Arceo began to exit the vehicle and Maria Arceo told him, ?Wait for them to tell us to get out.? Rigoherto Arceo exited the vehicle with his hands up and walked along the passenger side of the minivan towards the police vehicle. Maria Arceo heard a police of?cer yell, repeatedly, ?Stay in the car.? Rigoberto Arceo continued to walk towards the rear of the minivan with his hands up. Maria Arceo lost sight of Rigoberto Arceo as he arrived at the rear passenger side corner of the minivan. Suddenly, Maria Arceo heard a single gunshot. Maria Arceo could not see the shooting from where she was seated, nor did Maria Areeo hear Rigoberto say anything to the deputy, at any time, while he was outside of the minivan. Maria Arceo remained in the driver?s seat of the minivan; the engine was running and the headlights were on. Approximately one minute after the shooting, a female deputy spoke to her from outside the driver?s side door. The deputy told Maria Arceo to remain in the driver?s seat. Several minutes later, a deputy ordered Maria Areas to exit the minivan, which she did. As she exited, she saw Rigoberto Arceo laying on the ground behind the vehicle, handcuffed. Maria Arceo later told investigators that there was an unloaded handgun inside a gray ease between the front seats of the minivan. The handgun belonged to her father and had been brought with them earlier in the day when they drove from central California to Los Angeles. Maria Arceo did not know if there was any ammunition in the vehicle, but her father told her that the gun was unloaded. Maria Arceo never saw Rigoberto Arceo handle the weapon and believed that he was unaware of its presence in the minivan. Maria Arceo also told investigators that her father had approximately $3,000 in cash inside the minivan that he had brought with him earlier in the day. Cell Phone Video Shortly after the shooting, Hector Zendejas recorded several minutes of footage of the actions taking place at the scene of the shooting. Throughout the video, several male voices can be heard. At least one female voice can be heard as well. The majority of the audible commentary appears to come from two individuals. Based on their statements to the police and in their depositions, it is reasonable to assume that the voices belong to Zendejas and Campos.2 At one point in the video, the camera operator (Zendej as) focuses on a group of deputies standing in the street and states, ?That?s him, right there. Triggennan. Wave to the camera mother?lcker.? Later, the same person states, ?He didn?t tell that fool nothing. He jumped out of the car and they shot him. Probably just got back from Afghanistan or something.? Zendejas states, ?I?ve got it on videotape. How much do you think we?ll get for it?? A signi?cant amount of profanity is directed at the deputies, including, ?Fucking clowns, hoinie. Scandalous ass motherfuckers.? A female, likely Campos, adds, ?They need to learn how to fucking shoot right. Shoot in the leg, nowhere else in the body. You guys are gonna fucking get in trouble. Scandalous ass. . 3 in her deposition, Campos denied being the voice on the recording. Captain Harris June 5, 2014 i?age 3 of 11 Towards the end of the video, a group of deputies is gathered in the street. The camera operator pans to them and states, ?You know what they?re grouping for, right? Make sure their story?s right.? The same female responds, ?Get your story straight, guys. There?s a witness, I witnessed it.? That acknowledgment ?irthers the conclusion that the voice belongs to Campos. Finally, the camera operator states, ?Scandalous ass mother?icking sheriff?s. These fools are gangsters, they fucking want to be gangsters.? Another male replies, ?These ?ickers ain?t the law, dog. Crooked motherfuckers.? Forensic Evidence Investigators located a single expended shell casing in the grassy parkway between the curb and sidewalk in front of 4105 Walnut Street. The casing had been discharged from Mendoza?s firearm. Medical personnel out Rigoberto Arceo?s clothing off at the scene. Investigators recovered the clothing and Arceo?s shirt was tested for the presence of gunshot residue. The shirt bore a hole in the front, near the left breast pocket. An examination found that the hole and surrounding pattern of gunshot residue was most consistent with a muzzle to target distance of between three and 12 inches. Postmortem Examination On May 15, 2013, Deputy Medical Examiner J. Daniel Augustine performed a postmortem examination of Areeo?s remains. The examination revealed a single fatal gunshot wound to the chest. The bullet perforated Arceo?s heart and thoracic aorta. No soot, stippling or muzzle abrasion was observed. A toxicological examination of Arceo?s blood revealed the presence of alcohol, metabolites of marijuana and cocaine. LEGAL ANALYSIS California law permits the use of deadly force in self-defense if it reasonably appears to the person claiming the right of self?defense that he actually and reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of great bodily injury or death. The belief in the need to defend oneself must be both actual and reasonable. ?[T]he role is well established that one who, without fault, is placed under circumstances suf?cient to excite the fears of a reasonable than that another designs to commit a felony or some great bodily injury and to afford grounds for a reasonable belief of imminent danger, may act upon those fears alone and may slay his assailant and be justi?ed by appearances.? 3 People v. Mercer (1962) 210 Cal. App. 2d 153, 161. Captain Harris June 5, 2014 Page 9 of i In protecting himself or another, a person may use all force which he believes reasonably necessary and which would appear to a reasonable person, in the same or similar circumstances, to be necessary to prevent injury which appears to be imminent.? ?Where the peril is swift and imminent and the necessity for action immediate, the law does not weigh in too nice scales the conduct of the assailed and say he shall not be justi?ed in killing because he might have resorted to other means to secure his safety.?5 ?The ?reasonableness? of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable of?cer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police are often forced to make split- second judgments -- in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving -- about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation."6 Actual danger is not necessary to justify the use of force in self-defense. If one is confronted by the appearance of danger which one believes, and a reasonable person in the same position would believe, would result in death or great bodily injury, one may act upon those circumstances. The right of self-defense is the same whether the danger is real or apparent.7 If a person acted from reasonable and honest convictions he cannot be held criminally responsible for a mistake in the actual extent of the danger, when other reasonable men would alike have been mistaken.8 The Fourth Amendment reasonableness test is, ?an objective one: the question is whether the of?cer?s actions are ?objectively reasonable? in light of the facts and circumstances confronting thorn?? The analysis must take into account the of?cer?s perceptions as part of the totality of the circumstances. ?0 In Graham, the United States Supreme Court held that the reasonableness of the force used ?requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances" of the particular incident. ?2 . .Thus, under Graham, we must avoid substituting our personal notions of proper police procedure for the instantaneous decision of the of?cer at the scene. We must never allow the theoretical, sanitized world. of our imagination to replace the dangerous and complex world that policemen face every day. What constitutes ?reasonable? action may seem quite different to someone facing a possible assailant than to someone analyzing the question at leisure.?? 4 CALCRIM NO. 3470. 5 Peopic 1? Collins, (1961) 139 Cal. App.2d 575. 6 Graham v. Conner, (1989) 490 US. 386, 396?397. 7 People v. Toledo (?948) 85 Cal. Aprd 577 8 People Jackson (1965) 233 Cal. App.2d 639. 9 Graham v, Connor (Supra) 490 US. at 396. ?1 Miisteaci v. Kibler (1999) 1999 as. gist Lexis 8380. Smith Frelana? (6?h Cir. 1992) 954 F.2d 343, 347. Captain Harris one 5, 2014 Page ID of ll The test of whether the officer?s actions were objectively reasonable is ?highly deferential to the police of?cer?s need to protect himself and others.?12 When considering the reasonableness of a claim of selfadefense, one must take into account the effect of antecedent threats or assaults by the victim, or in this case, the person that the victim was perceived to be.33 In this case, a 9-1-1 call and subsequent radio broadcast indicated that the suspect in the earlier altercation, Arceo, was armed with a gun. CONCLUSION The evidence examined shows that on the evening of May 11, 2013, Deputy Lois Mendoza responded to a radio call of a suspect with a gun. A sheriff?s helicopter was following the suspect, who had entered a minivan. Mendoza located the minivan and followed from a short distance. Mendoza had not activated his lights or siren when, suddenly, the van pulled to the curb and came to a stop. Rigoberto Arceo immediately exited the front passenger side door and walked towards the rear of the minivan. Mendoza stepped out of the driver?s side door of his patrol vehicle. Mendoza was aware of the earlier radio call and believed Arceo could be armed with a ?rearm. Mendoza ordered Arceo to get back into the van. Arceo ignored Mendoza?s orders and continued to walk towards Mendoza, who moved to the front of the patrol vehicle. Arceo came around the rear corner of the van. Mendoza ordered Arceo to, ?Get on the ground!? to which Arceo replied, ain?t doing shit!? Mendoza saw a blank stare on Arceo?s face as Arceo advanced towards him. Mendoza was pointing his gun at Arceo, who raised his hands and had an aggressive posture. Arceo closed within a few feet and Mendoza believed Arceo was going to try to take his gun. In fear for his life, Mendoza ?red a single round at Arceo from his department?issued ?rearm. Arceo fell to the ground and died as a result of his injuries. Subsequent forensic examination revealed that Arceo was within one foot of Mendoza when he was struck by the bullet. Mendoza?s actions are analyzed based on the totality of circumstances, which include the nature of the initial radio call which indicated a suspect whose description matched Arceo was armed with a firearm, the minivan stopping abruptly in the absence of any lights or sirens from the patrol vehicle, the immediate exit of the minivan by Arceo and Arceo advancing on Mendoza while ignoring Mendoza? 5 orders. Deputies Deck and Hughes, monitoring from an overhead helicopter. corroborate Mendoza?s observation of the minivan abruptly stopping prior to the activation of any lights or sirens as well as the rapid exit by Arceo via the front passenger door. Maria Arceo told her brother to stay in the van, yet Rigoberto Arceo did not heed her advice and proceeded towards Mendoza. Maria Arceo heard Mendoza order Rigoberto Arceo to, ?Stay in the van.? Rigoberto Arceo?s actions ?3 Munoz v. City ofUm'on City (2004) 120 Cal. App. 4?h 1077, 1102. ?3 CALHC N0. 5.50.1 Captain Hands June 5, 2014 Page 11 of 11 led to Mendoza?s fear that Arceo, possibly anned with a gun, might ambush him. That belief was furthered as Arceo continued to ignore Mendoza?s orders and, aggressively, approached within more feet of Mendoza, who was pointing his service weapon at Aroeo. Mendoza?s fear, under the circumstances, was reasonable. Although two alleged eyewitnesses observed Arceo approach Mendoza with his hands in the air, both con?rm that Arceo exited the minivan and walked towards the deputy, ignoring Mendoza?s orders. Lepez? statement to investigators contains several inconsistencies and there is a signi?cant doubt as to whether he viewed the actual shooting. Most notably, he stated that his attention was first drawn to the incident by the shot and that Arceo and his sister had gotten into the van immediately prior to the shooting. Additionally, Lopez stated that Arceo fell on the grass next to the van and was dragged into the street by Mendoza. Substantial evidence supports a conclusion that Arceo fell to the ground behind the van, including statements by the deputies in the helicopter. Campos initially refused to provide a statement to investigators and stated she would only talk to an attorney representing Arceo?s family. An explanation that she was ?in shock? from the incident is belied by, what appear to be, her statements and conunentary on the video recorded shortly after the shooting. The tone and nature of those comments convey an unquestionable bias. An examination of Areeo?s clothing provided additional evidence that supports Mendoza?s version of events. Speci?cally, a hole and surrounding gunshot residue on the left breast pocket of Arceo?s shirt indicate that Arceo was standing within 12 inches of the end of the barrel of Mendoza?s service weapon at the time of the shooting. Based on the evaluation set forth above, we conclude that Deputy Mendoza acted in lawful self- defense when he used deadly force against Arceo. We are therefore closing our ?le and will take no further action in this matter. Very truly yours, JACKIE LACEY Eistrict Attorney By GEOFFREY RENDON Deputy District Attorney (213)974~3888 a: Deputy Luis Mendoza, #521021