logo


Cop Shoots Man Holding Baby: James Loxas Killed In Phoenix

First Posted: 04/18/12 03:59 PM ET Updated: 04/18/12 04:00 PM ET

PHOENIX -- Authorities are investigating an Arizona officer's decision to shoot a man holding a baby, as officials point out that the same policeman had been involved in six previous shootings since 2002, five of them fatal.

James Peters was one of several Scottsdale officers called to a home in the Phoenix suburb on Tuesday night after neighbors reported a man holding a baby was threatening them with a handgun, Chief Alan Rodbell said.

James Loxas, 50, was shot and killed, but the infant he was holding was not harmed, he said.

Peters is a 12-year veteran of the police force who has served on its SWAT team. In three of his previous six shootings, other officers also fired at suspects.

A list compiled by The Arizona Republic shows Peters' first shooting was in 2002, when he was one of three SWAT officers who shot and wounded a domestic violence suspect after a standoff. Between 2003 and 2010, he was involved in five fatal shootings.

The Maricopa County Attorney's Office investigated his previous shootings and ruled them justifiable, Rodbell said. In one instance, he received the department's medal of valor for killing a suspect who was holding a store employee hostage after hijacking a doughnut truck driver.

Not everyone agrees that Peters always acts appropriately.

Jason Leonard, a lawyer in Fort Myers, Fla., who represented the family of a man killed in 2006 by Peters and another officer, said he is concerned the city seems to support Peters even when his actions are questionable.

"My concern is that he seems to shoot first and ask questions later and has been supported in this policy," Leonard said. "I don't think he's going after innocent citizens, however, if you find yourself in a precarious situation, he seems to err on the side of escalating the violence."

Kevin Hutchings had gotten into a fight with a close friend in August 2006 and then left and drove to his house in Mesa, about 10 miles to the south. Officers had the friend call Hutchings at his house, and Scottsdale police went there, Leonard said.

While he was talking on the phone, police cut the power to flush him out, Hutchings came outside with a gun to investigate, and was fatally shot. Leonard said officers never announced their presence. The family accepted a $75,000 settlement from the city.

Police department spokesman Sgt. Mark Clark said investigators were looking into Peters' decision to shoot Loxas on Tuesday and why officers felt threatened or believed he was a threat to the child.

"There were at least three officers that were in a position to engage the suspect," Clark said. "At least one of the officers thought he saw something in the suspect's hand. So at this point in the investigation we want to make sure we have all of the officers' statements down."

Rodbell said the investigation will likely take weeks to complete. Afterward, the findings will be turned over to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office.

Police said Loxas went back in his house after allegedly threatening the neighbors, then opened the door with the 9-month-old grandson in his arms but wouldn't come out.

Several officers called for him to come outside, but Loxas refused, Rodbell said. Peters shot Loxas in the head with a scope-equipped rifle from about 15 yards away when he leaned over and reached inside the house.

Loxas died instantly, and fell with the baby in his arms, police spokesman Sgt. Mark Clark said. The baby was unhurt.

Police said a loaded handgun was tucked into the side of a chair a few feet inside the door, and a shotgun was also found nearby.

Rodbell promised a complete investigation into the shooting.

"A police officer's primary duty is to protect life. It is difficult for everyone when we are forced to take a life," Rodbell said.

Mike Rains, a suburban San Francisco lawyer who represented officers involved in hundreds of shootings in the past 30 years, said one with so many shootings deserves extra scrutiny from his department and the public.

"Seven shootings is a hell of a lot," Rains said, noting that Peters is either very aggressive in taking calls that end up requiring him to shoot or he is quicker on the trigger than he should be.

In this case, the actions Loxas took in threatening his neighbors with a gun and refusing to come outside while holding a baby led to a legitimate concern by the officers, he said. He speculated that Loxas may have wanted police to shoot him in a so-called "suicide by cop."

Regardless, a more critical look at the officer and the shootings is important, Rains said.

"We can only hope that they have sufficient training and sufficient good judgment and common sense and reasoning to make good decisions," Rains said. "Because sometimes they don't and when they don't, people get injured and killed who don't deserve it."___

Associated Press Writer Mark Carlson contributed to this report.

 
  • Comments
  • 21
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
04:00 PM on 02/17/2012
Another idiot gone that I will not have to support with my taxes. Thank you !
02:56 PM on 02/17/2012
Civilians cannot, will not, nor will be able to, understand the sequence of events that precipitate a shooting. As a SWAT team member, orders are very clear on the use of deadly force. The use of it is not at the officer's discretion but has been per-determined before arrival on the scene. There is no more thought given to the situation by the officer involved as training takes over. When involved in a stressful situation (military included) they will respond in the manner they have trained. If you haven't been trained to respond, you will hesitate or not perform as needed. You then become a liability to your team and any civilians.

Without a doubt there have been cases where the "go ahead" was not issued and the officer fired anyway. That does not mean it occurs in all cases. When negotiations start to breakdown, the OIC (Officer-In-Charge) on the scene will make the call for use of lethal force. Wounding is not an option and it just doesn't work to the betterment of the situation. The main objective is to prevent death where possible and that is not always possible. In society, "shoot first ask questions later" is used more by criminals than by the law. Given the choice of saving a baby or saving a criminal, which will you save?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:10 PM on 02/17/2012
At this point, it doesn't matter if his shootings are justified or not, he's high risk - get rid of him.

If someone has too many non-fault claims with an insurance company, their rates get jacked or they get dumped.

This is beyond ridiculous.
01:21 PM on 02/17/2012
Ridiculous analogy, Justified means (per Merriam Webster):
a : to prove or show to be just, right, or reasonable b (1) : to show to have had a sufficient legal reason

My turn
should we fire any officer who writes too many tickets?
08:24 AM on 02/17/2012
He has been involved in multiple shooting, agreed.

Were the people he shot innocent? not even according to the lawyer for one of the deceased

Is he trigger happy? No, there would be a whole lot more shootings in almost 10 years (12 total).

Why is he involved in so many shootings? Sounds like he is very qualified officer, including SWAT training: Special Weapons And Tactics - perform high-risk operations that fall outside of the abilities of regular officers. SWAT team members' duties include: performing hostage rescues and counter-terrorism operations. Sounds like the guy you would want to be on scene for a volatile situation, not a well meaning rookie or someone that is going to hesitate when instant action is required.

How many of you would be in an uproar if the Police stood by as the man killed his grandson and then himself (Think Josh Powell with a cop on scene).

CIVILIAN review, NOPE. Civilians will never be as qualified to review the actions Police, emergency, military etc. The reviews need to be conducted by people that have "been there done that". No professor or scholastic can understand the stress of the situations first responders get into no matter how much they have studied it.
08:02 AM on 02/17/2012
He shot criminals as they were actively committing their crimes - not just random people walking down the streets..maybe if there were more cops like him there'd be less criminals?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:12 PM on 02/17/2012
OK then, next time you break the law and get a ticket - you should get shot too...
05:14 AM on 02/17/2012
His day will come and I hope he dies a slow and painful death. He is a disgrace to any police department,
12:53 AM on 02/17/2012
Is he "trigger happy"? Probably yes....however when it is proven that the circumstances warranted the used of deadly force then what does it matter? Just think of the millions he's saved the taxpayers in court costs and the cost of incarceration of these low-lifes. I'll make another point...7 shootings IS a high number...but when it is proven he acted in a just manner it just further supports the notion that he probably has a very good head on his shoulders. I mean...if he was just killing to be killing then to be sure he woulda been involved in an incident by now that would've put him behind bars. Think about that for a minute.
09:57 PM on 02/16/2012
Award him a medal and move on.
11:17 PM on 02/16/2012
Agreed... so long as they continue to be justified shootings, the guy deserves a medal. Seems like an unusual number of times, but statistical anomolies happen. Someone has to have the highest number.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:20 PM on 02/17/2012
I agree 100%
09:52 PM on 02/16/2012
Wyatt Earp Shot WAY more than this many people and he is still considered a Hero... I was a cop for ten years... This seems justified to me... You NEVER shoot to Wound.. You SHOOT TO KILL... Every Cop will tell you the same thing!!!! Im surprised he didn't Double Tap.. probably because the baby (Hell he saved its life)!!
07:52 PM on 02/16/2012
All prior fatal shootings were found justifiable, and the officer was even award in one case. If he was trigger happy for 2 or even 3 instances, he sure would be much more suspect. The only reason he's being analyzed is because an infant was involved. Any person using a child as a shield, who has threatened violence, and has the weapons to support the threat knows the situation they are in and must face the reality that they may not survive. People cry that the police were too hasty, but none of us were there. We don't know what the circumstances were. The police made the decision to save the child, and the officer made the shot. A child has a future thanks to the police. Save your 'cops are like that, blah blah blah' for the REAL jerk cops who beat citizens without provocation, etc.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
concerned14534
08:53 PM on 02/16/2012
Most cops are NEVER involved in a shooting. Almost none are involved in a fatal shooting. I find it hard to believe that this one officer just happened to be involved in 7 shootings, 6 of them fatal. The odds of that happening are vanishingly small. He should be investigated by an independent agency, if he is 'trigger happy' then the department should be investigated.
10:27 PM on 02/16/2012
I would image that SWAT team members are more likely to be involved in shootings than other police officers.
11:16 PM on 02/16/2012
The thing is, once you kill it changes the fabric of you as an individual. It's a loss of a second innocence. People start ENJOYING killing and then you get situations like this. Its sad, but no one is "wrong" in this situation. All we can do is hope future responders to these unique "civil incidents" are smarter.
07:36 PM on 02/16/2012
This is no surprise. This is what they (cops) do. They are attracted to the job because of the power they can wield over others. When they are not held accountable in the early stages of this abuse this is the obvious result of the escalation of their violence. Higher ups, IA, civilian review boards and the media almost always support the officers so they won't be seen as a threat to the society they are supposed to protect. When the average citizen behaves as they do, they are always charged, convicted, and imprisoned. Why not them, when the threshold of accountability should be even higher.
11:38 PM on 02/16/2012
As far as I'm concerned, this shooting appeared to be justified because the victim had weapons within his "Grab Range". I have worked with 3 police officers that have been killed in-the-line-of-duty, mainly because the suspect got the drop on them before they could react fast enough. Most Police will go the extra mile before they pull their weapon. I only had to unholster my weapon 2 to 3 times in 18 years which isn't to much considering all the bad situations that I was put in. Not every Law enforcement Officer fits your stereotype and the very few that do usually "Wash Out" in a short time. Remember that it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. If you had been in our shoes would you still be so sure to judge a law enforcement officer so harshly, I think not.