City of Chico Bends to Lawsuit Pressure and Settles for $950,000

CHICO, Calif. - The city of Chico recently settled a wrongful death lawsuit for $950,000.

The case involved Chico police officers that shot and killed 19-year-old Breanne Sharpe during a two-mile car chase in 2013.    Investigators say more than one officer fired at Sharpe’s car when she reportedly drove toward them. They say she was high on meth at the time.  (This was a criminal that specialized in stealing certain kinds of cars.  When caught in a stolen car she fled, making it a felony pursuit.  Later when police  located her again, she tried to run them over. Officers fired in order to save an officer in harms way.  How does this warrant her parents being a dime of taxpayer money?)    

Sharpe’s mother, Mindy Losee, filed a lawsuit saying excessive force was used.

(It should be noted that the shooting was investigated by the D.A.’s office and found to be within the force reasonable and authorized, by law.  An IA by CPD also found no fault on the part of any officer.)

Chico Mayor Randall Stone told Action News Now why the city chose to settle the lawsuit before the trial.

“The entire thing was a terrible incident for everyone involved,” Stone said. “That said, we have to evaluate the best course of action that makes the most fiscal and accountable sense.”

Mayor Stone would not say what the terms of the settlement were.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to City of Chico Bends to Lawsuit Pressure and Settles for $950,000

  1. Harold says:

    Fiscal possible, accountable, you got to be kidding, he said that!. Just another lie coupled with LIBERAL use of city tax dollars.

    The only thing this will do is open the door for more unjustified lawsuits, next in line might be a homeless class action for lack of public facilities, or even lack of more shelters that do not have rules about onsite drug or alcohol abuse, and don’t provide laundry and maid service.

    That had to be 4-3 Liberal majority vote, lead by Mayor R. (Rock-head) Stone

    • Post Scripts says:

      Harold, after searching the internet seems $900,000 is getting to be the target number for the shyster attorneys suing on behalf of criminals. I don’t believe Chico should have settled. In the long run, it won’t be cheaper. Right was on the cops side and this settlement is a total injustice.

  2. Libby says:

    Interesting. The $950K speaks buckets. I’ll bet the defense deposed themselves some expert who said that the police tactics exacerbated the situation.

    It probably boils down to this: having finally crashed the car, she was no threat to anyone. And, seemingly, the cops had no defense they could risk a jury on.

    If it makes you feel any better, that mother-of-dubious-worth will get only half the settlement, and that in an annuity she will likely piss away every month, on the rest of her miserable life.

    Now, here … I got something that will REALLY twist those knickers:

    • Chris says:

      Yeah, I have to say, if the facts are as Jack lays them out here, the settlement is ridiculous. But the fact that the city paid such a settlement indicates to me that there are facts being left out here. Perhaps those are facts that are not even publicly known, but it strikes me as pretty naive to believe the police couldn’t have acted improperly given the size of the settlement. Like believing Bill O’Reilly didn’t actually harass anybody, or Trump didn’t sleep with Stormy Daniels. The number speaks for itself.

      • Post Scripts says:

        Chris, it doesn’t take too long to rack up $900,000 in attorney fees on a case like this. We know from crazy jury verdicts that such cases are never a slam dunk… even with a preponderance of good evidence. No doubt this part weigh heavy on the city fathers who took the settlement.

        Now I am not saying what Chico did was right. I would have rather them gone to court and laid it all out there before the public and take their chances. The problem is, there is so much of this case that is subjective and the facts can be spun one way or the other….to a lay jury this can be quite confusing. A good lawyer for the plaintiff could have a field day with [any] shooting by cops, look at Ferguson, Baltimore and New York, etc..

        However, I choose to believe the DA’s investigation on this one. The incident was judged by independent experts in law enforcement to be a good shoot. The cops involved are all good cops, with excellent training and maturity and that influences me too.

        Further, as the shooting team discovered, their stories each fit the crime scene, as did the witness statements. The conclusion was: They did not use deadly force until their own lives were in jeopardy. Now remember, this is according to independent expert analysis and witnesses. Even so, a good lawyer can make black look white and there is the gamble in court. So, just because the city settled out of court for a big amount, do NOT assume there was guilt or they were hiding something. That’s an injustice to lay on good police officers.

        One other thing…the new mayor is a liberal and I would not call him pro-police, so that may have had some bearing on the settlement too.

  3. Peggy says:

    Off topic, but too funny not to share, Must watch video.


    • Chris says:

      I can’t imagine being so stupid as to believe having a wall around one’s house means one should support a wall along the entire U.S.-Mexico border.

      • Peggy says:

        Being stupid is not being able to realize it’s not the size that matters, but how well it works. Big or small!

        • Chris says:

          But a wall spanning the entire U.S.-Mexico border would not work as well as a wall around a house.

          This is obvious.

          • Peggy says:

            No it’s not. A wall around a mega federal prison would work just as well as one at a county or state jail/prison would. Add proportional amount of guards/border patrols, surveillance cameras and drones and our problem with illegals entering our country would be pretty much solved.

            25,000 family units crossed our border last month. 500 illegals a day are being released on to the streets of El Paso. This is not sustainable, no matter how you try to spin it, and have our country survive the financial, economic, drug deaths and crimes committed against US citizens and legal residents.

    • Libby says:

      Didn’t I just hear about some famous person who planted poison ivy around his Martha’s Vineyard Manse?

      The thing is, Peggy, it’s YOU he’s trying to deter … not any thundering brown hoard.

      You people are absurd.

      • Peggy says:

        What a racist thing to say! Why, because I’m WHITE and not a member of a “thundering brown hoard”?

        Bet you and Chris have common relatives in your family trees’.

        • Libby says:

          No, Peggy. You have to try harder to think about this. What is the difference between a gated community, poison ivy under the windows, and your border wall?

          Is there any difference?

          Is that how you want to live?

          Think about it, will you please.

  4. J. Soden says:

    Update on Funding the Wall:

    Gee, maybe Chico City Council should start an account to pay for their expansive homeless supporting activities . . . . . . .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *