In Custody Death Investigation

Los Angeles:  Officers and a private security guard detained a theft suspect, who later died despite emergency treatment by rescue ambulance personnel.

On February 18, 2025 at about 5:05 p.m., Officers Joseph Broussard, an 8-year veteran with the Department, and Esmeralda Ruiz, who has 8 months with the Department, responded to a radio call of a theft / battery “suspect at the CVS Pharmacy at 3751 Wilshire Blvd.”  When the officers arrived at the location, they were directed into the store.  Officers saw the suspect, lying face down on the ground, handcuffed and being restrained by a private security guard.

As officers began to talk to employees and the security guard to find out what the circumstances were, they determined that the suspect had stopped breathing.  The officers immediately removed the suspect’s handcuffs and rolled him over onto his back.  They requested an ambulance and began CPR.  

The Los Angeles Fire Department medical personnel arrived and transported the suspect to a local area hospital where he was pronounced dead.

No force was used by the officers and no officers were injured.

Force Investigation Division personnel responded and are conducting an In Custody Death investigation. 

Comments

[Centurion]

Why is this an In-Custody death?

[karen]

this person wasn't in police custody. they had just arrived on the scene. it wasn't even their handcuffs on the guy. next thing, officers going to a db call will be labeled as an "in custody" death.

[LA LT]

I would think it would be treated as an in-custody death for two reasons. First, the officers had arrived and were conducting their interview, thus it would be reasonable to assume they were going to take custody of the prisoner. The suspect was not free to leave, officers were present, therefore technically he was "in custody."

Second, FID responded for the safety of the officers. The investigation will determine the circumstances around the death, while the coroner will determine the cause. There's no reason to believe the officers did anything wrong, and the in-custody death investigation will prove that.

[Satisfy me pls]

Gonna have to disagree with you on your reasons LT. Officers arrived and were conducting an interview,which could have revealed there wasnt a crime. The only thing that is reasonable is that the police show up when they are called and make a determination if they are needed to effect an arrest. The suspect not being free to leave could have been a mistake by the security who can sometimes be over zealous in making a private persons arrest. No one is "technically in custody" until we place our handcuffs on the person we are effecting an arrest on. Until then,we have to make the determination. And it sounds like the officers arrived,began their investigation and then called an ambulance due to a medical emergency. Who knows if the suspect detained by the security was in violation of any law. Now ofcourse due to liability and the city always placing the burden on the street cops who are doing thier job, it is all placed on their shoulders. And all they did was show up. In the end,someone has to take the hit,and its always an "a" car. Part of the game i guess. So your reasons LT,arent satisfying. Next.

[LA LT]

Hi Satisfy me,

Fair enough, I respect your opinion, however I'll still contend the investigation is of great benefit for the responding officers. And the term "technically in custody" was a poor choice of words on my part. I will now say he was "in custody," because he was handcuffed while in the officers' presence. It may well have been a bad call on security's part, but regardless, he was not free to leave.

When an attorney gets hold of this, and claims the officers contributed to this fellow's demise, would you rather have an FID investigation to support the officers, or nothing? You're spot on that the rank-and-file officers "take the hit," and the full investigation greatly helps them.

[Woody]

Why not have FID do it...two to do the investigation and ten more to stand around in a circle. All on overtime... must be nice.

[Satisfy me pls]

I hear you knocking LT. I guess the poor choice of words is what threw me off,your right,its better to have an investigation that supports the officers than nothing at all. im a little sensitive to in-custody deaths,i just went through the ringer in federal court for an in custody death. talk about just showing up.but i agree with you LT. i am satisfied. 8)

[LA LT]

Hi Satisfy me,

Glad you're satisfied this time, but keep up the questions. Supervisors owe you the answers. I've never been afraid of being questioned about a decision I made, because I try to base them on facts at the time, and as much objectivity as I can muster. Of course, not all supervisors are like that, but I think most are.

Keep your head up, be aware of your surroundings, communicate with your partner, live a good life off-duty (take care of yourself, maintain contact with friends and family), and document your actions and observations. Hope you made it through federal court okay, and that you have a prosperous career!

Be careful out there.

[Satisfy me pls]

thanks LT...much appreciated.much appreciated.

[anon]

Lots of questions and answers. Point being, one way or another, someone on the Dept. is going to have to write something down. Sergeant's log, Death Report, Incident Report, and don't forget the officers applied CPR. Was he dead before or after they put hands on him. Apparently, since they performed CPR, why would they use CPR on a deceased person. So, was there a chance he would revive and survive?

Too many questions, and too many authors on many different reports. Think risk management, consistency, and protecting the officers from future liability, like lawsuit from family. Too many possibilities to make the coppers and Dept. appear liable.