Inquests slated to start again Thursday

One year, six months and eight days have come and gone since the last coroner's inquest.

In that time 18 more people have died at the hands of law enforcement officers in Clark County, and little to nothing has been revealed about what happened and why.

That could begin to change this week.

After 18 months of discussions, legal fights and delays, the coroner's inquest is set to restart Thursday under new rules designed to make the process more balanced and transparent while answering key questions for the public and families of the dead.

"Families have been waiting for a long time just to find out what happened" to their loved ones, said lawyer Maggie McLetchie, who helped mold the new process when she worked for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada.

At this week's inquest, scheduled for Thursday and Friday at the Regional Justice Center, a panel of citizens will hear the case of Eduardo Lopez-Hernandez, a 21-year-old who died in August 2010 during a drawn-out fight and struggle with Nevada Highway Patrol troopers on U.S. Highway 95.

The County Commission changed inquest rules in late 2010 following two controversial Las Vegas police shootings.

Key changes included having the juries make findings of fact instead of fault and adding a lawyer, called an ombudsman, to represent the family of the dead in the hearing.

'NOW WE NEED TO LET IT WORK'

"It's been a long time coming," said Coroner Mike Murphy, who faces a backlog of 19 inquests because of the delays. "Now we need to let it work."

Supporters of the changes have been eager to see the new system in action. Not so for law enforcement officers in Southern Nevada.

Led by the Las Vegas Police Protective Association, which represents 2,400 rank-and-file Las Vegas officers, the region's police unions have opposed the revamped inquest format, saying it threatens their officers' constitutional rights. The changes have transformed what's supposed to be a fact-finding hearing into an adversarial trial-like hearing, they say, especially with the addition of the ombudsman, who can directly question witnesses.

The PPA has backed two legal challenges against the inquest - one involving three of its own officers and the other involving the troopers in the Lopez-Hernandez case. Both challenges were thwarted, one by a federal judge and one by a state judge, though both decisions are under appeal.

REQUEST TO SUSPEND INQUEST

And this week's inquest could face another legal delay. Last week the troopers asked the state Supreme Court to suspend the inquest while their appeal is pending.

"People are crossing their fingers and hoping" the inquest happens, said Dane Claussen, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada.

Newly appointed District Attorney Steve Wolfson said he also hopes the inquest goes forward.

"I'm in favor of giving it a chance to see how it works," he said.

Since taking office in February, Wolfson has started reviewing fatal police incidents and releasing written decisions on whether they were legally justified, which is commonly done throughout the country.

His office released the first two decisions earlier this month and found both cases justified, including the fatal confrontation between troopers and Lopez-Hernandez.

FIFTH AMENDMENT CONCERNS

Chris Collins, the PPA's executive director, has been fighting the ombudsman concept since the idea was discussed at a special committee assembled to suggest inquest changes. If the inquest goes forward, the unions are recommending that their officers take the witness stand and refuse to testify under the Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination.

McLetchie said the officers shouldn't be allowed to "essentially boycott" the inquest.

Claussen added that such a strategy would prevent the inquest from being the fact-finding hearing it's intended to be.

"If every officer takes the stand and pleads the Fifth Amendment, the community's still going to have a lot of questions about what happened," he said.

When the County Commission approved the inquest changes in late 2010, Commissioners Steve Sisolak and Larry Brown had reservations about the ombudsman's effect on the process and voted against it.

If the officers don't testify, the inquest might have to be revisited and changed again, Sisolak said. "We might be back where we started," he said.

Supporters of the new inquest say the new process can't be judged either way until it actually goes forward. Only then can its effectiveness be determined.

"We just need to let it unfold, and then we can evaluate it after that," Murphy said.

Contact reporter Brian Haynes at bhaynes@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0281.