Deputies’ Slaying of Drug Suspect Justified, Jury Says

Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies were justified in fatally shooting a 26-year-old Malibu man when they entered his house in the middle of the night with machine guns in search of drugs, a jury ruled Thursday.

Concluding an eight-week civil rights trial in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, a six-member jury concluded that deputies made reasonable efforts to warn sleeping residents inside the house before bursting through the front door and confronting Glenn Gorio, a suspected cocaine dealer, outside his bedroom door.

Gorio’s parents had sought up to $3.7 million in damages from the Sheriff’s Department, claiming a 29-member SWAT team used excessive force when it arrived at the Gorio home in the pre-dawn hours of Oct. 26, 1984, to serve a search warrant, killing Gorio when he leveled a handgun at an oncoming deputy.

“This confirms our belief from the beginning of the case that the officers’ actions were entirely justified,” said Anthony P. Serritella, who represented the Sheriff’s Department.

The unanimous verdict, he said, “basically vindicates the officers in every case, proving our contention that (the lawsuit) was entirely frivolous and without merit.”

Neither the Gorios nor their attorneys, Stephen and Marian Yagman, were present during the reading of the verdict, and they could not be reached for comment later. Jurors refused to discuss the case after the verdict.

At issue was whether sheriff’s officials took adequate steps to warn occupants of the house when they arrived shortly after 4 a.m. to serve what was considered a high-risk search warrant, based on information that Gorio had a large cache of arms on the property.

Deputies testified that they shouted warnings outside the house for 30 to 45 seconds before bursting through the front door with a battering ram and throwing a “flash bang” concussion grenade up to the second level of the house.

Fiancee’s Testimony

Gorio’s fiancee testified that they were awakened by the sound of the grenade and that Gorio grabbed a gun from beside the bed to confront what they both assumed were burglars. Both sides agreed that Gorio pointed the gun at a figure outside the door, shouting, “Who is it? Who is it?”

Deputy David Furmanski testified he replied, “Sheriff’s Department, Sheriff’s Department,” firing his automatic weapon only after Gorio fired first. Yagman argued that physical evidence at the scene indicated the deputy had fired first.

“The plaintiffs don’t contend that the use of force in this case was excessive,” he told the jury in closing arguments earlier this week. “They contend the use of force in this case was insane. It was way beyond excessive.”

Although the Gorio family contended that deputies should have searched the house during the daylight hours when no one was at home, U.S. District Judge J. Spencer Letts ruled early in the case that the nighttime service warrant was issued with good cause, given deputies’ belief that Gorio might destroy evidence if warned of the their arrival.

Moreover, the jury was not asked to decide whether Gorio actually knew there were deputies, and not burglars, in the hall outside his bedroom. To side with the Sheriff’s Department, jurors had only to find that deputies took reasonable steps to assure that Gorio would know that law enforcement officers had entered the house.

In their findings, jurors also ruled that deputies had good reason to believe that they had been seen by residents of the house and had reason to believe that Gorio may have been arming himself and destroying evidence.

Deputies’ Testimony

In part, the jury’s findings were based on testimony that deputies had heard an alarm going off in a room near the master bedroom where Gorio’s gun collection of 41 weapons was stored. Other deputies had testified that they discerned movement at one of the windows before entering the house.

Letts had earlier dismissed most of the defendants from the case, including the Sheriff’s Department, Sheriff Sherman Block and the majority of the deputies who entered the house and planned the warrant service.

The jury’s verdict was in favor of the two remaining defendants, Furmanski, and the officer who had led the entry team on which Furmanski served, Sgt. Willie Henderson.