Gun Record Fuels Police Shooting Dispute

The gun that a young man reportedly aimed at two Claremont police officers before they shot and killed him was last registered to a deceased Ontario police chief, officials said Monday.

The connection to a high-ranking police officer, whose name had been redacted from an official report made public about the incident, is fueling further controversy about the death of Irvin Landrum Jr., 18, who was shot three times during a traffic stop in January. The police shooting has already prompted weekly demonstrations in front of City Hall and an FBI investigation into possible civil rights violations.

The district attorney’s office concluded in October that the officers, Hany Hanna and Kent Jacks, were not “criminally culpable” in the shooting. Its findings were based on the report, which detailed a Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department investigation into the incident.

One of the most disputed points in the case is whether Landrum was armed the night he was pulled over for speeding and told to step outside his car. The officers say that Landrum drew the weapon from his waistband and fired.

But tests conducted by the Sheriff’s Department showed that the gun had not been fired and bore no fingerprints. Police have not explained how the officers saw and heard Landrum’s weapon discharge. Claremont Police Chief Robert Moody has cited a study by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms showing that few guns recovered from crimes bear usable fingerprints.

Landrum’s family and their supporters, meanwhile, say they have long suspected that the large .45-caliber revolver--a collector’s item--would be traced back to someone in law enforcement.

They said the news about the gun underscores their suspicion that the gun was planted by the officers.

“It’s what we suspected from the beginning,” said Obee Landrum, the victim’s uncle. “I ask: Is it more likely for a gun owned by a police chief to find its way to other police--or can we assume that his widow just sold it to someone on the street?”

Moody, however, said there is absolutely no connection between the gun and his department. Neither officer worked in Ontario, he said, and it is unclear who has owned the weapon since Ontario Police Chief Wayne Simmons, a well-known gun collector, died 11 years ago.

The sheriff’s report, completed March 15, identified the gun as coming from a collector and quoted his widow as saying she had no information about how the weapon came to be involved in the Claremont incident. The names of Simmons and his wife, Joanne, were blotted out; there was no mention that Simmons was Ontario police chief for a year and a half until his death in 1988.

Moody said the names were initially withheld based on legal advice that Joanne Simmons “wasn’t really involved in the case.” However, he recently released the names after a reporter for the Claremont Courier, a local weekly newspaper, filed a Public Records Act request.

Anthony Willoughby, the Landrum family attorney, who is suing the city in federal court for wrongful death and civil rights violations, said the fact that the gun had belonged to Simmons is a crucial piece of information. “You’re talking about the wife of a cop,” he said. “She’s not going to walk down and sell this gun on the street.”

Pitzer College professor Halford Fairchild, who has helped rally support for the Landrums, agreed that the gun’s origin was significant.

“This to me is very exciting news and is consistent with the theory we’ve developed about this shooting, which is the gun was planted and came from a police source,” he said.

Willoughby said he plans to sue the city on behalf of Obee Landrum, the uncle, who was recently targeted in a city news release.

In the October release, City Manager Glenn Southard gave reporters a chart of Obee Landrum’s criminal record dating back to 1969, including arrests that were dismissed and convictions for theft and burglary that landed him in state prison for more than eight years.

The attorney maintained that the city manager was trying to tarnish Landrum’s reputation and intimidate him. “The purpose was to stifle him,” said Willoughby.

A spokesman for the city, Mike Maxfield, said Southard was unavailable to comment Monday. He added that all of the information on Landrum was from public records and found by attorneys conducting a routine investigation to defend the city against the family’s lawsuit.

“Glenn thought the public needed to know what type of person is making these comments,” said Maxfield. “His thinking was: This raises questions in our mind; would this raise questions with the public?”