In a crowded Austin courtroom, the trial regarding the 2021 fatal shooting of Alex Gonzales Jr. began with opening statements from both the plaintiffs and the defense.
Gonzales Jr. was shot by off-duty Austin police officer Gabriel Gutierrez while he was strapped into the back seat of a car with his 2-month-old infant.
Four and a half years later, Alex Gonzales Sr. and Elizabeth Gonzales, the parents of the victim, are seeking damages related to the death of their son and charging the city of Austin with mishandling the investigation following the incident.
Donald Puckett, attorney for the plaintiffs, emphasized that the upcoming weeks will focus on two essential elements: truth and accountability.
Puckett asserted that his team will expose information that the Austin Police Department (APD) has not disclosed regarding the events of the night Gonzales was killed, as well as the ensuing investigation.
The trial includes two defendants: Officer Gutierrez, who was off-duty during the shooting, and the city of Austin, which oversees the APD.
According to Puckett, police officers are held to a minimum standard of truthfulness, and police departments are obligated to conduct thorough investigations.
He claimed that both obligations were not met in Gonzales’ case, leading to the current trial.
Puckett recounted the events of January 5, 2021, arguing that from the moment Gutierrez called 911 after the shooting, he has not provided an accurate account of what transpired.
He pointed out that the Special Investigations Unit and Internal Affairs, responsible for reviewing the use of lethal force by APD officers, failed to conduct a comprehensive investigation into Gonzales’ death.
Puckett noted that both bodies neglected to rigorously interrogate Gutierrez’s statements and compare them against factual evidence.
The attorney contended that while the defense may attempt to portray Gonzales as the one responsible for the altercation, the case hinges on a confrontation between Gutierrez’s testimony and the actual facts and evidence.
Puckett underscored that civil lawsuits like this are vital to ensuring accountability within police departments.
Following Puckett’s remarks, the defense for Gutierrez was presented by Albert Lopez.
Lopez stressed that understanding the full context of the incident is critical, asserting that there are always two sides to a story.
He argued that Gutierrez felt his life was in danger when he decided to use lethal force, asserting that the question before the jury is whether Gutierrez’s action was reasonable given the situation he faced.
If the jury accepts Gutierrez’s account, Lopez stated, the case should be straightforward.
He urged the jury to remain focused as the trial progresses, advising them to “keep an eye on the ball.”
Finally, attorney Gray Laird, defending the city, characterized the investigation as thorough and unbiased despite the hindsight advantages of the present situation.
Laird stated that former Chief of Police Joseph Chacon approached the investigation with commitment and seriousness.
He described both the Special Investigations Unit and Internal Affairs as “handpicked” teams, insisting that the APD follows a stringent protocol when assessing use-of-force cases and appropriately disciplines officers for excessive use of force when identified.
Once the opening statements concluded, presiding Judge Robert Pitman invited the plaintiffs to present their first witness, setting the stage for the trial’s next phase.
Further coverage is expected in online updates and future publications.
image source from：austinchronicle
