By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 24, 2007

The parents of 14-year-old DeOnté Rawlings sued the District and two police officers for $100 million yesterday, saying their son was unarmed and was a victim of negligent homicide when he was shot by an off-duty officer.

The suit claims that DeOnté's death was the result of "reckless and malicious" actions by the officers, James Haskel and Anthony Clay, as they searched for Haskel's minibike the evening of Sept. 17 in their Southeast Washington neighborhood.

The complaint filed in federal court by Charles Rawlings and Loretta Hall alleges that the officers ignored the law and conspired to violate police procedures because they wore street clothes, drove an unmarked SUV, behaved in a threatening manner and failed to identify themselves as police officers.

DeOnté died from a gunshot wound to the back of his head, an autopsy showed.

Police have said that Haskel and Clay found the teenager riding the minibike in the 600 block of Atlantic Avenue SE. Authorities have said the officers told them that Haskel shot in self-defense in a running gun battle after DeOnté fired at them.

DeOnté's death outraged community members because police have not found the gun the officers said the youth used and because of the officers' actions. Clay left the scene in the SUV and returned on foot, according to law enforcement sources. And police learned of the gunfire not from the officers but from ShotSpotter audio detectors.

The suit says Haskel had previous interactions with DeOnté and knew him because they lived in nearby developments in the Washington Highlands neighborhood. It does not provide specifics.

The lawsuit says: "The [fatal] wound suffered by DeOnté Rawlings was inflicted when he presented no immediate threat to anyone."

The attorney representing Haskel and Clay, Robert Ades, did not return a call last night seeking comment.

D.C. police spokeswoman Traci Hughes said: "Any complaint filed against MPD will be handled by the attorney general's office. The Rawlings family has every right to exhaust their legal remedies."

A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office, which is overseeing the investigation of the shooting, could not be reached for comment late yesterday evening.

Several law enforcement sources say they have had trouble finding witnesses to either affirm or rebut the officers' account. They have said they have developed no information showing that Haskel and DeOnté had an antagonistic relationship before the shooting.

Officers are permitted to shoot someone in self-defense or if they think a person poses a serious threat of bodily harm to others.

The suit claims that the officers' actions after the shooting illustrate their guilt. It alleges that they continued to violate procedures by failing to call for an ambulance or quickly report the shooting.

Clay and Haskel are being sued both as police officers and as individuals. The parents' suit was also filed against the District, alleging that the city failed to properly supervise and train officers and that in recent years the Justice Department had warned the city about the use of deadly force.

In this case, the suit notes, the police department had no regulations or policy governing what off-duty officers could do in investigating the theft of their property.

After the shooting, Chief Cathy L. Lanier issued a directive to clarify how off-duty officers should respond if they are victims of a nonviolent crime. The directive said that off-duty officers "who come upon or are victims of a non-violent property crime where there is no immediate threat to their safety" should proceed cautiously "in order to avoid any appearance of impropriety." The directive also said that an off-duty officer should contact on-duty officers before taking police action.