POLICE MISTOOK OFFICER'S SHOT AS HOSTILE FIRE DURING RAID, SOURCE SAYS

A mistaken belief that a Houston police officer had been hit by hostile
fire during a drug raid prompted the barrage of gunfire that killed a
22-year-old suspect, an HPD source told the Chronicle on Tuesday.

Pedro Oregon Navarro never fired the handgun found in his apartment after
he was shot to death by police last week, the source said.

A shot fired by one of the officers in the raid hit a fellow officer in his
bullet-resistant vest and knocked him to the floor. Officers apparently
thought the shot had been fired by Oregon, prompting police to open fire on
the suspect, the source said.

Police fired more than 30 shots at Oregon. Autopsy findings released Monday
showed Oregon was hit by 12 shots, nine of them fired into his back and
from above him.

New details of the incident were revealed Tuesday by a police source, who
asked to remain unidentified.

Members of the gang task force assigned to the Southwest Patrol Division
arrested a man with narcotics in his possession late Saturday, the source
said.

That suspect told the officers he bought the narcotics from a man in
Oregon's apartment and offered to help them arrest the man in return for
not being arrested himself.

The narcotics suspect knocked on Oregon's door while the gang task force
officers hid outside, the source said. When the door was opened, the
officers, all in full HPD uniform, ran inside.

Gang task force members ran after Oregon but found the door to the bedroom
he had gone into locked. Officer Lamont E. Tillery kicked the bedroom door
open.

When the bedroom door opened, one of the officers shouted that Oregon had a
gun. About the same time, the gun held by the officer behind Tillery went
off, the bullet striking Tillery and knocking him to the floor.

The other officers, thinking Tillery had been shot by Oregon, opened fire.

Under Texas law, though, it may not matter whether Oregon fired a weapon or
not, Harris County District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr. said Tuesday.

Holmes said earlier that the gang task force officers, who have been
relieved of duty while the matter is investigated, probably had no legal
right to enter Oregon's home without a warrant.

As Holmes pointed out then, however, while Texas law allows a person to
resist unlawful deadly force with deadly force, it does not allow a person
to resist a search or arrest by a peace officer, even if the search or
arrest is unlawful.

Holmes said he has received many calls and letters, "some of them pretty
hateful," from outraged people who apparently did not understand that he
was only quoting the law, not expressing his personal view.

"Most of the people are influenced ... by the fact that the officers made
an entry that hindsight tells us was not lawful, in my personal view, and
I'm no lightweight when it comes to arrest, search and seizure," Holmes
said.

But the law dealing with resistance to unlawful search or arrest was
discussed at length by the legislative committee that revised the penal
code in 1974, Holmes said.

The committee ultimately decided "that it was preferable to have citizens
and cops fighting about the lawfulness of what they do in the courtroom
rather than on the street or in the building or in the home, because the
citizen is going to lose nine times out of 10," Holmes said.

"I don't know what happened out there," Holmes said. "I can imagine a
scenario where they're justified. I can imagine a scenario where they're
not.

"What I truly feel in my heart of hearts is these guys had no idea what
they were doing," Holmes said.

"One of the things that could be acknowledged here is how smart the police
chief's rule is," Holmes added, referring to Police Chief C.O. Bradford's
order that all informants used by narcotics or vice officers be registered
with the department.

"Narcotics investigation is a specialized kind of police work," Holmes
said. "I don't want some burglary and theft detective investigating my
killing, and I would prefer not to have patrol officers ... working
narcotics cases.

"That's why I suspect they developed the rule that they did with regards to
working informers and that kind of stuff," Holmes said: "It's a good rule
and this, I think, points out why it should be followed."

Evidence collected in the case will be presented to a grand jury, Holmes
said, adding it probably will be presented to a new panel that will be
seated Aug. 1.

Checked-by: (Joel W. Johnson)