A Fontana family seeks justice after their unarmed loved one was shot in the back of the head by police in his own driveway, but authorities claim he reached for an officer’s weapon.
At a Glance
- Jaime Valdez, 33, was shot and killed by Fontana police officer Alex Yanez in November 2023 following a 911 call about threats
- Body-cam footage shows Valdez was tased and then shot while lying in his driveway
- Police claim Valdez attempted to grab the officer’s weapons, but DNA evidence was inconclusive
- The coroner’s report confirmed Valdez was shot in the back of the head and shoulder
- California Department of Justice is investigating the incident as required by law when unarmed individuals are killed
Family Claims Police Used Excessive Force and Misled Them
The family of Jaime Valdez has filed a lawsuit against the Fontana Police Department, alleging excessive force and negligence in the November 2023 shooting that claimed his life. According to court documents, police responded to a 911 call from a family member who reported that Valdez was under the influence of drugs and making threats.
When officers arrived at the scene, they found Valdez lying unresponsive in the driveway of his home. What happened next is at the center of the legal dispute that has drawn intense scrutiny to the department’s use-of-force protocols.
The lawsuit specifically targets Officer Alex Yanez, who discharged his weapon during the confrontation. Body camera footage shows Yanez initially using a taser on Valdez before firing his service weapon, striking Valdez in the back of the head and shoulder. The family contends that Valdez posed no immediate threat to officers and was incapacitated from drug use when the shooting occurred. They argue that the police response was disproportionate to the situation and resulted in an unnecessary loss of life.
Disputed Accounts of the Shooting Incident
The Fontana Police Department’s account differs substantially from the family’s version of events. Official police statements indicate that Valdez attempted to grab Officer Yanez’s gun and taser during the encounter, prompting the officer to use lethal force. However, the family points to forensic evidence that raises questions about this narrative. DNA testing on the officer’s weapons produced inconclusive results, failing to substantiate the claim that Valdez reached for the weapons.
“[An] officer basically shot an unarmed person in the back of the head and then lied to the family about it for a year or more. It’s pretty egregious,” said Bradley Yourist, the family’s attorney.
Adding to the controversy is the coroner’s report, which confirmed that Valdez was shot from behind. This physical evidence contradicts the notion that Valdez was actively confronting the officer face-to-face when the shooting occurred.
The family believes this discrepancy is crucial to understanding what they characterize as an unjustified use of deadly force against a man who was not actively threatening police at the time he was shot.
Family Alleges Police Deception Following the Shooting
Beyond the shooting itself, the Valdez family has raised serious allegations about how police handled the aftermath. According to family members, officers provided misleading information about Jaime’s condition and delayed notifying them of his death. This has further eroded their trust in the department and contributed to their decision to pursue legal action. The family contends that the police deliberately attempted to control the narrative by withholding critical information.
“They lied about everything,” his sister, Rita Brandon, told The Times. “They came and they told my mom that my brother was gonna be okay, that he’d been shot and he was on the way to the hospital, and the whole time he was outside in the driveway dead.”
Jaime’s mother, Isabel Valdez, has been particularly vocal about seeking accountability. “I want justice for my son. The officer who took his life [should pay] just like any other criminal would pay. Just because he’s a police officer he shouldn’t avoid jail,” she stated.
The family describes Jaime as a music lover and sports fan who struggled with addiction and mental health issues but who maintained close family bonds, particularly with his teenage daughter.
Investigation and Legal Proceedings Ongoing
The California Department of Justice has opened an investigation into the shooting, as required by state law when an unarmed person is killed by police. This state-level review will examine whether the use of force was justified under the circumstances and if departmental policies were followed. The findings could have significant implications for both the civil lawsuit filed by the family and potential administrative actions against the officers involved.
The 911 call that initiated the police response has also come under scrutiny. Records show a caller stated: “I have a relative that’s not supposed to be here. He’s one of my cousins that’s been coming around, he’s on drugs and he’s threatening to kill us.” While the call indicated a potentially dangerous situation, the family’s lawsuit argues that what officers found upon arrival—an unresponsive man lying in a driveway—should have prompted de-escalation rather than the rapid progression to lethal force.
