QuickTake:

Nine years after being shot multiple times by police, Edgar T. Rodriguez gave his version of events as part of a civil lawsuit. But jurors largely rejected his account, assigning a small percentage of negligence to two officers but finding Rodriguez mostly at fault on the night of the shooting. The city avoids paying damages.

Jurors in a police shooting civil trial rejected a claim that two Eugene police officers used excessive force when they shot a man who had called 911 for help.

The verdict on Wednesday, Oct. 1, came just before 5 p.m. after a day of deliberations by the six-person panel. The jury also deliberated for about three hours on Tuesday afternoon after hearing six days of testimony.

Edgar T. Rodriguez was shot multiple times by police outside his West Eugene apartment, after he had called 911 just before 1 a.m. on Sept. 10, 2016, asking for help in dealing with a houseguest behaving violently.

His lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Eugene alleged battery and negligence in addition to excessive force, with the city and two officers named as defendants for the trial proceedings.

Jurors heard vastly different versions of the encounter between Rodriguez and Mark Hubbard, the Eugene police officer who fired first at Rodriguez. Another officer, Timothy Hunt, also fired on Rodriguez. In 2016, the Lane County District Attorney found their use of deadly force justified, according to published reports.

In court on Wednesday, jurors assigned some fault to the city as part of their verdict.

Following instructions given to them, they assigned percentages of how much the parties to the lawsuit were at fault, assigning 20% of the fault to the city and 10% to each officer. They did so after answering that Rodriguez did not attempt to commit first-degree assault on the night in question.

But under the comparative negligence standard in place in Oregon, because the jurors assigned a greater percentage of fault, 60%, to Rodriguez, the person filing the lawsuit, he may not recover any damages.

Derek Larwick, an attorney for Rodriguez, declined to comment after the verdict. In his closing argument Tuesday, Larwick told jurors that damages related to Rodriguez’s pain, suffering and “loss of enjoyment of life” could “easily be in the range of $10 million.”

During the trial, Rodriguez told jurors he at first didn’t know a police officer had shot him as he held a .50 caliber Desert Eagle handgun by its barrel while en route to putting it in his car for safekeeping.

Hubbard, who told jurors he retired in January, stated from the witness stand that soon after arriving a few minutes before 1 a.m. at Rodriguez’s apartment building in he encountered a man holding a gun who then raised it to Hubbard’s waist level, leading him to draw his weapon and fire, as he feared for his life.

Jurors also heard conflicting information about other key details of the shooting. Rodriguez testified he stood about two feet from his apartment door, and that he flung the handgun away from his body.

In closing arguments Tuesday, Ben Miller, an assistant city attorney, told jurors that the two accounts of the shooting were “largely diametrically opposed.”

No police body-camera footage existed for the encounter between Hubbard and Rodriguez. Eugene police did not have to wear body cameras until 2017, according to published reports.

In opening arguments, Miller told jurors that a night of drinking fueled bad decisions by Rodriguez. On Tuesday, Miller said Rodriguez had a blood alcohol level of 0.14% at the hospital a half-hour after the shooting.

Attorneys for Rodriguez questioned why Hubbard on the night of the shooting did not immediately tell other officers that Rodriguez had tried to kill him. Hubbard told jurors he did not think the information was pertinent at the time.

Rodriguez had a conviction vacated in connection with the night of the shooting, but this information never was shared with jurors.

A nonunanimous jury in Lane County Circuit Court found Rodriguez guilty of unlawfully using a weapon.

Rodriguez appealed the decision. But, while that appeal was pending, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2020 ruled a unanimous jury was required to convict someone of a serious offense, and Lane County prosecutors declined to retry Rodriguez, according to court documents.

U.S. Senior District Judge Ann Aiken, in an opinion issued before the start of the trial, wrote that Rodriguez and the city “are broadly in agreement that no reference should be made to the prior criminal case.”