On a December evening just before Christmas in 2011, a traffic stop in Pittsburgh's Knoxville neighborhood ended in the death of 24-year-old Lawrence A. Jones Jr. The incident, which occurred on December 23, 2011, involved two undercover Pittsburgh police officers, Jeffrey John Abraham and Joseph P. Fabus. The officers' account of the event stated that after they pulled over the vehicle Jones was driving, they saw a gun in his possession.
They contended that Jones was shot as he attempted to flee, and that their actions were therefore justified.
The family of Lawrence Jones vehemently disputed the police's narrative, describing his death as a 'senseless murder.' They maintained that he was unarmed and on his way to do some last-minute Christmas shopping. His father acknowledged that his son had a criminal history but was adamant that he did not own a gun and would not have posed a threat to the officers. The family's claims were bolstered by their legal representation, who asserted in a subsequent lawsuit that Jones was the unarmed subject of a traffic stop when he was shot by Officer Fabus.
In the wake of the shooting, the Allegheny County District Attorney's Office launched an investigation into the incident. In November 2012, Lawrence Jones's mother, Marie C. Reese, filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Pittsburgh, the two officers, and the police chief. The lawsuit alleged that the officers had used excessive force and that a lack of proper training for undercover officers had contributed to her son's death. The legal proceedings continued for several years, and in August 2014, a United States Magistrate Judge made a significant ruling in the case. The judge granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of the City of Pittsburgh, the police chief, and Officer Abraham, effectively dismissing the claims against them. However, the judge denied the motion for summary judgment for Officer Joseph P. Fabus, allowing the lawsuit to proceed against him. The final resolution of the lawsuit against Officer Fabus is not publicly documented in the available search results. Similarly, the conclusions of the investigation by the District Attorney's office have not been made public.
