Chaos and confusion before Weezer bassist wife was shot in LAPD-released videos

CNN - Apr 26th, 2025

The Los Angeles Police Department has released body-worn camera footage showing the intense moments leading up to the shooting of Jillian Shriner, wife of Weezer bassist Scott Shriner. The incident occurred on April 8 in an Eagle Rock neighborhood during a search for a hit-and-run suspect. Officers navigating through the area encountered Jillian Shriner in her backyard armed with a handgun. Despite officers repeatedly instructing her to drop the weapon, she allegedly lifted and racked it, prompting police to open fire. Shriner was struck but managed to return to her residence, believing mistakenly that the hit-and-run suspect, not the police, had shot her. She was later arrested for attempted murder of a police officer but released on bail, with a court appearance scheduled for April 30.

The release of the footage is part of ongoing investigations by the LAPD, as questions linger over the communication and conduct during the incident. The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office has not yet received a case for filing consideration, and the lack of updates has kept the community and media in anticipation. This case highlights issues of police-community interactions, especially in high-stress situations, and raises discussions about the use of force and the transparency of law enforcement actions. The incident also underscores the complexity of situations involving armed civilians and the potential for tragic misunderstandings during police operations.

Los Angeles Lapd Police Shooting Scott Shriner Jillian Shriner Body Worn Cameras Attempted Murder Charge Hit And Run Suspect

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive account of a complex and controversial incident involving a police shooting. It effectively uses available evidence, such as bodycam footage and a 911 call, to present multiple perspectives on the events leading up to the shooting of Jillian Shriner. The story is timely and engages with significant public interest topics, such as police accountability and civilian safety.

However, the article could benefit from more balanced representation by including direct input from Shriner or her representatives. The reliance on LAPD-edited footage introduces potential bias, and the lack of definitive evidence regarding key aspects of the incident, such as whether Shriner fired her weapon, limits the story's impact and accuracy.

Overall, the article is well-written and accessible, with a clear narrative that captures reader interest. It effectively engages with a controversial topic, encouraging debate and consideration of multiple perspectives. However, it could be strengthened by incorporating more diverse sources and providing additional context for certain actions described in the narrative.

Accuracy

The article appears to be largely accurate, with many of the core facts aligning with available evidence. The incident involving Jillian Shriner occurred on April 8 in Eagle Rock, which is corroborated by multiple sources. The article correctly identifies the involvement of both LAPD and CHP officers, as confirmed by bodycam footage. However, there are discrepancies regarding whether Shriner fired her weapon, as the article mentions a smoke cloud but does not provide definitive evidence of her firing at officers, which is a critical point needing verification.

The story accurately reports that officers commanded Shriner to drop her weapon, consistent with the audio from the bodycams. The description of the chaotic scene, including the presence of helicopters and the officers' shouts, matches the released footage. However, the claim that Shriner believed the shooter was a suspect rather than police is based on a 911 call, which should be cross-referenced with official statements for confirmation.

Overall, while the article captures the main events accurately, it lacks definitive evidence for some claims, such as Shriner's alleged firing of her weapon. It would benefit from additional forensic evidence or unedited video footage to fully verify all assertions.

Balance

The article attempts to present a balanced view of the incident by including multiple perspectives, such as the police's account and the 911 call from Shriner's perspective. However, it leans slightly towards the police narrative by heavily relying on LAPD-released footage and statements without equally exploring Shriner's side or potential defense arguments.

The story does mention Shriner's belief that the shooter was a suspect, not the police, which adds some balance by showing her perspective. However, it lacks direct quotes or statements from Shriner or her representatives, which could provide a more comprehensive view of her side of the story.

Overall, while the article provides a reasonably balanced account, it could improve by incorporating more direct input from Shriner or her legal team to ensure all relevant perspectives are adequately represented.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, providing a chronological account of the events leading up to the shooting. It effectively uses direct quotes from the bodycam footage to convey the intensity of the situation, which enhances reader understanding.

The language is straightforward and neutral, making the complex situation accessible to a general audience. However, the article could benefit from clearer explanations of certain technical terms, such as 'racked the gun,' to ensure all readers fully grasp the implications.

Overall, the article is clear and easy to follow, though it could enhance clarity by providing more context for specific terms and actions described in the narrative.

Source quality

The article relies heavily on LAPD-released footage and statements, which are credible sources for the police perspective. However, this also introduces potential bias, as the footage was edited by the LAPD. The story does not mention any independent verification of the police's claims, which could enhance source quality.

The inclusion of the 911 call provides an additional source that supports Shriner's perspective, but the article does not specify how this call was obtained or verified. Including comments from legal experts or independent witnesses could further improve the reliability and depth of the reporting.

Overall, the source quality is solid for the police perspective but could be strengthened by seeking more diverse and independent sources to balance the narrative.

Transparency

The article provides some transparency by mentioning that the videos were edited by the LAPD, which is crucial for readers to understand potential biases in the footage. However, it lacks detailed information on how the 911 call was obtained and whether it was independently verified.

The story does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest or biases from the sources used, which could impact the impartiality of the reporting. Additionally, it would benefit from a clearer explanation of the methodology behind the police's actions and the subsequent investigation.

Overall, while the article makes some effort to disclose important context, it could improve transparency by providing more detailed information about the sources and the potential limitations of the evidence presented.