Lodi police release names of officers involved in Jan. 25 shooting
02/01/2014 12:14 PM
03/30/2014 10:33 AM
The Lodi Police Department has identified the two officers involved in a Jan. 25 shooting that left a Gulf War veteran dead.
In a news release, department veterans Cpl. Scott Bratton and Officer Adam Lockie were named as the pair involved. Bratton has been with the Lodi Police Department since 2000 and Lockie since 1999, the release said.
According to police reports, the officers shot 43-year-old Parminder Singh Shergill after he charged at them with a knife.
Shergill’s family has a different story and says they have witness accounts to prove it. Shergill served in the Gulf War and suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. His mother had called police, worried about her son’s state of mind.
Shergill was a Sikh, and the death has prompted questions and outrage in the local Sikh community. Few details have been released to the public, including how many shots were fired and details about the knife officers recovered at the scene. Multiple agencies, including the San Joaquin County District Attorney’s Office, Lodi Police Department and the state Department of Justice are investigating.
Lodi police characterized the probe as a way to address the concerns of the community, noting that a full investigation may take months to complete.
Sacto 911 StaffBill Lindelof
More Sacto 911Crimemapper
Send news tips
Sign up for breaking news alerts
Crime Q&ASacramento Bee reporter Cathy Locke answers your questions about crime news, trends and issues. Look up specific cases using Arrest Logs and Sacramento Superior Courts case database.
Submit your question
Join the Discussion
The Sacramento Bee is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.