Family sues over gun death
1
2
3
SPRINGFIELD - The Micro Uzi machine gun that killed 8-year-old Christopher K. Bizilj at a Westfield gun fair last October reportedly jammed twice and was inspected by a 15-year-old boy before it slipped from Christopher's grasp and discharged, according to a $4 million wrongful death lawsuit filed Monday.
Christopher was shot through the head at the "Great New England Pumpkin Shoot" last year, an event the suit alleges was advertised as "an opportunity to shoot machine guns and automatic weapons, without the requirement of permits or licenses to do so" It was sponsored by COP Firearms & Training, owned by Edward Fleury, who resigned as Pelham police chief in March, and the Westfield Sportsman's Club.
The suit was filed in U.S. District Court by attorney Vincent A. Bongiorni, of Springfield, on behalf of Christopher's parents, Suzanne M. and Charles D. Bizilj, and his 11-year-old brother, Colin, of Ashford, Conn. The suit alleges negligence in maintenance and training, wrongful death and the infliction of emotional stress against seven defendants: the Westfield Sportsman's Club Inc.; COP Firearms & Training of Amherst; Fleury, of Amherst; Provost Precision Pistols LLC, of Weatogue, Conn.; Carl Giuffre of West Hartford, Conn.; D&T Arms LLC, of New Milford, Conn.; and Domenico J. Spano, of Milford, Conn.
Fleury, Spano and Carl Giuffre face additional criminal charges in Hampden Superior Court. Each has pleaded innocent to charges of involuntary manslaughter and furnishing a machine gun to a minor in connection with the shooting. Their trial had been set for Dec. 8, but was postponed last week.
According to the 32-page lawsuit, on Oct. 28, 2008, Charles Bizilj purchased the opportunity for his son, Christopher, to fire a Micro Uzi 9 mm that was owned by Giuffre and brought to the exposition by Spano. Giuffre and Spano were reportedly designated as "renters" at the expo, hired and solicited by Fleury to provide the weapons used by patrons.
When Christopher reportedly stepped to the line to fire the weapon, the suit alleges that Spano's son, 15-year-old Michael Spano, was the line officer charged with loading the weapon, handing it to the participant and providing instructions on its use. While Christopher was firing, Charles Bizilj was reportedly ordered to stay clear of the area and was required to stand behind restraining ropes.
On the first and second firing attempt, the suit alleges the weapon jammed and that Spano retrieved it, cleared what he believed was a jammed round of ammunition, and handed it back to Christopher. On the third try, when the boy attempted to raise the weapon to his shoulder, the stock slid down his shoulder, causing the barrel to spin upward and discharge as Christopher tried to prevent it from falling, according to the suit.
Shortly after the incident, Hampden District Attorney William M. Bennett initiated a probe into the boy's death aimed at determining whether it was illegal or reckless for children to possess or fire a machine gun. State law prohibits furnishing a machine gun to any person under the age of 18.
But others have asserted that the state's gun laws are so poorly written that even experts have trouble deciphering them.
Owen Boss can be reached at oboss@gazettenet.com
Comments
Calling the kettle black
Bottom line is that for the parents to sue over a responsability that was theirs... Is wrong. It was their son, His dad brought him, His dad paid the money for his child to hold and fire an automatic weapon.... This was not an arcade or a pop gun at the county fair... it was a deadly firearm... If he did not like the way they were handling the firearms, simple --- DO NOT DO IT ! DUH..... Homer Simpson would have known better ! Yes, the fools who put it on should answer for the mistakes made, but the should not have to pay a parent who is thoughtless enough to place a child in harms way.... I have wondered why the father was not charged with anything, I know he has to live with it.... BOTTOM LINE....He should not be entitled to recieve a settlement for a situation that he holds the ultimate responsability for.
Sorry to sound kind of cold :(
This is going to sound very cold but I hold the parents responsible as well for this tragedy. They will have to live with their joint decision to go to this event with the intention of allowing their 8 yr. old son to fire such a gun. As a mother of three children (17,13,7) I have to say that I would NEVER!!! give my husband permission to do this. My husband, after we heard about this, said he would NEVER allow ANY of our children to shoot these kinds of guns. My kids are gun safety trained by an approved program, with their cards to prove they have had this training, my oldest son has his FID (not called that anymore) card through the local police station and they both hunt with their father. There is an element of responsibility to us parents that was missing in this case.
I do, however, feel that the people involved with this event bear responsibility also. No matter what the laws say, they should have NEVER allowed anyone under at least 16 yrs. of age to fire these guns AND ONLY an adult, who knows the gun, should supervise.
Fleury is an incompetent clown and has been one for years.
His lack of care with firearms is well-known and well-documented even BEFORE this case.
A total incompetent with guns, a badge and a stupid old gun "safety" training school.
And on top of it, his little "paid salary" vacation of several months cost the town how much money?
What a self-serving jerk.
Post new comment