Three parties are fighting for the $1.2 million reward for the capture of ex-LAPD officer Christopher Dorner, but some donors are withdrawing their pledges.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa first announced that the reward would go to “information leading to Mr. Dorner’s capture,” but officials later amended that to “capture and conviction.” The police received thousands of calls, but the parties who believe they should receive the reward are Jim and Karen Reynolds, who were tied up by Dorner and later called the police, and Rick Heltebrake, who was carjacked by Dorner and then called the police.
What was the intent of the reward money? Are these parties eligible to the money or were they fulfilling their civic duty? Would the issuing of the reward money have changed the outcome of this case at all? How legally binding are pledges from donors? Who is ultimately responsible for issuing the reward money?
Eugene O’Donnell, professor of law and police science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice