Courtesy Department of Motor Vehicles

Charles Hill, 45, was shot and killed by BART Police on July 3, 2011. The photo was taken in 2009 for his license.

New details about the BART police shooting of a 45-year-old homeless man were revealed in a lawsuit filed by his family against the transit agency Wednesday.

BART police say that officer James Crowell shot and killed Charles Hill on July 3 in self-defense after the inebriated Hill threw a knife at him.

But the lawsuit claims that Hill was standing “15 to 20 feet away” when Crowell “unlawfully shot” him three times in the chest, even though the “immediate threat of harm” had passed.

“It looked like a wrongful shooting and the police should be accountable even though he appears to be homeless,” said John Burris, the attorney for Hill’s family. 

The lawsuit claims that Crowell and another officer were 15 feet away when they showed up on the platform at Civic Center station in response to a report of a “wobbly drunk.” The suit also alleges that the officers “escalated the situation by shouting conflicting and confusing commands” at Hill, who first tossed a liquor bottle at them before drawing a knife.

Video surveillance released by BART shows that Crowell put on gloves, approached Hill and than backed up and fired at him. Hill is not shown on screen, but the knife he threw can be seen ricocheting off a BART car to the left of Crowell.

Questions have been raised about how close Hill was to the young officer whom fellow BART personnel called a “newbie” on radio calls. Crowell had been on the force for 18 months at the time of the shooting. The lawsuit offers the first public assertions about the distance between the two. 

Filed in federal court, the civil suit does not seek specified damages. But Burris secured $2.8 million in settlements from BART for the family of Oscar Grant III, who was shot and killed by BART officer Johannes Mesherle on Jan. 1, 2009.

Dale Allen, a lawyer representing BART and the officers, said the lawsuit “doesn’t have any merit to it.” 

“The officers acted appropriately to the danger they were facing under the law,” said Allen. “Hill was a threat — he was carrying a deadly weapon. He brandished it at the officers, and he did throw a knife at the officers.”

Allen added that the facts would show that “there is no confusion about what they told him to do.”

Hill’s sister-in-law, Jan Hill, first told The Bay Citizen in a November interview that the family had retained Burris to file a lawsuit.

But plans to the file the lawsuit were held up because of a dispute between Hill’s relatives, who live in Connecticut. Hill’s father, Ronald, did not want to file a lawsuit against BART because “he just didn't agree with how Charles lived his life,” said Ephraim Walker, a clerk in Burris’ law office.

Charles Hill was a drifter who crisscrossed the country with few possessions. Social workers and homeless people in San Francisco remembered him as a drinker who was prone to yelling, but not physically aggressive.

Hill’s brother, Chris, and sister-in-law claimed his body from the San Francisco morgue and told the coroner that Hill's father didn’t want anything to do with his son.

But the father died in December, Walker said. That helped clear the path for Chris, a construction worker, to be the plaintiff in the suit against the transit agency.

“Chris Hill has been pretty torn up,” Walker said.

Seven months after the incident, San Francisco police still haven’t finished their investigation of the shooting, said Jim Allison, a spokesman for BART. Once that investigation is complete, BART’s independent police auditor will also weigh in on Crowell's conduct.