The Randy Webster Case: Shooting, Throwdown Gun, and Lawsuit

The Randy Webster case was the 1977 Houston police killing of a 17-year-old from Shreveport, Louisiana, in which officers shot the teenager in the back of the head after a stolen-van chase, planted a “throwdown” gun on him, and fabricated a self-defense story that unraveled after his father’s investigation triggered a federal civil rights prosecution, criminal convictions for perjury and conspiracy, a landmark municipal liability ruling by the Fifth Circuit, and a $428,000 settlement from the City of Houston.¹

What Happened the Night of February 8, 1977

Randy Webster drove a stolen van through the front window of a Houston car dealership and led police through southeast Houston at speeds reaching 100 miles per hour. The chase ended in a wreck. As Webster got out of the van, officers rushed him, and Patrolman Danny Howard Mays struck him with a service revolver. The gun discharged. The bullet entered the back of Webster’s head at close range on a downward trajectory. He also had a wound to his palm. He died from his injuries.¹

The official account was different. Officers reported that Webster had climbed out of the van pointing a pistol at them, that Mays had fired in self-defense, and that drugs were recovered at the scene. The shooting was ruled a justifiable homicide.²

The Planted Gun

The pistol found next to Webster was not his. It was a .22-caliber handgun that Roy Hooven had bought in 1964 and used to kill himself. Houston police had logged the weapon into the property room. Records said it had been melted down in 1968. It had not. Officer William Byrd had kept it, carried it in the glove compartment of his patrol car, and used it to hunt rabbits while on duty. He kept it as a potential throwdown, police slang for a weapon planted on a victim to support a self-defense claim.¹

Officer John Thomas Olin later told investigators that immediately after the shooting, he, Sergeant Paul Dillon, and Officer Wayne Holloway discussed whether they could get away with planting a gun despite the presence of a taxi driver named Billy Dolan, who had seen what happened. Holloway produced the pistol and placed it in the hand of the dying teenager, who was still alive and groaning, so a trace metal test on Webster’s hand would show contact with a firearm. If Holloway’s prints turned up on the gun, the officers agreed to say he had picked it up because Webster was still moving and might have reached for it.¹

A civilian named Lexie Fate Daffern backed up the police story, claiming he had seen Webster armed. He later admitted to the FBI that he had lied, and had not reached the scene until after the shooting. Homicide detectives also told Randy’s father, John Webster, that a grand jury had already cleared the officers. No grand jury had looked at the case.²

How the Cover-Up Came Apart

John Webster did not accept the official version. Working from Shreveport, he pulled the autopsy report, which showed the fatal bullet had entered the back of Randy’s head rather than the front, which is what a face-to-face shooting would have required. He found Billy Dolan, the taxi driver, who told him he believed police had killed the boy and planted the weapon. He learned that the gun on the scene had been shipped to Houston in 1964, thirteen years before Randy died.¹

Webster wrote to Houston’s assistant chief of police, B.K. Johnson, asking for lie-detector tests of the officers and alleging that the gun and drugs had been planted. He got no reply. He then filed a civil rights complaint with the U.S. Attorney’s office.¹

U.S. Attorney Mary Sinderson and assistant U.S. Attorney Lupe Salinas took the case. Salinas and an intern, Robert Ontiveros, traced the throwdown by hand-searching a box of index cards at a Southwest Houston discount store to match the serial number, then located the 1964 police suicide report in department warehouses. The trail led back to the Houston Police Department’s own property room. Olin agreed to cooperate under a grant of immunity and laid out how the gun was planted and the story coordinated. Byrd admitted he had supplied the weapon.¹

Criminal Charges and Verdicts

In April 1978, Houston Police Chief Harry Caldwell fired six officers connected to the case: Mays, Holloway, Dillon, Olin, Byrd, and James Estes. On June 2, 1978, a federal grand jury indicted Mays, Holloway, and Dillon for violating federal civil rights laws.¹

The five-week federal trial before Judge Finis E. Cowan ended in April 1979. The jury acquitted Mays and Holloway of the civil rights charge, which required intentionally depriving Webster of his rights resulting in death, but convicted both of conspiracy and perjury for planting the gun and lying to a federal grand jury.³ Dillon was acquitted of all charges, and a state judge later ordered him reinstated with back pay.⁴

On May 14, 1979, Judge Cowan gave Mays and Holloway five-year suspended sentences, meaning probation with no prison time.³ Daffern, the civilian who perjured himself, drew five years of probation and a $5,000 fine. Byrd had pleaded guilty to concealing knowledge of a felony, but the plea was withdrawn and the charge dismissed after the civil rights trial.¹

The Civil Rights Lawsuit and Settlement

Randy’s parents sued the City of Houston, the Houston Police Department, and six former officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In October 1980, a jury awarded the family $1.4 million in punitive damages: $1 million from Mays, $200,000 from Olin, and $200,000 from the City. At the time, it was reported as the first case holding a city financially liable for civil rights violations by its police.⁵⁶

Houston moved to set the verdict aside on the ground that Section 1983 did not authorize punitive damages against a municipality. A Fifth Circuit panel affirmed liability but struck the punitive award and ordered a new trial on damages. The full Fifth Circuit reheard the case en banc and, on July 9, 1984, vacated the entire judgment and ordered a new trial, finding the original jury instructions “too lax” for proving municipal liability.⁷

Rather than retry the case, the parties settled. In March 1985, the Houston City Council unanimously approved a $428,000 payment to Randy’s mother, Billie Webster, and his father, John Webster.⁸ Reflecting on the outcome, John Webster said he was gratified not by the money but “because the facts were brought to light.”⁵

What Webster v. City of Houston Established

The en banc ruling in Webster v. City of Houston, 735 F.2d 838 (5th Cir. 1984), and the earlier panel decision at 689 F.2d 1220 (1982), shaped how cities can be held liable for unconstitutional conduct by their police under Section 1983.

A city is liable only if the deprivation of rights results from an official policy: either a formal rule adopted by authorized officials, or a persistent, widespread practice so common and settled that it amounts to a de facto custom of the municipality.
To charge a city’s governing body with a custom of misconduct, the pattern must be so persistent and widely known that officials can be treated as having constructive knowledge of it, for example through prolonged public discussion or extensive publicity.
A city cannot be held liable simply because it employs someone who violates a person’s rights. The violation has to trace back to a policy or custom, not the employment relationship alone.
Only individuals who act in place of a governing body to set goals and design the functions of a department qualify as policymakers for liability purposes. Discretion held by a subordinate officer is not enough.

The 1982 panel decision also held that a municipal policy need not be written. An informal custom of tolerating constitutional violations, such as knowledge and acceptance of throwdown guns inside a department, could suffice.⁹ The same decision confirmed that municipalities are immune from punitive damages in Section 1983 actions, applying the Supreme Court’s ruling in City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc. (1981).

What Changed at the Houston Police Department

The Webster shooting was not the only Houston police scandal of that year. Three months after Randy’s death, officers beat 27-year-old Joe Campos Torres while he was in custody for disturbing the peace and forced him into Buffalo Bayou, where he drowned. A state jury convicted two of the officers of negligent homicide and gave them probation and a one-dollar fine, which set off the Moody Park riots of May 1978.¹⁰¹¹

Between July 1977 and June 1978, the FBI’s Houston office logged 316 police brutality complaints, the most of any FBI field office in the country, after 182 complaints in the previous three years combined.¹² Chief Harry Caldwell, who led the department from 1977 to 1980, formalized the Internal Affairs Division, issued the department’s first general orders, tightened use-of-force policy, and started psychological screening for incoming officers.¹³ Firearm discharges by officers dropped 26 percent from 1977 to 1978.

1
Texas Monthly. The Throwdown
2
The New York Times. TV: The Killing of Randy Webster
3
The New York Times. 2 Houston Ex-Officers Sentenced; Youth Shot by Officer
4
The Washington Post. Houston Ex-Policemen Receive Probation in Prisoner’s Death
5
United Press International. Jury Awards Parents $1.4 Million in Police Brutality Case
6
United Press International. The City of Houston Will Ask a Trial Judge
7
Justia. Webster v. City of Houston, 735 F.2d 838
8
United Press International. City Council Approves $428,000 Settlement
9
Law Resource. Webster v. City of Houston, 689 F.2d 1220
10
Texas State Historical Association. Torres, Joe Campos
11
The New York Times. Ex-Policemen Given $1 Fines in Slaying
12
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Police Practices and the Preservation of Civil Rights
13
Houston Chronicle. Pioneering HPD Chief Harry Caldwell Dies