LMPD investigates shooting by off-duty officer

exactly. not to mention he was in his department vehicle and claimed to be acting in his authority as a representative of LMPD. Is it ridiculous? Absolutely. But they will use it. Understand that what I and others above have said doesn't mean WE believe LMPD is legitimately at fault, but just that a lawsuit will not be difficult

"failure to properly train". He was not on duty therefore his employer is not responsible for training him how to behave off duty.

"failure to properly supervise". No employer is responsible for the supervision of an employee when than employee is not on duty,

"failure to properly vet the candidate...". This officer likely had the exact same vetting process as every other employee. As long as the employer didn't deviate and showed no legigence, there is no claim.

Sorry, but LMPD (or should I say taxpayers) should not have any liability on this one.