"The suit was filed by the Black Lawyers for Justice, of
Washington, D.C., against Ferguson, St. Louis County, and the police
chiefs of both, as well as named and unnamed police officers for police
actions between Aug. 10 and 13.
Its president and founder,
Malik Z. Shabazz, said in a press conference that "police were
completely out of control" and "used excessive force on a regular
basis," calling it "virtually a police riot." Shabazz said that although
the suit was filed on behalf of "the Ferguson Five," he expects others
arrested during the protests to join the suit." 8/28/2014, "Five Ferguson protesters sue police for $41.5 million over arrests," St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Robert Patrick
.....................
10/3/16, "Federal judge dismisses Ferguson protesters' $41.5 million lawsuit against police," St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Robert Patrick
"A federal judge has dismissed a civil rights lawsuit that alleged
police used excessive force against Ferguson protesters and violated
their civil rights.
U.S. District Judge Henry Autrey on Friday
ruled in favor of summary judgment motions filed by police, police
officials, St. Louis County and the city of Ferguson. The order appeared
publicly in electronic court files Monday, the same day that lawyers
for protesters filed a notice that they would appeal.
In his order, Autrey said that the protesters who filed the suit
“have completely failed to present any credible evidence that any of
the actions taken by these individuals were taken with malice or were
committed in bad faith.”
Autrey
wrote that protesters were told to disperse, and when they did not and
officers were ordered to begin making arrests, those officers gave
repeated warnings before they started arresting protesters.
Autrey ruled that individual police officers were “entitled to official and qualified immunity” from the lawsuit, and therefore their supervisors and St. Louis County were also entitled to immunity.
In
ruling for police on the summary judgment motion, Autrey had to view
the evidence “in the light most favorable” to the plaintiffs and find
that “no genuine issue of material fact exists and the moving party is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Autrey ruled that many of the plaintiffs’ claims were not backed up by video evidence or other testimony.
Tracey
White, one of the plaintiffs, had alleged that she and her 17-year-old
son were arrested inside of the Ferguson McDonald’s. She claimed
officers with rifles rushed in “like something out of a movie.” She
claimed that she was thrown to the ground and arrested when she
protested the treatment of her son, who she claimed was arrested when
she tried to give him the iPad she was carrying.
But videos showed
that she was actually arrested a block away. “She agreed that video
showed an officer placing hand ties on her, and that she was not on the
ground, and that there was no knee in her back,” Autrey wrote. “No
racial epithets or slurs were used against Tracey White.”
Another
plaintiff, Dwayne A. Matthews Jr., had claimed that he was walking to
his mother’s house on Aug. 13 when he was shot with rubber-coated
bullets, pepper-sprayed and nearly drowned in a drainage ditch before
being beaten before and after he was restrained.
But Autrey wrote that Matthews’ “own statements (to paramedics and hospital staff) belie his position.”
Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green claimed
that they were hit by less-than-lethal projectiles fired by three
officers, Autrey found, but were unable to contradict statements by
those officers that they were not carrying such equipment that night.
Other
plaintiffs were unable to identify the officers that they claimed
committed violations, Autrey found, or were not hurt during the
encounters.
Gregory Lattimer, one of the lawyers representing
protesters, said in a telephone interview Monday: “It’s unfortunate that
the Constitution has such a rough time in Missouri, but I think that
the court of appeals will look at this and make a determination that ...
the judge’s refusal to allow these cases to go forward was not
consistent with applicable law.
“This is summary judgment and a jury should have been able to decide whether or not these actions were OK,” he said.
Lattimer
characterized White’s claims about McDonald’s as a “mix up” and said
people were “taken out of the McDonald’s” and then “moved up and down
the street illegally.” He said, “Well, you took them out of the
restaurant, put them on the street, and then tell them they failed to
disperse.”
He called issues created by his clients’ inability to
identify police officers one of the “most disturbing aspects,” noting
that officers wore masks and took off their badges. “They obscure their
identity and then because you can’t identify them, then the officer goes
free. That is not the way it is supposed to work.”
St. Louis County Counselor Peter Krane called it a “well-considered opinion” but declined to comment in detail.
The original $41.5 million lawsuit was filed
Aug. 28, 2014, by protesters who variously alleged that they were
pepper-sprayed, shot with rubber bullets, beaten and arrested. It was
amended to add more plaintiffs that October.
This year, lawyers for the police filed motions to dismiss, claiming that much of what had been alleged was incorrect.
The
arrests were among hundreds during protests that followed the Aug. 9,
2014, fatal shooting of Michael Brown, 18, by Ferguson police Officer
Darren Wilson."
...................
No comments:
Post a Comment