Resetting Expectations in the Malika Calhoun Case

The Vice of Injustice and Virtue of Justice
frescoes at the Arena Chapel in Padua by Giotto

The video (here) of King County Sheriff's Deputy Paul Schene assaulting 15-year-old Malika Calhoun has left many outraged. People all over the world are presuming that the deputy will be fired and even convicted of some criminal offense that will land him in prison for some period of time.

People also presume that Malika will win a civil suit and are wondering at the millions this deputy's apparent lack of self control will ultimately cost the cash-strapped King County government.

...even though none of these presumptions are even close to the reality of Seattle.

Let me be clear, there is a strong possibility that all of these presumptions are misplaced.

In fact, based on all the recent case history available, it is unlikely that the deputy will be found guilty of anything.

It is unlikely that the county would be able to fire him even if they tried.

And it's likely that Malika will, at absolute best case, stand to possibly win $250,000 in a civil case, if she doesn't settle for something half of that before hand... or lose the civil case she hopes to file... even though the criminal and civil defense for the deputy, which the county will pay for, will cost more than double anything Malika stands to win as compensation for what she suffered.

Why?

Let's address each aspect by looking at each presumption and compare them to similar recent events.

1.The deputy will be convicted and go to prison.

In Seattle it is rare that police officers are charged in similar cases. When they are, it is rarer still that they are convicted. Even then, when a conviction seems likely they plead down to lesser misdemeanors that carry deferred conviction deals that wipe their records after a year of good behavior, with no jail time.

Given that the deputy only faces a misdemeanor already, even if convicted it is exceedingly improbable that he would spend any time in jail even if this went to trial and he were convicted. For which, the county would be stuck with prosecution AND defense costs which may exceed $300.000 no matter what.

For an example, look at the last trial which was against King County deputy Brian Bonnar on federal civil rights violations based on accusations that he used excessive force when he allegedly beat a handcuffed woman after a car chase. While other officers testified against him, prosecutors still could not gain a conviction and the case cost the county nearly $400,000 in defense fees.

2. The deputy will be fired.

It is unlikely the deputy will be fired, especially if he is not convicted and, even if he is, a misdemeanor conviction is not enough on its own to fire him based on state laws and precedents that protect officers.

Let's be clear. Even if King County Sheriff Sue Rahr did fire him, the Washington State Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) would likely force King County to reinstate him with back-pay and additional penalties as it's likely the deputy would be able to argue that other officers who have done the same, or worse, were not fired thus his firing would be discrimination.

It's likey he could do this because, in the past, King County has been very lax in how it disciplined officers ad that established a precedent for how future disciplinary actions are viewed by the police union-friendly PERC board. So, even if the county tried, it is unlikely that they could fire him.

For an example of this problem, just read the Conduct Unbecoming series in the Seattle PI.

3. Malika will win millions in a civil case.

First, it's important to understand that Seattle and King County use the same private lawfirm to defend themselves and their police officers from civil rights suits. While the officer's attorney, Anne Bremner, has drawn criticism for arguing that the video seen around the world doesn't tell the whole story. She, and her firm, are very ruthless in how they defend against police misconduct lawsuits.

They are so effective that they have only lost one case in a decade and that suit cost the city twice as much in legal fees than the award of $269,000 that was given to Romelle Bradford who was wrongfully arrested and punched by a Seattle Police officer.

There are a number of cases that they have settled, but those only net their victims half as much at best, such as the case of Maikoiyo Alley-Barnes who was savagely beaten and falsely arrested outside a nightclub in Seattle. His case settled for half as much as Bradford won, $185,000, even though Alley-Barnes clearly suffered far more serious injuries and both were entirely innocent of any crime.

(For a list of the latest known lawsuits to settle or win in Seattle, refer to here)

This case is somewhat different because Malika wasn't subjected to a false arrest. Therefore, if the case even makes it to trial and if it won, I think we would see an award of $100,000-$150,000, if that. If it settles, maybe $75,000.

Latest litigation outcomes against Seattle's PD

In any case, nothing close to a million.

Of course, I don't want this to be the way that it is. Nor do I think that it's right that the state of Washington and Seattle/King County put such a small price tag on our civil rights when they are violated.

But the harsh reality here is what it is and the sooner people understand what the realistic outcomes of this disturbing case are, while this case is still in the spotlight, the more hope we might have in improving the situation here in convincing people that changes are needed.

Police Misconduct NewsWatch for 02-13-09 - Local Edition

A lot of news going on in Seattle so instead of a regular News Watch I'm turning the focus local for this issue... even though I have a lot of catching up to do for some national stories I'm looking into.

Arrested For Standing While Black
Tim Harris at the always intriguing Apesmas Lament tells the tale of a Real Change newspaper vendor named Donald Morehead who was selling copies of the local advocacy weekly paper when a Seattle Police officer allegedly knocked one of his teeth out, slammed his head against a cruiser, and then arrested him...

Morehead's crime?

Apparently nothing more than standing while black one of the city's "drug enforcement zones". The officer arrested Morehead on unspecified charges, though Morehead had no drugs and only a few copies of the paper and $20.00 from the copies that he had already sold.

The money was confiscated as alleged "drug money" and Morehead spent 16 days in the King County Jail until people at the paper raised enough for the $160 bail.

Tim first mentioned the case in a post on the fifth when he first discovered Morehead was in jail from a public defender who was representing him and started collecting money for his release shortly afterward.

This type of racially-based enforcement activity has been becoming more common in Seattle with the NAACP noting the issue towards the end of last year which also sparked allegations of retaliation when officers later charged a witness of a racial profiling incident named Yvonne Gaston who testified for the NAACP's news conference, of assaulting an officer a day after that conference... strangely enough, weeks after the alleged incident occurred.

Harris has recently joined with other community activists in an effort, Initiative 100, to force the city to allow voters to decide whether or not the city should build a new jail to house more prisoners or work on alternative ways to reduce the need for more jail space... like not arresting so many people on questionable charges.

Though now out on bail, Morehead is still facing charges, though no word yet about whether a legal defense fund has been established for him.

King County Deputy Charged For Beating A 15 Year Old Girl
Update: The video has been released
King County sheriff deputy Paul Schene has been charged with 4th degree assault for allegedly kicking, punching, and pulling a 15 year old girl while booking her into jail.

The incident was recorded by security cameras at the jail where the officer and his partner were booking two teenage girls into juvenile jail under suspicion of auto theft in November of last year.

He alleged in charging papers that she had assaulted him when she was removing her shoes and, according to the girl, one slipped off her foot and hit the officer in the shin.

An investigator reviewing the tapes to prepare the case of assaulting an officer against the girl saw the deputy kick the girl, shove her against a wall, take her down to the floor in a hair-hold, and then punch her twice.

Ex-Civilian Review Board Member Running For City Council
Perhaps just as interesting on a local level as was the nomination of SPD Chief Gil Kerlikowske as drug czar was the announcement from ex-OPARB member Pete Holmes that he is running for an unspecified city council seat in the next election, according to The Seattle Weekly "Daily Weekly" blog.

Holmes was one of the then three member civilian review board that sharply criticized Kerlikowske for allegedly working behind the scenes to influence an internal investigation of two officers who were accused of planting drugs and lying on arrest reports. The board then had it's last report to city council censored because of it's criticism of the department's internal investigation process before it was disbanded and all of it's members replaced.

Holmes graduated from Yale University, earned his law degree from the University of Virginia, and currently works at a local law firm specialized in commercial bankruptcy law.

Victim Of Police Excessive Force Forced To File Lawsuit On His Own
Jonah at The Stranger Blog (SLOG) has an update on the case of Mark Hays who was subjected to a barrage of punches to the head and knees to the torso when he was arrested in November of 2007 by undercover SPD "Anti-Crime Team" officers after he and a friend had jaywalked in front of their unmarked SUV. The tail end of the beating he received that night was caught on a dashcam video of a responding SPD officer's cruiser.


An internal investigation into that arrest found that the officer who beat Hays had used excessive force and that he was misleading when interviewed by investigators looking into complaints about that violent arrest, even though Hays himself was found guilty of assaulting an officer for allegedly jumping on one of the officer's backs during the incident.

It appears, according to Jonah, that Hays has now filed a civil suit against the city seeking $750,000 in damages for the beating, for improperly withholding public records, and for conspiring to deny a proper investigation into allegations of misconduct... all without a lawyer to represent him.

I certainly wish him all the best, but worry about why he's going it alone at this point.

A Tapestry Of Abuses Redux

I haven't posted for a while on purpose as I wanted to leave the previous post up top for a while. It's about how Seattle Police misconduct complaints are being dismissed out of hand and bypassing the OPA process. It seems that when the city refined rules that made it more difficult to excuse sustained findings of misconduct the department responded by skirting the investigative process so officers wouldn't be found guilty of misconduct.

But, let's move on... A while back I wrote a piece about different police abuse stories around the nation that sort of meshed together... some of those stories have some updates so, for those who were actually interested in those stories, I wanted to give some updates.

But first, some local news...

The Sturgis Shooting
The shooting incident involving off-duty Seattle Police Officers and a Hells Angel's MC member in Sturgis is still generating quite a bit of interest so I've been updating our coverage of the investigation and grand jury questioning that has been going on surrounding that event. For the latest summary of noteworthy updates, tune in here.

Ex-Cop Fugitive Arrested Near Seattle
An (now ex) Alabama police officer who's been charged with transporting children across state lines for sexual purposes, rape, possession of child pornography, and other related charges has been arrested in Lakewood, Wa, near Seattle on Monday. The officer appeared in federal court today shackled from head to toe because he had been trained in SWAT tactics and was deemed a dangerous prisoner.

He had fled Alabama once he was released on bond and had been staying at a friend's home nearby for nearly a month when he was finally found. After he fled, federal agents found that his car had been left at an Alabama airport and contained several weapons along with a handwritten note that said "they won't ever find me; six days (in jail) was unbearable for me."

...Guess he was mistaken.

Latest Lawsuit Against the SPD
The federal civil rights lawsuit filed by Michael Watson and his attorney John Kanin was lost last week. While Mr. Watson claimed to have been stunned by a Taser a dozen times and doctors confirmed at least that many burn marks on his torso, the police claimed they didn't shock him that much and that they did so in order to stop him from being combative. Apparently the jury sided with the officers after a week-long trial.

This is the first loss against the city after a long slate of highly publicized settlements and the very pricey loss on a civil rights case appeal by the city on what was originally a quarter of a million dollar lawsuit that bloomed into half a million dollar bill for the city after the legal fees were added. There are several more lawsuits in the works from others though, so we'll try to keep up to date with the latest as we become aware of it.

Now for those updates on the Tapestry stories...

The Death of Andre Thomas
Andre Thomas ended up dead after an encounter with Swissvale Pa. police earlier this month that started with him going door to door asking for help saying he was afraid someone was going to shoot him and ended with, as one witness detailed, police stunning him with a Taser and then punching him in the back of the head until he vomited and then remained motionless for several minutes.

An autopsy performed by Allegheny County coroner was said to be inconclusive with the coroner citing the highly questionable "excited delirium" (a cause of death that is strangely only associated with deaths in police custody) as the cause of death and that there was no evidence of excessive force. With toxicology results taking longer than usual to be released the family asked for an independent autopsy to be performed as well.

The independent autopsy revealed 17 bruises and wounds on Mr. Thomas' face and torso and a preliminary finding of death to be positional asphyxia, though further results are pending due to the county coroner refusing to give the independent coroner blood and other tissue samples. The independent examiner also canvased the neighborhood where the death occurred and said that witnesses say Mr. Thomas did nothing criminal that night, he only seemed to be knocking on doors and pleading for help...

I'm sure we'll hear more about this case in the future since the citizens of that city have been holding protests and rallies to demand a proper investigation into this questionable death in custody.

More from Prince Georges County
While the case of the mistaken raid on a mayor's home in Prince Georges County Maryland has dominated the news, shortly after the case of an accused cop killer being "inexplicably" strangled to death in custody, comes yet another troublesome story of a man who's death has two different stories, one from police and the other from witnesses of Manuel de Jesus Espina's death.

It appears, in this case, an off-duty officer working security had confronted Manuel, supposedly for public intoxication, in an apartment stairwell and depending on which account you believe, the two ended up in a struggle that took them into an apartment where two women claim to have witnessed what happened next... While the officer claims that Manual reached for either his gun or his baton, he's not certain which, and he shot Manuel in front of the two witnesses.

However, the witnesses give a different tale, saying that they heard a commotion outside and saw the officer beating a cowering Manuel. They opened the door and the two fell into the apartment and the officer continued to beat on Manuel until he stood up and then shot Manuel while he laid on the floor.

The embattled police department, already being investigated by the FBI over the jail death and the raid against the mayor, has asked the Latino community for calm while they promise to investigate this latest high profile case of allege police brutality. However, the other two incidents were quickly put down as officers doing their jobs correctly, despite the FBI being called in to investigate these color of law abuses. So residents are rightly skeptical that a fair and unbiased investigation will be conducted by their scandal-ridden police department.

I'm sure we'll be hearing more from Prince Georges County soon, sadly enough.

Man Shocked 12 Times By SPD Files Suit

Jury selection began Tuesday for the civil rights lawsuit filed by Michael Watson against several Seattle Police officers over an arrest that occurred during the February 2005 Mardi Gras in Seattle’s Pioneer Square.

The incident arose over allegations of theft made by a reportedly aggressive street vendor against Watson, who was accused of stealing a $5.oo string of beads. Officers claim that they overheard the dispute and when they warned Watson to pay the vendor he became belligerent and punched an officer in the chest. Officers then claim they were forced to wrestle him to the ground and arrest him for theft, resisting arrest, and assaulting an officer.

However, Watson claims that he was struck from behind by one of the officers after he used an obscenity in reaction to being accused of theft which caused him to fall into the officer he was accused of striking and then he claims officers needlessly used a stun gun on him over a dozen times during the arrest and suffered a ruptured disc, bruised ribs, and a shoulder injury caused by the officers.

While police officers, one of which an alleged expert in the use of Tasers, claim that they didn’t use their stun guns on Watson nearly as many times as was suggested, medical reports taken from Watson’s visit to Harborview Medical Center a day after he was arrested and posted bail record at least 12 individual burn marks on his torso and back. According to records, the charges against Watson were later dismissed in Seattle Municipal Court.

Allegations of excessive use of force being tied to counter-accusations of assault on an officer are fairly common, and sometimes contentious as the use of an assault on an officer charge along with obstruction and resisting arrest have long been termed as “the trinity” by police officers and as “cover charges” by defense attorneys and civil rights lawyers. Several recent cases in Seattle highlight the problems with accusations of assault on an officer, some of which resulted in losses by the city of Seattle in federal court.

Hayes & Lujan Case: Officers claim that Hayes tackled an officer who was arresting Lujan over a jaywalking incident but witnesses talking to journalists after the event made no claims to that effect. Hayes was ultimately found guilty of assaulting an officer anyway.

Bradford Case: Bradford ultimately won a wrongful arrest and use of force case against the city of Seattle even after an officer who reviewed the arresting officer's report tried to change it to indicate that Bradford had hit the officer, when the arresting officer even admitted he hadn't.

DV-One Case: A local DJ was arrested and convicted of assaulting an officer when he was trying to find out why officers were arresting and throwing his daughter against a cruiser for jaywalking. The DJ and some witnesses claimed he didn't hit the officer when he was beaten by several officers, but he was still convicted of assaulting an officer.

Nix Case: Nix, in his 70s at the time, was brutally beaten and later ended up hospitalized after he nearly bled to death in jail from the injuries he sustained in the beating which included a ruptured spleen. Officers insist that the arthritic old man, of whom friends say had great difficulty walking, had "surprised them with his speed and strength" when he allegedly assaulted them. Nix and other witnesses claimed the officers never identified themselves before they started pummeling him in an alleyway during an alleged drug bust.

In each of these cases of use of force the charges of Assault on an Officer came under questionable circumstances or the charges were outright disproved and highlighted serious problems with officers embellishing reports without consequence. Certainly, though, with the large number of publicly visible cases of alleged assaults on officers, there must be an epidemic of violence against the police, which they often cite as being the reason for aggressive tactics against civilians during arrests.

A review of records supplied by the Seattle Police Department seem to indicate otherwise, in fact showing a remarkable downward trend in the number of assaults against officers and the level of violence alleged during those supposed assaults, as the following graph shows… police work is the safest that it’s been in years:
chart shows incidents of assault on an officer, injuries from incidences, and excessive use of force complaints

However, as can be seen, the number of excessive use of force complaints filed don't correlate to the number of reported incidences of assault on an officer... while incidences of assault against officers have drastically declined over the years, excessive use of force by officers has risen somewhat in comparison, showing that officer aggressiveness is not tied to any reduction or increase in incidences of assault against officers.

It should be noted that there has been a downward trend in citizen reporting of abuses as trust in the oversight system has eroded and reports have indicated that complaints are used to prepare defenses against lawsuits instead of disciplining problematic officers, as exhibited in both the Bradford case and this case where the people alleging abuse did not report it to the police due to mistrust or the advice of their lawyers, so the use of force trending is likely off. Irregardless, it's clear that working as a police officer in Seattle is safer than ever, thus the steadiness of use of force complaints remains baffling.

So, the city finds itself in the midsts of another excessive force lawsuit where problematic claims of assault on an officer as justification for excessive force have been called into question. If Seattle's private law firm hired on a no-bid contract to defend police officers against civil rights litigation lose this battle, it will be the seventh civil rights abuse case lost or settled by the city in the last 12 months. The case against the city on behalf of Mr. Watson is being handled by Seattle civil rights attorney John Kannin of Kannin Law and no details yet on start dates or expected duration.

Seattle Loses Police Misconduct Lawsuit Appeal

Jonah at The Stranger reports that a federal judge has denied the city of Seattle's appeal in the Bradford v. City of Seattle case which found in favor of Bradford who was wrongfully arrested and hit by an SPD officer in 2006.

A jury awarded the Boys and Girls Club volunteer $268,000 in the case and the city of Seattle appealed. But now it appears that the city will have to pay about $553,000, which nearly doubles the original award, in order to cover additional attorney fees associated with the case and appeals process.

The additional costs are so high, in part, because the city is required to pay for a private law firm under a no-bid contract to defend officers accused of misconduct instead of using it's own lawyers to defend officers due to a contractual agreement with the Seattle Police Officer's Guild. It was previously estimated here, and later in the mainstream press, that the appeal would ultimately double the city's cost for the lawsuit when the city's private law firm announced it's intent to appeal on behalf of the city, this now appears to have been the case.

This case marks the sixth police misconduct related settlement or loss that the city has had to pay out in the last 12 months and several more federal civil rights lawsuits are reportedly in the works against the city and it's police department. The approximate total for those suits appears to be close to a million dollars when the city's legal fees are added to the calculations:(...the number climbs to a million dollars when you add the $76,000 the city has paid it's private law firm to help an SPD officer with his own numerous legal battles)

How Many Lawsuits, Seattle?

The Seattle Times reported yesterday, (and that report has since been parroted nonstop elsewhere), that the city of Seattle has lost or settled three police misconduct lawsuits in the last year when they reported on the most recent settled lawsuit that involved a young lady who had to have reconstructive surgery after her encounter with the Seattle police in 2006.

Three?

Really?

Try again...

July, 2008
Brittany Beaulieu receives $115,000 settlement from the city over an incident where an officer slammed her face into the pavement resulting in a compound facial fracture when she was shouting legal advice to a friend who was being charged with DUI.

JUNE, 2008
The city pays out a $5,000 settlement for Brad Nebinger who accused SPD officers of roughing him up before transporting him the the King County Jail, where he was assaulted again by a jail guard (King County settled that case for $20,000)

May, 2008
Romelle Bradford wins $269,000 lawsuit over wrongful arrest and use of force when he was knocked to the ground by an SPD officer while he was working at a Boys and Girls Club event.

February, 2008
Seattle pays a $20,000 settlement to Aaron Claxton, a Boys and Girls Club counselor, who was repeatedly tasered and then left to sit handcuffed in his own driveway while SPD ACT officers, who pulled him over because they thought he didn't belong in the neighborhood, tried to think of what to charge him with. Ultimately he was charged with "obstruction" which the prosecutor promptly dropped due to lack of evidence.

November, 2007
Bogdan Mohora wins an $8,000 settlement from Seattle over an incident where he was arrested and detained merely for taking pictures of an SPD arrest in progress.

November, 2007
Maikoiyo Alley-Barnes wins a $185,000 settlement over an incident where SPD officers lifted and threw him to the ground by his crotch, brutally beat, repeatedly kicked, and then arrested him for asking an officer why he was citing his friend for littering when his friend put out a cigarette on the ground.

That is at least twice as many as you cited by my count and there is no sign that it's letting up either. In fact, as I hear it, there are several other lawsuits in progress against the city and it's police force, including:

• An incident where a pregnant woman was tasered in her car for refusing to sign a traffic ticket.
• another incident where a man arrested at an anti-war protest for allegedly throwing water on a pro-war protester was pinned to the ground and unable to breathe because officers pinned his arms under him so he couldn't comply with commands to put his arms behind him.
• also, the well known Post Alley incident has spurred a lawsuit against an off-duty SPD officer who shot an unarmed defense attorney, the city has set aside $46,000 to pay it's private law firm to defend him and help him with his counter-suit.
• and apparently a pending suit that includes the person who claims he used his cell-phone to photograph the Alley-Barnes beating and that SPD officers erased his camera-phone when he was arrested and then released for photographing the incident.

There are others as well... several it seems when looking through the federal court dockets... and this appears to starkly contradict the city's private law firm's attorney who told reporters that the relentless string of settled and lost civil rights suits against the city of Seattle were "just a fluke."

An inability to hold officers accountable for misconduct and then paying out the nose to hire private attorneys on the taxpayers dime to defend their behavior no matter what is not a fluke, it's a recipe for encouraging more misconduct, and this string of lawsuits that continues onward in the foreseeable future proves it.

Update: Looks like the Times fixed it by clarifying they were only talking about six-figure lawsuits... but it's still misleading later in the article as they talk about those suits as if they were the only ones that happened in the last 12 months.

Some Advice For Those Looking For Justice

The Vice of Injustice and Virtue of Justice
frescoes at the Arena Chapel in Padua by Giotto

Ever since I started this site I've received letters from people who have had their rights violated or have been through similar or worse abuse than I was put through. So I try to help them find the resources they need to find justice even when I don't write about their cases, (which happens a lot actually). So, in the course of all this, I found myself giving the same pieces of advice over and over again... So I decided to make a list.

First, I am not a lawyer, please keep this in mind. The following advice is based on my experiences and my experiences helping others prepare to contact lawyers in regards to their own case. The following tips are merely “common sense” recommendations of things you should consider before attempting to contact a lawyer about your case. This site does provide a list of legal experts in the field of civil rights law but has no affiliation with any of the professionals or organizations in those listings and does not represent them in any way. We do encourage you to think about the following pieces of advice before using that list to contact a lawyer in regards to your own situation.

With that out of the way... Let's get started.

Let's Be Frank:

So, you believe your civil rights have been violated… now you want justice and so you’ve started to look for a lawyer to consider your case in that pursuit. Now, maybe your friends told you that lawyers love these kinds of cases or that the ACLU will definitely be interested in helping you because they’re all about civil rights lawsuits, or maybe someone told you that the city is frightened of lawsuits and will write you a check right away at the mere mention of legal action… Well, let’s dispel some of those myths right off the bat.

1. Lawyers Love To Sue The Government:

First, it is incredibly difficult to win a civil rights lawsuit against the government. In fact, it’s incredibly difficult to even get such cases to trial because the government, and their employees, has so many immunities to prosecution and civil action that it’s very rare that such suits ever make it beyond the initial stages of legal action. What’s worse is that government employees have no such barriers to sue you and your lawyer if your lawsuit fails, so lawyers tend to be VERY cautious about what cases they’ll take on.

This doesn’t mean that your case isn’t legitimate or that what you say happened did or did not happen as you say it did, but that lawyers need to consider how difficult it would be to PROVE what you allege really did happen in the face of all the various ways the government can cover up evidence and change reports to favor their position. This is why it’s discouraged for victims of police brutality to file official complaints with the department because such complaints are used to warn the department of possible legal action which gives them a head start in preparing a defense against your potential case.

It’s not that a lawyer might not care about how badly you were wronged or hurt when your rights were violated, it’s just that most lawyers are in this to make a living by getting a cut of winning lawsuits so taking on high risk suits isn’t appealing to them… and even the ones who care about how badly you got hurt aren’t willing to risk their home in a countersuit if the evidence in your case isn’t strong enough.

2. The ACLU Will Help!

Next, the American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, only takes on very special cases that would, if won, change the laws or make a case like yours very visible in the press in order to highlight civil liberties issues. So, it is incredibly rare that the ACLU takes on any case of police brutality or detainee abuse… so if you know your type of case isn’t unusual or has been done before, don’t bother, they probably won’t be interested. Sure, if you tried everyone else first and it’s your last resort, go for it… otherwise, it’s not your best chance regardless of what you’ve heard from your friends.

3. The Government Will Pay You To Keep It Quiet!

Next is the myth that the city is quick to make settlement offers to people they think they’ve wronged. Again, this rarely happens and, in fact, the city of Seattle is well known for its “scorched earth” defense against civil suits and they do fight tooth and nail against any civil rights actions. The city doesn't care if it makes the news because, frankly, there have been so many stories of abuses that they figure the public is too tired of them to care anymore. Now, of course, the city does prefer to settle rather than risk losing a suit, but they’ve only lost one suit in the last 25 years, so even when they do settle the settlement amounts are VERY small when compared to other cities because of their fierce defense tactics and the use of SLAPP suits, (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, these are suits designed to punish people for making allegations of abuse by suing them when they fail in their legal actions or complaint attempts), to dissuade lawyers from filing such lawsuits. Sometimes the city will issue “nuisance payments” to people who threaten legal action, but these are VERY rare and are very small, the largest I’ve heard of is $5,000.

That Advice:

Now that you might be able to see how difficult it is to even get a lawyer interested in your case, let alone make it to trial, let’s focus on what you need to think about in order to improve your chances for at least getting your story heard by a lawyer and taken seriously. Of course, all this advice stems from the assumption that you will tell your lawyer the complete and utter truth, because even worse than a lawyers telling you they aren't interested is if a lawyer takes your case and it comes out that you lied and you get your pants sued off as a result!

1. Remember that lawyers are in this to make money. Just like you work to get paid, so do lawyers, so when you present a case you need to SELL it to them. How do you do this? Well, there are a few steps involved with this:

a. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING!!! Document it quickly, as soon as it happens. Document every little detail about what happened, who saw what, when what happened to whom… even document what color that puppy on the corner was the day after it happened… Document every little thing because you’ll never know what detail that you forgot might be important to remember later.

b. Go over everything you documented and use it to start making your detailed case.

c. Do a little research to see what laws might have been violated or exactly how your civil rights were violated. You’ll need to tell the lawyer how you were LEGALLY wronged, not just ethically or morally wronged.

d. Carefully calculate how much your injuries or the loss of your civil rights has cost you and those who were involved with your case. You need to be ready to itemize your harms to the lawyer and give him an idea of how much damage was caused. This includes medical bills, legal bills, lost wages, loan repayments, and even the harms done to your family while you suffered as well. Come in with a real list of damages and a good estimate of what those damages cost in real terms before you even start calling lawyers.

e. Prepare your case carefully! Again, you’re not going to get far by just sending a bunch of documents and transcripts of what happened. You need to make a concise sales pitch that quickly explains the meat of the problem. This should be a way to explain the situation in a concise and efficient manner so that you could tell it to someone in the time it takes to ride an elevator. This “elevator pitch” is only to get your foot in the door; to get a lawyer interested enough to hear you out, not to explain all the nitty-gritty and tiny details of your case.

f. You also need to be ready to present your case in a way that is easy to understand and covers all the bases and possible flaws that might exist. While people like us might argue on occasion, lawyers argue for a living and make a living by finding flaws they can exploit in a case. So you have to spend quite a bit of time going over your case and considering what kinds of arguments someone might come up with to say your case isn’t going to work and be ready to tell them why it would. Be prepared to defend yourself, be prepared to answer questions of your integrity… If you went through a criminal trial, think of each lawyer call as a potential retrial… Sometimes it can be that hard to get a lawyer to listen and they will question your side of things as well.

g. As part of making your case easy to understand, it’s also important to make sure what you are trying to communicate is legible and articulate. Write down what happened, all your arguments, and everything else and then present it to your family or friends before you contact a lawyer. Make sure that people can understand your case, what you believe was wrong about what happened and what harms were done and how that was the fault of those you believe violated your rights. A lawyer won’t return your calls or agree to help you if they can’t figure out why you want their help.

2. After you’ve prepared your sales pitch, your full presentation, have done your homework to make sure your case has some legal standing, and carefully considered what the case is worth, then you’re ready to start calling. But, who do you call or write? Well, again, remember that it is much more difficult to get a lawyer interested in taking on your case than you could possibly imagine. So be prepared to call or write each and every lawyer that you can find. Sure, it is very emotionally traumatic to tell your story over and over again and face a brutal questioning by a lawyer over what happened to you… But you have to be ready to do this over and over and over again… odds are you’ll have to. Odds are even more in favor of you doing so and still not ever getting your case heard.

3. Be persistent. Keep trying, try and try again, try until your eyes bleed and you’re so frustrated you just want to scream! Then scream your guts out and try again! Keep trying until the statute of limitation runs out on you… Because it really is that hard to find a lawyer that will take your case unless the abuse you suffered was caught on camera and aired on the television, (…and even then it can be hard to find a lawyer that will take your case).

4. Be prepared for rejection. I bet you could see this coming, right? Everything I’ve said so far should have made it clear that the odds are against you ever getting a lawyer to take your case, let alone that case being successful if someone does take it. The laws of this state and city are such to make it nearly impossible to win a case against the government, and this is by design. It’s not that anyone thinks you haven’t been wronged; odds are that you were because there are few consequences for those who violate your rights exactly because it’s so hard to sue for such violations.

Some lawyers told me that they hear HUNDREDS of stories of abuse, some worse than the ones you’ve heard in the media, and they can’t take the cases because they would be so hard to prove, even if they were so compelling that you could tell that person was clearly wronged. That’s the nature of the law in this country, it’s unbalanced against the defendant in criminal trials and unbalanced against the victim in trials against the government… remember, government made the laws so those laws will favor the government. Sure, it’s wrong and it encourages more abuses… but it is the way it is for now. It’s best that you know this up front and be prepared to have to live with what was done to you.

It's also important not to be mad at the lawyers who turned you down, they aren't the ones that hurt you or violated your rights. Their hands are tied by the same system that allowed you to be abused and there isn't much they can do about it. I know it's hard not to see them as participating in the injustice against you by not helping you right it, it was hard for me too... but in the end it's not their fault, it just is what it is. All we can do is try to change the system to make it more just for everyone.

In the end, if you’re case doesn’t make it anywhere… you’re not alone. So many people have been wronged by their own government throughout history that, well, it’s been done since time in memorial. Heck, it’s the reason why this country was formed, because a government wronged the people. If it helps, it happened to me as well, it’s why I’m giving you this advice today. So, in the end, still try to make something positive out of what happened in whatever way you can, and try to live with it as best you can. Because you’re not alone, and there are people that care even if it seems like those you tried to get help from didn’t.

I sincerely hope this helps you find justice where so many others have failed, and if it doesn't I hope it better prepares you for the very real possibility that you will never have justice, like so many others before you. In the end, may all of our efforts and suffering bring about change so that others may not have to endure what we have, regardless of whether any of us have justice for ourselves or not.

I also wish you the very best of luck... Let us hope you succeed where most have failed before you.

SPD Officer Shoots Unarmed Attorney Three Times And Then Sues Him

In June of 2006, off-duty undercover Seattle Police officer Zsolt Dornay, then member of an SPD "proactive policing" Anti-Crime Team (ACT), was driving his motorcycle down a dual-use pedestrian and vehicular alleyway behind Pike Place Market where several nearby taverns were sending their patrons home for the night at the time. Why the officer chose to drive through Post Alley at that time of night, in an area he was well familiar with, instead of nearby main roads is a matter of contention, but witnesses allege that he was gunning his engine in an aggressive manner as he drove through the crowd that numbered at least 75 to 100 people according to most witness accounts.

Post Alley, where the incident occurred, shown in center.

Witnesses allege that as he drove through the crowd he hit a female paralegal with his side mirror which sparked an argument between the woman and the plain-clothed off-duty officer and the woman put herself in front of his bike during the exchange. Witnesses also state at this time that the officer drove forward while the woman was hanging on to his windshield which then caused his bike to tip. At this point, witnesses state that the officer grabbed the woman and threw her forcefully against a nearby door which sparked the nearby crowd to grab the officer.

At this point witness testimony diverges as many witnesses who gave SPD officers testimony later recanted when interviewed by Kent Police investigators when they were brought in to investigate the matter. Some witnesses who later changed their story say their testimony was altered or pressured by SPD officers. Video evidence of what happened also appears to have been lost by the Seattle Police Department who stated to Kent Police investigators that there was no video taken despite there being several nearby cameras that were trained on the site where the attack took place. As a result, there appears to be no way to confirm whether the officer's story or all the witnesses are right about what happened that night.

But witnesses agree that, at this point, the officer was attacked by at least 4 people in the crowd that came to the woman's defense and, in the course of the attack, the officer fired his duty weapon 5 or 6 times into the crowd and shot a nearby unarmed defense attorney 3 times in the abdomen. Witness accounts vary, at worst they say the attorney's involvement was limited to trying to grab the officer to pull him off the woman, others say he never even touched the officer, but all accounts agree that nobody saw him punch or otherwise assault the officer who alleges that he fired into the crowd in self defense and shot the 52 year old lawyer because he was mortally afraid of the lawyer.

The incident drew a great deal of media attention because the officer in question, a second generation cop, had a previous history of problems in the department, and even a possible criminal past. As a result, in a rare step, the SPD turned to an outside department to investigate the incident, the results of which ended up with no charges filed as prosecutors stated that the crowd had some justification to interceded on behalf of the woman who was attacked by the officer.

The problems in this officer's past that prompted this rare move by the SPD include:

• In 1984 he was allegedly arrested and plead guilty to charges of 2nd degree burglary, 3rd degree theft, and criminal trespass as a juvenile.

• In 1991 he was allegedly arrested again and charged with attempting to elude officers in a Grays Harbor incident, the case was ultimately transferred to superior court at the defendant's request and no mention of the case exists in any records afterward. In fact, when questioned about his criminal history by the KIRO 7 news reporters that discovered these court records, the police department stated that the department has no knowledge of such records, nor did they have his initial application for employment or background check in order to ascertain whether these criminal incidents were mentioned on his application... Seems that they conveniently lost his file.

• In 1995 a sustained finding of conduct unbecoming and improper use of force was found against him in an off-duty road rage incident where he assaulted someone at gunpoint. The incident alleges that he chased another motorist for several miles to the victim's workplace while shouting obscenities and "flipping him off", he then held a gun to the victim's head and hit him several times with the gun while grinding his face into the pavement of a parking lot. He only lost 15 vacation days as a result of that sustained finding.

• In 2003 he was accused, along with one other ACT officer, in the widely publicized beating of a 57 year old homeless Native American (in the same area of Post Alley as the incident above). The victim, Nix, was beaten so badly that he nearly died four days later in jail when he collapsed in a shower from a lacerated spleen and several other severe internal injuries. He flat-lined at least twice before surgery that was needed after he nearly bleeding to death after being denied medical care in jail. Nix also alleged that after the beating officers paraded him in front of prisoners and allegedly issued a warning to them that "This is what happens when you mess with the Sgt. In charge of narcotics." Prosecutors dropped all charges against the victim after testimony from several witnesses, some who claimed officers came at them with their clubs and said "you want some of this?", indicated the officers attacked him so quickly he likely wouldn't have known that it was police officers who were beating him.

Photo taken of 65 year old Nix's injuries after a 2003 arrest by SPD ACT Officers

• In 2005 he was accused, along with two other ACT officers, of strip searching three black men, yanking on their testicles, and conducting an invasive body cavity search against policy. Findings partially sustained for strip-searching all three men in front of each other in the same room, a finding that resulted in "re-training".

• 2006: The Post Alley incident noted above.

Additionally, recent reports in the press concerning the possible racial bias of obstruction arrests indicate that this officer is reportedly 12th in the entire department of 1,200 in the number of controversial "stand-alone obstruction" charges issued, (local lawyers sometimes refer to these charges as "contempt of cop"). There have also been several other abuse complaints filed against this officer, though no others are known to have been sustained.

This year, the attorney Dornay shot 3 times filed suit against the officer. In a move highly reminiscent of the infamous SLAPP suits filed by the police guild in the 90's to frighten victims into not reporting abuse, the officer is filing suit against the attorney that he shot, in addition to another suit he filed against the people he alleges attacked him, at the expense of the city who retains a private law firm under a no-bid contract to defend officers against civil rights lawsuits. The city, in fact, has paid the private lawfirm $76,000 in taxpayer funds so far in it's effort to allow this officer with a checkered past to sue the unarmed civilian that he shot while off-duty.

Predictably, as a result, the officer has found himself placed in the media's eye yet again, giving the city of Seattle and it's problematic police department yet another black eye, and it's taxpayer citizens yet another hit in their pocketbooks in the process... more than this, we wonder, what will the toll be in human suffering next time.

The officer in question is still on the SPD payroll, reportedly now as a narcotics officer.

Sources for this story:
A Tale of Two Cops: Seattle Post Intelligencer
Witnesses Give Differing Views Of Fight In Post Alley: Seattle Post Intelligencer
Police Shooting Leads To Two Lawsuits: Seattle Post Intelligencer
Controversial Seattle Police Officer Files Civil Suit: The Stranger
Seattle Officer Accused Of Unecessary Force: KIRO 7 News
The Cops' Credibility Gap: The Seattle Weekly
Shielded From Justice: Human Rights Watch
Law Firm Gets Millions To Defend Cops: Seattle Post Intelligencer

New Poll and Stuff

As you can see above, there's a new poll. I'm trying to figure out how to better serve as an advocate for victims of police misconduct and detainee abuse, so I figured I'd ask our readers for help. It's a multiple choice poll, so you can pick more than one answer... though, as you can see, a few police officers visiting from the city's network address chose an option that they'd like to see happen here, which is me arrested for speaking out. (big surprise, huh?)

An interesting aside about one of those items, more legal information, victim support, etc... One of the most visited pages on our site is the misconduct attorney contact page that gives victims and their families a list of civil rights attorneys in the Seattle area that they can contact. Well, we've been hearing rumors that there has been a sharp increase in the number of suits filed against the city alleging police misconduct, so many in fact that the mainstream news outlets have stopped covering it because it's become so common.

Also, we've heard that since there are so few civil rights lawyers that serve the Seattle area that they're backlogged and can't take many more clients. So, if you do use the misconduct attorney contact page, make sure you follow our advice. Contact several of them, not just one. You might get turned down a few times, so keep trying. Since the city can't seem to enact policies that will help prevent misconduct and bring accountability to the department, and since the news media has stopped covering these issues, the only hope to enact change is through the city's pocketbook.

Take care out there.

Declaring War On The Homeless

Alexander the Great stood before Diogenes and said, "Ask of me any boon you like." To which, Diogenes replied; "Stand out of my light."

"The only stable state is the one in which all men are equal before the law." -Aristotle

A few years ago, cities across the US started to "declare war on homelessness"... little did we know that it was Orwellian doublespeak for declaring war on the homeless by enacting policies that make being homeless akin to a criminal offense. In Seattle this war on the homeless has been ratcheting up lately with homeless encampment sweeps and the outlawing of providing food to the homeless on public lands.

Just last week, in order to bring attention to the sweeps and how detrimental it is to the homeless to be robbed of what little they have left in the process, let alone how the city lacks shelter space for the homeless to go once kicked off public lands, 15 people were arrested in an act of civil disobedience when they set up a tent right outside city hall. The city, homeless advocates state, has been destroying a vast amount of the property they find in encampments instead of storing it and providing a way for the homeless to retrieve what little belongings they might have left.

While many in Seattle may not care much about allowing the city government to seize property without due process when the homeless are concerned, it should give some pause to those who can see where allowing the government to circumvent the constitution when dealing with the most vulnerable in our society might eventually affect them too. After all, if the city can justify simply taking private property from those who have little, what stops them from illegally seizing the property of anyone else for any reason? Indeed, it would seem the only limit to violating a person's constitutional rights in Seattle would be whether the city government thought their victims could afford a lawyer to fight it.

Indeed, this issue was fought out already in court, with the city of Fresno where the city has settled a suit against their raids on homeless camps when the court found that the city's policy of destroying the property they seized amounted to a violation against constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure. The city of Seattle, apparently not learning the lesson, has allegedly destroyed over 21 tons of property in it's raids on homeless encampments so far this year.

There are many conjectures about why maxims of fairness and justice have import to us, but few consider that it is self-interest which ultimately drives the need for us to consider the rights of those most vulnerable in our society as being just as important, if not more so, as our own. For, once you concede the rights of the powerless, little then exists that would not in turn make you just as powerless. Once you permit the state to suggest that some deserve fewer rights than you have, what rights do you really possess inherently as a human in equal standing instead of having to make payments on those rights instead?

If it does not sway your sensibilities to have concern about the rights of those most vulnerable, then consider the hit to your tax pocketbook that the city is risking by carelessly violating the rights of those they consider less worthy of such rights than you. How much are you willing to pay to support a war on the homeless by way of your rights... and by way of your pocket?

City of Seattle's High Priced Attorneys Appeal Wrongful Arrest Verdict

As predicted, the private attorneys that cost the city of Seattle over a million dollars a year in no-bid contracts to defend officers against misconduct charges have appealed a verdict against the city in the wrongful arrest federal civil rights lawsuit concerning Romelle Bradford.

Per the Seattle Post Intelligencer, the city's expensive lawyers proclaimed:

"...the jury issued an inconsistent verdict. For example, jurors decided Briskey had a right that night to stop Bradford for questioning but not to arrest him. The city's private attorneys, Moses Garcia and Anne Bremner, also argued that police officers have "qualified immunity" against such lawsuits if they are doing their jobs and have reason to believe they aren't violating anyone's rights."

Bradford's lawyer, Lem Howell, says in reply:

"the city is "full of prunes" and is wasting taxpayers' money pursuing the appeal.

Because of the verdict, the city is also on the hook for Bradford's attorneys fees as well as its own. The total cost of the case including fees -- already more than $500,000 -- will rise considerably if the city doesn't prevail in its appeal, Howell said."

The the hubris of the city and it's high-priced lawyers knows no bounds and their egos find it impossible to ever admit mistakes or wrongdoing, let alone sufficiently enough to make things right when mistakes or intentional abuses do occur in a way that wouldn't end up costing taxpayers over twice as much as it would have to just sit down with the people they wrong and offer reasonable restitution help for harms done.

We'll let you know when the city's total cost for this folly blows up to over a million, which shouldn't take long at all. Prior to appeals, the city's legal costs alone were approaching the cost of the judgment (estimated at $190,000), if appeals continue they'll eclipse the amount of the judgment itself... so much for the notion that the city is appealing the verdict to save money. It's all about saving face and covering up for the failed half-hearted attempts to reign in police misconduct.

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against King County Jail

I've been wondering when this would happen. It's good to see that the King County Jail (located in downtown Seattle) will finally be taken to task over it's failure to treat detainees in need of medical care and for not doing enough to prevent the spread of MRSA infections in that hellhole. Glad to see someone took up the call to represent all these people since the ACLU of Washington State sure wasn't interested in defending their rights!

The legal discussions between the jail and the US DOJ over their charges that the King County Jail violated the rights of detainees there are still ongoing, by the way... for seven months now. (how King County could stall the DOJ for seven months over this is beyond me!)

From the report in the Seattle PI:

Filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, the lawsuit contends jail officials failed to stop the spread of a highly infectious strain of staph infection called MRSA. During a five-month period beginning in September, at least 65 inmates were diagnosed with MRSA; one inmate afflicted with MRSA and a flesh-eating bacteria died while in custody.

The plaintiff, 40-year-old Matthew Wisecarver, suffered serious injuries when surgeons were forced to dig into his hand to remove an MRSA infection he contracted in jail, said his attorney, Ed Budge of Seattle. Wisecarver didn't receive treatment for the infection until he was released from jail, where he was being held pending trial on domestic violence charges.

The county's inability to stop the spread of the disease amounted to a violation of inmates' rights to equal protection under the law and freedom from cruel or unusual punishment, Budge said.

"As soon as they close that door behind you, you're pretty much at the mercy of those jailers," Budge said. "If they don't do what the Constitution mandates, which is get you immediate medical attention, there's not a darn thing you can do about it."

Last year, the U.S. Justice Department's Civil Rights Division released a report highly critical of the county Department of Adult and Juvenile Detention, which operates the Seattle jail. Justice investigators found that the jail didn't have proper procedures in place to deal with a host of problems, from handling suicidal inmates to investigating complaints against corrections officers.

Trust me, I know they didn't care if you were innocent or guilty, if you were just accused or had been convicted. Once they put you in that dungeon you lost all your rights and you were treated like an animal... hell, worse than that as most people would take their pet to the vet if they suffered like most people do in that inhuman place.

Even though their firm wasn't interested in helping me and I can't be a part of that class action suit, I still wish them all the best of luck and I hope all those victims find justice at long last... and I hope it sparks some interest in respecting people's constitutional and human rights at that jail.

More Thoughts On The Romelle Bradford Case

Instead of updating the previous post on Romelle Bradford's win against the Seattle Police Department, I figured it best to put some additional thoughts about that case here.

1. About the proposed internal investigation and the city's lawyer suggesting that it would have been used to defend the city and not help the victim. Given past case histories (an example here) an OPA investigation into this same case would have definitely resulted in an exoneration finding because the OPA system is so biased. (Remember, internal investigations are not done by a dedicated internal investigation department but done by officers pulled right off the streets, who are then supposed to be trusted to investigate their fellow officers and pals. It's inherently biased and flawed... and the civilian oversight portion is utterly powerless).

Hence why the city's lawyers stated that if Romelle had filed a complaint with the SPD OPA, the city would have probably won the suit. The system isn't there to help victims of abuse find justice, it's there to cover up abuse. It's why we strongly recommend that victims of police misconduct never use the OPA complaint process without talking with a lawyer (several of them actually) first.

2. The lawyers representing the city want to appeal... of course they do, they have a no-bid contract with the city to defend all cases of police misconduct and have charged the city more in legal fees than what the city pays in settlements. I guarantee this, what the city will ultimately pay that law firm for their work on this case will utterly dwarf the judgment of $268,000 that was found against the city in this case. How's that for efficient and open government?
(The Seattle PI just ran a story about this exact same thing for tomorrow's edition! "The city will spend more than $500,000 -- perhaps a lot more -- as it pays for what a federal civil court jury found Monday was a violation of Romelle Bradford's civil rights.")
(UPDATE: The city filed an appeal on 05/30/08, of course)

3. As one commenter posed... "Can't wait to see the perjury charges against supervising sergeant" (for committing perjury when he lied on reports to cover for the arresting officer). He answered his own rhetorical question of course, the answer being never. Just as the city won't do anything that would actually prevent the same situation that landed them in court from happening again in the first place.

Why? Because the city would rather spend millions trying to cover up cases with a broken oversight system and keep misconduct cases quiet with hushed settlements than actually addressing the underlying problems and policies that still allow their police officers to get away with these kinds of antics without any fear of being held accountable for their actions.

Again we ask the readers which approach they think would be more cost effective and better for community relations, owning up to the problems and fixing them, or covering them up and continually paying for the same misdeeds over and over again?

4. Finally, we certainly thought this story would have gotten quite a bit of media attention... to date, only one Seattle MSM outlet (the Seattle PI newspaper) carried the story and one local independent paper (The Stranger) had a brief link to the story without commentary in their blog's morning news roundup.

Other Seattle blogs? Not a even a single damn peep!

Again, it just shows us why this site is so desperately needed in Seattle. Without attention these problems are only going to get worse.

Stay safe out there people.

UPDATE: Looks like a few more MSMs finally took up the story a bit late. The Seattle Times ran a pretty one-sided piece in defense of the city while KING 5 ran a piece that gave the victim a chance to speak... he plans to use his winnings to give more kids a chance to turn their lives around and get more needed resources for the Boys & Girls Club... That is, if the city pays up as the city attorney is looking to appeal the ruling.

Good luck Romelle, you have our support!

Seattle Loses Wrongful Arrest Lawsuit

Finally... It's good to read about someone who was mistreated and wrongfully arrested by the Seattle Police going to court and getting justice. It's been far too long to read about pitiful settlements and to hear so many cases of people who can't even get that far.

A jury awarded Romelle Bradford (mentioned here as the Boys & Girls Club Youth of the Year in 2003) $268,000 in damages for a federal civil rights case over an August 2006 arrest on charges of Obstruction and Resisting Arrest that were later dismissed.

The shocker is this: The attorney representing the city stated that if the victim had just reported the misconduct to the police department's internal investigation unit (the SPD OPA) the city would have had a better chance to win the case... in other words, the city's own attorney appears to be suggesting that the city's "police accountability" program is nothing more than a way to cover up for police misconduct.

Thanks for the tip.

From the article in the Seattle Post Intelligencer:

Bradford has a clean record and in 2003 was named youth of the year in the state for overcoming chronic truancy, getting good grades and for his work helping other disadvantaged youngsters at the Rainier Vista Boys & Girls Club in South Seattle. His case was featured in a Seattle P-I investigation of obstruction arrests, titled "Strong Arm of the Law."

The P-I found blacks were eight times more likely than whites to be arrested for obstruction, and that about half of the cases were dismissed by the City Attorney's Office before trial. Bradford is black (and) the criminal charges against him were dismissed before any attempt at prosecution.

It was after a club dance Bradford was supervising in August 2006 that he and club volunteers summoned police because of a potentially unruly crowd outside the club. (That) was then a rookie officer arrived as things were settling down, spotted Bradford jogging down the street and ordered him to stop. When Bradford didn't halt immediately, (the officer) rushed at him and slammed him to the ground.

Bradford said he didn't think the officer was talking to him because he said he was wearing a red T-shirt clearly identifying him as a Boys & Girls Club member. He said he was holding up his club badge and showing the officer his T-shirt when he said the officer decked him with his forearm.

Using the F-word, the young officer threatened to break Bradford's arm as he handcuffed him in front of several youngsters who were protesting that he was, indeed, a staff member trying to help.

After a police station interview in which Bradford insisted he was a staff member, police nevertheless booked and jailed him overnight. The arresting officer claimed Bradford's failure to immediately stop justified the obstructing charge and that a hesitation to offer one arm during handcuffing -- which Bradford doesn't recall -- justified the resisting charge.

Criminal defense attorneys refer to "obstructing a public officer" arrests by two other monikers: "Contempt of cop" and "the cover charge." Several told the P-I those nicknames are applied because the charges are sometimes abused to punish people for their being "mouthy" or to cover up when police might have used wrongful force against an innocent person.

"Sergeants, lieutenants, captains, assistant chiefs and chiefs should be alerted to the contempt of cop charge," Howell said after Monday's verdict. "These charges by their very nature are suspicious."

Several jurors said their verdict should send a message to the city to better supervise young officers. Several questioned department procedures and leadership. They even questioned the officer's use of the F-word in front of a crowd of Boys & Girls Club youngsters.

Jurors had to sort through conflicting statements. While Bradford and numerous witnesses said he was wearing the identifying red T-shirt, the police officers testified that he was wearing a plain white T-shirt. They did not explain why they took Bradford's red staff T-shirt into custody when they arrested him.

The supervising sergeant, also made a misleading statement on an after-action "use of force" report, justifying (the officer's) actions. He twice claimed that Bradford took a swing at the officer. Even the officer admitted that wasn't true. The sergeant later explained that he interpreted Bradford's holding up of his identification badge, which was attached to a key chain, as a move tantamount to taking a swing at the officer. The arresting officer also claimed he thought the keys might be used as a weapon.

In the end, I'm very happy to hear that someone finally got some justice after a long uphill battle for it. It's a rare event in Seattle, where several SLAPP lawsuits from police officers and their guild has frightened most lawyers into refusing to take cases against the city...

Seattle police have not lost an officer misconduct case before a judge or a jury for at least a decade and probably longer, said Anne Bremner, a partner at Stafford Frey Cooper, the firm that defends the city against such lawsuits. Some notable cases have been settled with payments made to plaintiffs, including a recent excessive force case on Capitol Hill and the settlement with WTO demonstrators.

Bremner said she has not lost such a case before a judge or jury in the 20 years she has defended Seattle officers against lawsuits.

"I was surprised," she said. "Appeal options are being analyzed."

But, for those still seeking justice and those who will have to in the future, take this advice to heart about the Seattle Police Department's Office of "Professional Accountability" internal investigation and complaint process:

...the private attorney who defended the city and the police against the lawsuit, said there would be no point now in conducting an internal investigation, though he added that ironically an internal investigation might have provided (the city) with more evidence to win the case. He also noted that Bradford didn't file a complaint with internal investigators, a tactical move by his attorney.

Because the OPA process is still broken, and because the city backed down and weakened reforms during contract negotiations with the guild, we still highly recommend that victims of police misconduct DO NOT USE THE OPA COMPLAINT PROCESS. It will only serve to help the city prepare a defense against your case and will not result in any substantive disciplinary action or help you recover from the harm done to you. It can only hurt you, and won't help anyone except for the officers it seeks to cover up for... and even the city's lawyers aren't afraid to tell people the fact that the system only works in their favor, not yours.

Good luck and thank you Romelle, and your attorney Lem Howell, I think what you both achieved has given some people hope in Seattle.

Washington State's Anti-Gang Crime Bill May Be Unconstitutional

Washington state's legislature is passing an "anti-gang bill" that includes provisions to fund police anti-gang taskforces, increased penalties for gang-related crimes, and supposedly deter recruitment by punishing adults who recruit teens into gangs.

However, the most troubling part of the anti-gang crime bill is how it defines a gang and the implementation of a state-wide gang watchlist database that will include the names of anyone a police officer accuses of belonging to a gang.

First, the bill defines a gang as an association of three or more individuals who share a symbol or name either formally or informally and who's members participate in a crime. Now, let's strip away the extraneous terms and, simply put, anyone who has an informal relationship to anyone who commits a crime and that informal relationship includes three or more people would be considered as a gang member. So, let's say a member of your bowling team commits a crime, that would mean that you could technically be labeled as a gang member.

Now, all of that aside, what burden of proof is involved in being labeled as a gang member? None.

Is there a way to make sure the names put in that database are really gang members? No. There is no oversight. There is no due-process. There is no judicial overview.

If a police officers decides to put your name in that database, it's there, you're profiled, and there is no mechanism available for you to appeal that designation and no way for you to clear your name in a court of law. This is the unconstitutional portion of the bill, allowing the executive to take punitive action on citizens without due process.

So, if your name gets placed on that database because, oh, let's say some officer decides he doesn't like your opinions about police accountability... then there is nothing you can do about it, no way for you to appeal, no judicial avenue available for you to plead not guilty... Nothing.

Guess what happens when you apply for a job and go through a background check. Well, you've been denied employment because your name was on an unconstitutional list of gang members and there is nothing you can do. (not to mention the absurdity of suggesting that denying alleged gang member employment will help induce gang members to go straight!)

This bill is, on the very face of it, illegal and unconstitutional. Without mechanisms of appeal and judicial oversight, it is a stark violation of civil rights that grants the executive branch unchecked power to harass citizens at will and without any burden of proof or consequence for abuse... and I guarantee that it will be abused.

...and I don't foresee anyone who will be willing to challenge it.