City Pays For Cop To Sue Civilians

In early July we reported on the case of Zsolt Dornay and how he is using tax payer funds to sue a man that he shot, along with four others who were involved in allegedly attacking him while he was off-duty, and in plain clothes, after he had allegedly hit a woman with his motorcycle and then threw her against a wall when his bike had been tipped over in 2006. Well, the story just got much more disturbing...

It's already a matter of public record that, after a lengthy investigation into the incident that included both the Seattle Police Department and an outside police department that was brought in after allegations were made that Seattle police were pressuring witnesses, prosecutors stated that no charges would be filed against the people who allegedly attacked the officer because the attack was justified given that it was done in response to the perceived danger that was posed to the woman the officer allegedly ran over and then assaulted.

Well, now the City of Seattle has reportedly paid at least $76,000 so far for a private law firm, retained under the city's contract with the Seattle Police Officer's Union to defend officers against civil rights suits, to sue these people in a civil suit on the officer's behalf. Which means, of course, that the officer and law firm would get the winnings, not the city or taxpayers.

Meanwhile, the civilians who have been named as defendants in that case have no such funding, they don't have a law firm paid for by taxpayer money. Indeed, some of them appear to be facing the nightmare scenario of going into court without any representation whatsoever to defend themselves against a multi-million dollar law firm that has received millions of dollars in taxpayer money defending misbehaving cops... simply because they cannot afford legal representation.

We know this, unfortunately, because one of those defendants contacted us, desperately trying to find out what to do since he cannot afford a lawyer. While we are currently trying to help him find a lawyer, it's a difficult endeavor considering he doesn't stand to win anything from defending himself against such a suit... a suit against him that he likely funded, ironically, with the very same taxes he paid to the city.

More appalling than this is the outrageous notion that the city would be funding a police officer's private lawsuit using taxpayer money after the defendants named in the lawsuit were found innocent by prosecutors who investigated the very same case. While, if this were a criminal case, the defendants could get a public defender, but since this is a civil suit, there is no such legal assistance available to defend against this city-funded attack.

How insanely unjust is it that a man who was found by government prosecutors to have legal justification for his actions on that night in 2006 to now face a private lawsuit financed by the city on behalf of the person who he was found to have legal justification to act against? A lawsuit that taxpayer can't even afford to defend himself against in a court of law?

It's absurd, it's unjust, and frankly, what the city is doing, with taxpayer money, should be considered a criminal offense in it's own right!

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

Seattle's Criminal Anti-Crime Team?

SPD following a protest march in 2003

The Seattle Police Department's "Anti-Crime Team" is a group of about a half dozen undercover officers from each Seattle Police precinct that are supposedly set up to patrol Seattle's streets undercover to look for criminal activity. Lately, however, they have been in the news several times this year for apparently instigating several instances of violence. Seemingly not satisfied with looking for crime, they have apparently resorted to making crime happen instead.

However, this isn't a recent development for the SPD's ACT, instead they have a long history of misconduct and of employing officers with criminal backgrounds and a history of misconduct. Not only this, but they are seemingly above the law and immune from any attempts to discipline, even when they are found to be in the wrong by internal investigations.

The following are the documented cases of abuses by the SPD ACT, while a small part of the SPD itself, they do seem to contribute greatly to the SPD's poor reputation and massive credibility problems.

However, most painfully clear, is that when you fail to hold such overly aggressive officers accountable, as is clearly the case in Seattle, the number of cases of abuse will only continue to get more eggregious and more frequent.

Remember, these are only the cases that have been documented in the media:

Seattle Weekly “The Cops Credibility Gap”

07/02, Nix Case:
SPD ACT pepper sprayed, then tasered in the stomach and buttocks, slapped, and repeatedly kicked a 5’10 180lb 66 year old senior citizen until they cracked his ribs, ruptured his spleen, and lacerated his abdominal wall. ACT claimed Nix was making a drug transaction and allegedly punched officers repeatedly and was too fast for them to subdue. People familiar with Nix stated that he was slow moving due to medical problems.

The SPD and ACT officers lost the use of force report and the OPA investigation left them “administratively exonerated”. Nix was left in jail for 5 days before he finally collapsed in the shower and he was taken for emergency surgery to have his spleen removed.

The Stranger “Gil’s Boys”

08/05, Sandidge Case:
SPD ACT mistake two men with clean records for gang members, taser them both numerous times, then accuse them of obstruction and assault of an officer. Months later, during trial, it is revealed the officers lied on their reports and the two men were cleared.

The SPD OPA found the officers guilty of misconduct and recommended severe sanctions. Chief Gil Kerlikowske overruled the OPA findings without explanation. Two of the three are still on the elite SPD ACT, one is working in Narcotics.

KIRO TV “Seattle Officer Accused of Excessive Force”

06/06, Post Alley Case:
Off-Duty plain-clothes ACT Officer shoots a 55 year old local defense attorney three times outside of a downtown bar after the attorney witnessed the officer throw a woman against a wall over a dispute involving the officer’s personal motorcycle.
This same officer had a criminal record before becoming an officer and a history of misconduct prior to being promoted to the ACT that included a 1995 incident where he held a gun to someone’s face while off-duty over a verbal dispute while he was off-duty. He then ground the man’s face into the ground while repeatedly hitting him in the head with his loaded duty pistol.

Officer was cleared of any wrongdoing by the OPA.

Seattle PI “Jail Unlikely for Firing at Officers”

06/06, Toro Case:
Three plain-clothes ACT detectives in an unmarked SUV instigate a fight with a jeweler in his car at an intersection without identifying themselves which resulted in Toro fleeing because he thought he was being attacked by "gangbangers" which led to a drawn out high-speed chase through residential areas while the ACT officers repeatedly discharged their weapons at Toro, missing several times and hitting his car at least twice. Toro pulled ahead and fired back, disabling the ACT SUV by shooting out the front tires. Because the ACT was shooting wildly, never engaged their lights or sirens during the chase, and never identified themselves as police officers to Toro they recklessly endangered public safety.

Toro was never charged with a crime that would have justified the officers initiating the confrontation, but he plead guilty to misdemeanors associated with brandishing and discharging a weapon to avoid a felony charge associated with the shots that disabled the SUV.

The officers involved are still being investigated, though it's doubtful that any discipline will be issued for their reckless endangerment of public safety.

The Stranger, “Tase First, Ask Questions Later”

08/06, Claxton Case:
Aaron Claxton and his cousin, Leroy Gibbs were chased by the ACT in an unmarked black SUV on their way home from a basketball game. As Claxton pulled into his garage, the SUV sped up and pulled in front of the house. The two young men ran inside when chased by four men with guns, they tasered Claxton repeatedly when they caught him before finally identifying themselves by yelling, "Police! Roll over or I will Taser you again!"

Officers then had Claxton wait a half hour handcuffed in his driveway while they tried to figure out what to charge him with.

All charges were later dropped against Claxton, who is an athletic director at a local Boys and Girls club, for lack of evidence of any wrongdoing. The ACT officers were not disciplined for the attack but Claxton filed suit in Dec of 2007. (That suit was settled for a reported $20,000 in Febuary of 2008)

Seattle PI “Jaywalkers smarting after rude encounter with cops”

09/07, De Jong Case:
Canadian couple Kristen Heidt and her boyfriend, Benjamin De Jong, were walking from a Seahawks football game and an unmarked SUV screeched to a halt near Heidt. Several plain-clothes ACT officers jumped out and tackled Heidt, bruising and bloodying her without identifying themselves as police officers, De Jong ran up and yelled fearing his girlfriend was being attacked by thugs. Officers then tackled De Jong as well, leaving him bloody and bruised as well.

De Jong was charged and jailed for pedestrian interference and obstructing while his girlfriend was not charged in the incident though the initial excuse for the attack was that she jaywalked. SPD claims an internal investigation was initiated but no results as of yet.

The Stranger, “Head Banger”

11/07, Hays Case:
Michael Lujan and Mark Hays walked in front of an unmarked SUV and were chased by several plain-clothes ACT officers for jaywalking (obstructing traffic). They then tackled Lujan and Hays in front of several witnesses from a corner coffee shop and other local businesses who then stated that they witnessed ACT officers hold Hays down on the ground while one officer sat on hays’ head and repeatedly bashed his head into the pavement at least 15 to 20 times while yelling “stop resisting” when Hays was clearly not able to resist.

ACT officers claimed that Hays tackled them when he saw that they had detained Lujan, but witnesses only stated that they saw officers jump out of the SUV and tackle Lujan and Hays. Reportedly, no investigation has been initiated. Hays faces charges of assaulting an officer and obstruction, Lujan faces charges of pedestrian interference and obstructing traffic. (Hays was convicted of both charges in Febuary of 2008 because witnesses who told reporters that Hays did not attack the officer would not come forward at trial.)