Courthouse News Service

Transcription

1 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 1 of 22 DUSTIN MYERS and RODNEY MYERS. Plaintiffs, VS. MURRY BOWMAN, Individually, and as the Chief Magistrate of Jefferson County, Georgia; WILEY CLARK EVANS, IV, Individually, and as a Deputy Sheriff with the Jefferson County Sheriffs Department; CHARLES hutchins, Individually, and as the Sheriff of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department; and JAMES W. MILLER, JR., Individually, and as a Chief of Police of the City of Louisville, Georgia; JEFFERSON COUNTY, GEORGIA; and THE CITY OF LOUISVILLE, GEORGIA; Defendants. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION FILE NO. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES COME NOW the Plaintiffs, DUSTIN MYERS and RODNEY MYERS and state their claims for relief against these Defendants as follows: 1. This is an action against Defendant Jefferson County, Georgia, the City of Louisville, Georgia and the other individual Defendants, all of whom are or were formerly elected officials, representatives, law enforcement officers, agents or employees of Jefferson County, Georgia or the City of Louisville, Georgia, for violations of constitutional rights, for violations of Georgia law and for violations of Courthouse News Service common law duties owed. Plaintiffs Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers allege that Defendants violated their constitutional rights by their deliberate indifference arising out of their pursuit and conduct relating to an incident of August 13, These Defendants acquiesced in the unlawful conduct of the Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, el at. Page 1 of 22

2 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 2 of 22 Defendants, elected officials, Jaw enforcement personnel, representatives and employees of Jefferson County, Georgia and the City of Louisville, Georgia and failed to properly train representatives of Jefferson County, Georgia and the City of Louisville, Georgia in proper law enforcement conduct. Plaintiffs further claim that Defendants have condoned a custom and practice of conduct that encouraged the abuse of authority by elected officials, law enforcement personnel, representatives and employees of Jefferson County, Georgia and the City of Louisville, Georgia, including but not necessarily limited to, the other Defendants in this action. 2. This is a lawsuit arising out of an incident of August 13, 2009 which includes, but is not limited to, the pursuit, handcuffing, seizure and abuse of Plaintiffs, and the acts and failures to act of the named Defendants, as set out in this Complaint, including, without limitation, the conduct of Defendants. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1981, 42 U.S.C and 42 U.S.C. 1985, for violations of the civil rights of the Plaintiffs. This action for constitutional deprivations and for the violations by these Defendants of duties owing the Plaintiffs is also brought under the Constitution and laws of Georgia and the common law of Georgia. 3. On account of the facts set forth herein, jurisdiction and venue are proper in this Court. Plaintiffs Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers are now and were at all times stated herein citizens of Berrien County, Georgia. 5. At all times states herein, Charles Hutchins (hereinafter "Defendant Hutchins") was the Sheriff for Jefferson County. As Sheriff, Defendant Hutchins was the chief policymaker and person in charge of training officers and making policies and procedures for the Jefferson County Sheriffs Department and, Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Marry Bowman, et at Page 2 of 22

3 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 3 of 22 on account of the facts set forth herein, said Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. Defendant may be served at 415 Green Street, Louisville, Georgia. At all times states herein, Murry Bowman (hereinafter "Defendant Bowman') was the Chief Magistrate for Jefferson County. As Magistrate, Defendant Bowman was the chief policymaker and person in charge of training officers and making policies and procedures for the Jefferson County Magistrate Court and, on account of the facts set forth herein, said Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. Defendant may be served at 911 Clarks Mill Road, Louisville, Georgia. 7. At all times stated herein, Wiley Clark Evans, IV (hereinafter "Defendant Evans") was a deputy with the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department and said Defendant acted under the authority delegated to him and under color of state and local law. Defendant Evans is a resident of Jefferson County and, on account of the facts set forth herein, said Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. He may be served at 7473 Church Street, Bartow, Georgia. 8. At all times stated herein, James W. Miller, Jr. (hereinafter "Defendant Miller") was the Police Chief for the City of Louisville, Georgia. As Police Chief, Defendant Miller was the chief policymaker and person in charge of training officers and making policies and procedures for the Louisville Police Department and, on account of the facts set forth herein, said Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. Defendant may be served at 1484 Bryant Drive, Louisville, Georgia. Because Defendants reside in Jefferson County, jurisdiction and venue are proper in the Augusta Division of the for the Southern District of Georgia. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, el al Page 3 of 22

4 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 4 of Jurisdiction is proper under 28 Usc 1331 and At all times stated herein, Jefferson County, Georgia (hereinafter 'Jefferson county") has been a political subdivision organized and existing under the law and authority of the State of Georgia. At all times relevant hereto, Jefferson County was exercising governmental functions pursuant to its grant of authority, including the operation of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department and its various departments. On account of the facts set forth herein, said Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. 12. At all times stated herein, the City of Louisville, Georgia (hereinafter "Louisville, Georgia") has been a municipality organized and existing under the law and authority of the State of Georgia. At all times relevant hereto, Louisville, Georgia was exercising governmental functions pursuant to its grant of authority, including the operation of the City of Louisville, Georgia police department and its various departments. On account of the facts set forth herein, said Defendant is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court, 13. At all times stated herein, the individual Defendants Bowman, Evans, Hutchins and Miller (hereinafter referred to as "the Individual Defendants") and all other agents, officers, employees and representatives were acting under color of state law, and particularly under color of the statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs and usages of the State of Georgia, Jefferson County or the City of Louisville, Georgia. Further, Defendant Jefferson County was also acting under color of the statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs and usages of the State of Georgia. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et al. Southern District of Georgia I Augusta Division Page 4 of 22

5 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 5 of Kelly Bowman is the daughter of Defendant Bowman. 15. Prior to August 13, 2009, Plaintiff Dustin Myers and Kelly Bowman had been engaged to be married and had been living together. 16. Prior to August 13, 2009, Plaintiff Dustin Myers and Kelly Bowman had ended their relationship. 17. On August 13, 2009, Plaintiffs were in Jefferson County for the purpose of picking up Plaintiff Dustin Myers personal belongings. 18. On the morning of August 13, 2009, Plaintiff Dustin Myers had picked up various personal belongings including, but not limited to, a television, fishing equipment, a box of clothes and dog. 19. Plaintiffs had conversations with Kelly Bowman and her father, Defendant Bowman, about getting an engagement ring and various monies belonging to Dustin Myers. 20. Kelly Bowman had forged various paychecks of Plaintiff Dustin Myers and had used them for her own benefit. 21. Shortly thereafter, the Plaintiffs visited a local bank and went to eat breakfast in Jefferson County. 22. After completing their business at the bank, the Plaintiffs began driving back to their residence in Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, el al. Page 5 of 22

6 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 6 of 22 South Georgia. 23. At all times, Plaintiff Dustin Myers was operating his vehicle in a lawful manner in Jefferson County, Georgia. 24, Defendant Bowman attempted to follow and stop the Plaintiffs. 25. At the time the individual Defendants began to follow the Plaintiffs, Defendants did not have probable cause to pursue the Plaintiffs or to believe that they were guilty of any criminal violation. 26. Defendant Bowman abused the office of Chief Magistrate of Jefferson County by requesting or ordering three law enforcement personnel to assist him in pursuing and stopping the Plaintiffs. 27. The actions of Defendant Bowman in pursuing and stopping the Plaintiffs were for purely personal reasons. 28. At no time whatsoever did Defendant Bowman have probable cause to pursue or stop the Plaintiffs or to believe they were guilty of any criminal violation. 29. Defendant Bowman lacked legal authority to pursue or stop Plaintiffs. 30, Plaintiffs were not dangerous, neither Plaintiff was wanted for a violent crime and there was no reason to utilize law enforcement in trying to pursue or stop them. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et al Page 6 of 22

7 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 7 of Defendant Bowman violated the policies of Jefferson County and the Jefferson County Magistrate Court in pursuing the Plaintiffs for purely personal reasons. 32. Defendant Bowman violated the policies of Jefferson County and the Jefferson County Magistrate Court in pursuing the Plaintiffs without legal authority of any kind. 33. Defendant Bowman violated the Plaintiffs' rights in initiating pursuit under these facts. 34. At the time Defendant Bowman initiated the pursuit of the Plaintiffs, Defendant Bowman had no basis under the laws, rules, regulation, procedures and practices of Jefferson County, the Sheriff's Department of Jefferson County or the Magistrate Court of Jefferson County for initiating a pursuit of the Plaintiffs. 35, Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller pursued and stopped the Plaintiffs. 36. At the time Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller began to pursue the Plaintiffs, Defendants did not have probable cause to pursue the Plaintiffs or to believe that they were guilty of any criminal violation. 37. Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller abused their oaths and obligations as law enforcement officers in pursuing and in stopping the Plaintiffs. 38. The actions of Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller in pursuing and stopping the Plaintiffs Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Marry Bowman, et al. Page 7 of 22

8 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 8 of 22 were for purely personal reasons and were not for any law enforcement purpose. 39. At no time whatsoever did Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller have probable cause to pursue or stop the Plaintiffs or to believe they were guilty of any criminal violation. 40. Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller lacked legal authority to pursue or stop Plaintiffs. 41. Plaintiffs were not dangerous, neither Plaintiff was wanted for a violent or other crime and there was no reason to utilize law enforcement in trying to pursue or stop them. 42, Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller violated the policies of the City of Louisville, Georgia, Jefferson County and Jefferson County Magistrate Court in pursuing the Plaintiffs for purely personal reasons. 43, Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller violated the policies of the City of Louisville, Georgia, Jefferson County and Jefferson County Magistrate Court in pursuing the Plaintiffs without legal authority of any kind. 44. Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller violated the Plaintiffs' rights in initiating pursuit under these facts. 45. At the time Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller initiated the pursuit of the Plaintiffs, Defendants Evans, Bowman and Miller had no basis under the rules, regulation, procedures and practices of the City of Louisville, Georgia, Jefferson County, the Sheriffs Department of Jefferson County or the Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et at Page 8 of 22

9 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 9 of 22 Magistrate Court of Jefferson County for initiating a pursuit of the Plaintiffs. 46. The Defendants began a high speed pursuit of the Plaintiffs in violation of the policies and procedures of the City of Louisville, Georgia, Jefferson County and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department. 47. At the time the individual Defendants began pursuit of the Plaintiffs, they did not have reasonable grounds to believe the Plaintiffs were a clear and immediate threat to the public. 48. At the time the Individual Defendants began pursuit of the Plaintiffs, they did not have reasonable grounds to believe the Plaintiffs had committed or were attempting to commit a felony. 49. At the time the Individual Defendants began pursuit of the Plaintiffs, they did not have reasonable grounds to believe the Plaintiffs had committed any crime. 50. At the time the Individual Defendants began pursuit of the Plaintiffs, they did not have reasonable grounds to believe the need to apprehend the Plaintiffs outweighed the level of danger created by a pursuit. 51. At the time the Individual Defendants initiated pursuit of the Plaintiffs, they did not have the permission of the shift supervising officer to do so. i.1 At no time did the Individual Defendants obtain permission of his shift supervising officer to initiate or continue pursuit of the Plaintiffs. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, ci al Page 9 of 22

10 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 10 of The Individual Defendants pursuit of the Plaintiffs was not reasonable under the facts and circumstances of this case. 54. Defendant Evans drove and placed his vehicle in the immediate path of Plaintiffs' vehicle causing Plaintiffs to stop. 55. Defendants Evans and Miller pulled their weapons on the Plaintiffs. 56. Some or all of the Individual Defendants threatened to shoot the Plaintiffs. 57. At the time they pointed the weapons at the Plaintiffs, Defendants Evans, and Miller had no information whatsoever that Plaintiff was being pursued for a crime. 58. At the time they pointed the weapons at the Plaintiffs, Defendants Evans and Miller lacked a reasonable belief that the Plaintiff was being pursued for a crime. 59, At the time they pointed the weapons at the Plaintiffs, Defendants Evans and Miller lacked a reasonable belief that the Plaintiffs were an immediate threat of physical violence to Defendants or others. ATO At the time they pointed the weapons at the Plaintiffs, Defendants Evans and Miller lacked probable cause to believe that the Plaintiffs were an immediate threat of physical violence or serious harm to Defendants or others. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et at Page 10 of 22

11 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 11 of At the time they pointed the weapons at the Plaintiffs, Defendants Evans and Miller lacked any reasonable belief that Plaintiffs had a weapon or firearm. 62. Defendant Evans handcuffed Plaintiff Dustin Myers. 63. Defendant Evans snatched Plaintiff Dustin Myers out of the vehicle. 64. Defendant Evans threw Plaintiff Dustin Myers to the ground. 65. Defendant Evans told Plaintiffs that they did not know who they were messing with, that Defendant Bowman was the Chief Magistrate of Jefferson County, Defendant Bowman made repeated statements that "this is my god-damned county" and that "this county belongs to me". 67. Defendant Bowman directed the individual law enforcement persons at all times. 68. Defendant Bowman was in control of the situation and all of the deputies and law enforcement personnel. Kelly Bowman. Defendant Bowman took Plaintiffs dog out their vehicle and put it in his vehicle with his daughter Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, el al Southern District of Georgia I Augusta Division Page 11 of 22

12 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 12 of Defendant Bowman instructed the deputies to take the handcuffs off Plaintiff Dustin Myers. 71. Defendant Bowman instructed the Plaintiffs to leave his county and never return. 72. The individual law enforcement officers acquiesced in Defendant Bowman's demands, took the handcuffs off Plaintiff Myers and let the Plaintiffs leave the county. 73. At no time were the Plaintiffs read their rights. 74. At not time were the Plaintiffs told that they were being stopped for any criminal violation. 75. At no time were the Plaintiffs told why they were being stopped. 76. Plaintiff Dustin Myers suffered serious injury as a result of the incident. 77. Plaintiff Dustin Myers suffered a permanent injury. 78. Plaintiff Dustin Myers incurred medical expenses as a result of this incident. 79. Defendants Evans and Miller actions violated the policies and procedures of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department and the City of Louisville, Georgia Police Department. 80. Defendants intended to cause fear or apprehension of unauthorized physical contact with the Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et at Page 12 of 22

13 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 13 of 22 Plaintiffs. Si. Defendants' actions were neither authorized nor privileged. 82. Defendants' caused unauthorized physical or offensive contact with the Plaintiffs. 83. Defendants unlawfully detained Plaintiffs without legal authority and without a warrant. 84. Defendants' conduct was intentional and malicious. 85. Defendants acted in a reckless manner. 86. Defendants conduct was extreme and outrageous. 87. Defendants conduct caused Plaintiffs severe emotional harm. 88. The emotional harm and suffering of the Plaintiffs were proximately caused by the conduct of the Defendants. 89. The Defendants acted in a manner which resulted in the theft and conversion of Plaintiffs' property. The actions of the Defendants deprived Plaintiffs of liberty and property without due process of law as guaranteed by the Constitutions of the United States and the state of Georgia. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et al. Page 13 of 22

14 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 14 of The actions of the Defendants deprived Plaintiffs of equal protection of the laws as guaranteed by the Constitutions of the United States and the state of Georgia. 92. Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs show that Defendants and other officers conspired to and did act in a manner designed to cover up, conceal and hide the true facts and the actions of Defendants and others and did conspire to impede, hinder, obstruct and defeat the due cause of justice with the intent to injure the Plaintiffs and to deny and deprive the Plaintiffs of equal protection and due process of law. 93. The conduct of the individual Defendants in this ease violated clearly established rights including, but not limited to, clearly established policies of the City of Louisville, Georgia, Jefferson County Sheriffs Department, Jefferson County and the laws of the State of Georgia and Federal law. 94. As a result of the acts set forth herein, Plaintiff Dustin Myers has incurred medical expenses, suffered a loss of earnings, endured pain and suffering and suffered other general damages. 95. The medical expenses, general and special damages and other complications suffered by Plaintiff Dustin Myers were the direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the Defendants. MO Both Plaintiffs suffered emotional distress, pain and suffering and other general damages as a direct and proximate result of the contact of the Defendants. 97. In derogation of their duties and with deliberate indifference to their obligations to Plaintiffs rights and to Plaintiffs' health and welfare, these Defendants proceeded with deliberate indifference to Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et at Page 14 of 22

15 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 15 of 22 conceal and cover up the true facts and circumstances in this case. 98. As the chief policy maker for the Sheriff's Department of Jefferson County, Defendant Hutchins engaged in the following acts which fostered an environment of lawlessness by Defendants, which resulted in damage to the Plaintiffs and which hindered the administration of justice: 1) In failing to provide adequate training to law enforcement and other department employees in connection with crimes, investigations, pursuits and the use of force; 2) In failing to properly supervise or correct misdeeds and misbehavior of individual Defendants, officers and employees; 3) In permitting law enforcement and other department employees to investigate and participate in activities and investigations without adequate training, experience or know how; 4) In allowing Defendant Bowman and other elected officials to utilize law enforcement other department employees for personal reasons related to valid law enforcement matters; and 5) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the environment in which Jefferson County, its elected officials and its representatives acted in disregard for existing laws and acted without authorization or authority. As deputies with the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department, Defendants Evans and others engaged in the following acts which contributed to the violation of Plaintiffs' constitutional rights, which assisted in the injuries and damages to the Plaintiffs and which hindered the administration of justice: 1) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the pursuit, seizure, assault and restraint of the Plaintiffs; 2) In conspiring to and in cooperating in depriving Plaintiffs of their constitutional rights; 3) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the creation of an environment in which Jefferson County, its elected officials and its representatives acted in disregard for existing laws and rights; 4) In handling a private matter in a manner which is inconsistent with Georgia law and the policies, practices and procedures of law enforcement personnel; This/in Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et al Page 15 of 22

16 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 16 of 22 5) In initiating a pursuit and a seizure of the Plaintiffs without probable cause or justification in violation of the policies, procedures and customs of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department, Jefferson County and the laws of the State of Georgia and the United States. 6) In conspiring to and in cooperating with others in the making of false statements and in the concealment and cover-up of the actual circumstances involving Plaintiffs; and 7) In allowing Defendant Bowman to control their actions and conduct in violation of the policies and procedures of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department and the laws of the State of Georgia and the United States Defendant Jefferson County caused evidence to be concealed or destroyed and otherwise failed to perform its duties in a competent manner by engaging in the following actions and by allowing their agents, representatives and employees to engage in the following actions: I) In failing to provide adequate training and supervision to Sheriff's Department representatives and employees in connection with traffic patrols, pursuits, seizures and the use of force; 2) In permitting untrained and incompetent department employees to investigate and participate in investigations of improper action or conduct, including, but not limited to, investigation of improper pursuit or improper or illegal use of force; 3) In failing to assign better trained persons to the misconduct investigations; 4) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the environment in which Jefferson County, its elected officials and its employees and representatives acted in disregard for existing laws and acted without authorization or authority; 5) In failing to have adequate procedures for hiring, training and supervising department representatives and employees, in failing to have proper policies and customs for preventing unsafe and dangerous pursuits involving non-dangerous persons and in failing to have adequate customs, policies and procedures for when, where and how to utilize force and deadly force; and 6) In allowing the Chief Magistrate of Jefferson County to control the Sheriff's Department employees, utilize Sheriff's Department employees for purely personal reasons and in not having appropriate command and control procedures in force As the chief policy maker for the Police Department of Louisville, Georgia, Defendant Miller engaged in the following acts which fostered an environment of lawlessness by Defendants, which Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Many Bowman, et al Page 16 of 22

17 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 17 of 22 resulted in damage to the Plaintiffs and which hindered the administration of justice: 1) In failing to provide adequate training to law enforcement and other department employees in connection with crimes, investigations, pursuits and the use of force; 2) In failing to properly supervise or correct misdeeds and misbehavior of individual Defendants, officers and employees; 3) In permitting law enforcement and other department employees to investigate and participate in activities and investigations without adequate training, experience or know how; 4) In allowing Defendant Bowman and other elected officials to utilize law enforcement other department employees for personal reasons related to valid law enforcement matters; and 5) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the environment in which the City of Louisville, Georgia, its elected officials and its representatives acted in disregard for existing laws and acted without authorization or authority As an officer with the City of Louisville, Georgia, Defendant Miller and others engaged in the following acts which contributed to the violation of Plaintiffs' constitutional rights, which assisted in the injuries and damages to the Plaintiffs and which hindered the administration ofjustice: 1) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the pursuit, seizure, assault and restraint of the Plaintiffs; 2) In conspiring to and in cooperating in depriving Plaintiffs of their constitutional rights; 3) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the creation of an environment in which Jefferson County, its elected officials and its representatives acted in disregard for existing laws and rights; 4) In handling a private matter in a manner which is inconsistent with Georgia law and the policies, practices and procedures of law enforcement personnel; 5) In initiating a pursuit and a seizure of the Plaintiffs without probable cause or justification in violation of the policies, procedures and customs of the City Police Department of Louisville, Georgia and the laws of the State of Georgia and the United States. 6) In conspiring to and in cooperating with others in the making of false statements and in the concealment and cover-up of the actual circumstances involving Plaintiffs; and 7) In allowing Defendant Bowman to control their actions and conduct in violation of the Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, el al Page 17 of 22

18 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 18 of 22 policies and procedures of the City of Louisville, Georgia and the laws of the State of Georgia and the United States. 103 Defendant Louisville, Georgia caused evidence to be concealed or destroyed and otherwise failed to perform its duties in a competent manner by engaging in the following actions and by allowing their agents, representatives and employees to engage in the following actions: 1) In failing to provide adeqi ate training and supervision to Police Department representatives and employees in connection with traffic patrols, pursuits, seizures and the use of force; 2) In permitting untrained and incompetent department employees to investigate and participate in investigations of improper action or conduct, including, but not limited to, investigation of improper pursuit or improper or illegal use of force; 3) In failing to assign better trained persons to the misconduct investigations; 4) In conspiring to and in cooperating in the environment in which the City of Louisville, Georgia, its elected officials and its employees and representatives acted in disregard for existing laws and acted without authorization or authority; 5) In failing to have adequate procedures for hiring, training and supervising department representatives and employees, in failing to have proper policies and customs for preventing unsafe and dangerous pursuits involving non-dangerous persons and in failing to have adequate customs, policies and procedures for when, where and how to utilize force and deadly force; and 6) In allowing the Chief Magistrate of Jefferson County to control the Police Department employees, utilize Police Department employees for purely personal reasons and in not having appropriate command and control procedures in force The actions of the various Defendants in this case violated the clear established and well settled Federal constitutional rights of each of the Plaintiffs to be free from unreasonable seizure of his person and to be free from the use of excessive, unreasonable and unjustified force against them Prior to the complete investigation of the incident and the gathering and evaluation of all highly relevant evidence, the Defendants and others fabricated a justification for the incident. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, ci al. Southern District of Georgia I Augusta Division Page 18 of 22

19 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 19 of Prior to the investigation of the incident and the gathering and evaluation of highly relevant evidence, the Defendants and others conspired to and did act in a manner intended to create evidence of fault on the part of Plaintiffs. At all times, these Defendants were acting within the authority delegated them as representatives of the City of Louisville, Georgia and the Jefferson County Sheriffs Department, were acting within the scope of that authority, and were using the authority of their positions to carry out the unlawful and deliberately indifferent acts alleged in this complaint Jefferson County, by and through its elected officials, have condoned, authorized and ratified all such improper and illegal actions of the Defendants and have condoned a custom and practice of conduct that encouraged the abuse of authority by representatives and employees of the Sheriffs Department and the Magistrate Court, including, but not limited to, persons or parties who are unknown, undiscovered or unnamed in this action. Jefferson County knew or should have known that such conduct was a violation of existing laws, practices and polices. As a result of these and other actions of the Defendants, Jefferson County is liable to the Plaintiff. Further, these authorities were previously notified of these customs and practices and did nothing to change these behaviors The City of Louisville, Georgia, by and through its elected officials, have condoned, authorized and ratified all such improper and illegal actions of the Defendants and have condoned a custom and practice of conduct that encouraged the abuse of authority by representatives and employees of the Police Department and the Magistrate Court, including, but not limited to, persons or parties who are unknown, undiscovered or unnamed in this action. The City of Louisville, Georgia knew or should have known that Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Marry Bowman, ci al Page 19 of 22

20 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 20 of 22 such conduct was a violation of existing laws, practices and polices. As a result of these and other actions of the Defendants, the City of Louisville, Georgia is liable to the Plaintiff. Further, these authorities were previously notified of these customs and practices and did nothing to change these behaviors The Defendants knew or in the exercise of ordinary diligence should have known that their conduct was inconsistent with existing standards, practices, procedures, and legal requirements. Ill. Prior to the institution of this action, Plaintiffs caused to be served upon the City of Louisville, Georgia and Jefferson County and its representatives various notices informing these Defendants of the claims against them. Copies of said notices are attached hereto as and incorporated herein as "Exhibit A- 1 and A-2" By the actions described above, Defendants deprived the Plaintiffs of the rights to liberty, due process of law, and equal protection of the laws of Georgia and the United States The conduct of the Defendants was either malicious or for the purpose of causing harm, or was done recklessly and with clear disregard for the rights of the Plaintiffs, 114. The conduct of the Defendants as alleged above, were carried out by virtue of a custom and practice of deliberate indifference permitted, condoned and ratified by the governing body of Jefferson County and the City of Louisville, Georgia These Defendants are liable to the Plaintiffs for the deprivation of the Plaintiffs' constitutionally protected liberty interests, in such amounts as the jury determines to be just and appropriate to Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, el al. Southern District of Georgia I Augusta Division Page 20 of 22

21 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 21 of 22 compensate for their losses The Defendants, either intentionally or with deliberate indifference, acted in a manner which deprived Plaintiff of his rights and which caused injury to the Plaintiff Dustin Myers The Defendants' conduct was reckless and intentional, it was extreme and outrageous, and it resulted in severe emotional distress, on account of which, and for other just cause, Plaintiffs seek recovery of their damages The conduct of the Defendants amounted to willful misconduct, malice, wantonness, oppression, or that entire want of care which raises a presumption of a conscious indifference to the consequences. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from these Defendants, jointly and severally, an award of punitive damages in such an amount as the jury determines to be appropriate to deter these Defendants from repeating their unlawful conduct, or to punish them The foregoing acts of the Defendants evidence stubborn litigiousness and bad faith, and have caused the Plaintiffs unnecessary trouble and expenses such that Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their necessary expenses of litigation, including an award or reasonable attorney's fees under the law of Georgia, as well as under federal law, including, but not limited to, 42 Usc 1988, 120. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover pre-judgment interest Plaintiffs are entitled to recover post-judgment interest on any verdict rendered in this case as provided by law. Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et al Southern District of Georgia I Augusta Division Page 21 of 22

22 Case 1:09-cv JRH-WLB Document 1 Filed 12/09/09 Page 22 of 22 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand the following relief: 1) That Plaintiffs have and recover judgment in compensatory damages against the Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally, in such an amount as the jury in this case determines to be appropriate to compensate them for the deprivation of Plaintiffs' rights, which rights are protected by the Constitutions of the State of Georgia and the United States; 2) That Plaintiffs have and recover an award of compensatory damages against these Defendants, jointly and severally, for any violations of the law of Georgia; 3) That Plaintiffs have and recover an award of punitive damages against each Defendant in such an amount as the jury in this case determines to be appropriate to deter or punish each such Defendant for having engaged in such a willful and deliberate deprivation of the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs. 4) That Plaintiffs have and recover their costs of this action, including attorneys fees as provided by 42 U.S.C. 1988, and the Law of Georgia; 5) That Plaintiffs have a jury trial by a 12 member panel of his peers as to all issues in this case to which the right to trial by jury is afforded; and 6) That Plaintiffs recover pre-judgment and post-judgment 10 interest as provided by law; and 7) That Plaintiffs have and recover such other and further relief as this Court may deem appropriate. JO C. SPTJRLIN G StateBarNo North Central Avenue Post Office Box 7566 Tifton, Georgia (229) A t6q, 4, V"e/ GAR C. McCOR'VEY Ga. State Bar No ()p/jj j AVb WILLIAM DOW iioiøs Ga. State Bar No Dustin Myers and Rodney Myers vs. Murry Bowman, et al Page 22 of 22