IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRCT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Transcription

1 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: JAMES S. TERRELL (SBN #00) Anacapa Road Victorville, California (0) -0 fax (0) - jim@talktoterrell.com SHARON J. BRUNNER, (SBN: ) Law Office of Sharon J. Brunner Park Avenue, Suite 0 Victorville, CA sharonjbrunner@yahoo.com Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRCT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 RAYMOND LOFTIN, vs. Plaintiff, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SHERIFF JOHN MCMAHON, SGT.D.BABEL, SGT. JIM EVANS, SGT. V.PUTNAM, DEPUTY J. GICE, DEPUTY J.BARNER, DEPUTY NICK DOWNEY, DEPUTY CHAPDELAINE, DEPUTY T.JAMES, DEPUTY DOMINIC MOODY, DEPUTY OAKLEAF, DEPUTY ROMERO and DOES -, Inclusive, Defendants. ) Case No.: :-cv- COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES. Excessive Force ( USC ). Failure to Intervene ( USC ). Monnell ( USC ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

2 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 JURISDICTION AND VENUE. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action for damages under the laws under U.S.C., the United States Constitution and common law principles, to redress a deprivation under color of state law of rights, privileges, and immunities secured to PLAINTIFF and their decedent, by said status, and by the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.. Pursuant to USC, this Court has original jurisdiction under the Civil Rights Act and related common law claims pursuant to USC,.. Venue is proper in this Court because the Defendants reside in, and all incidents, events, and occurrences giving rise to this action occurred in the County of San Bernardino, California. PARTIES. Plaintiff RAYMOND LOFTIN was, at all times herein mentioned a citizen of the United States of America and a resident of San Bernardino County over the age of.. Defendant JOHN MCMAHON (McMahon) was, at all times herein mentioned, the elected Sheriff of the County of San Bernardino (Sheriff). Sheriff McMahon was and is the policy maker for the County of San Bernardino Sheriff Department as that term is understood in U.S.C. Section litigation.. Defendant SGT. JIM EVANS( EVANS") is and was at all times

3 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: mentioned herein a Sergeant employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant SGT.D.BABEL( BABEL") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Sergeant employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant SGT. V. PUTNAM( PUTNAM") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Sergeant employed by the COUNTY OF SAN 0 BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DEPUTY J. GICE ("GICE") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DEPUTY J.BARNER ("BARNER") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DEPUTY CHAPDELAINE ("CHAPDELAINE ") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN

4 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DEPUTY T.JAMES ("JAMES ") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DEPUTY OAKLEAF ("OAKLEAF") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DEPUTY ROMERO ("ROMERO") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DEPUTY NICK DOWNEY ("DOWNEY") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy for the COUNTY.. Defendant DOMINIC MOODY ("MOODY") is and was at all times mentioned herein a Deputy employed by the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. He is being sued in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as a Deputy

5 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 for the COUNTY.. Defendant County of San Bernardino was, at all times mentioned herein, a political subdivision for the State of California.. The individual defendants other than Sheriff McMahon were and are employed by the County of San Bernardino as Deputy sheriffs, or supervisors and assigned to the San Bernardino Sheriff's department. 0. Each of the acts or omissions alleged herein was under color of state law.. The unknown named defendants, identified herein as DOES through, include, but are not necessarily limited to, unknown Custody Assistants, Classification Specialists, Deputies, Sergeants, Lieutenants, Captains, and /or other employees of Defendant San Bernardino Sheriff Department of unknown rank and title who engaged in, assisted with, approved of, or acquiesced in the actions and misconduct described by known defendants herein, resulting in the deprivation of Plaintiff civil rights and injuries to their person, as is described below.. Said DOE Defendants additionally include unknown employees of the County of San Bernardino and the San Bernardino Sheriff Department who were supervisors who created, fostered, acquiesced, ratified and/or maintained the policies, customs and/or practices that caused the deprivation of Plaintiff Constitutional rights and his injuries.

6 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of these DOE Defendants, though all are believed to have been employed by Defendant County of San Bernardino, or Defendant San Bernardino Sheriff Department or acting in concert with Defendants and in the capacity of state actors, but allege that each such Defendant was in some manner responsible for their injuries due to their own conduct which were either intentional done or done with reckless indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff.. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the Defendants designated as a DOE is intentionally responsible in some manner for the events and happenings herein referred to, and thereby caused injuries and damages as herein alleged. The true names and capacities of DOES through, inclusive, and each of them, are not now known to Plaintiff who therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names and will be added to this action as provided by California Code of Civil Procedure Section.. Defendants, and each of them, did the acts and omissions hereinafter alleged in bad faith and with knowledge that their conduct violated well established and settled law.. Defendants, and each of them, did the acts and omissions alleged herein in done intentionally or with reckless indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff and in violation of clearly established law.. Each of the individual Defendants are being sued in their individual

7 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 capacity as well as their official capacity. FACTS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTIONS. On January, 0, Plaintiff was arrested and charged with criminal acts related to the incident. On June, 0, the charges were dropped/dismissed.. On January, 0 the Plaintiff was at his mother s house located at 0 Catalina Street, Hesperia, California at approximately :00 am the Plaintiff was under his automobile making auto repairs. The Plaintiff s mother, the Plaintiff s girlfriend (Patricia Avias) and the Plaintiff s six children were inside the residence. While the Plaintiff was working on his car he heard some noises. 0. The Plaintiff saw approximately several San Bernardino County Deputies swarm the house.. Several of the San Bernardino County Deputies were dressed in all black.. The Plaintiff heard the Deputies yelling for his girlfriend to sit on the ground when she exited the house to dispose of a bag of trash.. The Plaintiff was able to see that some of the Deputies had their guns pointed at his mom and his children. The Plaintiff was paralyzed with fear as all of the Deputies were yelling orders at his mother, girlfriend, and their children.. The Plaintiff also saw some Deputies ran to the backyard of the residence... The Plaintiff was aware of the fact that three people lived in a trailer

8 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 in the backyard (Joseph Jhane, Brian Smith and Steven Waddell). The Plaintiff was aware as to why Law enforcement was at the home.. The Plaintiff did not move from his position under the car as the Deputies present all had had guns and were running and moving across the entire property. The Plaintiff had also had negative contact with law enforcement a few days earlier. A few days prior to this incident Defendant Downey had told the Plaintiff If we have to come back we are going to fuck you up.. This threat was communicated to the Plaintiff at the same residence and was right after the Plaintiff had made bail on an arrest.. The Plaintiff heard some of the Deputies asking his mother about the Plaintiff s whereabouts. The Deputies then made their way to the vehicle where the Plaintiff was located. The Plaintiff was ordered to come out with his hands up. The Plaintiff stated I am unarmed; don t shoot!. The Plaintiff was initially laying on his back when he was making repairs on the vehicle prior to the arrival of law enforcement. If this conduct hindered or delayed deputies, here thereafter surrendered and complied with all police commands. 0. However, after the Deputies swarmed the residence the Plaintiff had rolled over on his belly. The Plaintiff s stomach/belly was flush with the ground. The Plaintiff obeyed the commands of the Deputies and Plaintiff put his arms outside the vehicle with the palms down on the ground.

9 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0. As soon as the Plaintiff put his arms and hands out from under the vehicle he was grabbed violently by several Deputies.. The Plaintiff was unable to see which Deputies grabbed him due to his view being obstructed by the vehicle.. Immediately after being pulled from under the vehicle the Plaintiff had several Deputies standing over him.. The Plaintiff heard a Deputy yell Stop resisting!. The Plaintiff was not resisting and the Deputy had grabbed his left arm and another Deputy grabbed his right arm and twisted the right arm upwards the Plaintiff neck area.. A Deputy or Officer dressed in all black struck the Plaintiff with his knee to the Plaintiff s face breaking the Plaintiff s nose.. The Plaintiff describes this as being knee d. The Plaintiff distinctly remembers the Deputies screaming Stop resisting!.. The Plaintiff recalls this because he was not resisting and could not resist because he was on the ground with a Deputy on each of his arms and numerous other Deputies on his ankles.. The Plaintiff s ankles were placed in handcuffs.. The Plaintiff recalls the Deputies making a circle around him with their bodies. 0. The Plaintiff was then hit, kicked and punched by the Deputies present. The Plaintiff was hit by the Deputies fists and a baton.

10 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0. The Plaintiff lost consciousness due to the beating and the excessive forced applied by law enforcement. The Plaintiff was kicked in the head by Deputy Downey several times.. The Plaintiff suffered injuries to his right shoulder, his ribs, and he suffered a seizure two days later at a holding cell located at Victorville, California due to the physical beating and kicks he received from the deputies.. The Plaintiff also recalls a Deputy stating This will teach you to make stupid-ass comments on Facebook... Plaintiff had made some unfavorable comments about local law enforcement on Facebook a few days prior to the incident.. None of the Deputies tried to intervene or stop this senseless beating. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Excessive Force ( U.S.C. ) Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments (Against all Defendants). Plaintiff refers to and re-pleads each and every allegation contained in paragraphs through of this complaint, and by this reference incorporates the same herein and make each a part hereof.. Sheriff's Deputies, including Sergeants and, including the Doe Defendants brutally tortured Plaintiff without justification. Defendant Deputies pulled and twisted Plaintiff although Plaintiff was at all times compliant and never resisted or refused any Deputy's command. This beating was severe enough to displace Plaintiff shoulder. This constituted excessive force against Plaintiff in

11 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 violation of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.. Defendants' use of excessive force caused Plaintiff severe physical injuries; pain and suffering; extreme emotional distress, fear, trauma, and humiliation; bruises on his face and body; lacerations and abrasions on his face and body.. Plaintiff claims against Defendants COUNTY and Sheriff McMAHON are based on their maintaining and permitting the practices, policies and customs described in this complaint in particular, Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges Sheriff McMahon, as the official policy maker for Defendant COUNTY, was aware of widespread beatings and use of excessive force in COUNTY. On information and belief, instead of taking proper steps to discipline Deputies, Sheriff McMahon condoned, encouraged, fostered and/or ratified the unlawful conduct of the Defendant Deputies. Plaintiff is further informed and believes thereon alleges that Defendants Sheriff McMahon and COUNTY have ratified the individual Deputies' unconstitutional conduct toward Plaintiff. As result of the conduct, Defendants reliable for Plaintiff' injuries either because they were integral participants in the misconduct, or because they failed to intervene when they had the opportunity and try to do so to prevent these violations. 0. Plaintiff alleges that the acts of the individual Defendants were willful, malicious, intentional, oppressive, reckless, and/or were done in willful or

12 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: conscious disregard of Plaintiff' rights, welfare, and safety, thereby justifying the awarding of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at the time of trial.. As a direct and legal result of Defendants' acts and omissions, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including without limitation, pain and suffering, extreme mental and emotional distress, severe physical injuries, medical expenses, attorneys' fees, costs of suit, loss of earnings, and other pecuniary losses not yet ascertained. 0 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FAILURE TO INTERVENE (VIOLATION OF U.S.C. ) (By Plaintiff Against All Individual Defendants). Plaintiff refers to and re-pleads each and every allegation contained in paragraphs through of this complaint, and by this reference incorporates the same herein and make each a part hereof.. Commencing on January, 0, Defendants, and each of them knew and understood Plaintiff was being subjected to a deprivation of his constitutional rights and were in the position and had the duty and authority to intervene to prevent the wrongdoing committed against Plaintiff by Defendants. By virtue of the foregoing, Defendants, and each of them, violated U.S.C... As a direct result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has been damaged as

13 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: recited above and demands and is entitled to the damages recited in First Cause of Action, including, but limited to, general and punitive damages (except to as to County of San Bernardino), and attorney's fees. 0 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (UNLAWFUL CUSTOM AND PRACTICE UNDER SECTION ) (By Plaintiff Against Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO & SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON individually). Plaintiff refers to and re-pleads each and every allegation contained in paragraphs through of this complaint, and by this reference incorporates the same herein and make each a part hereof.. Defendant COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO is and at all times herein mentioned has been a public entity and an incorporated municipality duly authorized and existing as such in and under the laws of the State of California; and at all times herein mentioned, Defendant COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, possessed the power and authority to adopt policies and prescribe rules, regulations and practices affecting the operation of the San Bernardino Sheriff s Department and its tactics, methods, practices, customs and usages related to internal investigations, personnel supervision and records maintenance, and the proper uses of force by its rank and file, generally.. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, were employees acting under the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO direction and

14 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 control, who knowingly and intentionally promulgated, maintained, applied, enforced and suffered the continuation of policies, customs, practices and usages in violation of the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments respectively to the United States Constitution, which customs, policies, practices and usages at all times herein mentioned required and encouraged the employment, deployment and retention of persons as peace officers who have demonstrated their brutality, dishonesty, bigotry, and numerous other serious abuses of their powers as peace officers in the employment of the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO.. Defendant COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO knowingly maintains and permits official sub-rosa policies or customs of permitting the occurrence of the kinds of wrongs set forth above, by deliberate indifference to widespread police abuses, failing and refusing to impartially investigate, discipline or prosecute peace officers who commit acts of felonious dishonesty and crimes of violence, each ratified and approved by COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON 0. The unconstitutional policies, practices or customs promulgated, sanctioned or tolerated by Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON include, but are not limited to:. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON had knowledge, prior to and since this incident, of repeated allegations of abuse and assaultive misconduct toward detainees and arrestees.

15 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 Specifically, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON knew Defendants had in the past committed acts of police abuse, dishonesty and prevarication;. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON had knowledge, prior to and since this incident, of similar allegations of abuse and dishonesty by Defendants, and refused to enforce established administrative procedures to insure the safety of detainees and arrestees;. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON refused to adequately discipline individual deputies and employees found to have committed similar acts of abuse and misconduct;. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON refused to competently and impartially investigate allegations of abuse and misconduct alleged to have been committed by San Bernardino Sheriff s Deputies.. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON reprimanded, threatened, intimidated, demoted and fired deputies who reported acts of abuse by other deputies;. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON covered up acts of misconduct and abuse by Deputies and sanctioned a code of silence by and among deputies;

16 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON rewarded deputies who displayed aggressive and abusive behavior towards detainees and arrestees;. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON failed to adequately train and educate deputies in the use of reasonable and proper force and failed to enforce the department s written regulations with respect to uses of force;. Defendant COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON failed to adequately supervise the actions of deputies under their control and guidance; 0. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON condoned and participated in the practice of prosecuting known groundless criminal charges for the purpose of insulating the County of San Bernardino and its deputies from civil liability and reducing or dismissing criminal charges against individuals in return for release from civil liability;. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON condone and encourage a conspiracy of silence among their employees for the purpose of concealing and furthering wrongful and illegal conduct by their employees;. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON engaged in the practice and custom of withholding from criminal

17 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 defendants, judges and prosecutors, known Brady evidence unfavorable to their deputies in violation of law and the Constitution.. Defendants COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO and SHERIFF JOHN McMAHON fostered and encouraged an atmosphere of lawlessness, abuse and unconstitutional misconduct, which by January, 0 and thereafter, represented the unconstitutional policies, practices and customs of the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO.. By reason of the aforesaid policies, customs, practices and usages, Plaintiff s rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution were deprived.

18 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: PRAYER WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants and each of them, as follows: AS TO EACH CAUSE OF ACTION AS APPLICABLE. For General damages according to proof;. For Special damages according to proof;. For Punitive damages as provided by law, in an amount to provided against each individual Defendant;. For attorney's fees;. For Costs of suit;. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper. 0 Dated://0 Dated://0 By: /s/_james Terrell James Terrell, Esq Attorney for Plaintiff By: /s/ Sharon Brunner Sharon Brunner, Esq Attorney for Plaintiff

19 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: PLAINTIFF demands a jury trial. Dated: //0 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Dated://0 By /s/james Terrell James Terrell, Esq Attorney for PLAINTIFFS By_/s/Sharon Brunner Sharon J Brunner, Esq Attorney for PLAINTIFFS 0