complaint against hammond police

INTHEUNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTFORTHENORTHERNDISTRICTOFINDIANA

HAMMONDDIVISIONJAMALJONES,LISAMAHONE,JOSEPHIVY,andJANIYAIVY, Plaintiffs,

v.

CITYOFHAMMOND,PATRICKVICARI,CHARLESTURNER,andOTHERUNKNOWNOFFICERS,

CaseNo.

Defendants.

JURYTRIALDEMANDED

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs JAMAL JONES,LISAMAHONE, JOSEPH IVY,and JANIYA IVY,by

and through their undersigned attorneys, complain against Defendants CITY OF

HAMMOND, PATRICK VICARI, CHARLES TURNER, and OTHER UNKNOWN

OFFICERS,asfollows:

JURISDICTIONANDVENUE

1. ThisCourthasjurisdictionpursuantto28U.S.C.1341,1343.ThisCourt

hassupplementaljurisdictionoverstatelawclaimspursuantto28U.S.C.1367.

2. Venue isproper in this judicialdistrictunder28U.S.C.1391(b)and (c)

becausePlaintiffsandallDefendantseitherresideinthisdistrictorhavetheirprincipal

placeofbusinessinthisdistrict,andalleventsgivingrisetoPlaintiffsclaimsoccurred

withinthisdistrict.

case 2:14-cv-00362 document 1 filed 10/06/14 page 1 of 17

2

PARTIES

3. Jamal Jones (hereinafter, Jamal) resideswithin the state of Indiana and

withinthisjudicialdistrict.

4. Lisa Mahone (hereinafter Lisa) resides within the state of Indiana and

withinthisjudicialdistrict,andistheparentandguardianofJosephIvyandJaNiyaIvy.

5. JosephIvy (hereinafterJoseph) isa14yearoldminorandresideswithin

thestateofIndianaandwithinthisjudicialdistrict.

6. JaNiya Ivy (hereinafter JaNiya) isa7yearoldminorand resideswithin

thestateofIndianaandwithinthisjudicialdistrict.

7. The City of Hammond is a municipal corporation and public entity

organized under the laws of the state of Indiana and is located within this judicial

district.

8. PatrickVicariisapoliceofficeremployedbytheCityofHammond.

9. Atallrelevanttimes,DefendantVicariwasondutyandactedundercolor

oflawandwithinthescopeofhisemployment.

10. CharlesTurnerisapoliceofficeremployedbytheCityofHammond.

11. Atallrelevanttimes,DefendantTurnerwasondutyandactedundercolor

oflawandwithinthescopeofhisemployment.


3

12. Defendants otherunknown officers arepolice officers employed by the

CityofHammond.

13. At all relevant times,Defendants otherunknown officerswere onduty

andactedundercoloroflawandwithinthescopeoftheiremployment.

FACTSRELEVANTTOALLCLAIMS

14. On or about September 24, 2014, at about 3:30 p.m., Plaintiffs were

traveling in a vehicle in the vicinity of 169th Street andClineAvenue in theCity of

Hammond.

15. Lisawasthedriverofthevehicle.

16. Jamalwasseatedinthefrontpassengerseat.

17. JaNiyaandJosephwereseatedintherearpassengerseats.

18. DefendantsVicariandTurner,whowereinuniformanddrivingmarked

City of Hammond police vehicles, activated their emergency equipment and pulled

Plaintiffsvehicleovertothesideoftheroad.

19. Lisapulledover to thesideof the road,but themanner inwhichVicari

andTurnerpulledoverPlaintiffsvehiclewashighlyaggressiveandplacedPlaintiffsin

fearfortheirsafety.

20. Uponapproachingthevehicle,VicariorTurnerplacedspikestripsunder

thewheelsofPlaintiffsvehicle,whichmadePlaintiffsevenmorefearfulfortheirsafety.

21. VicariandTurnerdemandedLisasidentification.


4

22. Lisacompliedandgavetheofficersheridentification.

23. Vicari and Turner stated that they had pulled over Plaintiffs vehicle

becauseLisahadnotbeenwearingherseatbelt.

24. LisaconcededthatshehadnotbeenwearingherseatbeltandaskedVicari

andTurnertoissueheraticketquickly.Lisainformedtheofficersthathermotherwas

dyingandthatPlaintiffswereonthewaytothehospitaltoseeherbeforeshedied.

25. RatherthanissuingLisaaticketforfailuretowearaseatbelt,theofficers

demandedthatJamal,thepassenger,providetheofficerswithhisidentificationaswell.

26. Vicari and Turner had no reasonable basis to believe that Jamal had

committedanycrime.

27. Jamal informed theofficers thathedidnothavehisdrivers licensebut

hadaticketwithhisinformationonit.1

28. Jamal offered to write his information down for the officers, but the

officersrefused.

29. Becauseof theofficersaggressivedemeanorand lackofany reasonable

basistobelievethatJamalhadcommittedanycrime,JamalandLisafeltthattheywere

inimminentdanger.

30. TheofficersthenorderedJamaltogetoutofthevehicle.

1 Hehadpreviouslyturnedoverhisdriverslicensewhenhewasstoppedfornotpayinghisinsurance.


5

31. Jamalofferedtoshowtheofficerstheticket,whichhadhisinformationon

it,buttheofficersrefused.

32. Lisacalled911andrequestedasupervisor,andJamaldeclinedtogetout

ofthevehiclebecausetheywereinreasonablefearfortheirsafety.

33. In fullviewof theofficers, Jamal retrieved the ticket fromhisbackpack

andofferedthetickettotheofficers.

34. Theofficersdeclinedtotaketheticket.

35. Afteraminuteortwofornoreason,theofficersdrewtheirweapons.

36. Theofficershadnoreasonablebasistobelievethatanyoneinthevehicle

wasa threat.Thevehicleswindowswere clearand theofficershadanunobstructed

viewofeverypersonwithinthevehicle.

37. At no time did the officers inform any of the Plaintiffs that they were

underarrest.

38. OtherthaninformingLisathatshewouldbecitedforaseatbeltviolation,

atnotimedidtheofficersinformanyofthePlaintiffsthattheywereunderreasonable

suspicionofcommittingacrime.

39. AtnotimedidtheofficersorderanyofthePlaintiffstoputtheirhandsin

theairorupwheretheycouldseethem.

40. TheofficersagainorderedJamaltoexitthevehiclewithoutanybasis.


6

41. Jamalagaindeclinedbecausehefearedthattheofficerswouldharmhim

and/ortheotherPlaintiffsinthevehicle.

42. Despite the fact that Jamal was not under arrest, was not reasonably

suspectedof committinga crime,andpresentedno threat to theofficers, theofficers

decidedtoforciblyremoveJamalfromthevehicle.

43. Vicari, Turner, or one of the other unknown officers approached the

vehiclewitha toolandraised the tool intoanaggressiveposture,placingPlaintiffs in

imminentfearofphysicalharm.

44. The officer used the tool to smash the front passenger window of the

vehicle,strikingJamalintherightshoulderandcausingshardsofglasstostrikeJamal,

Lisa,Joseph,andJaNiya.

45. Vicari, Turner, or one of the other unknown officers shot Jamalwith a

taser and then, individually and collectively, the officers dragged Jamal out of the

vehicleandthrewhimtotheground.

46. TheofficerscontinuedtotaseJamalwhilehe layontheground,despite

thefactthatJamalwasnotresistinginanyway.

47. TheofficersthenplacedJamalinhandcuffsandplacedJamalunderarrest.

48. Atnopointduring this entire encounterdid Jamalphysically resist the

officersinanyway.

49. Jamalwaschargedwithresistinglawenforcement.


7

50. At no point did the officers search the vehicle or any of Plaintiffs for

weapons.

51. Lisawascitedforfailuretowearaseatbeltandeventuallyallowedtogo

onherway.

FACTSRELEVANTTOMONELLCLAIMSAGAINSTCITYOFHAMMOND

52. Defendants Vicari and Turner have a history of using objectively

unreasonableforceagainstcitizensandarrestingcitizenswithoutprobablecause.

53. DefendantVicarihasbeennamedasadefendantinatleastthreeprevious

lawsuits involving theuseofexcessive forceagainstcitizensaswellasarrestwithout

probablecause:

A. Stancatov.CityofHammond,No.07cv00259(N.D.Ind.)

B. Grayv.CityofHammond,No.08cv00114(N.D.Ind.)

C. Warnerv.CityofHammond,No.11cv00458(N.D.Ind.)

54. Similarly,DefendantTurnerhasbeennamedasadefendantinatleastone

previous lawsuit involving theuseofexcessive forceagainstcitizensaswellasarrest

withoutprobablecause:

A. Leidingv.CityofHammond,No.03cv00381(N.D.Ind.)

55. Thepublicdocuments listedabovearerepresentativeexamplesonlyand

donot includeother internaland informal complaints filedby citizensagainstVicari

andTurneraswellasotherCitypoliceofficers.


8

56. Inadditiontotheaboveexamples,therearenumerousotherinstancesof

City police officers using excessive force against citizens as well as false arrests of

citizens.

57. Despite thishistory, theCityofHammondhasnotdisciplinedVicarior

Turnerorotherofficersandhasinsteadpromotedthemtoleadershippositionswithin

thepolicedepartment.

58. Moreover,despitethishistoryofunlawfulconductbyCitypoliceofficers,

theCityhasfailedtoadequatelyinvestigateallegationsofofficermisconduct,hasfailed

to adequately discipline officers for the use of excessive force, and has failed to

adequatelytrainitsofficersontheproperuseofforce.

59. TheCitysfailuretodoso isadefactopolicythatencouragesofficersto

violatetheconstitutionalrightsofcitizenswithimpunity.

60. The Citys de fact policy proximately caused the individual officers to

engageintheunlawfulconductdescribedaboveagainstPlaintiffs.

COUNTI

ViolationoftheFourthAmendmentExcessiveForce

61. This count is pled against the individual defendants on behalf of all

Plaintiffs.

62. Under theFourthandFourteenthAmendments to theU.S.Constitution,

Plaintiffsareentitledtobefreefromtheunreasonableuseofforcebypoliceofficers.


9

63. Plaintiffs rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments are

enforceableunder42U.S.C.1983.

64. Vicari, Turner, or other unknown officers use of force in breaking the

window and striking Lisa, Jamal, Joseph, and JaNiya was objectively unreasonable

underthecircumstances.

65. Vicari,Turner,orotherunknownofficersuseof force inshooting Jamal

withataserwasobjectivelyunreasonableunderthecircumstances.

66. The individualDefendantsactionswereundertakenwithin thescopeof

theiremployment,whileonduty,andundercoloroflaw.

67. Asaresultoftheunjustifiedandexcessiveuseofforcebytheindividual

defendants,Plaintiffshavesufferedphysicalandemotionalinjuries.

WHEREFORE,Plaintiffspray that thisCourtenter judgment in their favorand

againsttheindividualdefendants,andawarddamagesasfollows:

A. Compensatorydamages;

B. Punitivedamagesasallowedbylaw;

C. Reasonableattorneysfees,costs,andlitigationexpenses;and

D. AnyotherreliefthisCourtdeemsjustandappropriate.


10

COUNTII

ViolationoftheFourthAmendmentExcessiveForce(Monell)

68. This count is pled against the City ofHammond only on behalf of all

Plaintiffs.

69. Theactionsof the individualDefendants,asdescribedabove,was taken

pursuanttothepolicyandpracticeoftheCityofHammond.

70. Asamatterofbothpolicyandpractice,theCityofHammondencourages,

andisthemovingforcebehind,theindividualofficersobjectivelyunreasonableuseof

force against citizens by hiring and retaining unqualified officers, and by failing to

adequatelytrain,supervise,andcontrolitsofficers.

71. By failing to adequately investigate and discipline officers who have

engagedprevious instancesof excessive forceagainst citizens, theCityofHammond

manifestsdeliberateindifferencetotheviolationsofthosecitizensconstitutionalrights

bytheCityspoliceofficers.

72. The Citys deliberate indifference to its officers use of excessive force

againstcitizensencouragesofficerstobelievethattheiractionswillneverbescrutinized

andthusencouragesofficerstocontinueusingexcessiveforceagainstcitizens.

73. TheCitysfailuretoadequatelytrain,supervise,anddisciplineitsofficers

fortheiruseofexcessiveforcecausedtheindividualdefendantstouseexcessiveforce


11

againstPlaintiffsbecause theofficersbelieved that theywouldnotbe investigatedor

punishedfordoingso.

74. AsadirectresultoftheCityspolicyandpractice,Plaintiffshavesuffered

physicalandemotionalinjury.







COUNTIII

ViolationoftheFourthAmendmentFalseArrest

75. ThiscountispledagainsttheindividualdefendantsonbehalfofPlaintiff

JamalJones.

76. Under theFourthandFourteenthAmendments to theU.S.Constitution,

Joneshasarighttobefreefromarrestwithoutprobablecause.

77. Plaintiffs rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments are

enforceableunder42U.S.C.1983.

78. TheindividualdefendantshadnoprobablecausetobelievethatJoneswas

committingorhadcommittedacrimeatthetimetheyplacedhimunderarrest.


12

79. The individualdefendantsactionswereundertakenwithin the scopeof

theiremployment,whileonduty,andundercoloroflaw.

80. As a result of his arrest and detention without probable cause by the

individualdefendants,Joneshassufferedphysical,emotional,andfinancialinjuries.







COUNTIV

ViolationoftheFourthAmendmentFalseArrest(Monell)

81. ThiscountispledagainsttheCityofHammondonlyonbehalfofPlaintiff

JamalJones.

82. Theactionsof the individualdefendantsasdescribedabovewere taken

pursuanttothepolicyandpracticeoftheCityofHammond.

83. Asamatterofbothpolicyandpractice,theCityofHammondencourages,

and is the moving force behind, the individual officers arrest of citizens without

probablecausebyhiringandretainingunqualifiedofficers,andbyfailingtoadequately

train,supervise,andcontrolitsofficers.


13

84. By failing to adequately investigate and discipline officers who have

engaged inprevious instancesofarrestofcitizenswithoutprobablecause, theCityof

Hammond manifests deliberate indifference to the violations of those citizens

constitutionalrightsbytheCityspoliceofficers.

85. TheCitysdeliberateindifferencetoitsofficersarrestofcitizenswithout

probablecauseencouragesofficerstobelievethattheiractionswillneverbescrutinized

andthusencouragesofficerstocontinuearrestingcitizenswithoutprobablecause.

86. TheCitysfailuretoadequatelytrain,supervise,anddisciplineitsofficers

for arresting citizenswithout probable cause led the individual defendants to arrest

PlaintiffJoneswithoutprobablecausebecausetheofficersbelievedthattheywouldnot

beinvestigatedorpunishedfordoingso.

87. As a direct result of the Citys policy and practice, Plaintiff Jones has

sufferedphysical,emotional,andfinancialinjury.








14

COUNTV

StateLawAssaultandBattery

88. ThiscountispledagainstalldefendantsonbehalfofallPlaintiffs.

89. The actions of the individual defendants created a reasonable

apprehensionof imminentharmbyandconstitutedharmfuloroffensivecontactwith

eachPlaintiff.

90. The actions of the individual defendantswere objectively unreasonable

under the circumstances andwereundertaken intentionallywithmalice,willfulness,

andrecklessindifferencetotherightsandsafetyofPlaintiffs.

91. The actions of the individual defendants were undertaken within the

scopeoftheiremploymentwiththeCityofHammond

92. TheCityofHammondisliableasprincipalforalltortscommittedbyits

agents.

93. As a result of the actions of the individual defendants, Plaintiffs have

sustainedphysicalandemotionalinjuries.





C. AnyotherreliefthisCourtdeemsjustandappropriate.


15

COUNTVI

StateLawFalseArrest/FalseImprisonment

94. ThiscountispledagainstalldefendantsonbehalfofPlaintiffJamalJones.

95. The individual defendants did not have probable cause to believe that

Joneswascommittingorhadcommittedanycrime.

96. The individual defendants caused Jones to be arrested and imprisoned

withoutprobablecauseorlegaljustification.

97. The actions of the individual defendantswere objectively unreasonable

under the circumstances andwereundertaken intentionallywithmalice,willfulness,

andrecklessindifferencetotherightsofJones.

98. The actions of the individual defendants were undertaken within the

scopeoftheiremploymentwiththeCityofHammond.


agents.

100. Asaresultoftheactionsoftheindividualdefendants,Joneshassustained

physical,emotionalinjuries,andfinancialinjuries.

WHEREFORE, Jones prays that this Court enter judgment in his favor and

againsttheindividualDefendants,andawarddamagesasfollows:




16


COUNTVII

StateLawIntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress

101. ThiscountispledagainstallDefendantsonbehalfofallPlaintiffs.

102. The individual Defendants actions were objectively extreme and

outrageousunderthecircumstances.

103. The individualDefendantsactionswere taken intentionallywithmalice,

willfulness,andrecklessindifferencetotherightsandsafetyofPlaintiffs.

104. The actions of the individual Defendants were undertaken within the

scopeoftheiremploymentwiththeCityofHammond.


agents.

106. As a result of the actions of the individual Defendants, Plaintiffs have

sustainedsevereemotionalinjuries.

WHEREFORE,Plaintiffsprays that thisCourtenter judgment inhis favorand

againsttheindividualDefendants,andawarddamagesasfollows:





17

Respectfullysubmitted,JAMAL JONES, LISA MAHONE,JOSEPHIVY,andJANIYAIVYs/DanaL.Kurtz AttorneyforPlaintiff

ElectronicallyfiledonOctober6,2014DanaL.Kurtz(ARDC#6256245)KURTZLAWOFFICES,LTD32BlaineStreetHinsdale,Illinois60521Phone:630.323.9444Facsimile:630.604.9444Email:[email protected]


complaint against hammond police

Documents