Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 30 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Tasered biker sues in civil rights case
Published Thursday, September 24, 2009
CHESAPEAKE — The bicyclist who was the center of a Tasering incident last year is taking Lawrence County Sheriff Jeff Lawless, a Sheriff’s deputy and Chesapeake village officials to federal court.
On Aug. 19, Anthony Patrick, 38, of Huntington, W.Va., filed a suit in U.S. District Court in Cincinnati against Lawless, Charles Hammonds, a Lawrence County sheriff’s deputy; the Village of Chesapeake, Russell Bennett, Chesapeake police chief at the time; and Dennis Gibson, the current village chief.
The suit was filed exactly one year to the day to when Patrick, a construction firm owner and cycling enthusiast, along with a juvenile, a nationally ranked racer, were pedaling through Chesapeake. The incident was documented in “Bicycling,” a national monthly magazine, and on its Website bicycling.com.
The suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages following what the documents filed in district court describe as “the illegal and intentional detention, attack, beating, arrest and Tasering of plaintiff by defendants.”
Patrick was stopped and Tasered by Hammonds and Gibson, who was a Chesapeake patrolman at the time.
The incident happened on County Road 1, near the Chesapeake Library.
As the two bikers rode down County Road 1 toward the Robert C. Byrd Bridge, Hammonds “drove his sheriff’s vehicle beside plaintiff and told plaintiff ‘he should not be riding on the roadway,’” the suit states.
The Plaintiff responded that he had a legal right to operate his bicycle on the roadway.
“In response, Defendant Hammonds became enraged and began yelling at the two cyclists and several times telling them to ‘get off the (expletive) road’,” the suit alleges.
The suit also alleges that Hammonds tried to force the two bikers off the road and deliberately tried to “cause a collision between the Sheriff’s cruiser and John Doe and his bicycle.”
Next the suit claims Hammonds fired a Taser at Patrick and then “pulled out his telescoping baton and came after plaintiff, swinging the baton at plaintiff with the intention of striking plaintiff and incapacitating him and attacking and assaulting plaintiff.”
When Gibson arrived on the scene, he “without warning to the plaintiff, deployed his Taser, firing the Taser barbs into plaintiff’s back and causing significant jolts of electrical current to flow into the plaintiff’s body.
“… Upon information and belief, defendants Gibson/and or Hammonds intentionally and maliciously deployed the Taser more than once after the plaintiff was incapacitated and lying on the ground,” the suit claims.
The defendant was subsequently arrested and taken to the Lawrence County Jail, charged with obstructing official business, resisting arrest, attempted assault on a police officer and operating a bike on the road.
The case was filed with Lawrence County Municipal Court Oct. 17, a hearing was held before Municipal Court Judge Donald R. Capper on the defendant’s motion to dismiss the case because the officer had no probably cause for the arrest.
Capper granted the motion and three months later the Lawrence County prosecutor’s office dismissed the case.
Earlier this year Patrick’s attorney, Steve Magas of Cincinnati, requested information from the law enforcement authorities involved.
“I never heard from them,” Magas said in a phone interview with The Tribune Wednesday. “I just got zip. I did get some response for requests for information and some other information.”
Magas admits Patrick’s injuries were not debilitating, but said the suit was filed “because it was wrong. …he was injured from this very intentional and misdirected sort of road rage with a badge. … It has shocked the conscience of the bicycling world, someone can shoot you with a Taser because you were exercising your right to move about the country.”
The suit seeks a jury trial.
Phone calls made to Lawless, Gibson and Brenda Neville, counsel for the village of Chesapeake, were not returned by press time. Chesapeake Mayor Dick Gilpin declined comment.
A lawsuit only states one side of a case.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by crimefighter (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 10:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ever since Denis was put back on the police department several past officers commented that Denis would get the village sued. WELL GUESS WHAT HE DID!!!!
Posted by dtbartender1 (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 10:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is ridiculous...Prosecutor's office dismissed the case huh?......no doubt.....Odd how they choose to dismiss some cases and pursue others.
Posted by froggigger (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
could it be that judge capper is a friend of the suspect and also has rode bikes with him....sounds like he should not have even heard the case
Posted by michaelOH (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If this happened in Lawrence County
it does not surprise me at all.
Posted by Country (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 11:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
They still ran from the cops and more importantly tried to cause harm to them. Was it right or wrong to pull them over in the first place does not excuse the bikers later actions.
Posted by falinrok (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The "road rage with a badge" comment the man made about these power drunk deputies couldnt be more correct. I have needed the assistance of our men in black a few times & almost was struck in the teeth by his big long metal flashlight by one of these so called public servants because he didnt like what i said. I have no respect for any of them. This county would make a good story for 20/20.
Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 11:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Here we go again! Sheriff Jeff needs to have a "Legal rights" refresher course with his patrol deputies.
Posted by nottellin (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 12:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
They were being harassed with NO PROBABLE CAUSE, other than a fat lazy deputy dawg wanted to exercise what teeny bit of authority he THOUGHT he had.
I hope this guy wins and takes the crappy excuses for law enforcement in this county down about a dozen notches on the "Inflated Ego" scale.
Posted by hustlinhillbilly (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Of course everything the "victims" said was the gospel truth.
There couldn't have been any wrong doing by them, only the Deputies could have been the aggressors. Give me a break, even the Trib says that only one side of the story is being told. Until the court date, that is the only side that will be told.
The accusers always make an attempt to try the case in the media, long before the actual trial, because they know that the Deputies are required to stay quiet, and keep doing their jobs.
Posted by dtbartender1 (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 12:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Did these deputies get in trouble?..or is the sheriff's office just like ipd. Cover up for the good ole boys.....Believe we are in a boiling pot and the lid is about to explode with our local law enforement.
Posted by RUNutz (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I took the time to go to "bicycling.com" and read the full story, as distributed nationwide. Needless to say, bearing in mind that all charges were dismissed against both the cyclists, the article acurately describes our small town, small mind, law enforcement mentality, and proves, again, the idea those people unprepared in the letter of the law should not be in law enforcement at any capacity. The deputy's flagrant overreaction to the situation and actual use of physical force is unbelieveable. I regret Mr. Patrick should have no difficulty winning his case and costing Lawrence County money it can ill afford to lose. RUNutz?
Posted by OzzyGrymes (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 1:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This incident took place before Jeff Lawless was our Sheriff. His name is added to the suit because he is the current Sheriff when the suit was filed.
At any place of employment, the supervisor get sued along with the employee.
Remember anyone can be sued for anything anytime.
Posted by jason (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 3:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How do these people get hired?
interview question 1
Do you have any respect for the rights of others?
question 2
Are you opposed to beating an innocent person?
question 3
Would anyone you know recommend you for this job?
If the answer to all of these questions is no then you've got the job.
Posted by beitthetruth (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 4:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Capper doesn't have a problem with conflicts of interest in any cases he oversees. I know this for a fact. I appeared as a witness in a court case as a witness because I witnessed a car accident that Capper oversaw. The case was dismissed based on what I saw. 2 months later I get called into civil court as Capper is now representing the person who caused the accident who is now suing the other persons insurance company. These upstanding clients of Cappers are very well off financially and don't need the money but hey it's the American right to sue everyone. Needless to say I missed so much work and I myself was never compensated for missed income I went into debt. My employer wouldn't pay for missed work but was required to give
me the time off so I wouldn't lose my job. But this was definately a conflict of interest and all about money.
Posted by osu (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 4:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Those riding bicycles along County Road 1 in Burlington and Chesapeake need to be a bit more considerate. I've been behind them many times, and it is very difficult to pass them. Though the law gives them the right to be on the roadways, I believe they should excercise common sense and courtesy to yield the highways for automobiles.
Posted by barb62_99 (barb hammonds) on September 24, 2009 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
would someone please ride a bike down 3rd street and not let cars go around you and when the police show up , tell then that you have the right to be on the road and see what the police officer would have to do to get traffic moving . make one person happy or the 20 people that have to drive five miles ahour?
Posted by dtbartender1 (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 5:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would rather get a ticket than get tazed for no reason. And while on the subject...Cannot wait to see all of you crow eaters when this truth about the rist lady comes out.
When the facts are in federal court and published by a cincy newspaper and they are not distorted to suit the chief and the mayor. Caldwell has the facts, he is just not printing them. Think there are some by laws in ref. to slander that he might want to take into consideration. Defamation....serious there Mike......Why no photo of Wilcox in the paper today....He must not sell papers.
Why would you have to taze someone who is riding a bicycle...lol...alittle fear there maybe...
Posted by dtbartender1 (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 5:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Heard there was a picture....working and no papers here.
Posted by bleedingheart (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 5:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If it is legal to ride a bicycle on the road, then why was Mr. Patrick charged with "operating a bike on the road"? Most laws are pretty black and white. Either you cannot ride a bike on the road or you can. If you cannot, then give him a ticket and be done. If it is legal to ride a bicycle on this road, then the policeman had no business engaging the gentleman in the first place. Most local cops ARE power hungry. (Not ALL!) I believe all officers need a refresher course on how to treat people with common decency. Respect is earned and not guaranteed by a badge. Like I tell my grandkids, if you want people to respect you then respect others.
Posted by nottellin (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
bleedingheart, the judge THREW THE CHARGES OUT? The judge dismissed the case and told the cops they were wrong for accosting and assaulting the guy.
Yes, it IS legal to ride a bicycle on the road. You don't know the law, that is YOUR fault. But the law is there, it was cited in the original article.
Posted by bleedingheart (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 9:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I read that. Perhaps I should have been more clear. If it is not against the law to ride a bicycle on the road, then why did the cop ORIGINALLY charge him with such? I know the charges were dismissed. But how can a cop charge you with something that is not illegal?
Posted by dontsaythat (anonymous) on September 24, 2009 at 10:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
dtbartender. you are a jumpy person, know the facts before you go running your loud mouth.... 1st statememt you made was "they dismissed the charges how odd" and then they pursue others" Do you even have a clue what you talking about? Of course they dismissed the charges, they had no charges on these bicyclist.... And what cases are they pursuing that shouldn't be pursued......??????
Then you bring Beth Rist into this matter, this is apples and oranges 2 different departments, run by 2 different people... So stop blabbing...
Posted by nottellin (anonymous) on September 25, 2009 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Bleedingheart... Sorry, you were clear enough, I misread. Ok..If I had to guess, I'd say the cop stopped them because he's a little turd who needs to throw his badge around and intimidate people to make himself feel important. He saw someone that wasn't doing WHAT he wanted WHEN he wanted, and felt like picking on someone.
Posted by OLDad (anonymous) on September 25, 2009 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
HELTER SKELTER
Posted by ce (anonymous) on September 25, 2009 at 10:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
watch out chesapeak,black leather jacketed,long haired,tattoed,boot stomping doper,bicycle riders.you gotta watch where you go.maby you can Brando to star in a movie about and the county commission can make some money to pave more rich folks road. HA HA HA
Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on September 25, 2009 at 10:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
With all the sheriff's budget request and having just two deputies on the road on each shift, how can the deputy justify stepping into a village matter of concern? Obviously both the deputy's radio and the Chesy cop's radio was too. The deputy should have just radioed the village cop, advised, and continue PATROLING the county.
Posted by BigJ (anonymous) on September 25, 2009 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Having read the Ironton Tribune article and the BYCYCLE article it sounded like everyone was cranked up and arrogant. If the Cop wanted the biker to talk to the biker he should have said for him to pull over and the biker should have pulled over. The officer and the biker should have discussed the issue and if necessary the officer should have written a warning or ticket and sent the biker on his way. The biker could then argue with a judge. That would have been the end of the story. I have never been a fan of the Chesapeake Police but they generally work situations well above their positions and get paid less than they should. A good many of the people they should pull over for violations are “connected”. Give the wrong law breaker a ticket and the officer will be out of a job before the end of their shift. The attitude of the CPD and the Sherriff’s department is issued to them by the Politicians and “Royalty” of Chesapeake Village, Union Township, and Lawrence County. The common folk end up catching all the flak. All police are on edge now days. The biker should have stopped when the Cop started talking to him and he should have refrained from insulting the CPD Officer. The Cop should be reprimanded for not being able to defuse the situation without resorting to violence. The Police are heavily armed and trained for combat, the biker was in shorts and tennis shoes. Was it necessary for the Officer to grab his Taser or baton?
Posted by woodyjohnson (anonymous) on September 25, 2009 at 7:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
all you people have to do is type in ohio revised code 4511.52. then you will be informed and the world will be a better place.
Posted by nottellin (anonymous) on September 26, 2009 at 3:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BigJ, the cop screamed obscenities at him and tried to force him off the road with his car.
You don't ride a racing bike on the shoulder. They are not designed to be ridden on gravel, their wheels are too easily bent to do that.
Also, it is 100% legal to ride a bicycle on the road, sweetheart. A cop does not have the right to stop a bicyclist just because he happens to be riding in the road. HE HAS A RIGHT ON THE ROAD. Bicyclists are NOT required to ride single file if there is plenty of space in the other lane for vehicles behind them to pass.
Posted by BigJ (anonymous) on October 8, 2009 at 9:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The last time I rode my bike on the road my mother busted my backside for doing it. It sounds like the excuse for not getting out the way of cars is that you bought a bike designed for a track rather than one built for the open road. A co-worker is a bike fanatic and said that his $8000 bike has over $400 in tires and rims. He rides country roads and does his best to ride the white line. He understands that the roads were designed for vehicles weighing several thousand pounds with big tires. He put out the money for a good bike, tires, rims that could take the punishment of the open road. Nearly all the roads in Lawrence county need repaved so don't whine to me if you bought the wrong bike and it gets damaged. As for the cop, they should never let their emotions get the best of them but they are human. I do not know what happened on the side of the road as I was not there but from the article in this paper and Bicycle Magazines it sounded like the rider was ready to confront any Cop that stopped him. They should both go to anger management classes and the rider should buy a bike better suited for the road.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)