A D V E R T I S E M E N T
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
contributed photos
Top row, the plaintiffs: Jerry E. Woodford, Juan Rubio, Britt Woodring, Samuel Contreras. Bottom row, the defendants: Chief Harold Skelton, officers Ernie Roberts, Bill Bergin and Kalen "K.T." Taylor.
ADVERTISEMENTS
The Sandy Police Department and its officers are facing six lawsuits — including five filed in federal court — that accuse officers of excessive force, harassment and violating constitutional rights.
On Monday, March 12, Sandy resident Samuel Contreras joined Firwood’s Juan Rubio, the family of Fouad Kaady, Jerry Woodford and Estacada’s Britt Woodring in filing a lawsuit in federal court claiming wrongdoing by the department. Rubio also has filed a lawsuit in Clackamas County Circuit Court.
Police Chief Harold Skelton said that before the Woodford lawsuit — the first of the six filed — the department hadn’t been sued for about 20 years.
Officer K.T. Taylor is a defendant in the two Rubio cases, the Woodring case and the Woodford case; Officer Bill Bergin is a defendant in the Kaady and Woodring cases; and Officer Ernie Roberts is identified in the Contreras suit. Clackamas County sheriff’s deputies Brandon Claggett and Dave Willard are being sued in the Woodford and Kaady cases, respectively.
Attorney Edward Merrill of Bend, who represents Rubio, Woodring and Contreras, said his clients filed the lawsuits — which concern four different incidents with the Sandy Police Department — not for monetary gain but to protest the actions of the department and to advocate for change.
“All we can do is try to right the wrongs that we’re alleging, and hopefully a by-product of that is that other (incidents) will be prevented,” Merrill said. “At some point in time you can hope somebody is going to take notice and ask if there’s a deeper, underlying problem here, and what can be done to remedy it.”
Added Rubio, “It just goes on, the same old clique. I think the citizens of Sandy should be educated on how the city government is dealing with its problems.”
Salem attorney Bruce Mowery, who represents the city interests through City/County Insurance, says the sextuple-whammy of lawsuits — he’s not involved in the Kaady case — is “probably something orchestrated by the attorney, since he’s the same one (for all of them, save Kaady and Woodford).”
“A lot of it is just contrived,” Skelton echoed. He said Rubio’s attorneys are “shopping for plaintiffs,” checking the county jail roster for Sandy arrests.
Mowery said in each case there’s evidence that any action taken by city officials was “justifiable,” although he said he couldn’t discuss any evidence supporting that statement.
“There’s absolutely no merit to the claims,” he said.
The city also maintains that the officers can’t be sued for any actual or alleged actions under the doctrine of qualified immunity — a legal doctrine established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1982 (Harlow v. Fitzgerald) that insulates officers “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,” which Sandy says is the case.
Any time the department receives a use-of-force complaint, Skelton said, it reviews the scenario. “Under the circumstances in these cases, I believe (the use of force) was justified. I believe in all these lawsuits we’ll be exonerated.”
He added, “I have total confidence in my officers. We’re always watching, always paying attention to make sure we’re doing things legally.”
Mowery wouldn’t say whether the city wants to settle with the Rubio camp or how he plans to defend the city in court.
“This doesn’t appear to be an unusual pattern,” City Manager Scott Lazenby said. “The idea is that if you throw a bunch of stuff in the hopper you might have some leverage to get your way. There’s no substance as far as we can tell to any of them.”
Lazenby said he was familiar with the episodes related to the lawsuits and has no concerns regarding the behavior of city police officers.
“I know what has gone on in these very incidents,” he said. “Often they involve a situation where there were a number of law enforcement officers, and reports from them make us pretty confident that there’s nothing of substance to these things.”
Lazenby isn’t worried about a trial. “Frankly,” he said, “I don’t think it would go that far.” That belief leads the city’s charge to get the lawsuits thrown out in court. Mowery is working on it, he said.
Mowery wouldn’t comment as to whether the city is looking for a settlement, and Merrill said the only appropriate out-of-court resolution — which would punish and/or terminate officers and institute new training — doesn’t appear likely.
Skelton, fresh from giving a deposition for Rubio’s trials last week, said the individual officers can turn around and sue Merrill’s law firm for harassment and frivolous litigation. He didn’t say whether the officers plan to do that, but said they will have that ability.
Rubio remains confident. “Do you how much they’re going to lose?” he asked. “They don’t want to cut their own throat. The blade is already up against their throat; they’re just hesitating on when to do it.
“I am going to break this town.”
Lawsuit no. 1: Woodford's federal case
Jerry Eureal Woodford, 48, of Sandy filed a federal case against the city of Sandy last June, 2006, alleging that the police brutalized him while he was staying at a hotel in town.
Woodford, who is disabled, said that he wasn’t able to move in bed on June 11, 2004, because he slept about 16 hours and wasn’t able to take his daily dose of necessary medication.
So when people knocked on his door asking him to come out, he yelled that he was disabled and couldn’t get to the door. At that point, he said he took his medication.
About an hour later, after his medication took effect, Woodford grabbed his crutches and before he could open the door, Taylor and Claggett broke through the door, shooting a Taser, which missed.
When asked to show his hands, Woodford complied. Taylor then tackled him, making him hit the edge of the bed and fall to the ground, where he was Tased three times — which made him involuntarily defecate.
Woodford then alleges that Deputy Claggett put his hand on his back and grabbed his hair before he was handcuffed and taken to the Clackamas County Jail, where he remained for three days.
He was charged with resisting arrest — a charge that was later dropped.
Woodford alleges that Taylor and Claggett violated his fourth and fourteenth amendment rights to be free of unreasonable search and seizures and unreasonable force from the government, since the “use of unnecessary force was unreasonable, excessive and disproportionate based on the circumstances.”
A response filed on behalf of the officers maintains that Woodford “refused to open the door and locked it form the inside.” They also said Woodford didn’t answer the hotel room phone when they tried to call it, and eventually, officers had to break down the door.
The officers “had probable cause” to arrest Woodford, the response continues, and that the officers used “no more force than was necessary” to accomplish that.
Once in the hotel room, police say Woodford was found standing, and that he refused to comply with all fof the officers’ commands and physically resisted arrest. The Taser was deployed to “gain control” of the suspect.
Woodford asks for unspecified non-economic damages resulting from the alleged injuries levied by the officers, as well as unspecified punitive damages and attorney’s fees. The officers are seeking reimbursement of legal fees.
Lawsuit no. 2: Kaady federal case
The family of Fouad Kaady filed a lawsuit against the city of Sandy and Clackamas County last September in federal court.
Kaady was shot and killed by Sandy police officer Bill Bergin and Clackamas County Sheriff's Deputy Dave Willard Sept. 8, 2005, after a string of seemingly bizarre events including several hit-and-run collisions, a car fire and a possible assault. He was naked, bleeding and severely burned before the fatal police encounter near Cottrell Grade School, northwest of Sandy.
The 31-page lawsuit claims that the county, the city and the officers violated Kaady’s civil rights. The 10-claim complaint alleges excessive force, unconstitutional arrest and wrongful death, among other accusations. Furthermore, it claims that the police-involved shooting was “oppressive, malicious … (and) motivated by evil motive or intent.”
Kaady family members seek monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial. That amount would include memorial service expenses, the loss of Kaady’s lifetime wages, compensation for pain and suffering, attorneys’ fees and punitive judgments against the officers.
“We’re hoping for a fair and just exploration of what happened, and maybe some result that will be a living testament to Fouad Kaady’s life,” said Michelle Burrows one of the Kaady family’s attorneys.
A Clackamas County Grand Jury cleared Bergin and Willard of all wrongdoing last year and an internal investigation by the sheriff’s office and the Sandy Police Department determined that they had fully complied with department policies and procedures. Both officers returned to duty, although Bergin is currently on personal leave.
Sheriff Craig Roberts and Sandy Police Chief Harold Skelton defended the actions of the officers, saying that in unstable situations such as the Kaady case, sometimes split-second decisions must be made to protect law enforcement officers.
The family has hired Wyoming attorney Gerry Spence, who is known for handling high-profile cases such as the landmark 1984 Karen Silkwood case. He represented Brandon Mayfield — the Portland-area man whose fingerprints were erroneously linked to the 2004 Madrid train bombings.
A trial isn’t expected for six months to a year.
Lawsuit no. 3: Rubio's federal case
The Rubio case stems from an incident during the 2005 Sandy Mountain Festival, in which Rubio had approached Chief Harold Skelton — who was riding in the parade as one of its grand marshals — and began yelling at the city’s top cop about the disappearance of his son, and compared the local police to Nazis.
At the time, Rubio’s son, 20-year-old Carlos, was had been missing for a month. The distraught father, upset by his son’s recent encounters with Sandy Police, asserted that local law enforcement had something to do with his son’s disappearance.
“His screaming in the public venue was creating public alarm,” Skelton noted in a previous interview. “In the right circumstances, that kind of thing could have started a riot.”
Rubio said he never threatened the chief, and yelled because Skelton was ignoring him. Had he received any acknowledgement from the chief, Rubio said he would have accepted it and backed off.
Skelton said he called for backup after Rubio approached him three different times, reporting that he and his wife felt threatened. Police then arrested Rubio on charges of menacing (threatening harm) and disorderly conduct/criminal mischief.
When the case finally went to court on Jan. 25, 2006, Clackamas County Circuit Court Judge Steven Maurer threw it out, noting that the facts proved the trial was illegitimate, because Rubio’s encounter with Skelton was just an “upsetting” and “unfair” exercise of his free speech rights. He said the arrest should have never taken place.
“One of attributes of free speech is that it well may be disturbing,” said Maurer in his closing remarks, “you take the good with the bad.”
Although a trial hasn’t been scheduled for the federal case, it is widely expected the trial would begin sometime in 2008 if an out-of-court settlement isn’t reached.
1 | 2 Next Page >>
Find a paper
Enter a street name
or a 5 digit zip code
Browse archive
The Sandy Post
News feed
Facebook
Digg
Del.icio.us
Newsvine
Stumbleupon
Reddit
