Sunday, May 26, 2002

Police-Dog Bitings Cost City More Than $940,000

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

May 26, 2002

ALBUQUERQUE (AP) — Police dogs have taken a $725,000 bite out of city coffers from payouts to victims of K-9 attacks, and it could rise to $942,000 if defense lawyers get the amount they’ve billed.

Seven APD dog-bite lawsuits are pending in court, including two filed last week, and dozens of citizens who were neither armed nor violent have been bitten, but police say the practice is justified.

Civil rights lawyers disagree.

Moriah Smith, 16, a witness to a shooting incident, says she was crouching behind a row of bushes in a schoolyard when an 80-pound police dog attacked her without warning, biting into her calf and shaking it violently, permanently disfiguring it.

Smith is one of 107 people bitten by APD dogs since 1996, and is among people who have sued the city over those bites.

Officers have claimed in several cases that they allowed their dogs to continue biting suspects for the officers’ own safety. In one case, the Albuquerque Journal reported Sunday, an unarmed suspect was ordered to walk toward an officer with a police dog still attached to her backside.

Sometimes, police dogs have even attacked sleeping people, generally transients, who were not accused of a crime, the newspaper reported.

According to APD policy, dogs can be deployed when a person flees, resists arrest or poses a threat, depending on the severity of the crime.

Police and their lawyers say the people who are bitten often are complicit in their refusal to obey lawful police orders.

‘‘There becomes a point in time where these people have to take responsibility for their own conduct,’’ said Albuquerque attorney Luis Robles, who defends APD officers in court. ‘‘There were a number of times they could have complied with police and they didn’t. There will be consequences, but they brought it upon themselves.’’

On Feb. 26, 1999, police considered Smith a potential felon. After she was attacked, she was arrested for criminal trespass. Her lawyers allege the attack was excessive force. They want the force to curb their dogs, even muzzle them on some searches.

‘‘There’s no reason for dogs to bite people,’’ said Brad Hall, an attorney representing Smith. ‘‘When they unleash the dog they don’t know if it’s going to bite a victim, a suspect or a witness.’’

Nick Bakas, the city’s chief public safety officer, said in the cases he’s aware of, ‘‘I feel comfortable stating that the officers were within police policy and acted appropriately.’’

Police have said Smith must have provoked the dog attack. And they using a dog in that situation defused dangerous circumstances in which officers might have had to use deadly force.

After Smith’s attack, K-9 officer Andrew Lehocky said his supervisor, Sgt. Tom Garduno, told him: ‘‘Good job.’’

Police data show the use of police dogs has escalated since 1996. Dog deployments jumped from 292 in 1996 to 1,449 in 2000, then fell to 1,201 last year.

In 1996, police took someone into custody using a dog 18 times. That rose 97 in 2000. Last year, 71 apprehensions were reported.

A police captain who oversaw the K-9 unit said a year ago that APD was now more likely to muzzle dogs for searches. But deputy chief Ray Schultz testified in a recent deposition that muzzling hasn’t happened and he knew of no plans to do so. Current police operating policy makes no mention of muzzling.

Bakas, who oversees police, fire and corrections for Mayor Martin Chavez, said last week said the department is reviewing K-9 policy.

‘‘We’re looking for accountability and documentation and justification whenever we use dogs, as we would in any use of force situation.’’

A Journal review of APD documents shows many of the people bitten over the past six years have been young and were either hiding or fleeing from police.

‘‘The majority of dog uses are for searches of buildings, and typically those people are unarmed,’’ said Albuquerque attorney Joe Kennedy, who also represents Smith in her lawsuit.

Sometimes police dogs have apprehended violent people fleeing arrest, such as bank robber Byron Shane Chubbuck, who was armed when caught in 1999.

The International Chiefs of Police Association says dog bites have generated a ‘‘near cottage industry’’ for civil litigation.

A large part of the problem has stemmed from ‘‘inappropriate deployment and-or lack of control of canines by their handlers,’’ according to a report last year by the association.

In recent years, the U.S. Justice Department has scrutinized several police departments’ dog units for possible civil rights violations.

Lehocky, by his own personal records, recorded 128 dog bites in his career, a city document shows.

Marlo Marquez, 19, who filed an excessive force lawsuit against the city last year, had been a passenger in a car being chased by police. The car crashed into a wall. She got out and started to run.

Bart bit her leg and buttock, after which Lehocky ordered her to walk over to him — with Bart still hanging on. She was charged with resisting and eluding police.

APD’s policy requires officers to issue a warning: ‘‘This is the APD, come out now or a dog will be used to locate you.’’

But Garduno in a deposition has said officers have discretion not to issue a warning if police safety would be jeopardized.

In the Smith case, Lehocky’s report states only: ‘‘K-9 warnings were not issued due to offender(s) demonstrated their effort to flee/conceal from police, armed with a firearm, and having total disregard for human life.’’

Saturday, July 28, 2001

Lawsuits accuse Gallup officers of misconduct

Andrea Egger
Staff Writer, The Gallup Independent

GALLUP — Lawsuits for police brutality have been filed against the Gallup Police Department, a Gallup police officer and a former Gallup police officer.

Gallup Officer Owen Pena and former officer Daron Overman, who filed a lawsuit last week against the police department for discipline issues, are under fire in two lawsuits charging them with using excessive force in two different incidents of arrest.

Ramah attorney William Stripp, who filed the two lawsuits against the officers, said he was amused at Saturday's Independent, in which a story appeared about Overman and Pena suing the police department for being disciplined.

"Both of these officers have displayed a pattern of misconduct," Stripp said.

Stripp actually filed the lawsuits Aug. 8 and Aug. 9. The Independent learned about them Monday.

Gallup Police Chief Daniel Kneale, who started as chief Aug. 7, said he doesn't know anything about these lawsuits because he wasn't around when the incidents allegedly took place.

The lawsuit against Overman, which also names as defendants officers Gerald Tholund and Anthony Ashley, dates back to an incident on Aug. 25, 1998. Plaintiffs are Jennifer Jones of Gallup and her baby, Joseph.

The complaint alleges that Ashley attempted to stop the vehicle driven by Daniel Pena, who is the father of Joseph, on Interstate 40. Jones and her baby were passengers in Daniel Pena's car. The reason for the stop was that the vehicle Pena drove had an expired license plate tag.

The lawsuit claims that Daniel Pena wanted to take Jones and the baby home before stopping for police because on April 13, 1998, an encounter with former Lt. Calvin Wiggins ended with Jones getting her front teeth knocked out. This made Jones and Daniel Pena afraid of the police, according to the complaint.

Ashley pursued the car, and Overman joined in the pursuit. At some point, the lawsuit alleges that Overman drove up next to the car and noticed Jones and the baby in the car.

Daniel Pena exited the interstate at the west interchange and drove into a dead-end street, at which point, Overman and Ashley exited their police cars. Daniel Pena started to make a U-turn.

"As (Daniel) Pena turned his car around, Overman began to shoot at (Daniel) Pena's car," according to the lawsuit.

A pursuit began again on Highway 66, with Tholund joining in. At Highway 66 and Dean Street, Daniel Pena's car stalled. At this point, the lawsuit alleges that Overman and other officers jumped out of their police cars and smashed the windshield of the car with their nightsticks and attempted to drag the suspect out of the car.

"When (Daniel) Pena started his car and put it into reverse, Tholund, who was aware that Jones and infant were in Pena's car, fired multiple rounds at (Daniel) Pena's car," according to the lawsuit.

Daniel Pena drove Jones and the baby to a nearby trailer park, stopped and ran. Police apprehended him and arrested him.
Stripp, whose lawsuit was filed on behalf of Jones and the infant, said in an interview Monday that police could have killed Jones and the baby by firing at the car. And they knew the baby was in the car, Stripp said.

"Who are the ones committing child endangerment in a case like this?" Stripp said.

He added that an expired tag is no reason to chase a vehicle. "In typical cowboy-and-Indian fashion, they turned it into a wild chase and a shoot-em-up," Stripp said.

Officer's side

The lawsuit doesn't tell the whole story, said Overman, who spoke about the case in an interview since he no longer works for the police department.

Overman said he didn't see the baby in the car until Daniel Pena's car stalled and he exited his police car.

During the actual chase, "He tried running me off the road," Overman said. "I shot at the tires."

When the car stalled, Overman ran to Pena's car and tried to pull him out of the car. At this point, Daniel Pena backed up, with Overman still hanging on to the car.

"He dragged me several feet," Overman said.

Daniel Pena then almost ran over Tholund, who was also on foot. Tholund shot at the tires, Overman said.

They arrested him for aggravated assault on a police officer and other charges, including child endangerment, Overman said.
In the case Stripp filed against Owen Pena, plaintiff Luis Alejandro Acosta accused Pena of police brutality.

The case alleges that on May 15, 2000, Acosta stopped at a gas station on Coal Avenue to make a telephone call. Owen Pena pulled into the gas station and told Acosta that someone had made a report of Acosta "bothering him," according to the complaint.

Acosta said he wasn't bothering anyone, and he asked the name of his accuser.

"Without warning, (Owen) Pena grabbed Acosta by the neck and threw Acosta to the ground," according to the lawsuit, which also accuses Owen Pena of pushing his knee against Acosta's face and grinding Acosta's face into the asphalt.

Acosta asked what he had done and why the officer was doing this.

Owen Pena made a profane, racial statement, according to the complaint, and then Owen Pena sprayed Mace into Acosta's eyes. The officer then dragged Acosta to his police car.

Acosta said Owen Pena laughed when Acosta said he needed treatment for his eyes.

"As a result of the incident, Acosta received abrasions, bruises, swelling and a wound to the left side of his face that has left a permanent scar," according to the complaint.

In both cases, District Judges Joseph Rich and Grant Foutz have decided against hearing the case. In Acosta's case, Judge William Birdsall of Farmington was assigned to the case on Friday.

No court dates have yet been set.

Thursday, October 22, 1998

October 22nd, 1998

Report on Oct 22 National Day of Protest events

National Office of the October 22nd Coalition for a National Day of Protest
to Stop Police Brutality, Repression and the Criminalization of a Generation

"Albuquerque, New Mexico: 50 people from New Mexico Vecinos United, Food not Bombs, the UNM Hemp Coalition, the UNM Progressive Student Alliance, Latinos Unidos, and more, marched from the University of New Mexico to the Albuquerque Police Department. They demanded that the Mayor's Office meet with them about a police officer that the police department refused to dismiss, and that they get a civilian review board. They were granted the meeting and won the civilian review board. Press refused to cover them, and refused to acknowledge that they were part of a National Day of Protest."

http://wearcam.org/decon/stolen_lives_october22.htm