Sunteți pe pagina 1din 47

Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 1 of 47 PAGEID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

JERAD R. ANGLE
118 Deer Trail Drive
Thornville, Ohio 43076

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF NEWARK, OHIO


40 West Main Street
Newark, Ohio 43055 Civil No. 2:18-cv-266

and

BARRY CONNELL, Individually and as Chief of


Police of Newark Police Department
39 South Fourth Street
Newark, Ohio 43055

and

JOHN BRNJIC, Individually and as Sergeant of


Newark Police Department
39 South Fourth Street
Newark, Ohio 43055

and

DOUG BLINE, Individually and as Sergeant of


Newark Police Department
39 South Fourth Street
Newark, Ohio 43055

and

STEVEN BAUM, Individually and as Captain of


Newark Police Department
39 South Fourth Street
Newark, Ohio 43055

and
1
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 2 of 47 PAGEID #: 2

DAVE HAREN, Individually and as Captain of


Newark Police Department
39 South Fourth Street
Newark, Ohio 43055

and

CLINT ESKINS, Individually and as Sergeant of


Newark Police Department
39 South Fourth Street
Newark, Ohio 43055

and

DARRIN LOGAN, Individually and as Captain of


Newark Police Department
39 South Fourth Street
Newark, Ohio 43055

and

JOHN/JANE DOE’S, individuals 1-5,


Employees of the City of Newark,
whose exact names and addresses
cannot be ascertained at this time

Defendants.

COMPLAINT

Now comes the Plaintiff, Jerad R. Angle, and for his complaint against Defendants, City

of Newark, Barry Connell, John Brnjic, Doug Bline, Clint Eskins, Steven Baum, Dave Haren,

Darrin Logan, and individuals 1-5 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Defendants”) states as

follows:

2
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 3 of 47 PAGEID #: 3

PARTIES:

Plaintiff:

1. Plaintiff, Jerad R. Angle, (“Plaintiff”) is an individual and former Newark Police


Officer residing in Thornville, Ohio 43076.

Defendants:

2. The City of Newark ("City") is a municipality in the State of Ohio. The Newark
Police Department ("NPD") is a law enforcement agency operated by the City.

3. Defendant, Barry Connell, (“Chief Connell”) is and was at all relevant times herein an
individual and the Chief of Police of the City of Newark Police Department.

4. Defendant, Doug Bline, (“Sgt. Bline”) is and was at all relevant times herein an
individual and Officer and/or Sergeant of the City of Newark Police Department.

5. Defendant, Clint Eskins, (“Sgt. Eskins”) is and was at all relevant times herein an
individual and Officer and/or Sergeant of the City of Newark Police Department.

6. Defendant, John Brnjic, (“Sgt. Brnjic”) is and was at all relevant times herein an
individual and Officer and/or Sergeant of the City of Newark Police Department.

7. Defendant, Steven Baum, (“Captain Baum”) is and was at all relevant times herein an
individual and Officer and/or Captain of the City of Newark Police Department.

8. Defendant, Dave Haren, (“Captain Haren”) is and was at all relevant times herein an
individual and Officer and/or Captain of the City of Newark Police Department.

9. Defendant, Darrin Logan, (“Captain Logan”) is and was at all relevant times herein
an individual and Officer and/or Captain of the City of Newark Police Department.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

10. This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, including
Article III, Section 1 of the United States Constitution and is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1981, 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

11. The Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 1343, and
2201.

12. Venue is proper in the Southern District of Ohio pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, as the
defendants reside in and the claim arose in the Southern District of Ohio.
3
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 4 of 47 PAGEID #: 4

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

13. On June 24, 2003, Plaintiff became a Newark Police Officer. Plaintiff is 37 years
old and married. Plaintiff had an exemplary record as an officer and received a medal for
meritorious unit reward and several letters of accommodation during his career. Plaintiff has no
criminal record of any kind.

14. Plaintiff has been S.W.A.T. certified since he joined NPD, back in 2003, and has
been asked to join the S.O.G. (Strategic Operations Group) numerous times over the course of
fifteen (15) years. S.W.A.T. and S.O.G. utilize the same tactics and strategies and are utilized in
the same way by various police departments.

15. During his employment as a police officer at NPD, Plaintiff became certified as a
defense tactics instructor, ASP baton instructor, advanced ground fighting and LVNR (Lateral
Vascular Neck Restraint) instructor.

16. In 2017, the SOG team was several members down and was struggling to find
officers willing to participate. Plaintiff had several conversations with Sgt. Shaffer about joining
SOG since he was a veteran officer and highly trained. Sgt. Shaffer suggested that Plaintiff talk
with Sgt. Eskins about being placed on SOG.

17. Plaintiff followed up with Sgt. Eskins who was excited about Plaintiff’s interest in
the SOG team. Plaintiff was looking to put his talents to use for the benefit of NPD.

18. For the last few years, Plaintiff was a member of Team 1 which consisted of Officer
Shayne Stevens, Officer Blake Duncan, Officer Michael Snode and Officer Christy Litzinger.

19. Team 1, as designated by NPD, was responsible for serving high risk warrants and
apprehending high risk criminals and suspects. Team 1 was highly effective at tracking down
violent suspects and apprehending them.

20. In 2017, Sgt. Brnjic was the direct supervisor of Team 1 and Chief Connell was the
Chief of Police for the NPD.

21. In March of 2017, Plaintiff met Heidi Clark when she came to NPD to discuss a
matter she was having involving her children. Plaintiff assisted Ms. Clark with this issue and
after the issue was closed, Plaintiff and Ms. Clark started to see each other romantically during
Plaintiff’s off-duty hours. Eventually, Plaintiff’s wife learned of the relationship and Plaintiff
sought the advice of Chief Connell regarding his marriage.

22. In May of 2017, Sgt. Brnjic learned of Plaintiff’s relationship with Ms. Clark and
began questioning Plaintiff about his relationship with Heidi Clark. Sgt. Brnjic began harassing
Plaintiff on a daily basis about the affair and the fact that Heidi Clark was a known felon. Sgt.

4
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 5 of 47 PAGEID #: 5

Brnjic, during several meetings with Plaintiff, called Ms. Clark derogatory names and continued
the pattern of harassment.

23. Sgt. Brnjic began threatening Plaintiff that his dating a known felon was a violation
of Police Orders or policies.

24. The original violation Plaintiff was accused of by Sgt. Brnjic started due to an
alleged “chain of command” issue/violation. During his investigation, Sgt. Brnjic continued on a
regular basis his tirade against Plaintiff and his relationship with Heidi Clark.

25. On or about May 19, 2017, Plaintiff went to Chief Connell to self-report his
relationship with Heidi Clark (and the continued issues with Sgt. Brnjic) and inquire as to
whether or not his relationship with a past “felon” is a policy violation of the department. Chief
Connell did not know the answer. Sgt. Brnjic learned of this self-reporting by Plaintiff to Chief
Connell and Sgt. Brnjic told Sgt. Doug Wells that he was going to issue a reprimand to the
Plaintiff. Sgt. Brnjic went on to state, according to Sgt. Doug Well’s letter (included in the
investigation packet) as follows:

“Sgt. Brnjic continued and said he had told his team they were not going directly
to command staff without going through him first. Sgt. Brnjic said this has
happened too many times.” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1)

26. The week after Plaintiff reported to Chief Connell, Plaintiff called him from his
house and left a message for him to call. Chief Connell called back and Plaintiff told him about
Ms. Clark and wanted to verify that he was not violating a policy by seeing someone that had a
record. Chief Connell stated that technically Plaintiff was not violating a policy but stated it
doesn’t look good. Chief Connell then told Plaintiff he had family members that had felony
records but it is all in how it is perceived.

27. On June 3, 2017, Sgt. Brnjic filed a written reprimand against the Plaintiff citing the
violation by Plaintiff of the chain of command. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 2)

28. During the time period around June 3, 2017 an unofficial criminal investigation
began on the Plaintiff regarding his alleged unauthorized use of Ohio Law Enforcement Gateway
(“OHLEG”) or Law Enforcement Automated Data System (“LEADS”). Plaintiff is unaware of
any orders from anyone authorizing a criminal investigation of the Plaintiff.

29. Included in the investigation packet of Sgt. Bline, there is a letter to DC Riley from
John. This letter is not dated or signed. John is presumed to be Sgt. Brnjic and DC Riley is
Captain Riley. In this letter there is no indication that Sgt. Bline had an official order from Sgt.
Brnjic to access OHLEG. In fact it states: “I then spoke to Sgt. Bline to see if he recalled CODE
arresting and convicting Heidi. Sgt. Bline could not recall but then did some researching to
include OHLEG.” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 3)

5
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 6 of 47 PAGEID #: 6

30. Also, in the investigation packet, there is a letter to Chief Connell from Sgt. Bline.
This letter is also not dated or signed. In this letter Sgt. Bline states:

“On the morning of June 4th … Sgt. Brnjic came in before his muster and wanted
to know if I knew if Heidi Clark was a convicted Felon and specifically for drug
trafficking… Sgt. Brnjic said the reason I ask I’m looking into chain of command
violation… Sgt. Brnjic says anything you can come up with would be appreciated.
I said ok let me do some digging. .. I went to OHLEG and ran her CCJ and found
there was indeed a past felony conviction for possession of drugs. On the CCH I
found that Officer Angle had run the same CCH earlier in May… I knew from the
conversation we were having in my office that Sgt. Brnjic was conducting an
official inquiry into something but I clarified with him and asked if this was an
official inquiry before I relinquished control of the printed CCH… Sgt. Brnjic
replied to me that ‘yes’ it was official so I gave him the printed CCH…”
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 4)

31. Nowhere, in this letter from Sgt. Brnjic does he state he gave Detective Bline an
official order to access OHLEG on Heidi Clark (Palmer). This is important because this is how
Plaintiff learned by Sgt. Brnjic and Sgt. Bline searched OHLEG for Heidi Clark on 5/8/2017, and
Sgt. Bline’s action could constitute unauthorized use of OHLEG.

32. Nowhere, in either letter (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 3 or Plaintiff’s Exhibit 4, below) does it
state Sgt. Brnjic gave Sgt. Bline an official order to access OHLEG on Heidi Clark (Palmer).
This is important because this is how it was learned by Sgt. Brnjic and Sgt. Bline that Plaintiff
searched OHLEG for Heidi Clark on 5/8/2017.

33. There is no indication that Sgt. Bline had an official order from Sgt. Brjnic to access
OHLEG. In fact the letter states: “I then spoke to Sgt. Bline to see if he recalled CODE arresting
and convicting Heidi. Sgt. Bline could not recall but then did some researching to include
OHLEG.”

34. In Sgt. Bline’s investigative report, he states:

“On June 4, 2017, I was ending my shift when I was approached by Sgt. Brnjic
who told me he was looking at an Officer who may have violated department
policy. There was conversation between us about a woman I know as Heidi
Parmer (Clark) (Married name is Parmer) whom I investigated in my previous
assignment at the CODE TF for drug crimes and the outcome of those
investigations. Ultimately I made an inquiry on OHLEG to see Ms. Parmer
(Clark’s) criminal history as it related to the official request from Sgt. Brnjic.”
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5, p.1)

Sgt. Bline is now calling it an “official request” from Sgt. Brnjic in an attempt to conceal
his own violation of OHLEG policy. It was not an official request when Sgt. Brnjic inquired into
6
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 7 of 47 PAGEID #: 7

Heidi Clark. Finally, it was not and is not a policy violation to date or have as an acquaintance
a felon, known or not known. Neither Sgt. Bline nor Sgt. Brnjic had a valid reason to run Heidi
Clark on OHLEG for a “chain of command” reprimand/violation and therefore violated the same
policies they were prosecuting Plaintiff for.

35. To add additional confusion to the investigation of Plaintiff, the criminal investigation
was originally started by Sgt. Brnjic and later assigned to Sgt. Bline by Chief Connell citing a
“conflict.” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5, p. 1) The problem is Sgt. Bline already had information from
Sgt. Brnjic and was too close to Heidi Clark due to his previous involvement in her criminal
proceedings.

36. This criminal investigation of the Plaintiff should have been conducted by an outside
agency, or by someone in the NPD who did not have a direct conflict of interest in this matter.

37. Sgt. Bline, in his criminal investigation, questioned members of Team 1, specifically
Officer Shane Stevens, Officer Blake Duncan, Officer Michael Snode and Officer Christy
Litzinger.

38. Every officer, except Officer Snode, initially refused to give an interview. Sgt. Bline
compelled the Officers to give the interview and compelled their statements invoking Garrity.
Sgt. Bline went to Chief Connell requesting an order that Garrity be read to the officers of Team
1 refusing to cooperate with the investigation. Chief Connell allegedly issued said order.

39. Garrity is used by police departments to compel public employees to answer


questions in an investigation or face disciplinary action and potentially lose their employment if
they refuse.

40. The Supreme Court of Ohio in Garrity held “[w]hen the state is free to review a
Garrity statement, the public employer cannot ensure that the statement will not be used directly
or derivatively. The public employer may run a risk of a lawsuit if it turns over a Garrity
statement to prosecutors, as the Sixth Circuit recently held in McKinley v. Mansfield (C.A.6,
2005), 404 F.3d 418, that police officers who turn over another officer’s compelled statement to
a prosecutor can be held liable for violating the officer’s constitutional rights. Id. at 436-439.

41. In State v. Conrad, 50 Ohio St.3d 1, 552 N.E.2d 214, the prosecutor’s use of a
compelled statement was found to have tainted the defendant’s indictment. In this case, other
officer’s statement were compelled by Garrity and were used to obtain the indictment. NPD,
Chief Connell, assigned the same person to both the criminal investigation and the internal
investigation, Sgt. Bline. NPD made available the Garrity protected statements to the state
which made derivative use of the Garrity statements if/when the prosecutor presented the
testimony to the grand jury from a Garrity-statement witness.

42. The Court in Garrity further stated, “however, a police department can always assign
the internal investigation of a police officer to an officer who has not taken part in and will not
7
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 8 of 47 PAGEID #: 8

take part in the criminal investigation. In the alternative, a police department can simply wait
until the conclusion of criminal proceedings before conducting an internal investigation.”

43. NPD and Chief Connell assigned the same person to conduct the criminal and internal
investigation, Sgt. Bline, who was going to be a witness in the criminal case.

44. On or about, July 25, 2017, Sgt. Bline gave the statement of facts report (Report) to
the Court and the Prosecutor, which he allowed to be publicized to the news media and which
was false, defamatory and misleading. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5)

45. The Report included the Garrity compelled statements of the Team 1 officers.

46. By virtue of Sgt. Bline’s investigation, Sgt. Bline knew some of the statements
contained within the Report were not based upon any fact, but pure conjecture and speculation.
Specifically, the last paragraph of his ten (10) page report stated:

“The timing and the way the request was made raised some very real concerns after the
OHLEG violations …… The Officer could alert the criminal that the raid was coming which
would allow the criminal to destroy evidence, move or even ambush officers.” (Plaintiff’s
Exhibit 5)

47. After several days of Plaintiff being unable to grasp the concept of what NPD and
their investigator were saying about what Plaintiff had allegedly done (and not sleeping for three
days), Plaintiff snapped. Plaintiff called his Partner, Mike Snode, from his parent’s home, and
told him he was done. Plaintiff told him that he was not going to “set and let them make me out
to be a criminal and told him he was going to kill himself.”

48. Plaintiff then called his wife and told her that he could not deal with the lies and
NPD fabricating a case against him. Before Plaintiff’s conversation with her was over, Officer
Snode, Officer Joe Phillips, Sgt. Webster and Sheriff’s deputies were at his parent’s house.

49. Plaintiff sat on the back deck and talked with Sgt. Webster, Officer Snode and
Officer Phillips. Plaintiff told them what had occurred and began telling them of the things Chief
Connell had dismissed and tried to get him to cover up and that he knew that he was being
charged as a direct result of standing up for himself and his team. Officer Snode and a deputy
transported Plaintiff to Riverside Hospital where Plaintiff was ultimately placed into inpatient
care at Sun Behavioral Institute.

50. Plaintiff was admitted into Sun Behavioral on August 9, 2017 and released on
August 16, 2017. Plaintiff was diagnosed with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and generalized
anxiety disorder. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 6)

51. After Plaintiff was released from Sun Behavioral, he spoke regularly with Sgt.
Webster and Officer Snode. Sgt. Webster told Plaintiff that the command staff never asked him
8
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 9 of 47 PAGEID #: 9

what had occurred at his parent’s residence and never asked him or Officer Snode for a
statement.

52. Sgt. Webster and Officer Snode stated that Sgt. Bline complained that they left the
City to come to Plaintiff’s aid.

53. Sgt. Webster stated that Captain Riley told him that the Captains had a meeting about
the incident with Chief Connell and that a member of the Command Staff had stated “who cares
if he blows his head off, it is not their problem.”

54. On August 10, 2017, Sgt. Bline presented the case to the prosecutor through his case
intake and Grand Jury review sheet. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 7) In the meeting with the prosecutor,
Sgt. Bline included officer statements and videos.

55. On August 24, 2017, Jerad was indicted on Four (4) counts, for Unauthorized Use of
a Database, a violation of R.C. 2913.04, Case No. 17CR758. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 8)

56. Plaintiff was initially suspended, with pay, which was changed to suspended without
pay by the NPD, during the criminal investigation and subsequent indictment.

57. On August 28, 2017, Sgt. Bline and Sgt. Eskins forwarded the entire investigation of
the Plaintiff to other officers within the NPD via drop box. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 9) The drop box
contained the entire case file that was given to the Prosecutor’s office and to the grand jury
earlier on August 24, 2017. (The day Plaintiff was indicted).

58. This drop box was caused to be published by Sgt. Bline and Sgt. Eskins and
distributed during a pending criminal case.

59. The drop box included the entire investigation file of the Plaintiff, which included
audio and transcripts of all persons interviewed, statements of various Sergeants attempting to
create a paper trial to validate their actions, investigative reports, reprimand and discipline file of
the Plaintiff, OHLEG records and searches by Plaintiff. The entire drop box include the
following:

SCON17-06 FOIA

Name Modified

101 Scon17-06, Sergeant Doug Bline Inve…. 9/19/2017 10:30 pm


102 Scon17-06, Sergeant John Brnjic Inve… 8/24/2017 8:58 am
103 Scon17-06, Report 17-21965(redacte… 8/24/2017 2:34 pm
104 Scon17-06, Sergeant John Brnjic Rep… 6/8/2017 9:05 am
105 Scon17-06, Chain of Command repri…. 6/4/2017 2:23 pm
106 Scon17-06, Sergeant Doug Wells Sta ... 8/10/2017 1:17 am
9
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 10 of 47 PAGEID #: 10

107 Scon17-06, Sergeant Doug Bline Stat… 6/8/2017 9:07 am


108 Scon17-06, Officer Jerad Angle Relie… 7/7/2017 3:22 pm
109 Scon17-06, Officer Jerad Angle’s Coll… 7/10/2017 11:17 am
110 Scon17-06, LEADS-OHLEG Violation… 8/24/2017 2:35 pm
111 Scon17-06, Similar Investigation, Sha… 8/28/2014 2:35 pm
112 Scon17-06, Similar Investigation, Sha… 8/28/2014 2:30 pm
113 Scon17-06, Similar Investigation, Sha… 9/14/2014 2:16 pm
114b Scon17-06, Request for Subpoena of… 8/24/2017 2:06 pm
115 Scon17-06, Chief Barry Connell Interv... 8/17/2017 3:16 pm
115 Scon17-06, Chief Barry Connell Interv... 7/12/2017 10:42 am
116 Scon17-06, Sergeant Clint Eskins Inte… 8/17/2017 3:15 pm
116 Scon17-06, Sergeant Clint Eskins Inte… 7/12/2017 12:19 pm
117 Scon17-06, Officer Brett Snelling Inte... 8/17/2017 3:15 pm
117 Scon17-06, Officer Brett Snelling Inte... 7/17/2017 4:32 pm
118 Scon17-06, Locker Search by Sergea… 8/14/2017 10:18 pm
201 Scon17-06, OHLEG Rules and Regul… 7/11/2016 1:04 pm
202 Scon17-06, OHLEG Rules and Regul… 7/10/2017 10:53 am
203 Scon17-06, OHLEG Security Use Pol… 7/11/2016 1:17 pm
204 Scon17-06, OHLEG Security Use Pol… 7/10/2017 11:11 am
205 Scon17-06, General Order 02-17 OH… 8/2/2017 2:26 pm
206 Scon17-06, OHLEG Notification Scr… 7/10/2017 9:56 am
207 Scon17-06, General Order 06-01 Co… 8/7/2017 4:45 pm
208 Scon17-06, General Order 06-01 Co… 8/7/2017 4:47 pm
209 Scon17-06, OHLEG Audit Return Co… 7/14/2017 10:53 am
210 Scon17-06, Angle, Jerad Audit 17-055… 8/24/2017 1:49 pm
211 Scon17-06, Clark, Heidi Audit 17-055… 8/24/2017 1:49 pm
212 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark CCH (redacte… 8/24/2017 1:49 pm
213 Scon17-06, Timeline in 2017.docx… 8/9/2017 9:13 pm
214 Scon17-06, Call Card for 17-6952, 20… 8/9/2017 10:08 pm
215 Scon17-06, Call Record 17-6952… 8/24/2017 10:00 am
216 Scon17-06, Report 17-9199, 2017-04… 7/17/2017 5:07 pm
218 Scon17-06, Recent Response Status… 8/2/2017 2:21 pm
219 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark Prior Arrest, O… 8/24/2017 1:29 pm
220 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark Case Summ… 8/24/2017 1:03 pm
221 Scon17-06, Offender Details.pdf 8/24/2017 1:02 pm
222 Scon17-06, Request for Offline Searc… 8/24/2017 2:41 pm
223 Scon17-06, Offline Search (redacted)… 8/24/2017 1:49 pm
301 Scon17-06, Officer Jared Angle Notic… 7/7/2017 4:25 pm
302 Scon17-06, Attorney Representation… 8/11/2017 11:11 am
303 Scon17-06, Attorney Sauter PowerD… 8/24/2017 2:26 pm
304 Scon17-06, Officer Jared Angle Mira… 8/24/2017 1:03 pm
304b Scon17-06, Officer Jared Angle Inte… 8/29/2017 7:21 pm
304b Scon17-06, Officer Jared Angle Inte… 7/25/2017 1:53 pm
305 Scon17-06, Attorney Sauter Email A… 8/3/2017 2:13 pm
10
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 11 of 47 PAGEID #: 11

401 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark Interview, 201… 8/29/2017 7:27 pm


401 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark Interview, 201… 8/8/2017 11:18 pm
402 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark Voicemail to… 8/29/2017 7:29 pm
402 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark Voicemail to… 8/8/2017 9:58 am
403 Scon17-06, Deputy Chief Darrin Log… 8/29/2017 7:28 pm
403 Scon17-06, Deputy Chief Darrin Log… 8/8/2017 4:38 pm
501 Scon17-06, Officer Mike Snode Notic… 8/4/2017 11:17 am
502 Scon17-06, Officer Mike Snode inter… 8/17/2017 3:20 pm
503 Scon17-06, Officer Christy Litzinger… 8/4/2017 11:16 am
504 Scon17-06, Officer Christy Litzinger… 8/17/2017 3:17 pm
504 Scon17-06, Officer Christy Litzinger… 8/9/2017 5:49 pm
505 Scon17-06, Officer Shayne Stevens… 8/4/2017 11:17 am
506 Scon17-06, Officer Shayne Stevens… 8/17/2017 3:17 pm
506 Scon17-06, Officer Shayne Stevens… 8/9/2017 5:51 pm
507 Scon17-06, Officer Blake Duncan No… 8/4/2017 11:16 am
508 Scon17-06, Officer Blake Duncan Int… 8/17/2017 3:22 pm
508 Scon17-06, Officer Blake Duncan Int… 8/14/2017 5:45 pm
509 Scon17-06, Officer April Fleming No… 8/4/2017 11:16 am
510 Scon17-06, Officer April Fleming Inte… 8/29/2017 7:10 pm
510 Scon17-06, Officer April Fleming Inte… 8/17/2017 1:33 pm
511 Scon17-06, Sergeant John Brnjic Inter… 8/29/2017 7:14 pm
511 Scon17-06, Sergeant John Brnjic Inter… 8/15/2017 5:47 pm
512 Scon17-06, Sergeant Clint Eskins Ad… 8/24/2017 1:02 pm
601 Scon17-06, Heidi Clark Complaint.pdf… 8/14/2017 9:13 am
602 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
603 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
604 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
605 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
606 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
607 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
608 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
609 Scon17-06, 2017-03-25 JBRN Times… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
610 Scon17-06, 2017-07-15 CESK Timesh… 8/16/2017 9:44 pm
701 Scon17-06, Prosecutor Followup.pdf… 8/24/2017 1:02 pm
703 Scon17-06, LEADS Deny Letter.pdf… 8/29/2017 2:58 pm

60. On September 21, 2017, ABC 6 news ran a story and published that Jerad had been
indicted on four counts of unauthorized use of law enforcement database. In addition the story
states:

“Findings in the investigator’s report conclude in three of the four violations, the
searches had no criminal purpose. The report also notes a concern when Officer
Angle requested to be put on the department’s Special Operations Group, a unit
where members are selected. Team members are said to know when a drug raid is
11
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 12 of 47 PAGEID #: 12

going to be conducted. The report says Officer Angles request, along with the
data base searches ‘raised some very real concerns. If an officer was providing
information to a criminal element then being on the SOG team would be a gold
mine.” That investigator adds, ‘the officer could alert the criminal that a raid was
coming which would allow the criminal to destroy evidence, move or even
ambush officers.” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 10)

61. On September 22, 2017, another article was published in the Newark Advocate
regarding the indictment and stated that “other Newark officers and some who recently left spoke
to the Advocate to say they support Angle and that he did not do anything wrong. The Advocate
is not using those officers’ names because of concerns for retribution.” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 11)

62. On September 27, 2017, Plaintiff filed a claim with the Bureau of Worker’s
Compensation and was approved for the following medical conditions on November 22, 2017:
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 12)

Sprain Lumbar Region (08/29/2015) Strain Shoulder/arm (04/06/2016)


Sprain Thoracic Region (08/29/2015) Strain muscle, neck (04/06/2016)
Contusion of Hands (Right) (08/29/2015) Sprain Shoulder (03/12/2014)
Lumbar Sacral Strain (10/08/2015)
Lumbar Sacral Sprain (10/08/2015)

63. On October 11, 2017, Plaintiff applied through the City of Newark Human
Resources Department for injury leave from August 8, 2017 through January 1, 2018.
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 13)

64. On November 5, 2017, Sgt. Brian Webster wrote an email on behalf of Plaintiff to the
Ohio Police and Fire Pension. Sgt. Webster outlines a history of his involvement with Plaintiff
over Plaintiff’s fifteen (15) years with NPD. Sgt. Webster describes the incidents that Plaintiff
was involved in towards the end of his career and the failure of the department to sufficiently de-
brief and aid Plaintiff. Specifically, this current Sgt. of the NPD, Sgt. Webster stated:

“In July of this year an alleged policy violation resulted in Jerad being placed on
paid administrative leave pending the outcome of the Internal Investigation. As
the investigation progressed, baseless allegations of Jerad associating with a
“criminal element” and “potentially setting up an ambush” on other officers
surfaced. They proved too great for Jerad to process and he suffered a mental
health crisis…” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 14).

65. On November 5, 2017, Officer Mike Snode made a statement on behalf of Plaintiff
regarding facts establishing PTSD symptoms and some of the harassment Plaintiff was going
through with his supervisors, captains and sergeants. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 15)

12
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 13 of 47 PAGEID #: 13

66. On November 5, 2017, Officer Blake Duncan made a statement on behalf of Plaintiff
regarding facts establishing PTSD symptoms and the harassment and attempts at filing
complaints against his supervisors, captains and sergeants. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 16)

67. On November 3, 2017, Officer Shayne Stevens offered a statement concerning the
mental health of the Plaintiff and the failure of his supervisors to offer or order any help for the
Plaintiff. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 17) In addition, on November 5, 2017, Officer Shayne R. Stevens
made a statement on behalf of Plaintiff regarding facts surrounding the New Mexico Police
incident. (See Paragraph 78(c), below). (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 18)

68. On November 7, 2017, Plaintiff resigned from the NPD (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 19) and
surrendered his Peace Officer Certification. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 20)

69. Despite Plaintiff having resigned on November 7, 2017, Defendant Chief Connell did
not publish this to the Department until November 28, 2017. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 21) This
notification should have been sent immediately by Defendant Chief Connell, in accordance with
department policy.

70. On December 6, 2017, the prosecutor filed a Motion to Dismiss Indictment against
Jerad stating “[A]t this time, after discussions with defense counsel and consultation with the
City of Newark and Newark Police Department, the State would move to dismiss the case, as the
parties have reached a mutual resolution.” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 22) For the record, there was no
mutual resolution though several attempts were made by the City of Newark and NPD to attempt
to force Plaintiff into signing two different separation agreements.

71. On December 8, 2017, the felony charges against Jerad were dismissed by the Court.
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 23)

72. On December 12, 2017, Plaintiff applied for Unemployment Compensation. NPD
fought the application and Plaintiff’s application was denied, referencing that Plaintiff “quit” the
City of Newark on November 7, 2017. The hearing officer in its denial stated “the employer did
not intend to discharge the claimant, nor had the employer given such notice to the claimant.”
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 24). This could not be farther from the truth as NPD was actively attempting
to get Jared to sign termination of employment agreements during this same time period on
August 4, 2017 and again on November 3, 2017.

73. On December 12, 2017, Plaintiff filed an additional motion (C-86) for post-traumatic
stress disorder (Acute) with the BWC; and it was granted by the BWC in its February 16, 2018
decision. The relevant part of the decision was as follows:

“* * *. Thus evidence indicates that the injured worker developed PTSD


symptoms as a result of general events in his work as a police officer, specifically
developing with the shooting of a fellow officer in November 2014. The incident
in which the allowed injuries occurred did aggravate the PTSD for a time.
13
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 14 of 47 PAGEID #: 14

However, as noted above, when the injured worker reported on the incident, he
made no reference to his actual injuries. The primary concern and trigger for
symptoms was not the injuries themselves but rather the overall danger of the
incident and the potential for being shot, as was the officer a few months earlier,
and perhaps killed. However, the injured worker continued to work and by a year
after the injuries, was functioning much more normally. Then, the July 2016 death
of the New Mexico officer severely aggravated the injured worker’s mental health
problems and further aggravation came with the July 2017 felony charges. * * * .”
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 25)

74. The normal procedure by NPD is to allow an accused officer a chance to take a
polygraph examination regarding allegations. Jerad was at no time offered this opportunity
despite his request to take an examination.

75. On January 3, 2018, Plaintiff submitted to a private polygraph examination


conducted by AAA Polygraph Service, John A. Amburgey, regarding the alleged LEADS
(OHLEG) violations that were subject to the felony charges. Plaintiff passed the polygraph
examination. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 26)

76. On January 12, 2018, Plaintiff submitted to a further polygraph examination


conducted by AAA Polygraph Service, John A. Amburgey, regarding a lengthy statement that
contains the allegations contained within this Complaint. Again, Plaintiff passed that polygraph
examination. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 27)

77. On February 14, 2018, Jerad’s record regarding Case No. 17CR758 (4 count felony
indictment) was expunged by the Court. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 28)

78. The following is an account of several incidents that occurred while Plaintiff was a
Newark police officer leading to his diagnosis of PTSD (as per Paragraphs 50 and 73 above, and
Plaintiff’s Exhibit 25)

a. Officer Conley Shooting:

i. Fall of 2014, while Plaintiff was in a training session at NPD, Officer Jerrod
Conley was on the street helping to apprehend a suspect wanted in connection
with Counterfeiting money. Officer Conley stopped the vehicle and the
suspect ultimately Shot Conley in the left arm. Plaintiff left the station and
responded to the scene. Plaintiff was ordered by Sgt. Shaffer of the NPD to
stay with Officer Conley and assist medics anyway he could. Plaintiff was
then ordered to stay with Officer Conley during transport to a Columbus
hospital. Plaintiff flew with Officer Conley in MedFlight to OSU hospital.
Once there, Plaintiff was in charge of giving information to the Doctors and
taking custody of Officer Conley’s uniform and property. Plaintiff then
received a call that the suspect was also being flown to the same hospital.
14
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 15 of 47 PAGEID #: 15

Plaintiff was then advised told to coordinate with Columbus Police


Department in preserving evidence from the suspect.

ii. Once the suspect arrived, Plaintiff made arrangements for the suspect’s hands
to be bagged and all property including property in the pockets of his clothes
be sealed for evidence. Plaintiff then spent the next hour coordinating with
officers to contact Officer Conley’s wife and making sure protocol was being
followed with the suspect. There was no command staff there or anyone to
help Plaintiff during this time. Captain Haren arrived at the hospital and
Plaintiff advised him of what he had done and asked him how he wanted him
to proceed. Captain Haren was almost in “shock” and gave no guidance or
support on what needed to be done. Plaintiff continued working with CPD
while Captain Haren stood at the end of the hallway talking on his cell phone.
Plaintiff did not have any assistance until Sargent McKee arrived at the
hospital and took command.

iii. By this time, former Newark police officer, Michael Snode was with Plaintiff
in the hallway waiting to see Officer Conley. As Michael Snode and Plaintiff
stood in the hallway, Chief Sarver and Safety Director Bill Spurgeon arrived.
Chief Sarver approached Plaintiff laughing and said “How was the helicopter
ride?” I replied with “It sucked, what do you think?” After Plaintiff left the
hospital he was never ordered back to the station for a statement or a debrief
of the situation.

iv. About a month after the shooting, Chief Sarver scheduled a meeting with
everyone involved in Officer Conley’s shooting. It was scheduled to be held
in the Briefing room during Plaintiff’s shift. As everyone arrived in the
briefing room and sat down, Chief Sarver stated that he wanted all of us to
talk about what happened to Officer Conley. Chief Sarver immediately asked
Plaintiff to stand up and tell everyone what it was like from his point of view.
Plaintiff was completely caught off guard but he stood up and shared his
experience with the department. Plaintiff told the crowd that Officer Conley
and him were hired together and the one thing he couldn’t get out of his head
was all the blood Officer Conley lost (and that Conley’s blood was all over the
Plaintiff). Plaintiff also told his fellow officers that he could not forget taking
Officer Conley’s bloody wedding ring off and promising him he would get it
to his Wife. Chief Sarver thanked Plaintiff and moved on. Plaintiff was not
ordered or scheduled for any type of debrief or counseling, regarding this
incident.

b. Mill Wheel Bar Incident:

i. In August of 2015, Plaintiff was on third shift, in order to get a break from the
high call volume of Day Shift. Plaintiff received a call to the Mill Wheel Bar
15
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 16 of 47 PAGEID #: 16

regarding an assault that was taking place. Upon arriving on the scene,
Plaintiff was met in the parking lot by numerous employees and patrons. They
stated that the suspects were running out the back door and several patrons
were injured. Plaintiff radioed for medics to respond to the bar and began
chasing the suspects on foot down Wilwood Ave.

ii. Plaintiff caught up to one of the suspects, Suspect #1, and, as Plaintiff closed
the distance, he deployed his taser which brought the chase to an end and
Suspect #1 to the ground. Plaintiff ordered Suspect #1 to stay on the ground
but Suspect #1 got up and attacked the Plaintiff and placed him in a “bear
hug.” Plaintiff had his taser in his right hand and instinctively punched
Suspect #1 with his right hand and the punch triggered the taser again and
they were both wrapped up in the wires. After the taser cycled, Plaintiff threw
the taser breaking the wires that were wrapped around his leg. At this point his
radio had fallen off and other Officers were unable to locate him. Plaintiff
then fought Suspect #1 off for over two minutes as he made several attempts
to pick up the taser and Plaintiff’s gun. Suspect #1 was under the influence
and was not feeling any of the strikes or pain techniques Plaintiff attempted.
Suspect #1’s brother, Suspect #2, came back to the scene and began jumping
the fence to get Plaintiff off of Suspect #1. Patrons of the bar came to his aid
and kept Suspect #2 off Plaintiff until other units arrived. After Officers
arrived and restrained the two suspects, suspect #1 was transported to the
hospital for facial injuries, and Plaintiff was also transported by Officers to the
hospital for a neck and back injury. Suspect #1 saw Plaintiff at the hospital
and yelled that he was “going to find Plaintiff’s wife and children and kill
them all.”

iii. Plaintiff was off work for a few days due to the altercation. When Plaintiff
returned to work he took a doctor’s note into the admin office. Captain Haren
saw Plaintiff, and he walked in and called me a “Pussy” in front of the Chief
Connell and other Administration employees. Again, no debriefing or
counseling occurred as a result of this incident.

iv. After this incident, Plaintiff began having nightmares on a regular basis,
involving his duties as an officer, such as his gun jamming, being stabbed, and
being attacked by multiple subjects. Plaintiff began falling out of bed choking
gasping for air. Plaintiff’s sleep pattern became totally thrown off and was
only averaging three hours of sleep a night. Plaintiff began taking pain killers
to sleep and be able to perform his job building up a tolerance to the narcotics.
Plaintiff was taking at one point a minimum of three to four Percocet’s a day
along with Aleve and Ibuprofen.

16
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 17 of 47 PAGEID #: 17

c. New Mexico Police Murder Incident:

i. In August of 2016, Plaintiff was working with Team 1 to apprehend serious


criminals. Plaintiff’s team missed apprehending the criminals by mere
minutes. Later it was learned that these same criminals were responsible for
the murder of an officer in Hatch, New Mexico and a carjacking of an
individual causing serious bodily-harm to the victim.

79. The following details several instances where Plaintiff reached out for help with the
symptoms of PTSD to his Supervisor, Chief Connell, and where Chief Connell took no action to
provide Plaintiff counseling or to facilitate treatment of Plaintiff for PTSD:

a. Officer Conley Shooting: Described in detail above.


b. Mill Wheel Bar Incident: Described in detail above.
c. New Mexico Police Murder Incident: Described in detail above.
d. Meeting with Chief Connell: In August of 2016, Plaintiff met with Chief
Connell in his office and reported that he was having mental health issues.
Plaintiff told Chief Connell that he was struggling with the guilt associated with
the Officer’s death in Hatch, New Mexico. Plaintiff told Chief Connell that he felt
if we (his team) would had done our job better and apprehended the suspects here
in Ohio, the Officer would still be alive.

Chief Connell agreed and stated that he could tell Plaintiff and other members of
his team were struggling. Chief Connell stated that Plaintiff had been involved in
some pretty serious incidents the last couple years including being attacked in a
bar fight where the suspect tried to take his gun; Officer Conley being shot and
riding in the helicopter with him; the back injuries sustained; and having to blend
his food and not being able to eat solid food had taken its toll on him.”

e. Meeting with Chief Connell: In a meeting, July 16, 2017, Chief Connell stated
that “he had stood and watched Plaintiff several times as he had worked out in our
facilities weight room and said that he almost ordered Plaintiff to stop because it
disturbed him.” Chief Connell further stated that “he could see the anger and
aggression in me to the point he could not watch and that he thought I had PTSD
and I may want to seek treatment before it became worse.” Plaintiff told Chief
Connell that “I was embarrassed to get treatment because I was supposed to be the
strong one on the team.”

Chief Connell asked Plaintiff if he was having suicidal thoughts. Plaintiff told him
that he would be lying if he said he hadn’t thought about it but he didn’t think he
could do it because of his kids. Chief Connell then told Plaintiff that he really
needed to seek treatment before he ended up like him. Chief Connell stated that
“he had stopped on his way home from work and put his own gun in his mouth in
the past and that he did not want me doing the same.” Chief Connell ended the
17
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 18 of 47 PAGEID #: 18

meeting saying he “would send Plaintiff an email of a contact where he could get
treatment and he urged Plaintiff to talk to the other members of his team about
seeking treatment or he would order us to per policy.”

Later that day, Chief Connell spoke with Officer Snode and told him he was
going to order the team into treatment. Officer Snode replied that “he would have
to fire him first.” Plaintiff, nor any other members of his team, were ever ordered
to treatment by Chief Connell, nor anyone else in the NPD.

f. Meeting with Chief Connell: On December 2, 2016, Plaintiff met with Chief
Connell at his residence around 9:30pm. Plaintiff told him that he was still
struggling mentally and so was his team. Plaintiff asked for suggestions on how
he could help himself and his teammates as well. Chief Connell stated that he
knew we were still struggling and said that he worried about Plaintiff and Mike
Snode because he could see us starting to engage in a self-destructive manner. He
further stated that he worried about Blake Duncan as well but could not get a read
on him. Chief Connell stated that he wanted to order us to treatment but knew
how bull-headed we were and would refuse. Chief Connell told Plaintiff that, as
the leader of the team, he should talk the rest of the team into seeking treatment.

Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that the team was now under the impression that
we were being targeted and that Sgt. Brnjic had told us on numerous occasions
that the harder that we worked on the street the more attention we were bringing
to ourselves and the command staff didn’t like us. Chief Connell once again
dismissed Sgt. Brnjic by calling him a liar. Chief Connell again urged Plaintiff to
talk his team into filing a complaint on Sgt. Brnjic and talking them into seeking
treatment. Chief Connell stated that he would only file a complaint on Sgt. Brnjic
if the rest of the team was on board.

Plaintiff asked Chief Connell why he needed to get the whole team to file a
formal complaint when he was the Chief and Plaintiff was telling him what the
issue is and has been. Chief Connell replied “have to make it official.” Plaintiff
told him that the rest of the team was very untrusting and stated that “all it would
do was make him mess with us more.”

80. Plaintiff was the subject of continuing and ongoing harassment in the workplace.

Specific Examples of the Harassment:

a. Post-Esophagus surgery incidents:

On March 2nd, 2016, Plaintiff underwent surgery due to a stricture in his Esophagus that
was preventing him from swallowing solid food. During the procedure, the physician
accidentally tore a part of his esophagus, almost perforating it. After the surgery, and due to the
18
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 19 of 47 PAGEID #: 19

accident, the doctor stated that he needed to take time off so the throat could heal due to the risk
of perforation.

After Plaintiff was released from the hospital, his Wife drove him to the Police Station to
give paperwork to the command staff regarding the surgery and time-off. Upon arriving, Plaintiff
met with Chief Connell in his office to deliver the paperwork. Captain Riley came into Chief
Connell’s office to check on the status of Plaintiff. After speaking with Chief Connell and
Captain Riley for a moment, Captain Baum and Captain Haren came into the office. Captain
Baum immediately looked at me and said “what’s wrong, tear your throat from sucking so much
dick?” Captain Baum and Captain Haren began laughing and made several other lewd,
inappropriate and derogatory comments about how it all finally caught up with the Plaintiff.

Chief Connell and Captain Riley did not speak up or say anything regarding the
comments by Captain Baum. Plaintiff looked at Chief Connell in disgust, gathered his paperwork
and left the office. Plaintiff immediately reported the incident to his wife, who was outside the
office, and told her what had occurred and that Chief Connell did not step in or stop them from
making the lewd, inappropriate and derogatory comments.

When Plaintiff returned to work, after approximately two weeks, Plaintiff met with Chief
Connell about the incident. Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that he was extremely bothered by it
and that it really upset him. Chief Connell simply replied “well it’s just their weird sense of
humor.” Chief Connell then informed Plaintiff that Captain Baum and Captain Haren thought “I
was worthless” but that he had stuck up for him and told them he deserved a chance. Plaintiff
asked Chief Connell why they thought he was worthless and Chief Connell replied “I don’t
know, but they thought I was worthless and I’m the chief now.” Neither Captain Baum or
Captain Haren was reprimanded or further counseled regarding the lewd, inappropriate and
derogatory comments to the Plaintiff.

In April of 2016, Plaintiff was still unable to eat solid food. As a result, Plaintiff had to
place any solid food in a blender to eat. Plaintiff kept this blender in the upstairs breakroom.
Plaintiff entered the upstairs breakroom and was blending his breakfast after morning briefing as
he did every morning. As Plaintiff turned the blender off, Sgt. Brnjic came into the breakroom
and began talking to Plaintiff. Sgt. Brnjic first made a comment about Plaintiff tearing his throat
from sucking dick and immediately laughed. Sgt. Brnjic then informed him that the
administration did not like that Plaintiff was blending his meals at the station. Plaintiff asked Sgt.
Brnjic what that was supposed to mean and that it was either use the blender or starve. Sgt.
Brnjic then informed him that he told them (Captain Baum and Captain Haren) to leave Plaintiff
alone. Sgt. Brnjic further stated “they will find anything to mess with you guys and that he was
in Captain Riley or Chief Connell’s office daily defending you guys because they want to see
you jammed up.” Sgt. Brnjic then told Plaintiff that he could not trust Chief Connell and he was
our only protection.

Over the next couple months Sgt. Brnjic began making fun of Plaintiff’s throat issue in
front of other Officers and teammates. Every time Sgt. Brnjic saw the Plaintiff with blended food
19
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 20 of 47 PAGEID #: 20

or a protein shake he would call Plaintiff “sweetheart” and make a comment about Plaintiff
“sucking too much dick.”

In late September or early October, 2016, Plaintiff was still having issues with his
esophagus and was still blending his food and shakes for nutritional purposes. Everyone in the
department including the Command staff was aware of this. Plaintiff kept protein and a blender
in the upstairs breakroom to make his meals during working hours. Every evening after his shift,
Plaintiff would pack the supplies up because he needed them at home to prepare his meals.

Plaintiff finished his shift and was working out in the facilities weight room that is
located right next to the break room. During his workout he observed Captain Baum walk from
the hallway into the break room. Captain Baum exited a short time later and left down the
stairwell. After Plaintiff finished his workout, Plaintiff went into the locker room, changed his
clothes and proceeded into the break room to gather the blender and nutritional supplies. As
Plaintiff entered the break room he noticed that all of his protein and meal supplies were gone,
including his blender and blender cup. Plaintiff checked all the cupboards and the dishwasher
twice to make sure someone did not put it away. Plaintiff then opened the trash can lid and found
all of his nutritional supplies and blender in the trash.

Plaintiff immediately became enraged and lost control and flipped the break room table
over. Plaintiff made his way back to the administration offices, but everyone was gone. Plaintiff
then returned to the break room and fixed the table and gathered his blender and supplies and
then called Officer Snode and told him he was going to have a breakdown. Plaintiff then
observed Chief Connell walking to the city building across the street from the police department.
Plaintiff drove his truck over to Chief Connell’s location and started screaming and telling him
what had happened.

Plaintiff told Chief Connell that he was losing control and was going to have a
breakdown. Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that he saw Captain Baum go into the breakroom.
Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that he wanted to file a formal complaint against Captain Baum.
Chief Connell said he would handle it in the morning.

The next morning, Chief Connell called Plaintiff into his office and said it had been
handled. Plaintiff asked him what that meant. Chief Connell said it was Captain Baum that had
thrown all Plaintiff’s stuff away and that he addressed it. Chief Connell told Plaintiff later that
day when he was in the breakroom that he was going to make Captain Baum apologize. Plaintiff
told Chief Connell that he didn’t want Baum’s apology because he knew it would be forced and
fake. Plaintiff again told Chief Connell that “he can’t take much more and that he felt like he was
going to snap.” Chief Connell replied, that “you should seek treatment because you are
becoming out of control.” No complaint or disciplinary action was ever filed against Captain
Baum. Again, no action was taken by Chief Connell to provide assistance to Plaintiff for any
mental health issues and trauma he was experiencing as a result of the harassment.

20
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 21 of 47 PAGEID #: 21

b. Shooting range incident:

In July of 2016, Plaintiff was instructed to report to the range to qualify with his handgun
while on duty. During this time, Plaintiff was assigned to Sgt. Webster along with Officer Blake
Duncan and Officer Shayne Stevens. Plaintiff and the other officers were tasked with working
leads to apprehend two murder suspects.

Sgt. Webster instructed Plaintiff, Officer Duncan and Officer Stevens to report to the
range and qualify for the continued handgun training as required of all officers. Sgt. Webster
informed all three officers to wait at the range until they all completed the training and then
report back to him. The range instructors were Captain Logan and Officer Massaro. Plaintiff
was the first to run the course and qualify. When Plaintiff was done with his qualification, he
reported back to the covered patio to wait for the other two Officers to finish. Officer Massaro
engaged Plaintiff in a conversation briefly and Captain Logan spoke up and asked Plaintiff if he
was done qualifying. Plaintiff replied “yes.” Captain Logan then replied, “then clean your shit
and get out of here” as he pointed towards the parking lot.

Plaintiff immediately tried to explain that Sgt. Webster had told them to stay together
until everyone finished but Captain Logan began screaming at Plaintiff and said “I don’t give a
fuck what you are doing. Clean your fucking gun and get the fuck out of here.” Plaintiff yelled
back at him and told him to “stop talking to me like a dog.” Plaintiff then went into the range
house to get cleaning supplies and Captain Logan followed him into the range house and shut the
door. Captain Logan aggressively approached Plaintiff and began pointing his finger in his face
and telling him he was “out of line and being unprofessional.” Plaintiff again tried to explain to
Captain Logan that he was assigned to apprehend two murder suspects and was ordered by Sgt.
Webster to wait for the other two officers to finish their training and then return to him for
further orders. Captain Logan once again stated that “I do not give a fuck.” Captain Logan was
clearly trying to push Plaintiff into a physical confrontation so Plaintiff removed himself from
the situation. Officer Massaro and Officer Stevens were present for the entire incident.

Plaintiff immediately called Sgt. Brnjic and told him that he wished to file a formal
complaint against Captain Logan. Plaintiff explained what had happened and told Sgt. Brnjic that
he was making a formal complaint. Sgt. Brnjic started laughing at Plaintiff and said “no you
aren’t filing a complaint and I’m not going to let you.” Sgt. Brnjic then said, “let me call Logan
and see what is going on.” Sgt. Brnjic called Plaintiff back into his office and said “Logan stated
it was you that was out of line and that you were yelling at him.” Sgt. Brnjic told Plaintiff he
could not file a complaint.

Plaintiff then went to Chief Connell and reported the incident the next work day. Plaintiff
informed Chief Connell that it felt like he was going to have a breakdown and he needed to do
something. Plaintiff further stated that “Sgt. Brnjic stated that I could not file a complaint and I
wanted something done.” Chief Connell stated that “Captain Logan had already self-reported to
me and that it has been taken care of.” Plaintiff asked him what that meant and he replied that
“Logan had already told on himself so you can’t file a complaint.” Chief Connell further stated
21
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 22 of 47 PAGEID #: 22

“Logan’s personal life was a mess right now and he has anger issues.” Plaintiff was never able to
make a formal complaint against Captain Logan due to the actions of Chief Connell.

c. Unnecessary Orders:

Plaintiff and Officer Snode were dispatched to the Main Place on South 3rd St. on a
suicidal subject. A decision was made to call for a medic to transport subject to the hospital. As
Plaintiff and Officer Snode waited for the medic, Sgt. Brnjic marked Plaintiff on the radio and
asked if he was on a call. Plaintiff responded that he was and Sgt. Brnjic immediately said “come
to the station and see me as soon as possible.”

The medic was slow to respond to the scene and it was nearing the end of Plaintiff’s shift.
Plaintiff called Sgt. Brnjic on the telephone and advised him that I may be a while responding to
the station. Plaintiff asked if he needed him to take care of something and Sgt. Brnjic abruptly
responded with “come see me.” Plaintiff left Officer Snode on scene by himself and reported to
the station. Plaintiff walked into Sgt. Brnjic’s office and asked him what was wrong. He started
laughing and said “oh nothing, I just need you to sign a Power DMS document real quick.”
Plaintiff became angry and asked him why he would make it seem like something was wrong
and order him to leave Officer Snode by himself on a call. He replied “this way was more fun.”
Plaintiff told him he didn’t think it was funny and he was tired of his “bullshit.” As Plaintiff
walked away from the office, Sgt. Brnjic called Plaintiff back and stated he wanted him to know
and that “you know it’s my job to piss you off right?” Plaintiff became upset and started
swearing as he walked away. Sgt. Brnjic laughed at Plaintiff and called him “pumpkin” as he left
his office.

d. Tennis shoes incident:

On June 28, 2016, Plaintiff worked his regular shift, 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. This
particular day Plaintiff had to work his regular shift to complete paperwork. After completing
paperwork, Plaintiff unloaded his cruiser and took his gear to the locker room. After putting the
gear away and changing his clothes, Plaintiff realized that his tennis shoes were missing. Plaintiff
checked his locker and gym bag again just to make sure.

After not being able to find them, Plaintiff’s first reaction was that Captain Logan had
taken his shoes again. Several months prior to this, Captain Logan went into the locker room and
put everyone’s shoes in a trash bag. An email was sent to everyone that our property could be
recovered in the administrative office lobby. On the first occasion, the bag was hidden in
between a copy machine and the wall. Captain Riley assisted Plaintiff in finding it. Plaintiff was
extremely upset. Captain Riley patted Plaintiff on the shoulder and laughed and said “yeah, I
don’t think the Chief will let this happen again.” Plaintiff retrieved his property and left the
office.

So on June 28th, when Plaintiff could not find his shoes again he walked barefoot to the
administrative office and everyone had left for the day. Plaintiff checked around the Lobby and
22
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 23 of 47 PAGEID #: 23

could not locate them. Plaintiff called Captain Riley but did not get an answer. Plaintiff also tried
to contact Chief Connell but was unsuccesful. Plaintiff then telephoned Captain McKee who
answered the phone. Plaintiff asked him if he knew where his shoes were. Captain McKee stated
that he was in London teaching and Captain Logan was scheduled off but came in briefly for
Doug Well’s promotion. Captain McKee stated that he would call Captain Logan and call
Plaintiff back. Captain McKee called Plaintiff back and stated that Captain Logan did take
Plaintiff’s shoes when he came in for Wells promotion. Captain McKee stated that his shoes
were located in an empty paper box outside his office under the shelf. Plaintiff instantly became
angry and started swearing and yelling at Captain McKee on the phone which ended the
conversation.

After retrieving his shoes, Plaintiff left the station and Captain Riley called Plaintiff back
and Plaintiff told him what had happened. Captain Riley stated that he understood why I was so
upset and that the Chief was supposed to put a stop to that. Captain Riley then went on to say
“but I understand Logan too and the small things are what get them the most fired up.” After
talking with Captain Riley, Chief Connell texted Plaintiff “is this about the locker room?”
Plaintiff replied to Chief Connell and told him that “I could not take this anymore” and that he
couldn’t even go home because he didn’t have shoes and that he received no email or phone call
as to where they could be located. Plaintiff stressed to Chief Connell once again that he was “at
his breaking point and can’t take anymore.”

e. Sexual Harassment:

During 2016 and 2017, Plaintiff and his team worked closely with the Detective Bureau
finding and arresting suspects for their cases. Most of the time, they worked with Detective Lyn
Riley (Lyn). Lyn is the wife of Patrol Captain Craig Riley. During this time frame, Plaintiff’s
team worked closely with Lyn and Plaintiff’s interaction with her became uncomfortable to
Plaintiff, due to Mrs. Riley’s increasingly aggressive sexual behavior towards Plaintiff.

Mrs. Riley inappropriate conduct started when she stopped Plaintiff one day in the
hallway and told him that he was “a bad ass and it was sexy how well we hunted suspects.” She
would tell Plaintiff he was her hero and she was having “bad thoughts” about him. She would
stop Plaintiff in the stairwell on several occasions, asking him when he was going to come over
and checkout her barn and loft. Plaintiff would laugh and dismiss her comment with a joking
“Craig (her Husband, Plaintiff’s boss) would have my head.” Mrs. Riley continued the
advancements by asking Plaintiff if he had ever had sex in a horse stall or was into bondage.
Plaintiff again would laugh and find a way to change the topic. Mrs. Riley then began passing
Plaintiff in the hallway or stopping into the weight room and calling him a “sissy.” This
happened almost daily.

The advancements continued by Mrs. Riley sending Plaintiff screen shots from her
Kindle of graphic novels she was reading. Mrs. Riley would send Plaintiff screen shots and tell
him that she would think of Plaintiff while she read a particular part and she would also ask
Plaintiff does that “kind of stuff turned me on.” During one conversation while at the station,
23
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 24 of 47 PAGEID #: 24

Mrs. Riley asked Plaintiff do you think about “coming over and tying me up.” Mrs. Riley also
stated that she was into dressing up and being whipped with a riding crop and made reference to
using bridals and other equestrian equipment during sex.

As Plaintiff attempted to deflect the conversation once again he told her that “Craig
would target me if he found out you were having these conversations with me.” She responded
that it was fine because he was ok with it. She told Plaintiff that he did not mind sharing and may
even want to be there during an encounter. Plaintiff once again found himself extremely
uncomfortable, as he was aware that her husband was Plaintiff’s supervisor and realized the
problems that would result from these unwanted encounters. Plaintiff dismissed the conversation
once again by laughing and changing the subject.

Plaintiff was afraid to report the incidents due to the fact she was married to a member of
the command staff and, more important, his direct supervisor. Mrs. Riley has been given special
treatment by being able to work from home, and desk positions have been created for her when
others have not been afforded such positions. Plaintiff believed that, any report filed against her
would surely backfire on Plaintiff and leave him targeted and singled out by Captain Riley.

f. Examples of Incidents of Bullying by Sgt. Brnjic and Sgt. Bline:

Sgt. Brnjic stating he had a “rat” on his team:

Plaintiff also reported the bullying that was taking place from his supervisor Sgt. Brnjic.
Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that Sgt. Brnjic was constantly telling Plaintiff that the
command staff was out to get Plaintiff and his team. Sgt. Brnjic would also frequently tell
Plaintiff and his team that “we could not trust Chief Connell.” Chief Connell stated that “Sgt.
Brnjic is a liar and always had been” and urged Plaintiff and his team to file a formal complaint
against Sgt. Brnjic. Plaintiff stated that he feared if nothing came of the complaint being filed it
would make it worse on his co-workers. Chief Connell stated that as the team leader, Plaintiff
could only file a complaint if the rest of the team is on board.

Around, late 2016, Sgt. Brnjic called Plaintiff into his office and asked Plaintiff to have a
seat. After Plaintiff sat down, Sgt. Brnjic just stared at Plaintiff for a minute and then said he had
a problem. Plaintiff asked him what the problem was and Sgt. Brnjic stated that “I have a ‘rat’ on
my team.” Plaintiff asked him “what is that supposed to mean.” Sgt. Brnjic stated that “I am
taking a lot of ‘heat’ from the Administration” and Chief Connell and that “if I’m going to get
shit on this I’m going to shit on you in return.” Plaintiff told him he was confused and wasn’t
following what he was saying. Again, Sgt. Brnjic said “I have a ‘rat’ on my team and I will not
stop until I find out who it is.”

Sgt. Brnjic then asked Plaintiff who on our team was “feeding information to the Chief.”
Plaintiff told him he didn’t know what he was talking about but the team was under the
assumption that they could not trust anyone. Sgt. Brnjic stated that “you can trust me” and that I
kept you out of trouble daily because Connell was trying to get you in trouble.”
24
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 25 of 47 PAGEID #: 25

Sgt. Brnjic then told Plaintiff that “I know you, Duncan and Snode talk to the Chief off
duty and it is going to stop.” Plaintiff responded, “you cannot dictate who we talk to on our time
off.” Sgt. Brnjic stated “if I find you are talking to Connell, you are going to be in trouble and
that if it is not you feeding Connell information, then it is Christy Litzinger.” Sgt. Brnjic further
stated that “if I find out it was her I’m going to make life miserable for her and her brother, Mike
Snode.” Snode was an officer with the NPD.

The conversation ended with Sgt. Brnjic telling Plaintiff that “you better have a talk with
‘your boys’ and let them know that I will find out” and he also wanted Plaintiff to tell them that
“if they trusted Connell they are idiots, because I’m going to fuck them as soon as I can and I am
the only thing protecting them.”

Sgt. Brnjic comments in the “briefing room”:

In early 2016, Sgt. Brnjic began coming into the briefing room daily, telling Plaintiff and
his team that “you all have a target on your back and it is just a matter of time.” He then began
singling Plaintiff and his team out and it seemed almost daily that he was calling Plaintiff or one
of his team members into his office for anything he could.

On one occasion, Sgt. Brnjic came into the briefing room and told Plaintiff and his team
they had to start keeping hand written log sheets with a narrative attached to each call. Plaintiff
asked if other shifts had to do this and he replied “no.” The team voiced their concern that with
only having four Officers, it was going to cut our response time down and slow us in keeping up
with calls.

The next day in briefing, Sgt. Brnjic came into the muster room and sat down. He
immediately started warning the team and citing the chain of command. Sgt. Brnjic stated that
“you are no longer to go to the administration or address any concerns you are having without
going through me for permission.” Sgt. Brnjic stated that if he found out that Plaintiff and his
team talked to Connell or any of the Captains he would subpoena Connell’s phone records and
Plaintiff’s, including Team 1, and make sure that we all got into trouble. Sgt. Brnjic also stated
that he would no longer protect us from being targeted and that he was our only protection and
now we had lost it. Sgt. Brnjic said that we all want to be “buddy-buddy” with Connell and he
was the one that was pushing the hardest to see us in trouble. He laughed and said “that’s fine,
keep trusting that fucking guy because him and Logan were doing everything they can to jam
you up.” Sgt. Brnjic then went on to tell us how they have always tried to “fuck with me and
jam me up” and that we didn’t know the games they played and they tried to fire him more than
once, but every time they tried he “shoves it right back up their ass.”

Sgt. Brnjic would tell the team that same story multiple times and referred to himself as
“Rocky Marciano.” Other supervisors had also heard Sgt. Brnjic refer to himself as “Marciano”
as well as being untouchable. After the conversation in the briefing room was over, Sgt. Brnjic

25
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 26 of 47 PAGEID #: 26

got up and walked out and said something to the effect of “mic drop.” He then told the team we
were “on our fucking own” and he would not go to bat for us ever again.

That evening, Plaintiff called Chief Connell and reported what Sgt. Brnjic had threatened
in the briefing. Chief Connell immediately replied with “fuck him he is a lying mother fucker, I
will talk to whoever I want because I’m the fucking Chief.” Chief Connell told Plaintiff that as
the senior Officer he needed to get the team on board and file a complaint. Chief Connell then
stated that he was going to come to the briefing the next morning and set “shit” straight. Chief
Connell never did attend our briefing or confront Sgt. Brnjic on the threat which furthered the
teams belief if they filed a complaint it would only make things worse. Chief Connell never
carried through with any of his words, no action all words.

Sgt. Bline targeting Officer Litzinger:

After Sgt. Bline was promoted to Sergeant, Officer Stevens overheard Sgt. Bline talking
to another supervisor in the hallway. Sgt. Bline was talking about Plaintiff’s team, Team 1.
Officer Stevens overheard Sgt. Bline state that “I am going to ‘get’ the members of team one.”
Shortly after that, Sgt. Bline began watching hours of cruiser video because of an alleged
complaint that his wife made about Officer Snode. Sgt. Bline then went to the Patrol Captain
(Riley) and attempted to get Officer Snode in trouble. Captain Riley cleared Officer Snode of
any wrong doing and Sgt. Bline then immediately moved on to Officer Snode’s sister, Officer
Litzinger. Sgt. Bline began reprimanding Litzinger for everything he could and the
administration began singling her out to the point it was causing Plaintiff and other members of
the team to speak up in her defense.

Sgt. Bline and Sgt. Brnjic refusing to assist Team 1 and Sgt. Bline’s targeting of suspects:

The team began complaining of the “favoritism” that was taking place by Sgt. Bline and
the administration. Team 1 also began complaining about Sgt. Bline working overtime on their
shift and refusing to respond to calls or assist Team 1. Sgt. Bline would leave the briefing room
and immediately get in his cruiser and head to his residence located in Granville. Sgt. Bline
would stay there most days until the last hour he was scheduled to work. On one such occasion,
where Sgt. Bline worked overtime on our shift, Plaintiff was complaining about how busy they
were and never getting any assistance. Sgt. Bline laughed and stated that he was “a Sergeant and
I do not have to take calls.” He then suggested that Plaintiff become a Sergeant because “you
don’t have to do shit.” Sgt. Bline also told Plaintiff that he “was on schedule to make around One
Hundred and Nine Thousand dollars this year with all the overtime I’m working and doing
nothing.”

Team 1 made it known to Sgt. Bline and the administration that Sgt. Bline was getting
out of control. Plaintiff and other members of the team openly talked about how they were told,
by suspects on the street, that Sgt. Bline and other members of the department would stop them
or come to their residence and take their money or half of their narcotics. They also mentioned
certain members of the CODE task force. Team 1 started noticing that no matter who the
26
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 27 of 47 PAGEID #: 27

complainant was, they always accused the same members of the department. Team 1 began
encouraging people that they encountered to file a complaint, but the response that they would
get, most of the time, would be “yeah right, you are a piece of shit no one is going to believe me”
or “I don’t want any problems.”

Officer Mike Snode decided to go to Captain Riley after he found out that Chief Connell
had ignored Plaintiff’s complaints. Officer Snode hoped that Captain Riley would take action
against Sgt. Brnjic since Chief Connell had failed to act. Officer Snode informed him of the
things Sgt. Brnjic was saying and how dangerous he was making our job by messing with Team
1 and not backing them up on calls. It was common knowledge that Sgt. Brnjic would go to his
house on duty and stay for long periods of time. Team 1 could always tell when he was at home
because his portable radio had no reception there and he would not respond when they called
him. When his radio did transmit, he always replied with “Copy, I will be coming from out
West.” (This meant that Sgt. Brnjic was at his residence).

When Sgt. Bline was working, he would also go to his house in Granville and refuse to
respond to calls. He would have dispatch pull an officer off an active call and refuse to assist.
When Sgt. Bline did assist his radio traffic would consist of “Copy, it’s going to be a few.” That
meant he was responding from his residence.

Sgt. Brnjic’s continued claims that Plaintiff and his team were being targeted:

In 2017, after Officer Hunt and Sgt. Brnjic cleared an assault call in the area of 120 South
3rd St., Sgt. Brnjic asked Plaintiff to meet him at the church at the corner of South 3rd and
National Drive. When Plaintiff arrived at the church, Sgt. Brnjic was on the telephone for several
minutes. After the call ended he looked at Plaintiff and said “if you guys keep trusting Connell,
you are going to get fucked.” Plaintiff asked him what he was talking about.

Sgt. Brnjic said that “you guys (Duncan, Snode and Plaintiff) think he is your friend but
he is not.” Sgt. Brnjic stated that Connell was watching us and wanted to see the three of us
separated. Plaintiff asked him what he was talking about and why Chief Connell would want
that to happen. Sgt. Brnjic replied that the more work we did, the more attention we brought to
ourselves.

Sgt. Brnjic then told Plaintiff that Captain Logan and Safety Director Baum were the
ones actually running the department and that they already had a plan together that when Connell
retired, Baum was going to come back as the Chief and Logan would be his “right hand man.”
Sgt. Brnjic also told Plaintiff that he better watch his back because they were targeting him.
Plaintiff asked Sgt. Brnjic why they were targeting him and he stated that Plaintiff has been
creating a lot of waves by trying to file complaints on Baum and Logan. Sgt. Brnjic stated that
Plaintiff had better go to a night shift and try to hide from them the best you can and that Plaintiff
should tell Snode and Duncan they should watch their back as well. Sgt. Brnjic said he was just
trying to look out for Plaintiff and his team and protect them the best he could.

27
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 28 of 47 PAGEID #: 28

Plaintiff immediately met with Officer Snode, after Sgt. Brnjic left, and told him what
Brnjic had said. Plaintiff told Officer Snode that he could not take it anymore and he was going
to start applying for jobs outside of the law enforcement field. Plaintiff teared up while talking to
Officer Snode and asked him why we would he and his team would be targeted when they were
top producers. Plaintiff told Officer Snode that he needed to get out, because he felt like he was
going to have a nervous breakdown.

g. Confrontation at Police Department with Plaintiff’s Father:

On September 1, 2017, Plaintiff was released from the Sun Behavioral facility under his
doctor’s care and ordered to stay away from any police related situations or administrators.
Plaintiff had been admitted to Sun Behavioral on a suicide watch. Sgt. Logan had left a message
on Plaintiff’s answering machine ordering Plaintiff to turn in his Worker’s Compensation
paperwork in person. Plaintiff’s father and uncle transported Plaintiff’s paperwork to the police
station and Plaintiff’s father delivered the paperwork to the records window, telling them it was
from the Plaintiff, and then his father left the station. Captain Logan heard Plaintiff’s father and
came running outside and threw the paperwork into the window of his father’s truck and said he
was not accepting it. Plaintiff’s Father tried to explain why he was delivering it and Captain
Logan would not listen, stating that Plaintiff was violating a direct order.

Plaintiff’s father exited his vehicle, returned to the station, and again presented the
paperwork. Captain Logan ran back to the window and threw the papers back through the
window. Plaintiff’s father then stated “how can you refuse these? He is under a doctor’s care
and order to not have any confrontations with anyone affiliated with this department.” Plaintiff’s
father asked for a receipt and Captain Logan then got in his face and started pointing his finger at
him, yelling at him, asking him where he lived and what kind of relationship he had with
Plaintiff. Captain Logan took the papers and screamed at Plaintiff’s father to get out of the lobby
and not return. No receipt was given to Plaintiff’s father for the paperwork.

81. The following facts concern the alleged OHLEG violations against the Plaintiff and
the subsequent filing of criminal charges against the Plaintiff:

In March of 2017, Plaintiff met Heidi Clark on a call for service in the lobby. Plaintiff
and Ms. Clark began talking and hanging out together after work, shortly after that encounter.
Plaintiff was having personal problems at home and he and his wife were in the first stages of a
separation. Plaintiff never brought his personal life to work, but his close friends and teammates
knew he was seeing Ms. Clark. Shortly after Plaintiff began talking to Ms. Clark, Sgt. Brnjic
found out about it through conversations made in briefing.

From March to June in 2017, Sgt. Brnjic called Plaintiff into his office several times to
talk about Ms. Clark and Plaintiff’s relationship with her. Sgt. Brnjic would reportedly tell
Plaintiff that she was a “complete piece of shit,” and “once a piece of shit, always a piece of
shit.” The conversations progressed and Sgt. Brnjic stated that she was “actively selling drugs,
CODE had just raided her house and took a large quantity of drugs out, and her kids were just
28
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 29 of 47 PAGEID #: 29

taken.” During the progression of these conversations, Sgt. Brnjic began telling Plaintiff that he
was in trouble and being investigated. Sgt. Brnjic spoke of her “baby daddies” and how they
were selling with her.

Plaintiff asked Sgt. Brnjic who was doing the investigation and Plaintiff inquired as to
why he was being investigated. The conversations then turned personal, as Sgt. Brnjic talked
about Plaintiff “fucking her” and at this point, Plaintiff reminded Sgt. Brnjic that he was doing
nothing wrong, and that he was not violating any departmental policy. Sgt. Brnjic laughed and
said “we will see.”

The last conversation Plaintiff had with Sgt. Brnjic started like the others, with Sgt.
Brnjic calling Ms. Clark “a piece of shit” and telling him that he couldn’t believe Plaintiff would
hang out with her. Plaintiff told Sgt. Brnjic once again that he was not violating any departmental
policy or doing anything wrong. Plaintiff told him that he did not care what he thought about Ms.
Clark because she wasn’t doing anything wrong. Sgt. Brnjic smiled at Plaintiff and told him he
was under investigation. Plaintiff again asked Sgt. Brnjic why and he just shrugged his shoulders
and said “I told you Connell was going to fuck you” and “if you had just kept it between you and
me, it would have been ok, but you had to run to Connell and self-report.”

What Sgt. Brnjic was referring to by his use of the term,“self-report”, concerned the day
Plaintiff’s wife found out that Plaintiff was seeing Ms. Clark and that he had called him and
asked him what he should do. Plaintiff told him that he didn’t want to bring his problems into
work and asked him what he needed to do. Chief Connell told him not to go home and to give
her space and laughed and said, “ I have been in your shoes many times and it’s going to be a
long road.”

Plaintiff told Chief Connell that he was just going to try and keep himself occupied and
told him that he had talked to Sgt. Shaffer about the fact they were down members on the SOG
team and needed bodies. Plaintiff told him that since he was already SWAT certified that he was
going to talk to Sgt. Eskins about joining the team. Plaintiff did later talk to Sgt. Eskins and he
was happy that he had finally decided to join. Sgt. Eskins stated that he welcomed Plaintiff to
join the team and he would talk to Chief Connell and Captain Riley.

The day Plaintiff was placed on administrative leave, he called his union representative,
Officer Dave Arndt. Plaintiff told him that he had been placed on leave and he stated he would
call the Chief. Arndt called Plaintiff back later that day and confirmed that it was due to an
allegation involving Heidi Clark and OHLEG.

Plaintiff immediately requested that the investigation be conducted by someone other


than Sgt. Brnjic or Sgt. Bline, and also requested that an outside agency investigate the
allegations. Arndt stated that he forwarded Plaintiff’s request to Chief Connell, but that Chief
Connell was sticking with Sgt. Brnjic doing the investigation. Plaintiff then asked his Attorney,
John Sauter, to schedule a meeting with Chief Connell, so that he could voice his concerns about
Sgt. Brnjic and Sgt. Bline. After their meeting, Arndt contacted Plaintiff and stated that Chief
29
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 30 of 47 PAGEID #: 30

Connell changed the investigator to Sgt. Bline. Plaintiff informed Arndt that Sgt. Bline was just
as bad as Sgt. Brnjic. Arndt replied that Chief Connell doesn’t like being told what to do and said
he wasn’t changing it again.

On July 3, 2017, during Plaintiff’s work day, he was in the back lot in his cruiser. Sgt.
Eskins approached Plaintiff and asked him how Melanie (Plaintiff’s wife) and he were doing.
Plaintiff advised him that they were good and left it at that. Sgt. Eskins stated that he had been
there and knew how stressful it can be and stated that if he needed to talk he could call him
anytime. Plaintiff told him, thank you, and that he appreciated it. Sgt. Eskins then said that
Plaintiff should watch his back. Plaintiff asked him why and he replied that Sgt. Bline came to
him and asked him if he knew the girl Plaintiff was talking to. Sgt. Eskins replied “no”. Sgt.
Bline then informed him that her name was Heidi Clark and that he had dealt with her years ago.
Sgt. Eskins said that he didn’t recognize the name.

Sgt. Eskins went on to say that Sgt. Bline had been asking around and checking to see if
he could find anything on her and that he thought he could find something, but hadn’t so far. Sgt.
Eskins stated that the conversation gave him an uneasy feeling and it sounded like Sgt. Bline and
Sgt. Brnjic were trying to dig something up to get Plaintiff in trouble. Plaintiff again thanked Sgt.
Eskins and told him he appreciated the heads up.

On July 7, 2017, Plaintiff reported to work and went to the briefing room. Sgt. Eskins
called Plaintiff out of the room and took him to his office. He read a letter to Plaintiff, stating
that he was on paid administrative leave pending a criminal investigation prompted by Sgt.
Brnjic on unauthorized use of OHLEG. Plaintiff was stripped of his gun and badge and was
walked to his personal vehicle by Sgt. Eskins.

On July 25, 2017, the initial investigatory interview occurred with Sgt. Bline. From that
interview, Plaintiff learned that there were several other individuals that he was being accused of
illegally running on OHLEG. Sgt. Bline also mentioned that Plaintiff might have “drop/burner
phones” and asked Plaintiff if he knew that Ms. Clark was going through a divorce. Plaintiff has
never had a “drop/burner phone” and, as such, is a completely fallacious allegation being made
by Sgt. Bline in his investigation.

Sgt. Bline also asked if Plaintiff was aware of a call to Ms. Clark’s residence involving a
bag of white powder. Shortly after the interview started, Plaintiff’s attorney advised him to stop
answering questions. Plaintiff’s attorney and Sgt. Bline got into an argument as to why Plaintiff
had not been informed of these other allegations. The “white powder” was later discovered to
have been candy that the children were eating and Sgt. Bline knew this when he conducted his
interview. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 29)

Around August 1, 2017, Plaintiff received a call from Sgt. Webster. Sgt. Webster stated
that Sgt. Brnjic came into his office and began talking about Plaintiff. Sgt. Brnjic stated that they
were assuming that Plaintiff was running information for Ms. Clark and possibly other criminals.
Sgt. Webster stated that he told Sgt. Brnjic that he did not want to hear that “shit” and its best
30
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 31 of 47 PAGEID #: 31

they don’t talk about it. Plaintiff told Webster he was devastated that they would fabricate lies
about him.

On August 3, 2017, Plaintiff called his attorney and told him that he just wanted to quit
and that he was losing his mind. His attorney stated that he would reach out to the city and relay
that information to them. Plaintiff’s attorney called him back and stated that Safety Director
Baum had said “Plaintiff can quit if he wants to, but they are still charging him.”

The next day, Plaintiff was sent a proposed separation agreement from the City for
Plaintiff to sign. The contract stated that Plaintiff could not sue NPD or the City or speak ill of
the department, City Officials, or administrators. The contract also stated that they would stop
the investigation and put a letter in Plaintiff’s file stating that he left in good standing. Also, the
contract stated that no one but the HR Director, Mike Buskirk, would be able to answer any
questions on why Plaintiff resigned and that Plaintiff could not apply for medical and/or
Worker’s Compensation if he signed the agreement. Plaintiff refused the offer altogether, and
the “gag order,” and he stated that he would take a polygraph, at that point.

Plaintiff could not understand the nature of the allegations the department was making
against him, and, as a result, could not sleep for three days. Plaintiff was at his parents’ house
and suffered a nervous breakdown and was eventually admitted to Sun Behavioral as described
above on August 9, 2017.

After leaving Sun Behavioral, Plaintiff was under the care of several doctors, and was
advised not to be around the administration or employees of the NPD for fear he may become
violent by his doctors.

On August 10, 2017, Sgt. Bline presented the case, alleged against the Plaintiff, to the
prosecutor. Plaintiff was indicted on 4 of 9 counts of misuse of OHLEG. After he was indicted,
Plaintiff was contacted by Officer Shayne Stevens, who said Chief Connell had forwarded the
full investigation to anyone who wanted it. Chief Connell was also calling employees to his
office to personally “show” them that Plaintiff committed crimes. Officer Stevens forwarded the
Drop Box files Chief Connell had created to Plaintiff, who received it weeks before his attorney
did in the criminal case.

In the investigation, Sgt. Bline accused Plaintiff of having drop/burner phones and, either
by being blackmailed or by his own free will, running information to Ms. Clark. Sgt. Bline also
tried connecting Ms. Clark to the suspects that had murdered the Hatch PD Officer. Sgt. Bline
also stated that he believed Plaintiff wanted access to the SOG team because it was “a gold mine
of information” and that Plaintiff “could destroy evidence, or potentially facilitate the ambush of
Officers.” That information was later made public on FOX28 News. After the news story ran,
Sgt. Webster stated that the administration had a meeting about “The Angle supporters.”

Plaintiff did not use OHLEG to run any of the names included in the investigation for
Ms. Clark or any other person. Plaintiff was not being blackmailed or doing anything illegal.
31
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 32 of 47 PAGEID #: 32

Plaintiff did not run any of the names for personal gain. Plaintiff did not destroy or attempt to
destroy any evidence. Plaintiff did not want access to the SOG Team to tip off Ms. Clark or any
other person or ambush officers. Plaintiff did not possess a drop/burner phone to allegedly
contact Ms. Clark or anyone else.

In October 2017, the department placed Plaintiff on a non-pay status, and Plaintiff agreed
to be interviewed for his internal investigation by Captain Riley. The Department has rarely, if
ever, placed anyone on non-pay status. During Plaintiff’s investigation, Plaintiff, in his
interview, told Captain Riley the truth. At one point in the interview, Captain Riley asked
Plaintiff if he had anyone get into his Locker and take evidence pertaining to his case. Plaintiff
instantly knew that he was talking about his note pad because Sgt. Bline had put in his statement
that “it was a real concern that it was missing.” Plaintiff asked Captain Riley if anyone had
checked his uniform shirt that he was wearing the day he was placed on administrative leave.
Captain Riley replied that he did not know. Plaintiff informed him the note pad could be found in
his shirt hanging in his locker.

Captain Riley also gave Plaintiff a cell phone number and asked if he recognized it.
Plaintiff immediately told him that the phone number was a family friend whom he had met for
lunch in London while at Training, and that Sgt. Bline’s assumption that it was Ms. Clark’s
number was false.

After the interview, Plaintiff was offered a second separation agreement, which contained
substantially the same terms as the first one he had been presented. He once again refused to
sign the agreement. Plaintiff ultimately resigned and the prosecutor dismissed the charges.
Plaintiff decided to give up his commission, due to the fact that the false allegations by Sgt.
Bline, and others, he believed, had ruined his career in law enforcement.

During the first week of October, 2017, Plaintiff was contacted by a member of the
Detective Bureau (who wishes not to be named for fear of being targeted). This person had
informed Plaintiff that he was engaged in a conversation with Sgt. Brnjic, and he began talking
about Plaintiff. He advised that Sgt. Brnjic said that Plaintiff was going to have to plea to the
charges, because they were going to make sure he was charged. This person then said that there
had been a conversation with the Prosecutor saying that the charges needed to “stick.” Sgt.
Brnjic also told this person that the City Administration wanted a conviction because they would
receive a portion of the retirement contributions back.

After Plaintiff resigned on November 7, 2017, the City was still trying to get him to sign
the separation agreement. NPD would not release the content of Plaintiff’s Locker to Officer
Blake Duncan, despite Plaintiff’s request. They first told Officer Blake Duncan to check back the
next day. They then told him they had forgotten about it and that they had lost the key. When
Officer Duncan was finally able to retrieve Plaintiff’s property, Plaintiff found his duty shirt that
still had his ink pens and a handcuff key in it, but the notebook he had left in the pocket was
missing.

32
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 33 of 47 PAGEID #: 33

On November 21, 2017, at 5:56 p.m., Brian Webster and Plaintiff spoke on the phone
about a conversation that Webster had in his office with Sgt. Brnjic. Sgt. Webster said that Sgt.
Brnjic engaged him in conversation about Plaintiff. Sgt. Brnjic stated that what had happened to
Plaintiff was wrong and that the Safety Director Steve Baum, Chief Barry Connell, Captain
Darrin Logan and Sgt. Doug Bline were responsible for it.

Sgt. Brnjic told Sgt. Webster that they were “all liars” and Chief Connell lied during his
interview pertaining to Plaintiff’s case. Sgt. Brnjic said that he had been caught in the lie. Sgt.
Brnjic said Connell’s lying had been swept under the rug. He also said that Connell, Logan,
Baum and Bline all had a part in jamming Plaintiff up on the charges. Sgt. Brnjic said that the
false allegations against Plaintiff were a result of Chief Connell’s lie. Sgt. Brnjic went on to say
that Asst. Prosecutor Paula Sawyers was not very good at her job and she did not handle the
situation with the Plaintiff correctly. Sgt. Webster and Plaintiff both thought the statements
made by Sgt. Brnjic were strange, considering Sgt. Brnjic and Sgt. Bline were the individuals
that began the investigation and alleged the false allegations against Plaintiff in the first place.

82. Additional Examples of Plaintiff’s attempts to Report or File Complaints and Chief
Connell’s Failure to act on his requests:

BW3 Incident- Captain Haren:

Plaintiff reported to Chief Connell that he was eating dinner at BW3 in Heath when he
observed Captain Haren sitting at the bar drinking. Captain Haren had ordered take out and was
waiting at the bar. When Captain Haren received his order, he stumbled, almost falling and made
his way toward the exit. Captain Haren was so intoxicated that he had to lean against the wall
while he was walking. Captain Haren had seen the Plaintiff on his way out and stopped at his
table. He was so intoxicated that he could not form a sentence. Plaintiff asked Captain Haren if
he was ok and he replied yes. Plaintiff then watched Captain Haren stumble outside and get into
a Grey Ford Taurus and drive away. Plaintiff explained the incident to Chief Connell in detail,
down to the clothing he was wearing.

In another incident involving Captain Haren, Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that an
Officer from another team that works night shift had observed Captain Haren driving East Bound
on State Route 16. The officer told Plaintiff that Captain Haren was all over the road and was
obviously intoxicated. The Officer stated that he did not stop Captain Haren because he didn’t
want to get fired. The Officer then cited how Captain Haren had covered up for his wife years
earlier being intoxicated and crashing into a ditch out by Dayton Rd. Chief Connell once again
said that Captain Haren was an alcoholic and not to worry about it soon because Haren was
getting the Chief job at the City of Heath.

Altercation at Bar involving Captain Haren and Captain Logan:

Plaintiff reported to Chief Connell that Officers downstairs were talking about Captain
Haren and Captain Logan being involved in two violent crimes. Plaintiff informed Chief Connell
33
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 34 of 47 PAGEID #: 34

of the rumor about Captain Haren and Captain Logan physically assaulting another subject in a
bar in Mt Vernon. Plaintiff also alerted Chief Connell of another rumor that Captain Haren had
been involved in a domestic altercation with his wife at the Eastern Bar in Newark. Plaintiff told
him that people were saying that Captain Haren followed his wife and another female to the bar
where he threatened his wife’s friend. A patron at the bar (reportedly a lineman from AEP) told
him to stop. Captain Haren and the patron became involved in a physical altercation and the
patron dragged him out of the bar and threw him in the parking lot.

After Plaintiff finished talking, Chief Connell threw his hands up and said “Jesus, don’t
tell me that.” He went on to say that Captain Haren was an alcoholic just like his dad was and
Captain Logan had anger issues that he was working on. Plaintiff used this opportunity to ask
Chief Connell why he didn’t do anything about how the command staff treated Patrol Officers
and why it seemed like they could do and get away with whatever they wanted. At this point in
the conversation, Plaintiff mentioned to Chief Connell that, the Chief himself, Captain Riley and
Captain Baum bragging how they got their degrees on City time because former Chief Sarver
didn’t let them do anything. Plaintiff mentioned Captain Baum telling Plaintiff he injured his
esophagus from “sucking too much dick” in March and Captain Logan cornering Plaintiff at the
range in July. Chief Connell replied that he could only do so much. Chief Connell then told
Plaintiff that the other Captains thought Plaintiff was worthless but he had always stuck up for
him. Plaintiff asked him why the Captains thought he was “worthless” and he said they just
didn’t think Plaintiff was a good fit but he told them differently.

Officer Involved Shooting:

On May 10 2017, Plaintiff was at the NPD range teaching a joint self-defense and
firearms class. One of the Officers attending the training had his radio on. The radio began
transmitting and you could hear officers screaming that a victim had been stabbed and the
suspect was fleeing the scene.

As Plaintiff listened to the pursuit ensue, the suspect led three Officers out of the city east
of the Range. Officers Justin Wisecarver, Officer Brody Maring and Officer Oran Nauman (both
with less than three years’ experience as Officers) were primary during the pursuit. During the
pursuit, Officers began yelling to the others to watch out that the suspect was ramming them.

At this point, Team 1 began grabbing their gear and running to their cars. Chief Barry
Connell got on the radio and ordered all units at the range needed to respond. Plaintiff then heard
on the radio that shots had been fired and that the suspect was attempting to run them down with
his vehicle. As Plaintiff ran to his truck, other Officers followed. Sgt. Al Shaffer began telling
Officers not to go and told them to stand down that they were not leaving. Plaintiff, and other
Officers, ignored what he had said and went anyway.

Plaintiff raced to the scene and transported all three Officers back to the station. Once on
station, Plaintiff told them not to say anything and Plaintiff and other Officers began taking

34
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 35 of 47 PAGEID #: 35

inventory and securing their property and weapons. After Plaintiff was done helping the Officers,
he proceeded back to the Range to teach the second half of training.

When Plaintiff arrived he observed the other instructors, Sgt. Shaffer, Sgt. Bline, Doug
Wells, and April Hunt, sitting at the range house talking. Sgt. Bline was playing a tank battle
game on his tablet. Plaintiff asked them why they hadn’t responded to the scene or to the station
to assist the Officers that had just been involved in the shooting. They laughed and said that they
went to Puerto Vallarta Restaurant and had lunch. This upset Plaintiff and he told them that he
thought that was “bullshit.” Instructor April Hunt told Plaintiff later that she felt horrible for not
responding but didn’t know what to do.

The following day, Plaintiff attempted to file a complaint against Sgt. Bline and Al
Shaffer for not responding to help fellow Officers. Plaintiff complained directly to Chief
Connell and Sgt. Brnjic. Plaintiff expressed to Chief Connell that Sgt. Bline and Sgt. Shaffer
were supervisors and failed to assist Officers during a Critical Incident. Plaintiff also told Chief
Connell that he mechanically damaged his truck responding to the scene. Chief Connell laughed
and stated Plaintiff could not file a complaint, because he overreacted and there was no need for
him to respond. Plaintiff disagreed and told him that if it was him involved in an incident where
a suspect was trying to kill him with their vehicle, he would want everyone coming to help.

After Plaintiff talked with Chief Connell, he informed Team 1 in the briefing room that
once again Connell would not let him file a complaint and that he justified Bline and Shaffer
going to eat while Team 1 responded to fellow Officers. Sgt. Brnjic told members of Team 1
that he had addressed the issue with April Hunt and she had admitted that she knew it was wrong
for not responding but she didn’t want to disobey their orders to stand down.

Sgt. Shaffer attempted to reprimand and discipline Officer Shayne Stevens because he
ran to assist the Officers in trouble and left some of his duty gear at the range. Shaffer argued
that he had to secure Steven’s gear before he could leave to go to lunch. There was no debrief or
counseling offered to either Plaintiff or the other Officers involved.

City Paid Training Event:

Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that another employee had reported to Plaintiff that
when Chief Connell and Captain Riley went to a City paid training session, around October
2016, they texted two (2) female employees of NPD to meet them in Columbus to stay in the
City paid hotel with both of them. Plaintiff told him the rumor was one of the female employees
was out of town, but the other employee came up and was bragging about engaging sexually
with both of them. Chief Connell asked where Plaintiff heard that and stated “that’s not good.”
Plaintiff also reported that Officer Snode had heard that he (Chief Connell) was having a
relationship with someone in the NARI program. Plaintiff informed Chief Connell that this was
why everyone was so untrusting of the administration because the perception was they did
whatever they wanted.

35
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 36 of 47 PAGEID #: 36

Chief Connell asked if Plaintiff could find out who at the department was aware of this
and asked if Plaintiff could find out for him. Chief Connell stated that Baum and Logan were
“self- righteous mother fuckers” and if they found out they would make his life miserable.

During the week of December 5, 2016, Chief Connell came into the upstairs breakroom
and closed the door and asked Plaintiff if he had found anything. Plaintiff stated “no.” Chief
Connell again asked Plaintiff to find out what was being said and to tell him. Plaintiff told him
he would let him know if he heard anything and Chief Connell stated “this conversation” never
took place.

Later, Plaintiff learned that the female employee who did not meet them in the hotel,
went to Supervisor Brian Webster and discussed the incident and showed him the messages. The
female employee told Webster that it “creeped her out” and was worried and did not know what
to do, but told Webster she didn’t want to draw attention to herself. Webster urged her to file a
complaint but she was afraid of the repercussions. Shortly after that, the female employee’s desk
was moved upstairs outside of Chief Connell’s office. Plaintiff never spoke to Chief Connell
about the incident again.

83. Other Officers within the NPD have been investigated for utilizing OHLEG for
personal reasons, and were found to have violated General Orders of the NPD in doing so. One
particular officer was assigned to administrative duty with pay. The Officer was not charged
with any felonies or prosecuted in any way despite the determination by the internal investigation
that this Officer violated General Orders of the NPD. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 30-redacted). This
particular officer was reinstated to full duties.

84. Defendants engaged in the conduct described by this Complaint willfully,


maliciously, in bad faith, and in reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s federally protected constitutional
rights.

85. They did so with shocking and willful indifference to Plaintiff’s rights and their
conscious awareness that they would cause Plaintiff severe mental and emotional injuries.

86. The acts or omissions of all individual Defendants were moving forces behind
Plaintiff’s injuries.

87. These individual Defendants acted in concert and joint action with each other.

88. The acts or omissions of Defendants as described herein intentionally deprived


Plaintiff of his constitutional rights and caused him other damages.

89. These individual Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity for the conduct
alleged in this Complaint.

36
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 37 of 47 PAGEID #: 37

90. The Defendants were, at all times, relevant hereto, acting pursuant to
municipal/county custom, policy, decision, ordinance, regulation, widespread habit, usage, or
practice in their actions pertaining to Plaintiff.

91. As a proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered actual
physical and emotional injuries, and other damages and losses as described herein, entitling him
to compensatory and special damages, in amounts to be determined at trial. As a further result of
the Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has incurred special damages, including medically
related expenses and may continue to incur further medical and other special damages and
related expenses, in amounts to be established at trial.

92. On information and belief, Plaintiff may suffer lost future earnings and impaired
earnings capacities in amounts to be ascertained at trial. Plaintiff is further entitled to attorneys’
fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988, as well as pre-judgment interest and costs as
allowable by federal law. There may also be special damages for lien interests.

93. In addition to compensatory, economic, consequential and special damages, Plaintiff


is entitled to punitive damages against each of the individually named Defendants under 42
U.S.C. § 1983, in that the actions of each of these individual Defendants have been taken
maliciously, willfully or with a reckless or wanton disregard of the constitutional rights of
Plaintiff.

COUNT I – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Violation of the Fourth Amendment –False Arrest (Plaintiff
against Defendant Officers and City of Newark)

94. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

95. The actions of the Defendants described herein constituted unreasonable search and
seizure, without legal cause, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983.

96. The actions by the Defendants in falsely arresting Plaintiff without reasonable
suspicion or probable cause violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights to be free from
unreasonable search and seizure, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

97. The misconduct described in this Count was objectively unreasonable and was
undertaken intentionally, with malice and knowing disregard for Plaintiffs’ clearly established
constitutional rights.

98. The actions of the Defendants were the direct and proximate cause of the violations of
Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights, bodily injury, pain, suffering, mental distress, anguish,
humiliation, loss of liberty, loss of income, and legal expenses, as set forth more fully above.

37
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 38 of 47 PAGEID #: 38

COUNT II – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Conspiracy to Deprive Plaintiff of his Constitutional Rights


(Plaintiff against Defendant Officers and the City of Newark)

99. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

100. Each of the Defendants, acting in concert with other known and unknown co-
conspirators, conspired by concerted action to accomplish an unlawful purpose by unlawful
means.

101. Each of the Defendants took concrete steps to enter into an agreement to unlawfully
detain and arrest the Plaintiff, knowing they lacked probable cause to do so, and for the purpose
of violating Plaintiff’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

102. In furtherance of this conspiracy, each of the Defendants committed specific overt
acts, misusing their police powers for the purpose of violating Plaintiff’s rights. They
accomplished this goal by using unreasonable tactics in the investigation and fabricating
evidence against the Plaintiff, and approving trumped up charges against him, which resulted in
his unlawful arrest for a felony.

103. Each individual Defendant is therefore liable for the violation of Plaintiff’s rights by
any other individual Defendant.

104. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ conspiracy, Plaintiff suffered
damages, including bodily injury, pain, suffering mental distress, anguish, humiliation, loss of
income, and legal expenses, as set forth more fully above.

Count IV – State Law Claim: Civil Conspiracy (Plaintiff Against Defendant Officers)

105. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

106. The individual Defendant Officers, acting in concert with other known and unknown
co-conspirators, conspired by concerted action to accomplish an unlawful purpose by unlawful
means.

107. Each of the individual Defendant Officers took concrete steps to enter into an
agreement to unlawfully detain and arrest the Plaintiff, knowing they lacked probable cause to do
so, and for the purpose of violating Plaintiff’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

108. The individual Defendant Officers committed unlawful overt acts and were
otherwise willful participants in joint activity in furtherance of this conspiracy.

109. The individual Defendant Officers acted with malice, willfulness, and reckless
indifference to the rights of others.

38
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 39 of 47 PAGEID #: 39

110. Each individual Defendant is therefore liable for the violation of Plaintiffs’ rights by
any other individual Defendant.

111. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ conspiracy, Plaintiff suffered
damages, including severe emotional distress and anguish, as a proximate result of the individual
Defendants’ misconduct and conspiracy to engage in misconduct.

Count V – State Law Claim: Harrasment (Plaintiff against Defendant Officers)

112. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

113. The individual Defendant Officers’ conduct described above was extreme and
outrageous. The Defendants' actions were rooted in an abuse of power or authority. Defendants’
actions constituted harassment of Plaintiff in the workplace, either intentionally or by reckless
disregard of Plaintiff’s rights.

114. Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress as a direct and
proximate result of the individual Defendant Officers’ harassing behaviors and actions.

Count VI – State Law Claim: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (Plaintiff against
Defendant Officers)

115. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

116. The individual Defendant Officers’ conduct described above was extreme and
outrageous. Defendants’ actions intentionally caused Plaintiff to suffer from severe emotional
distress.

117. Plaintiff suffered, and continues to suffer, severe emotional distress as a direct and
proximate result of the individual Defendant Officers’ intentional actions.

Count VII – State Law Claim: Malicious Prosecution (Plaintiff against Relevant Defendant
Officers) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Malicious Prosecution in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth
Amendments (Against Defendants Officers)

118. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set
forth herein.

119. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides that: “Every person, who under color of any statute,
ordinance, regulation, custom or usage of any state or territory or the District of Columbia
subjects or causes to be subjected any citizen of the United States or other person within the
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the
constitution and law shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other
appropriate proceeding for redress . . .”
39
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 40 of 47 PAGEID #: 40

120. Plaintiff in this action is a citizen of the United States and all of the individual police
officer Defendants to this claim are persons for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

121. All individual Defendants to this claim, at all times relevant hereto, were acting
under the color of state law in their capacity as Newark police officers and their acts or
omissions were conducted within the scope of their official duties or employment.

122. At the time of the complained-of events, Plaintiff had the clearly established
constitutional right to be free from malicious prosecution without probable cause under the
Fourth Amendment and without due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.

123. Any reasonable police officer knew or should have known of these rights at the time
of the complained of conduct as they were clearly established at that time.

124. The Defendants made statements to prosecutors with the intent of exerting influence,
and to institute and continue the judicial proceedings against Plaintiff.

125. Statements of the Defendant Officers, including police reports, regarding the
Plaintiff’s alleged culpability were made with knowledge that said statements were false. The
Defendants fabricated police reports so as to bring charges against the Plaintiffs.

126. Individual Defendants violated Plaintiff’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights
to be free from malicious prosecution without probable cause and without due process when they
worked in concert to secure false charges against him, resulting in his unlawful confinement and
prosecution.

127. Individual Defendants conspired and/or acted in concert to institute, procure and
continue a criminal proceeding for the above described felonies against Plaintiff without
probable cause.

128. Defendants engaged in the conduct described by this Complaint, willfully,


maliciously, in bad faith, and in reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s federally protected constitutional
rights.

129. The procurement of prosecution against Plaintiff for allegations known to be false
were malicious, shocking, and objectively unreasonable in the light of the circumstances.

130. Those criminal proceedings terminated in Plaintiff’s favor. The prosecutor dropped
the charges without any compromise by Plaintiff, reflecting a prosecutorial judgment that the
case could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

131. The acts or omissions of all individual Defendants were moving forces behind
Plaintiff’s injuries.
40
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 41 of 47 PAGEID #: 41

132. These individual Defendants acted in concert and joint action with each other.

133. The acts or omissions of Defendants as described herein intentionally deprived


Plaintiff of his constitutional and statutory rights and caused him other damages.

134. Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity for the complained-of conduct.

135. The Defendants to this claim at all times relevant hereto were acting pursuant to
municipal/county custom, policy, decision, ordinance, regulation, widespread habit, usage, or
practice in their actions pertaining to Plaintiff.

136. As a proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered actual
physical and emotional injuries, and other damages and losses as described herein entitling him
to compensatory and special damages, in amounts to be determined at trial. As a further result of
the Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has incurred special damages, including medically
related expenses and may continue to incur further medically or other special damages related
expenses, in amounts to be established at trial.

137. On information and belief, Plaintiff may suffer lost future earnings and impaired
earnings capacities from the not yet fully ascertained sequelae of his closed head injury, in
amounts to be ascertained in trial. Plaintiff is further entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. §1988, as well as pre-judgment interest and costs as allowable by federal law. There
may also be special damages for lien interests.

138. In addition to compensatory, economic, consequential and special damages, Plaintiff


is entitled to punitive damages against each of the individually named Defendants under 42
U.S.C. § 1983, in that the actions of each of these individual Defendants have been taken
maliciously, willfully or with a reckless or wanton disregard of the constitutional rights of
Plaintiff.

139. The City of Newark has tolerated the misconduct of individual officers, described in
above, through its acts or omissions. These acts or omissions include, but are not limited to:

a. NPD officers/supervisors falsifying investigative reports;

b. NPD officers/supervisors not conducting proper investigations;

c. NPD officers/supervisors not filing reports based on complaints reported by its


officers regarding other officers/supervisors;

d. failing to implement a policy and appropriate guidelines for de-briefing and for
addressing mental health concerns and actions of individual officers;

41
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 42 of 47 PAGEID #: 42

e. failing to train NPD supervisors adequately to prevent the occurrence of


misconduct or inaction;

f. failing to supervise NPD supervisors adequately to prevent the occurrence of


misconduct; and

g. failing to supervise adequately and/or have policies in effect for its NPD
officers who have mental health issues or concerns and PTSD symptoms as a
result of events that have occurred in the workplace.

Count VIII – State Law Claim: Respondeat Superior (Plaintiffs against City of Newark)

140. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

141. In committing the acts alleged in this Complaint, each of the individual Defendant
Officers were members of, and agents of, the NPD, acting at all relevant times within the scope
of their employment.

142. Defendant City of Newark is liable as principal for the tortious conduct of the
individual Defendant Officers in violation of state law that were committed by them as agents of
the City of Newark.

Count IX – State Law Claim: Indemnification (Plaintiff against City of Newark)

143. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

144. In the State of Ohio, pursuant to O.R.C. Section 9.87, public entities are directed to
pay any reasonable judgment for compensatory damages for which employees are liable within
the scope of their employment activities.

145. The individual Defendant Officers acted within the scope of their employment in
committing the misconduct described herein.

146. Therefore, Defendant City of Newark is liable as their employer for any resulting
damages or award of attorney’s fees.

COUNT X – State Law Claim: Defamation (Plaintiff against Defendant Officers)

147. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

148. On or about July 25, 2017, Defendant Sgt. Bline gave a statement of facts report
(Report) to the Court and the Prosecutor, which he allowed to be publicized to the news media,
which was false, defamatory and misleading. (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 5)

42
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 43 of 47 PAGEID #: 43

149. Defendant Sgt. Bline made false and defamatory statements within his Report
regarding the Plaintiff.

150. By virtue of his investigation, Defendant Sgt. Bline knew some of the statements
contained within the Report were not based upon any fact, but pure conjecture and speculation.
Specifically, the last paragraph of his ten (10) page report stated that:

“The timing and the way the request was made raised some very real concerns after the
OHLEG violations …… [t]he Officer could alert the criminal that the raid was coming which
would allow the criminal to destroy evidence, move or even ambush officers.”

151. On September 21, 2017, ABC 6 news ran a story and published that Plaintiff had
been indicted on four counts of unauthorized use of law enforcement database. In addition the
story states:

“Findings in the investigator’s report conclude in three of the four violations, the
searches had no criminal purpose. The report also notes a concern when Officer
Angle requested to be put on the department’s Special Operations Group, a unit
where members are selected. Team members are said to know when a drug raid is
going to be conducted. The report says Officer Angles request, along with the
data base searches ‘raised some very real concerns. If an officer was providing
information to a criminal element then being on the SOG team would be a gold
mine.” That investigator adds, ‘the officer could alert the criminal that a raid was
coming which would allow the criminal to destroy evidence, move or even
ambush officers.” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit 10)

The Investigator’s report, as referenced in the ABC 6 news report, could only be
Sgt. Bline’s report, because it reiterates the last paragraph in said report that stated “[t]he
Officer could alert the criminal that the raid was coming which would allow the criminal
to destroy evidence, move or even ambush officers.” In addition, this was a pending
criminal case, as a result, there would be no other means for a news organization to
obtain this report.

152. On August 28, 2017, Sgt. Bline and Sgt. Eskins forwarded the entire
investigation conducted of the Plaintiff to the every member of NPD via Drop Box.
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 9) The drop box contained the entire case file that was given to the
Prosecutor’s office and to the grand jury earlier on August 24, 2017, (the day Plaintiff
was indicted). This drop box was distributed during a pending criminal case.

153. Despite having knowledge of the falsity of the statements regarding Plaintiff’s
alleged LEADS violations and his alleged alerting of criminals that a raid was coming which
would allow the criminal to destroy evidence, or move or even ambush officers; Defendant Sgt.
Bline nonetheless caused the publication of such statements to the news media and to Plaintiff’s
fellow officers within the NPD and administrators and employees of NPD.
43
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 44 of 47 PAGEID #: 44

154. Defendants false and misleading statements to the entire NPD and the news media
(public) were defamatory because such statements (1) falsely impute Plaintiff to have allegedly
committed multiple felonies from alleged LEADS violations and allegedly alerting of criminals
that a raid was coming which would allow the criminal to destroy evidence, or move or even
ambush officers; (2) based purely on speculation or conjecture; and (3) incompatible with
Plaintiff’s profession as a law enforcement officer.

155. The false and misleading statements made by Defendants to NPD and the news
media (public) were made with actual malice, that is, with knowledge that the statements were
false or with reckless disregard of whether the statements were false or not. Defendants could
have ascertained with the exercise of reasonable care that the publications were not true.

156. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s false and defamatory statements,
Plaintiff has (1) suffered harm to his reputation and standing in the community; (2) lost wages
and benefits; (3) lost any chance of a promotion to Sergeant; (4) suffered mental anguish and
distress; and (5) incurred other economic and non-economic damages in excess of $25,000.00,
the exact amount to be determined at trial.

COUNT XI – State Law Claim: Invasion of Privacy-False Light (Plaintiff Against Defendant
Officers)

157. Each paragraph of this Complaint is incorporated as if restated fully herein.

158. The actions and omissions of the City of Newark, through Defendant Sgt. Eskin and
Defendant Sgt. Bline placed Plaintiff before the public in a false light that would be highly
offensive to a reasonable person.

159. The City of Newark, through Defendant Sgt. Eskin and Defendant Sgt. Bline,
publicized the alleged LEADS violation and the allegation that Plaintiff would aid criminals to
destroy evidence, or help them move or even aid them in ambushing officers.

160. The City of Newark, through Defendant Sgt. Eskin and Defendant Sgt. Bline,
publicized an internal and criminal investigation of the Plaintiff to the entire NPD and news
media (public)

161. The City of Newark, through Defendant Sgt. Eskin and Defendant Sgt. Bline, acted
with reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which it had
placed Plaintiff.

162. The City of Newark, through Defendant Sgt. Eskin and Defendant Sgt. Bline, knew
or should have known that the publicized matter regarding the alleged misuse of LEADS and the
allegation that Plaintiff would aid criminals to destroy evidence, or help them move or even aid

44
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 45 of 47 PAGEID #: 45

them in ambushing officers would cause Plaintiff to be placed in a false and damaging light
within the community.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF:

Wherefore, Plaintiff requests that this Court grant the following:

i) As a proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has suffered actual


physical and emotional injuries, and other damages and losses as described herein
entitling him to compensatory and special damages, in amounts to be determined at
trial. As a further result of the Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has incurred
special damages, including medically related expenses and may continue to incur
further medically or other special damages related expenses, in amounts to be
established at trial;

ii) On information and belief, Plaintiff may suffer lost future earnings and impaired
earnings capacities from the not yet fully ascertained sequelae of his closed head
injury, in amounts to be ascertained in trial. Plaintiff is further entitled to attorneys’
fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988, pre-judgment interest and costs as
allowable by federal law. There may also be special damages for lien interests;

iii) In addition to compensatory, economic, consequential and special damages, Plaintiff


is entitled to punitive damages against each of the individually named Defendants
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in that the actions of each of these individual Defendants
have been taken maliciously, willfully or with a reckless or wanton disregard of the
constitutional rights of Plaintiff;

iv) Plaintiff seeks an order from this Court designed to fundamentally transform the NPD
operations related to policies and practices, accountability supervision, discriminatory
policing, training, data collection, and transparency, and ensure the NPD provides
officers with the comprehensive training and supportive resources that they need to
support officers who may be suffering from or show signs of PTSD;

v) An order and judgment granting reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1988;

vi) Plaintiff also seeks compensatory damages against all Defendants for the violations
alleged in this Complaint, in an amount in excess of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars
($25,000.00), the exact amount to be determined at the trial of this matter. Plaintiff
similarly seeks punitive damages against the individual Defendant Officers for all of
the violations alleged in the Complaint; and

vii) Grant such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.
45
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 46 of 47 PAGEID #: 46

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Joel R. Rovito


Joel R. Rovito 0064016
Attorney for Plaintiff, Jerad Angle
7538 Slate Ridge Blvd.
Reynoldsburg, Ohio 43068
Telephone: (614) 367-7655
Facsimile: (614) 367-7656
E-mail: Rovitolaw@gmail.com

/s/ James E. Southern


James E. Southern 0062521
Attorney for Plaintiff, Jerad Angle
7538 Slate Ridge Blvd.
Reynoldsburg, Ohio 43068
Telephone: (614) 577-1050
Facsimile: (614) 367-7656
E-mail: jimsolaw@gmail.com

Approved:

/s/ Jerad Angle


Jerad Angle, Plaintiff

DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff, Jerad R. Angle, by and through counsel, hereby respectfully requests a trial by

jury.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Joel R. Rovito


Joel R. Rovito 0064016
Attorney for Plaintiff, Jerad Angle

/s/ James E. Southern


James E. Southern 0062521
Attorney for Plaintiff, Jerad Angle

46
Case: 2:18-cv-00266-EAS-CMV Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/27/18 Page: 47 of 47 PAGEID #: 47

47

S-ar putea să vă placă și