12-Person Jury

FILED
2/6/2020 9:02 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DOROTHY BROWN
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION CIRCUIT CLERK
COOK COUNTY, IL
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

BERNARD KERSH, ) 2020L001518

)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
) Case No.
THE CITY OF CHICAGO, a Municipal )
Corporation; OFFICER JERALD ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
WILLIAMS (BADGE NO. 3317). )
)
Defendants. )

COMPLAINT AT LAW

Plaintiff, Bernard Kersh, by and through his attorneys, Action Injury Law Group LLC, and

Hart McLaughlin & Eldridge, LLC, complaining of Defendants The City of Chicago, a municipal

corporation, and Officer Jerald Williams (Badge No. 3317), states as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. On November 28, 2019, Officer Jerald Williams (Badge No. 3317) (“Officer

Williams”), utilized a mixed martial art (“MMA”) takedown and body-slammed Bernard Kersh

(“Mr. Kersh”), an unarmed 29-year-old African-American man, into the ground, cracking his head

on a concrete curb. Officer Williams was on duty as an officer with the Chicago Police Department

(“CPD”) when he body-slammed Mr. Kersh onto his head. As a result of Officer Williams’

conduct, Mr. Kersh sustained severe bodily injuries, including to his head, neck, shoulder, and is

in danger of going blind in his left eye, for which both Officer Williams and CPD are liable.

2. This incident is yet another example of the continuing injustice and maltreatment

of disenfranchised minority citizens by CPD officers.

1
 PARTIES

3. Plaintiff Bernard Kersh is a 29-year-old African American resident of the City of

FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

Chicago suffering from diagnosed mental illness.

4. Defendant City of Chicago is a municipal corporation created and authorized under

the laws of the State of Illinois. It is authorized under the laws of the State of Illinois to maintain

a police department, the CPD, which acts as the City’s agent in the area of law enforcement and

for which the City of Chicago is ultimately responsible.

5. Defendant Officer Williams was and, upon information and belief, is, a sworn

officer, employee, and agent of CPD. At all times material to the allegations made in this

Complaint, Officer Williams was acting within the scope of his employment with the City of

Chicago.

BACKGROUND

6. In December 2015, the U.S. Attorney General launched a broad civil rights

investigation into CPD’s policing practices. 1 The purpose of this investigation was (among other

things):

a. to determine whether the CPD is engaging in a pattern or practice of unlawful

conduct, and if so, what systemic deficiencies or practices within CPD, IPRA, and
the City might be facilitating or causing this pattern or practice. (Id., at 1);

b. to asses CPD’s use of force and address CPD policies, training, reporting,
investigations, and review related to officer use of force. (Id.);

c. to examine the CPD’s handling of incidents involving those in crisis, whether

related to addiction, trauma or mental health. (Id.).

1
DOJ Civil Rights Division and United States Attorney’s Office Northern District of Illinois, Investigation of
Chicago Police Department, at 4 (January 13, 2017).

2
 7. In January 2017, the U.S. Department of Justice released the results of its

investigation, finding a longstanding, pervasive “pattern and practice” of civil rights abuses by the
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

CPD. Among other conclusions, the U.S. Department of Justice concluded that:

a. the CPD engages in a pattern and practice of utilizing unreasonable use of force
that is perpetuated by CPD policies and practices. (Id., at p. 32);

b. the CPD’s pattern and practice of unreasonable force includes the use of excessive
force against people who present no threat. (Id.);

c. the use of unreasonable force to quickly resolve non-violent encounters is a

recurrent issue at CPD, including incidents in which CPD officers use retaliatory
force against people who object and claim that they were unlawfully stopped by
CPD. (Id., at 32-33);

d. the CPD has failed to achieve effective crisis intervention techniques to reduce the
need for force, including during incidents involving individuals with mental health
issues. (Id., at p. 37); and

e. the CPD’s de-escalation policies and trainings are deficient (Id., at p. 45-46).

8. In June 2017, The MacArthur Justice Center, Northwestern University School of

Law’s Bluhm Legal Clinic and the University of Chicago Mandel Legal Clinic formed a coalition

of attorneys, community organizations and plaintiffs and filed Campbell v. City of Chicago, a

historic class action lawsuit seeking federal court oversight of the CPD’s operations.

9. In August 2017, the Office of the Illinois Attorney General sued the City of Chicago

regarding CPD’s civil rights abuses. Both Campell v. City of Chicago and the Attorney General’s

lawsuits led to a Consent Decree, effective March 1, 2019 (“Consent Decree”). 2

10. The overall purpose of the Consent Decree was to “ensure that the City and CPD

deliver services in a manner that fully complies with the Constitution and laws of the United States

and the State of Illinois, respects the rights of the people of Chicago, builds trust between officers

2
http://chicagopoliceconsentdecree.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/FINAL-CONSENT-DECREE-SIGNED-BY-
JUDGE-DOW.pdf

3
 and the communities they serve, and promotes community and officer safety. In addition, [the

Consent Decree] seeks to ensure that the Chicago police officers are provided with the training,
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

resources, and support they need to perform their jobs professionally and safely. [The Consent

Decree] requires changes in the areas of community policing; impartial policing; [and] use of force

. . .” (Consent Decree at ¶ 2).

11. As part of the Consent Decree, the court appointed an Independent Monitor to

oversee the City of Chicago’s progress in meeting the Consent Decree’s requirements.

12. On November 15, 2019, about two-weeks before Officer Williams dangerously

body-slammed Mr. Kersh, the Independent Monitor released findings that the City of Chicago

failed to comply with the majority of the reforms set forth in the Consent Decree. 3 In particular,

the Monitor found that the City missed 37 of 50 agreed-upon deadlines, including failures to meet

“preliminary compliance”, which is simply defined as “creat[ing] a compliant policy.”

13. The Independent Monitor found that the City of Chicago failed to meet its

obligation under the following related Consent Decree provisions:

a. Community Policing: The Consent Decree set forth various guiding

principles to improve community policing, including “strong community
partnerships and frequent positive interactions between police and members
of the public . . .”; “. . . build and promote public trust and confidence in
CPD and ensure constitutional and effective policing, officer and public
safety . . .”; and “CPD will ensure that its community policing philosophy
is a core component of its provision of police services . . .”. (Consent
Decree, at ¶¶ 8-10). In 2017, the Community Policing Advisor Panel made
various related recommendations. (Id., at ¶ 13). The Independent Monitor
found the City has failed to even develop a plan for implementing these
recommendations. (Independent Monitoring Report, at p. 38).

b. Impartial Policing; “In conducting its activities the CPD will provide police
services to all members of the public without bias and will treat all persons

3
See “Independent Monitoring Report”, https://news.wttw.com/sites/default/files/article/file-
attachments/2019_11_15%20Independent%20Monitoring%20Report%201%20%28Filed%29.pdf

4
 with courtesy and dignity which is inherently due every person as a human
being without reference to stereotype based on care color ethnicity, religion,
In homeless status, national original immigration status, gender identity or
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

expression, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, age, disability,

incarceration status, or criminal history.” (Consent Decree, at ¶ 50). The
Internal Monitor found CPD did not achieve compliance at any level.
(Independent Monitoring Report, at p. 49).

c. Use of Force: CPD’s use of force policies are to include “de-escalation

techniques to prevent or reduce the need for force whenever safe and
feasible; when using force, CPD officers only use the force that is
objectively reasonable, necessary, and proportional under the totality of the
circumstances . . .”. (Consent Decree, at ¶ 153). The “CPD officer[s] have
the authority to use force, but that authority is limited by the law and
Department policy. The provisions of the [Consent Decree] seek to facilitate
compliance with the law and Department Policy regarding the use of force
to reduce the circumstances in which using force is necessary, and to ensure
accountability when CPD officers use force that is not objectively
reasonable, necessary and proportional under the totality of the
circumstances.) (Consent Decree, at ¶ 155). CPD failed to timely adhere
to 16 of the Consent Decree’s related “Use of Force” requirements.
(Independent Monitor Report, at p. 57)

FACTS

14. On November 28, 2019, at approximately 4:00 p.m., Officer Kerr (Badge No. 4871)

was driving westbound on East 79th Street in a white police SUV at the corner of East 79th St. and

South Cottage Avenue in Chicago, Illinois. Officer Williams was riding in the front passenger seat

of the white police SUV.

5
 15. Officers Kerr and Williams were in the left-hand turn lane when they suddenly cut

across two-lanes of traffic and pulled their white police SUV up to a bus stop such that they were
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

blocking both westbound lanes of traffic on East 79th St. (See Figure 1 below).

Figure 1

16. Officer Williams alleges that he witnessed Mr. Kersh drinking alcohol in the bus

shelter, exited the vehicle, went into the bus shelter, grabbed Mr. Kersh, and physically forced him

up against the white police SUV. Mr. Kersh was not armed, engaging in any threatening behavior,

or otherwise resisting. (See Figures 2 through 4 below).

Figure 2 Figure 3

6
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

Figure 4

17. As this incident was unfolding, Officer Kerr approached Officer Williams and Mr.

Bernard, evaluated the situation, and walked away from both individuals and towards the driver

side of the police vehicle to see whether Mr. Kersh had any outstanding warrants. Officer Kerr’s

actions confirm that Mr. Bernard was not resisting, threatening, or otherwise placing Officer

Williams or any third party in any physical danger. (See Figures 5 through 7).

Figure 5 Figure 6

7
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

Figure 7

18. Despite Mr. Kersh being unarmed and Officer Williams not being in any physical

danger, Officer Williams wrapped his arms around Mr. Kersh and body-slammed Mr. Kersh,

smashing his head into a concrete curb, and knocking him unconscious. (See Figures 8 through

10).

Figure 8 Figure 9

Figure 10

8
 19. In addition to being a sworn police officer of the CPD, Officer Williams is a trained

MMA fighter known as Jerald “Bacon and Eggs” Williams. Based on information and belief,
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

Officer Williams was trained to use similar maneuvers in the MMA setting. (See Figure 11

depicting Officer Williams in the blue shorts and body slamming an MMA opponent and Figure

12 depicting the similarities in the maneuver used on Mr. Kersh).

Figure 11 Figure 12

20. Despite Mr. Kersh being totally immobilized, unconscious, and having already

suffered severe head trauma, Officer Williams utilized a second MMA maneuver on Mr. Kersh –

a forearm strike to his head.

21. For a full 2 minutes following this vicious takedown, Officers Williams and Kerr

stood over Mr. Kersh’s unconscious body without providing any first aid before dragging his limp

body into another police vehicle. (See Figures 13 through 14).

9
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

Mr. Bernard’s
Mr. Bernard’s
unconscious
limp body
body

Figure 13 Figure 14

22. Video footage of this incident has been widely circulated on the internet.

23. Geoffrey Alpert (a criminology professor at the University of South Carolina)

reviewed and described Mr. Kersh’s behavior as cooperative, not a threat, and not resisting. He

further described the incident as “a routine situation that turn[ed] very ugly, very quickly" and

commented that Officer Williams’ maneuver “might be a good move in the [MMA] ring — [but]

it's certainly not a good move on the street . . . It’s not necessary to throw him to the ground. It’s

clearly an excessive takedown, and it’s not justified.” 4

24. City of Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot also weighed in on the video, stating that she

viewed video of “a Chicago Police Officer slamming an individual to the pavement,” which she

described as “very disturbing.” 5

25. After being body-slammed to the ground, striking his head on a concrete curb, being

knocked on conscious, and sustaining a forearm strike to the head, Mr. Kersh was charged with

4
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicago-police-officer-body-slams-man-caught-on-video-bernard-kersh-
interview-today-2019-12-18/
5
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/11/30/bernard-kersh-body-slammed-by-police-officer-charged-aggravated-
battery-resisting-arrest/

10
 one felony count of aggravated battery, one misdemeanor count of resisting arrest, one

misdemeanor count for assault, and issued a citation for drinking alcohol in public.
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

26. In an effort to conceal their misconduct, both Officers Williams and Kerr filed false

and misleading incident reports that are directly contradicted by the numerous videos depicting the

incident.

COUNT I – WILLFUL AND WANTON CONDUCT

Bernard Kersh v. City of Chicago

27. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set

forth herein.

28. On November 28, 2019, and at all relevant times, Defendant, the City of Chicago,

a municipal corporation, by and through its employee and agent sworn Officer Williams, had a

duty to refrain from willful and wanton conduct which would endanger the safety of others.

29. Notwithstanding its duty, the City of Chicago, by and through Officer Williams,

committed willful and wanton conduct exhibiting an actual or deliberate intent to harm, or through

a course of action which showed an utter indifference to or conscious disregard for the safety of

another, in one or more of the following respects:

a. removing Plaintiff from a place of safety on the sidewalk to an inherently

dangerous location in the middle of the street;

b. lifting Plaintiff off his feet and slamming his head onto the concrete;

c. striking Plaintiff in the face with his forearm while Plaintiff was
immobilized;

d. utilizing martial arts techniques learned through his MMA training to

takedown Plaintiff;

e. failing to use de-escalation techniques to prevent the need for force when it
was safe and feasible to do so;

f. using force as punishment and/or retaliation;

11
 g. failing to use force that was proportional to the actions and level of
resistance offered by Plaintiff;
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

h. subjecting Plaintiff to the use of force based on his race, ethnicity, and/or
mental health condition;

i. failing to provide Plaintiff with any care or aid after smashing his head into
a concrete curb;

j. violating Special Order S04-20 (April 25, 2018) - “Responding to Incidents

Involving persons in Need of Mental Health Treatment”; and

k. violating General Order G03-02-01 (October 16, 2017) - “Force Options”.

30. As a direct and proximate result of these willful and wanton acts and/or omissions,

Plaintiff sustained and will continue to sustain serious, permanent, and severe injuries, disability,

disfigurement, loss of normal life, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and the expense of past and

future necessary medical care, treatment, and services.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, BERNARD KERSH, prays for judgment in excess of $50,000

against the Defendant THE CITY OF CHICAGO, a municipal corporation, plus costs with interest

in bringing this action, and for such other relief this Court deems fair and just.

COUNT II – WILLFUL AND WANTON CONDUCT

Bernard Kersh v. Officer Jerald Williams (Badge No. 3317)

31. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-alleges Paragraphs 1 through 26 as though fully set

forth herein.

32. On November 28, 2019, and at all relevant times, Defendant Officer Williams, as

an agent, employee, and sworn officer of the City of Chicago, had a duty to refrain from willful

and wanton conduct which would endanger the safety of others.

33. Notwithstanding his duty, Officer Williams, as an agent, employee, and sworn

officer of the City of Chicago, committed willful and wanton conduct by exhibiting actual or

12
 deliberate intent to harm, or through a course of action which showed an utter indifference to or

conscious disregard for the safety of another, in one or more of the following respects:
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

a. removing Plaintiff from a place of safety on the sidewalk to an inherently

dangerous location in the middle of the street;

b. lifting Plaintiff off his feet and slamming his head onto the concrete;

c. striking Plaintiff in the face with his forearm while Plaintiff was
immobilized;

d. utilizing martial arts techniques learned through his MMA training to

takedown Plaintiff;

e. failing to use de-escalation techniques to prevent the need for force when it
was safe and feasible to do so;

f. using force as punishment and/or retaliation;

g. failing to use force that was proportional to the actions and level of
resistance offered by Plaintiff;

h. subjecting Plaintiff to the use of force based on his race, ethnicity, and/or
mental health condition;

i. failing to provide Plaintiff with any care or aid after smashing his head into
a concrete curb;

j. violating Special Order S04-20 (April 25, 2018) - “Responding to Incidents

Involving persons in Need of Mental Health Treatment”; and

k. violating General Order G03-02-01 (October 16, 2017) - “Force Options”.

34. As a direct and proximate result of these willful and wanton acts and/or omissions,

Plaintiff sustained and will continue to sustain serious, permanent, and severe injuries, disability,

disfigurement, loss of normal life, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and the expense of past and

future necessary medical care, treatment, and services.

13
 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, BERNARD KERSH, prays for judgment in excess of $50,000

against Defendant OFFICER JERALD WILLIAMS (Badge NO. 3317), plus costs with interest in
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

bringing this action, and for such other relief this Court deems fair and just.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury in this action on each and every one of his claims.

Dated: February 6, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

Action Injury Law Group, LLC

By: /s/ Andrew M. Stroth

One of the Attorneys for Plaintiff

Andrew M. Stroth
Carlton Odim
ACTION INJURY LAW GROUP, LLC
191 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2300
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Tel: (844) 878-4529
Fax: (312) 641-6866
FIRM ID: 59302
astroth@actioninjurylawgroup.com
carlton@actioninjurylawgroup.com

Steven A. Hart #6211008

Carter Grant #6306058
HART McLAUGHLIN & ELDRIDGE, LLC
22 West Washington, Suite 1600
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Tel: (312) 955-0545
Fax: (312) 971-9243
FIRM ID: 59648
shart@hmelegal.com
rmclaughlin@hmelegal.com
beldridge@hmelegal.com
cgrant@hmelegal.com
jprior@hmelegal.com

14
 FILED
2/6/2020 9:02 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DOROTHY BROWN
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION CIRCUIT CLERK
COOK COUNTY, IL
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

BERNARD KERSH, ) 2020L001518

)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
) Case No.
THE CITY OF CHICAGO, a Municipal )
Corporation; OFFICER JERALD ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
WILLIAMS (BADGE NO. 3317). )
)
Defendants. )

RULE 222(b) AFFIDAVIT OF DAMAGES

The undersigned verifies, pursuant to Rule 222(b), that the total damages sought by

Plaintiff exceed $50,000.00.

By: /s/ Andrew M. Stroth

One of the Attorneys for Plaintiff

Andrew M. Stroth
Carlton Odim
ACTION INJURY LAW GROUP, LLC
191 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2300
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Tel: (844) 878-4529
Fax: (312) 641-6866
FIRM ID: 59302
astroth@actioninjurylawgroup.com
carlton@actioninjurylawgroup.com

Steven A. Hart
Robert J. McLaughlin
Brian Eldridge
Carter Grant
Jack Prior
HART McLAUGHLIN & ELDRIDGE, LLC
22 West Washington, Suite 1600
Chicago, Illinois 60602

15
 Tel: (312) 955-0545
Fax: (312) 971-9243
FIRM ID: 59648
FILED DATE: 2/6/2020 9:02 AM 2020L001518

shart@hmelegal.com
rmclaughlin@hmelegal.com
beldridge@hmelegal.com
cgrant@hmelegal.com
jprior@hmelegal.com

16