-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
1/30
1
UNITED STATES COURT DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
TERRY THEDALE CAIN :3021 9th Street, SE :
DC 20032 : Civil Action No.:
:JAKWAN (A/K/A JAQUAN) BROWN:1142 Barnaby Terrace, SE :DC 20032 :
:ELLIE JAMES TURNER/BROOKS :1206 Barnaby Terrace, SE :DC 20032 :
:JAMES (CARTER)TURNER :62 Galveston Street, SW :
DC 20032 ::BRITTANI RONNICKA CARNEY :2104 Ridge Crest Courts, SE :DC :
:AAIRON JOHNSON :2584 Firth Sterling Ave. :DC 20020 :
:DON WHITAKER :1202 Barnaby Terrace :DC 20032 :
:ERIC BUTLER :1130 Barnaby Terrace, SE :DC 20032 :
:Plaintiffs : A JURY TRIAL IS DEMANDED
:v. :
:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA :A municipal corporation :Office of the Attorney General :441 Fourth Street, NW :Washington, DC 20001 :
:Serve: Designee
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 1 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
2/30
2
JOHN DOE MPD :CRUISER DRIVERS :Driver numbers 1 500 :
:Defendants :
COMPLAINT
INTRODUCTION
1) This law suit, brought under the Civil Rights Act, 42 USC section 1983, seeks
money damages for violations of the rights of the above referenced Plaintiffs
under the Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution via the
Fourteenth Amendment for unreasonable seizure, excessive deadly force and
violations of Due Process, as well as claims brought under the laws of the District
of Columbia, including common law claims for assault and battery, and
intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and negligence. It also
includes a claim for a FRCP 23 Class Action suit of this insular minority of young
black bikers, predominately male, who have been targeted with excessive and
deadly force by Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officers when these MPD
officers intentionally hit young black males with their MPD cruisers. This practice
is acquiesced to and condoned by the District of Columbia as well as by the
hierarchy of the MPD. This class action suit is filed against the District of
Columbia and the MPD officers who target young black bikers under color of law
with the tacit approval of the supervising officers of MPD. DC and the
supervisors of MPD knowingly fail to correct the unconstitutional behavior of its
MPD officers wherein they target said bikers with their cruisers under the color of
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 2 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
3/30
3
law. D.C. is liable for the conduct of its MPD officers under the theory of
respondeat superior.
PARTIES
2) Plaintiffs are a class of young black motorbike riders, primarily males, driving
motorbikes of 250 ccs or less. The definition of biker or motorbike driver for
purposes of this law suit includes two wheel motorbikes and all terrain vehicles
(ATVs) that include recreational vehicles often denoted as ATVs, 3 Wheelers
and 4 Wheelers of 250 ccs or less. There are two young black females in this
class whom the MPD mistook for a young black male rider; one young black
female that filed a 12-309 notice and another young black female that did not file
a 12-309 notice. The MPD is targeting these young bikers with deadly force, i.e.
intentionally hitting these bikers off their motorbikes with 250 ccs or less with
their MPD cruisers during the course of their work under color of law acting as
police officers.
3) The individual Plaintiffs include Terry Thedale Cain, JaKwan whose correct
spelling is JaQuan Brown who lives at 1142 Barnaby Terrace (not 1144), Ellie
James Turner Brooks whose correct name is Ellie James Brooks, James (Carter)
Turner whose correct name is James Turner, Brittani Ronnicka Carnery, Aairon
Johnson, Don Whitaker and Eric Butler. Their Declarations under oath are
herein incorporated by reference which have been previously been provided to
DC in docket # 09-2292 of this court and to DC s Office of Risk Management.
Said facts set forth the facts of their case and are incorporated by reference as if
fully set forth in this complaint. The above named Plaintiffs have attached their
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 3 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
4/30
4
respective Declarations in the Order in which they appear in the style of this
case.
4) The District of Columbia is a municipality and a governmental body within the
federal territory of the District of Columbia.
5) Defendants are the District of Columbia and numerous John Doe MPD
officers, whose names Plaintiffs will attempt to ascertain during discovery, who
drove MPD police cruisers and targeted young bikers with deadly force.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6) Subject matter jurisdiction is proper under 28 USC section 1331 and 1343 as
this suit arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States. Pendant
jurisdiction over the claims arising under District of Columbia law (state law
claims) is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1367.
7) Personal Jurisdiction is proper as all of the said collisions have taken place in
the District of Columbia.
8) Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1391 as all material and relevant acts and
inactions involving the collisions occurred within the District of Columbia, most
material witnesses and evidence may be found within the District or nearby, and
the Defendant is the District of Columbia.
9) The actions of which Plaintiffs complain violate Plaintiffs Constitutionally
Protected Rights and were taken under the color of law by MPD officers of the
District of Columbia and/or by the policies, procedures, customs or usages of the
District of Columbia and may be redressed pursuant to 42 USC 1983.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 4 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
5/30
5
10) Defendants violated Plaintiffs constitutionally protected rights, under the
Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, and the
laws of the United States, to be free from unreasonable search and seizure by
use of excessive force and to be free from deprivation of life or liberty without due
process of law.
11) This act of targeting an insular minority on a racial and class basis as a
system wide pattern and practice which is tolerated by and in some instances
encouraged by D.C. through the MPD is a violation of the Constitutional rights of
this insular minority class based on the holding in Monell v. Department of Soc.
Svcs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978).
FACTS COMMON TO ALL
12) Plaintiff restates and re-alleges each and every allegation set forth above as
if fully set forth herein.
13) The MPD has engaged in a practice of targeting young black bikers with
deadly force by intentionally striking motorbikes driven by young black bikers,
predominately males, with MPD cruisers.
14) The young black bikers invariably run from the scene after they have been hit
by MPD cruisers if they cant get away on their bikes and leave their bikes at the
scene of the collision.
15) The MPD officers take these motorbikes into custody. Ultimately these
motorbikes are either confiscated by individual police officers or sold by the MPD
and/or by D.C.s Department of Public Works , thus creating a revenue stream for
the District of Columbia. Most bikers would not give up their bikes voluntarily to
the police so that it is a fair conclusion that the vast majority of motorbikes
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 5 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
6/30
6
confiscated by the MPD or claimed as abandoned property are motorbikes that
come from bikers that have been hit off their bikes by MPD cruisers.
16) This unconstitutional act of targeting an insular minority of young black
motorbike drivers with deadly force is a discriminatory act of racial and class
profiling that is inherently unconstitutional and is exacerbated by the fact that the
respective bikers are being targeted intentionally with deadly force that can result
in serious injury or death. Consequently, this potentially deadly targeting of
young black bikers with MPD cruisers deprives this class of the rights to life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness. MPD knew or should have known that this
practice has persisted from at least 2009 and before because of the case of the
Estate of Arnell Robinson v. DC et. al., docket number 09-cv-2294 before this
Court. Furthermore, it should be obvious from the large number of motorbikes
taken into the storage facility of the MPD, usually Blue Plains.
17) The Plaintiffs identified in the style of this case have attached their
declarations under oath and are incorporated by reference to this Complaint.
These declarations set forth the facts of their individual claims.
18) These bikers who are filing suit, both on behalf of themselves and behalf of
the class are Terry Thedale Cain, JaKwan (a/k/a JaQuan) Brown, Ellie James
Brooks (Turner), Brittani Ronnicka Carney, James Turner, and Aarion Johnson
(hereinafter Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney, Turner and Johnson 12-309 notice
class) . Don Whitaker and Eric Butler (non notice class) are filing on behalf of
themselves and the class but they represent those that have the additional
element that they have not sent a notice to the District of Columbia pursuant to
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 6 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
7/30
7
DC Code 12-309. Their Declarations are attached herein and incorporated by
reference as the facts of their individual respective cases. Their declarations
under oath have been previously provided to DC and are incorporated herein by
reference. They are bringing their own individual actions in the event that their
class action claim does not survive judicial scrutiny.
19) Bikers set forth as individual bikers above, with the exception of Don
Whitaker and Eric Butler have given the District notice pursuant to DC Code
section 12-309 and have received acknowledgement of their claims from the D.
C. Office of Risk Management.
20) Defendant John Doe MPD cruiser drivers are jointly and severally liable to
the respective Plaintiffs involved in their individual collisions and are liable as part
of a pattern, practice and custom within the MPD to target young black bikers
with deadly force by hitting them off their bikes with their respective cruisers.
21) Defendant District of Columbia is liable to respective Plaintiffs as individuals
and as part of a class, under the doctrine ofrespondeat superior, for violations of
their respective rights.
22) Plaintiffs are seeking costs and reasonable attorneys fees in this action as
provided in 42 USC section 1988.
23) John Doe officers driving MPD cruisers are targeting said bikers with
deliberate and callous indifference to their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness
and with deliberate and callous indifference to their safety and health.
DAMAGES
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 7 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
8/30
8
24) As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendant John
Doe Police officers and Defendant D.C. as stated herein above and in each of
the Counts of this Complaint, Plaintiffs have suffered damages as follows:
a) Bikers have suffered an assortment of bodily injuries, pain and
suffering, disfigurement, inconvenience, mental anguish, disability, fright,
embarrassment, demoralization, deformity, discomfort, humiliation, degradation,
demeaned status and emotional distress.
b) Bikers have sustained damage to their vehicles, suffered loss of
income and other financial losses.
c) Some riders have incurred medical expenses in the treatment of their
injuries they sustained as a result of the deadly and dangerous acts of MPD
officers who target young black bikers.
d) Bikers have incurred costs and reasonable attorneys fees.
COUNT 1
FOURTH AMENDMENT UNREASONABLE SEIZURE
25) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
26) At all times DC and the MPD officers acted under the color of law.
27) On each and every instance set forth as attached herein, Defendants
intentionally used deadly force, i.e. used their police cruiser, as an object to strike
Plaintiffs which is tantamount to a traffic stop with potentially deadly force.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 8 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
9/30
9
28) The outrageous and intentional acts of the respective officers exhibit a
degree of malice to warrant punitive damages against said John Doe Drivers as
defendant John Doe DC cruiser drivers were targeting said bikers with deliberate
and callous indifference.
29) The conduct of these respective officers in targeting young black bikers is a
practice and pattern of the type that is customary and usual law enforcement
practice employed by many of the MPD officers in areas where young black
bikers drive motorbikes of 250 ccs or less drive their bikes. It is a pattern and
practice that is condoned and tacitly encouraged by the MPD.
30) The MPD and DC knew or should have known that such a practice is going
on by the large accumulation of abandoned motorbikes that occur after the police
attempt to apprehend the said bikers.
31) One of the motivations that the police had to continue this practice of
targeting said bikers is that DC and its officers sell these bikes which benefits
DC, the MPD and the individual officers where there is little to no accountability
regarding the sale of these bikes.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, i.e. Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney,
Turner, Johnson, Whitaker and Butler demand judgment against the District of
Columbia and respective John Doe police drivers in the amount of $200,000 in
actual damages for each of the said Plaintiffs and $500,000 in punitive damages
against each respective John Doe MPD driver individually and also join in the
class action as listed below in the class action count.
COUNT II FOURTH AMENDMENT: EXCESSIVE FORCE
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 9 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
10/30
10
32) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
33) At all times the MPD was acting under the color of law.
34) Defendant MPD John Doe drivers seized the respective bikers by targeting
them with their cruisers, struck them and knocked them off their bikes.
35) Such deadly force was clearly and objectively unreasonable in light of the
circumstances known to Defendants as they knew or should have known that
striking a young black biker with a cruiser could cause serious bodily harm or
death.
36) Such use of deadly force was out of proportion to the circumstances
presented by these respective bikers and class of bikers as the mere violation of
a traffic infractions or other relatively minor infraction does not justify the use of
deadly force.
37) At all times incident hereto, Plaintiffs were unarmed.
38) Defendant John Doe MPD officers outrageous intentional wrongful acts
exhibit the degree of malice that warrants punitive damages by their deliberate
and callous indifference to the safety and well being said bikers.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, i.e. i.e. Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney,
Turner, Johnson, Whitaker and Butler demands judgment against the District of
Columbia and respective John Doe MPD drivers in the amount of $200,000 in
actual damages for each of the said Plaintiffs and $500,000 in punitive damages
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 10 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
11/30
11
against each of the respective John Doe Defendant MPD cruiser drivers and also
join in the class action as listed below in the class action count.
COUNT III VIOLATION OF FIFTH AMENDMENT DUE PROCESS RIGHTS
39) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
40) At all material times Defendant John Doe MPD officers acted under the color
of law.
41) Plaintiffs have a right to be free from deprivation of life and liberty without due
process of law.
42) Defendants are targeting Plaintiffs with deadly force by knocking them off
their bikes by hitting the bikers with their police cruisers which amounts to
unreasonable governmental interference with Plaintiffs rights to life and liberty.
43) Defendant MPD Officers outrageous, intentional and wrongful acts exhibit a
degree of malice to warrant punitive damages against the John Doe MPD drivers
because of their deliberate and callous indifference to the safety and health of
said bikers.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, i.e. Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney
Johnson, Turner, Whitaker and Butler demands judgment against the District of
Columbia and respective John Doe police drivers in the amount of $200,000 in
actual damages for each of the said Plaintiffs and $500,000 in punitive damages
against each of the respective John Doe drivers for each of the said respective
Plaintiffs and also join in the class action as listed below in the class action count.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 11 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
12/30
12
. COUNT IV
1983 MONELL CLAIM FOR VIOLATIONS OF FOURTH AND FIFTH
AMENDEMENT
44) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
45) DC through its MPD Officers, violated the bikers Fourth and Fifth Amendment
Rights.
46) At all times incident hereto, the respective MPD officers who targeted these
bikers acted under the color of law.
47) At all times relevant to the instant lawsuit, it was the policy, practice and
custom of Defendant DC and its MPD Officers to encourage and permit officers
on patrol in their vehicles to intimidate and target young black bikers with their
police cruisers in an effort to dislodge the bikers from their bikes.
48) Invariably the biker would flee the scene leaving their bikes in the vicinity of
the respective pursuing police cruiser.
49) Since the bikers have abandoned their vehicles by running from the police,
the sale of these bikes by the D.C. government and confiscation for the personal
use of these bikes by friends of MPD officers and/or the subsequent sale to
unaccounted purchasers, provides a lucrative source of income to generate
revenues for the District and/or the individual police officers who obtained
possession of these bikes.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 12 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
13/30
13
50) These practices and customs employed by the MPD Officers were common
place and were knowingly or tacitly condoned and encouraged by supervisors
within the MPD.
51) At all times relevant to the instant lawsuit, it was the policy, practice and
custom of Defendant D.C. endemic to the MPD, to condone abuses of police
power by its officers including but not limited to the type of abuse of knocking
bikers off their bikes with MPD cruisers due to supervisor inaction and failure to
investigate and pursue reports of unlawful seizures and use of excessive force,
and failure to deter such behavior by its agents through failing to properly train,
reprimand, suspend or dismiss said MPD officers who target young black bikers
with deadly force.
52) At all times relevant to the instant lawsuit, it was the practice and custom of
Defendant D.C., endemic to its MPD, to fail to train and discipline its officers,
creating a situation where its unfit, untrained and undisciplined officers were
certain to violate the constitutional rights of bikers in DC through unreasonable
seizures, use of excessive force, and deprivation of due process of the law,
without fear of consequences.
53) The above described polices and customs demonstrate a deliberate and
callous indifference on the part of policy makers of Defendant DC to deny the
constitutional rights of bikers and said polices and customs are the direct and
proximate cause of the violations of plaintiffs Constitutional rights being violated
as alleged herein.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 13 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
14/30
14
54) Defendant DC and its agents adhered to the aforementioned policies,
practices and customs intentionally, and with deliberate indifference to the
obvious eventuality that bikers would be deprived of their Fourth and Fifth
Amendment constitutional rights in the manner described in these Counts herein
(unlawful seizures and uses of excessive force.)
55) As a result of improper training by Defendant D.C., Defendant MPD officers
were incapable to do their jobs without violating the constitutional rights of bikers.
DC allowed its MPD officers to exercise their jobs without providing them proper
training with respect to the constitutional rights of young motorcyclists, with
deliberate and callous indifference to the fact that they were almost certain to
violate the constitutional rights of bikers.
56) While this dangerous practice of targeting young black males continues
unabated, none of the MPD officers are sanctioned for their violations of civil
rights and are often promoted to higher levels of the MPD. Furthermore,
whenever infractions of police misconduct regarding knocking a biker off a bike
with a cruiser is exposed to public scrutiny, the MPD close ranks and place the
errant officer behind the veil of the blue wall of silence and said MPD officers
cover for their errant officers by covering up their misdeeds.
57) As the direct and proximate result of the official and unofficial policies,
procedures, customs, usages and practices of Defendant, D.C., Defendant D.C.
is directly liable under 1983 for the violations of Plaintiffs Constitutional rights.
58) As a direct and proximate result of the above described polices and customs,
the bikers suffered damages described in the damages section of this complaint.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 14 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
15/30
15
59) Defendant D. C. drivers outrageous, intentional, reckless, grossly negligent
unconstitutional and wrongful acts exhibit a degree of malice to warrant punitive
damages.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, e.g. Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney,
Turner, Johnson, Whitaker and Butler demands judgment against the District of
Columbia and respective John Doe police drivers in the amount of $200,000 in
actual damages for each of the said Plaintiffs and $500,000 in punitive damages
against each respective John Doe MPD driver and also join in the class action as
listed below in the class action count.
Wherefore, since this deadly practice of targeting young black bikers with
MPD cruisers is clearly excessive force under the Fourth and Fifth Amendment of
the Constitution; this practice needs to stop; and DC and the MPD has shown no
ability to stop said practice and that, in fact, they are profiting from this practice,
Plaintiffs as a class demand $100,000,000.00 ($100 Million Dollars) in damages.
Wherefore, since this has been on ongoing practice in the District of
Columbia for years and it must stop immediately, Plaintiffs pray for an Order from
this Court demanding that the MPD cease and desist from the practice knocking
young black bikers off their motorbikes with their cruisers regardless of the traffic
infraction unless deadly force would otherwise be necessary.
Wherefore, Plaintiffs also pray for an Order to D.C. to instruct MPD to
exclude MPD candidates who are be inclined to target young black bikers and
knock them off their bikes and to train its MPD officers not to target drivers of
motorbikes with their police cruisers.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 15 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
16/30
16
Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for Judgment awarding Plaintiffs their costs and
reasonable attorney fees in this action as provided in 42 U.S.C. sec. 1988 and
damages as the presentation of the evidence justifies.
STATE LAW CLAIMS
COUNT V NEGLIGENCE
60) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
61) Defendant DC and its MPD officers had a duty to operate their motor vehicles
in a careful and prudent manner and not target individual bikers on the basis of
race and class and use deadly force to knock young black bikers off their bikes.
62) Defendant DC and its MPD officers had a duty to obey all applicable traffic
regulations, laws, signs and signals, especially in non-emergency situations.
63) Notwithstanding the above referenced duties, and in the breach of such
duties, Defendant John Doe drivers negligently and carelessly failed to operate
their motor vehicles in a careful and prudent manner, and negligently and
carelessly failed to yield the right of way to Plaintiffs but instead targeted said
Plaintiffs.
64) Notwithstanding the above referenced duties, and in breach of such duties,
Defendant John Doe drivers negligently, recklessly, carelessly and without due
care failed to obey all applicable traffic regulations, laws, and instead targeted
young black bikers with deadly force.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 16 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
17/30
17
65) Said named Plaintiffs were injured and suffered humiliation and degradation
and were demeaned at the hands of the MPD in violation of Plaintiffs
Constitutional rights.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney, Turner,
Johnson, Whitaker and Butler demand judgment against the District of Columbia
and respective John Doe police drivers in the amount of $200,000 in actual
damages and $500,000 in punitive damages against each respective John Doe
Defendant driver and also join in the class action as listed below in the class
action count.
COUNT VI ASSAULT
66) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
67) At all times material hereto, the said MPD officers acted within the course
and scope of his employment as a servant and/or employee of Defendant D.C.
68) Said MPD Officers drove their cruisers in a manner that intentionally and
unlawfully assaulted Plaintiff by swerving their cruisers into the motorbikes driven
by Plaintiffs.
69) All such damages were solely and proximately caused by the intentional
actions of said MPD officers and the District of Columbia.
70) D. C. by its actions and failure to train such officers contributed to the
proliferation of its MPD officers targeting young black bikers with their MPD
cruisers.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 17 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
18/30
18
71) At all times during which these tortuous and unconstitutional acts were being
committed by the MPD officers, said MPD officers were acting within the scope of
their employment.
72) The Defendant DC is liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior for the
aforesaid tortuous acts and omissions of Defendant D.C.
73) Said motorbike Plaintiffs were harmed in their body, humiliated, demeaned
and degraded as a result of being targeted with deadly force by said MPD
officers and said conduct was condoned by the Defendant DC.
74) Damages sought under this count are proper pursuant to District of Columbia
law.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney, Turner,
Johnson, Whitaker and Butler, i.e. demands judgment against the District of
Columbia and respective John Doe police drivers in the amount of $200,000 in
actual damages for each of the said Plaintiffs and $500,000 in punitive damages
against John Doe Defendants and also join in the class action as listed below in
the class action count.
COUNT VII BATTERY
75) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
76) At all times material hereto, Defendant MPD Officers acted within the course
and scope of his employment as a servant and/or employee of Defendant DC.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 18 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
19/30
19
77) Said MPD officers intentionally battered Plaintiffs by targeting them with their
respective cruisers with deadly force.
78) As a result of these collisions the said bikers were injured in body and were
humiliated and degraded by the use of official power directed towards Plaintiffs
on a racial and class basis.
79) All such damages suffered by Plaintiffs were the direct and proximate cause
of the collisions.
80) Defendant DC is jointly and severally liable under the doctrine of respondeat
superiorfor the aforementioned tortuous acts and omissions against Plaintiffs.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney, Turner,
Johnson, Whitaker and Butler demand judgment against the District of Columbia
and respective John Doe police drivers in the amount of $200,000 in actual
damages for each of the said Plaintiffs and $500,000 in punitive damages
against each respective John Doe MPD driver and also join in the class action as
listed below in the class action count.
.
COUNT VIII INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
81) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
82) At all times material hereto, the MPD Officers who targeted these young
black bikers with deadly force acted within the course and scope of their
employment as a servant and/or employee of Defendant D.C.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 19 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
20/30
20
83) Defendant MPD officers drove their respective cruisers in a manner to target
young black bikers in order to cause intentional infliction of emotional distress
causing extreme fear, apprehension and emotional distress.
84) Defendant MPD officers, by targeting these respective biker Plaintiffs, did
cause extreme emotional distress, fear and apprehension.
85) Defendant MPD officers enjoy targeting these young black bikers as if it were
target shooting and/or sport.
86) As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants intentional targeting
Plaintiffs with their motorbikes with deadly force, Plaintiffs have suffered
damages of body and humiliation and degradation.
87) All such damages were proximately and solely caused by the intentional
actions of Defendant MPD officers with the acquiescence and being condoned by
D.C. and the supervisors of the MPD.
88) Defendant D.C. is jointly and severally liable under the doctrine ofrespondeat
superiorfor the aforementioned tortuous acts and omissions of D.C. of said MPD
officers.
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney, Turner,
Johnson, Whitaker and Butler demands judgment against the District of
Columbia and respective John Doe police drivers in the amount of $200,000 in
actual damages and $500,000 in punitive damages against each respective
John Doe MPD driver and also join in the class action as listed below in the class
action count.
COUNT XI (DEFENDANT D.C.) NEGLIGENT HIRING AND TRAINING
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 20 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
21/30
21
89) The individual Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and on behalf of their class
restates and allege each and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set
forth.
90) At all times relevant herein, the respective MPD officers who have targeted
young black male motorbike drivers, were employees, agents and/or servants of
D.C. and acted under the direction and control of, and pursuant to the statutes,
rules, regulations, policies, and procedures of Defendant D.C.
91) Defendant D.C. had a duty, through performance of reasonable inquiry, to
hire as police officers, only such individuals who were capable of appreciating the
rights of citizens of the District of Columbia afforded by the United States
Constitution, and to refrain from hiring individuals unfit or unable to enforce the
Districts police powers within Constitutional boundaries.
92) Defendant D.C. had a duty to refrain from retaining, i.e. a duty to suspend
and dismiss, those officers who demonstrate lack of capacity to appreciate the
rights of citizens of the District of Columbia afforded by the United States
Constitution, and to suspend and dismiss individuals unfit or unable to enforce
the Districts police powers within constitutional boundaries.
93) Defendant D.C. had a duty to train Defendant Police officers to effect
searches and seizures within the bounds of the Unites States Constitution, and
not in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of said Constitution.
94) Defendant D.C. had a duty to supervise Defendant John Doe drivers to
ensure that his actions were in conformity with the United States Constitution.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 21 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
22/30
22
95) In breach of the aforementioned duties set forth herein, Defendant D.C.
hired Defendant MPD officers, without inquiring into whether or not these officers
were capable of appreciating the rights and citizens of the District of Columbia
afforded by the United States Constitution, when in fact, these officers were unfit
and unable to enforce the Districts police powers within the boundaries of the
United States Constitution.
96) In breach of the aforementioned duties, the MPD failed to suspend and
dismiss officers who the District knew or should have known were violating the
Constitutional Rights of its citizens by unlawful searches and seizure that
involved excessive force by targeting young black bikers with excessive force in
order to knock said bikers off their motorbikes.
97) In breach of the aforementioned duties set forth herein, Defendant D.C. failed
to train said MPD officers to effect searches and seizures within the bounds of
the United States Constitution, and not in violation of the Fourth and Fifth
Amendments of said Constitution.
98) In breach of the aforementioned duties set forth herein, Defendant D.C. failed
to supervise Defendant MPD officers to ensure that their actions were in
conformity with the United States Constitution.
99) As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant D.C. with
respect to its negligent hiring, retention, training and supervision of its errant
MPD officers, the Plaintiffs suffered harm to their bodies, humiliation and
emotional distress and a loss of their freedoms guaranteed to them under the
Constitution.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 22 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
23/30
23
Wherefore each individual Plaintiff, Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney, Turner,
Johnson and Whitaker demands judgment against the District of Columbia and in
the amount of $200,000 in actual damages and also join in the class action as
listed below in the class action count.
Wherefore, since this deadly practice of targeting young black bikers with
MPD cruisers is clearly excessive force under the Fourth and Fifth Amendment of
the Constitution; this practice needs to stop; and DC and the MPD has shown no
ability to stop said practice and that, in fact, they are profiting from this practice,
Plaintiffs as a class demand $100,000,000.00 in damages.
Wherefore, since this has been an ongoing practice in the District of
Columbia for years and it must stop immediately, Plaintiffs pray for an Order from
this Court demanding that the MPD cease and desist from the practice knocking
young black bikers off their motorbikes with their cruisers regardless of the traffic
infraction unless deadly force would otherwise be necessary.
Plaintiffs also pray for an Order to D.C. to instruct and train its MPD
officers not to target drivers of motorbikes with their police cruisers.
Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for Judgment awarding Plaintiffs their costs and
reasonable attorney fees in this action as provided in 42 U.S.C. sec. 1988.
CLASS ACTION PURSUANT TO RULE 23
100) The aforementioned Plaintiffs, Cain, Brown, Brooks, Carney, Turner,
Johnson, Whitaker and Butler, on behalf of their class restates and allege each
and every allegation as set forth above as if fully set forth. Plaintiffs asserts that
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 23 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
24/30
24
there is a pattern and practice in the District of Columbia whereby the MPD is
targeting an insular category of people based on race and class with deadly
force.
101) Plaintiffs further assert that the method by which the MPD is targeting this
insular class is by hitting these young black bikers with their MPD cruisers under
the color of law. Plaintiffs further assert that the MPD is targeting particularly
poor geographic areas in D.C. This way, the MPD can target young black
bikers, most often males, with deadly force with impunity. This class includes
young black bikers, predominately male ones, who drive motorbikes of 250 ccs
or less in the District of Columbia in the poorer areas of town. Targeting poorer
areas in which poor young black bikers are concentrated conceals the MPD
predisposition to target these bikers based on MPD racial and class animus.
102) Almost to the person, a motorbike driver will not voluntarily give up their
motorbike to a police officer.
103) Yet, the District of Columbia has sold a large number of these motorbikes
that have been abandoned or confiscated by the police as a result of targeting
young black bikers with their cruisers, i.e. deadly force, which money goes into
District of Columbia or under that table to those who have control over said bikes.
104) There is a record by the D.C. Inspector General of opportunity for fraud and
abuse in the sale of abandoned cars and trucks that is documented the DC
Inspector General reports.
105) But the same scrutiny has not occurred with respect to abandoned or
confiscated bikes. There appears to be a different procedure for the sale of
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 24 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
25/30
25
these motorbikes going through the MPD as opposed to the public works
department. This procedure needs to be flushed out during discovery. Thus, the
ones who are confiscating the bikes are the same ones who have control over
the sale of the bikes. This creates a large potential for fraud and abuse. Thus,
DC and its MPD have a motivation to continue the practice of knocking young
black bikers off their bikes.
106) It appears that the District of Columbia and the MPD have engaged in a
pattern of making money from these confiscated bikes.
107) Since these smaller bikes are not registered and they appear to be
abandoned when the biker runs after being hit by the MPD cruiser, this leaves an
enormous opportunity to exploit their financial gain by selling these bikes.
108) Each time that a motorbike is abandoned or confiscated, a form PD 81 must
be filed.
109) In other litigation pending before this court, i.e. DC Docket number 09-2294,
at the time of the filing of this complaint, the MPD and DC have refused to
provide the PD 81s for the abandoned bikes which MPD has taken pursuant to
this practice of knocking young black bikers of their bikes.
110) There is a line on the MPDs PD 81 form for how much the motorbike is sold
for. The MPD and DC have not been held to account for the disposition of these
bikes as they are not easy to trace.
111) The above referenced plaintiffs have filed notice to the District pursuant to
12-309 with the exception of Don Whitaker and Eric Butler. However, it is
impractical to require all members of this class to do so. Requiring the traditional
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 25 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
26/30
26
12-309 notice will only serve to perpetual the practice of targeting young black
bikers with deadly force with impunity and will perpetuate the deprival of Plaintiffs
Constitutional Rights.
112) The above Plaintiffs represent a small proportion of bikers who have been
knocked off bikes in that DC requires a six month notice of the collision as a
prerequisite to filing suit.
113) This instant law suit is necessary to end the ongoing DC practice of
acquiescing to and condoning the practice of MPD officers targeting young black
bikers with deadly force by knocking young bikers off their motorbikes.
114) Plaintiffs allege that this practice of knocking young black bikers off their
bikes by police cruisers, while falling outside the six month notice period, has
persisted for a long time.
115) Plaintiffs have over 200 Declarations of bikers who have been hit by MPD
cruisers during a long period of time, most of which do not fall within the sixth
month notice 12-309 time frame.
116) The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impractical.
117) There are questions of law or fact common to the class.
118) The representatives of the parties will fairly and adequately protect the
interests of the class.
119) Inconsistent or varying adjucations with respect to individual class
members would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the party
opposing the case.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 26 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
27/30
27
120) Common questions of law and fact predominate over any questions
affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superior to other
methods for fairly and efficiently adjucating the controversy.
121) In most instances where young black bikers have been knocked off their
bikes by MPD cruisers driven by MPD officers acting under color of law, there are
insufficient medical bills to justify a personal injury case that is too expensive to
litigate without proper documentation.
122) This class case is a pure Model practice and usage suit that focuses on the
MPDs practice of targeting young black bikers with their cruisers under color of
law. This count is less concerned about the amount of the damage to either the
bike or to the respective plaintiffs personal injuries rather than the individuals
right to be free from excessive force which deprives the Plaintiffs of their
Constitutional Right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness without due process
of law.
123) This practice has already resulted in the death of at least one young black
male biker that is presently before this Court, e.g. docket # 09 2294.
124) The case brings to light a practice of depriving the disenfranchised and
outcast of their constitutional rights and targeting them with deadly force within
the District of Columbia that would not otherwise come to the attention of this
Court because most bikers run from the scene. In those cases where the injuries
are substantial and the biker is taken to the hospital, individual cases are filed.
So, this pattern and practice of targeting young black males with deadly force, i.e.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 27 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
28/30
28
cruiser collisions, has yet to be scrutinized by this court as part of a system wide
pattern and usage.
125) There is an urgency to hold DC and the MPD liable for their conduct of
racial and class profiling of young black bikers, as this dangerous and deadly
practice continues to persist.
126) Foreclosing the litigants who do not have the six month 12-309 notice letters
will perpetuate the practice of knocking young black males off motorbikes.
127) Since this case involves the constitutional rights to be free from excessive
deadly force under the United States Constitution, it is unreasonable to require
the litigants of this class to comply with a burdensome state law of D.C. Code 12-
309. Furthermore, the conduct of the MPD is a violation of this insular class of
US citizens, most of whom are DC residents, of their Constitutional rights to be
free from unlawful seizures and excessive force in which DC, by its condoning
and acquiescing to the MPD practice of targeting young black bikers with deadly
force, and deprives to this class their Constitutional Rights under the Fourth and
Fifth Amendments to be free from unwarranted excessive and deadly force under
the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.
128) Thus, this class should be open to all litigants who have suffered at the
hands of the MPD for being targeted with excessive and deadly force, i.e.
intentionally hit with MPD cruisers, and not be limited to those who have filed a
12-309 notice with the District of Columbia as a local statute cannot burden those
inalienable rights belonging to US citizens under the Constitution.
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 28 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
29/30
29
Wherefore, since this deadly practice of targeting young black bikers with
MPD cruisers is clearly excessive force under the Fourth and Fifth Amendment of
the Constitution; this practice needs to stop; DC and the MPD have shown no
ability to stop said practice and that, in fact, they are profiting from this practice,
Plaintiffs as a class demand $100,000,000.00 in damages.
Wherefore, since this has been on ongoing practice in the District of
Columbia for years and it must stop immediately, Plaintiffs pray for an Order from
this Court demanding that the MPD cease and desist from the practice knocking
young black bikers off their motorbikes with their cruisers regardless of the traffic
infraction unless deadly force would otherwise be necessary.
Plaintiffs also pray for an Order to D.C. to instruct and train its MPD
officers not to target drivers of motorbikes with their police cruisers.
Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for Judgment awarding Plaintiffs their costs and
reasonable attorney fees in this action as provided in 42 U.S.C. sec. 1988 and
such damages as the evidence dictates.
A JURY TRIAL IS DEMANED
Submitted by:
______________/s/______________________David L. Shurtz
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 29 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice
-
8/22/2019 Class Action Suit Against D.C.P.D. For Use of Deadly Force Against Bikers
30/30
Attorney at Law1200 North Nash Street, # 835
Arlington, VA 22209(202) [email protected]
Case 1:13-cv-01103-JEB Document 1 Filed 07/19/13 Page 30 of 30
Courthou
seNewsS
ervice