I Believe I Was Unlawfully Detained

My question involves police conduct in the State of: Florida

The following is a copy of a complaint I have filed with a local police department. I have deleted the names of the department and the people involved. I believe the officer's actions were illegal. Can anyone help me with an opinion. I am meeting with a department detective tomorrow to relate my version of the incident.


On December 30, 2011, at approximately 3:00 pm, I met JW at 7928 Coral Street, just north of Miner Road. She was followed by ---- PD officer , to the upholstery repair business that is operated at that address from Bay 11. Ms. W is a close personal friend of mine, and she and I had visited this establishment several times prior to this date and reached an agreement with the owner, (J, who was not on scene at the time) to repair her driver’s seat. After having paid J $250 for the work he had performed the prior week, he and his assistant were refusing to release the last piece of upholstery (a correction of a mistake they had made)of W---’ they had unless she paid them an additional $100. W had called for police assistance, hoping that the matter could be resolved. Officer --- attempted to utilize a third party, a gentleman that had nothing to do with the transaction but was at another bay at the address, to try to arrive at a suitable compromise. This was unsuccessful, and tempers and voice levels escalated as both sides stated their claims. Officer -- took the position that the upholstery shop did not have to release the item until it was paid for. This did not seem fair, and both W and I told the officer that. He said we could talk to his Sergeant if we did not like his solution, and we agreed. He then radioed for his Sergeant to respond to the scene. At no time did we use any profanity or epithets. There were approximately 10 black males in close proximity either watching the proceedings or taking part in them. Finally, when I realized that we were not making any progress, I agreed to pay the $100 for the upholstery. Officer --- took the money and walked inside the shop, where he paid the worker. He came back with the piece of upholstery, a leather back of a car seat.


Since I felt that the situation had been resolved, though not as we would have liked, I told Officer --- that we were going to leave and that he could call his sergeant and cancel his response. He said “No, you called for him, now you have to wait and talk to him”. I said that wasn’t necessary, and we would just leave. He restated, “No, you’re not leaving, you have to stay and talk to the sergeant”. I stated one more time that we wanted to leave, and Officer --- told me we could not. I will point out that Officer --- was in uniform and armed, and had his hand on his holstered weapon as he ordered W and me to stay where we were and not leave. I then said, as long as we can’t leave, I want the seat back reinstalled in the car, as it had been taken out by the worker, and we had paid $100 more than the original agreement.

Shortly after we were ordered to stay, another --- PD vehicle arrived, driven by Sgt. ---. I started telling him my version of the events that had taken place, and when I was almost finished, Officer --- interrupted and began to tell his version. He related the chain of events fairly accurately, up to the point where he said “And then this woman (pointing at W) called that man a nigger”. Both W and I were shocked, as neither of us had ever used that word, or any other derogatory or inflammatory language during the entire time we were there. When we both adamantly denied his statement, Officer --- walked toward the shop with the open bay, where several of the local residents were gathered, and asked three or four times in a loud voice “Didn’t you hear her call you a nigger?” Each time he used the word, the group of black males appeared to become more agitated, and started yelling insults at W and me. It was obvious that none of them had heard us use this language, but with Officer --- repeatedly saying it, the atmosphere quickly turned dangerous. In the mean time, when W and I repeatedly stated we had never used that word, he called W a liar several times. I took exception to that, and told him so.

As the worker was installing the seat, and I was standing next to Sgt. --- and Officer ----, the shop owner, Javis, pulled up. He quickly exited his car, went in to talk to his worker, then came out and started shouting insults at W and me. He was yelling and jumping around, holding his crotch and telling me that “Your girlfriend showed up here last week with another fat man, and she was sucking his dick. You’re not enough man for her” and on and on with similar language. I looked at Officer ---- and saw a grin on his face, and I said, “You’re enjoying this, aren’t you,?” and he said, “Do you see me laughing?” and I said “No, but you’ve got a big grin on your face as this guy insults me as much as he can, obviously trying to start a fight, and you’re forcing me to stand here and listen to it”. He then said “You can go now” and I said I wasn’t going to leave W there alone with them. Finally, the seat was installed, and we left.


I now understand that the actual disagreement that took place between the shop owner and W and me was a civil matter, and the officer’s options were limited. I strongly believe, however, that the officer acted irresponsibly, and even illegally, when he forced us to remain at the scene, falsely claimed that W had yelled a racial epithet, nearly inciting a riot, and forced me to stand and listen to a long rant of personal insults from the shop owner, Javis. Remember, I had been ordered not to leave. At several points during the incident, I felt that we were in danger due to Officer --- reckless handling of an already tense situation. For the reasons cited above, I wish to make a formal complaint against Officer ---.










f

Okay. The officer may have inflamed the situation and almost certainly had no lawful right to detain you under the circumstances. You seem to have a valid complaint to make.

Was there something beyond that?

I agree that, according to your version of events, the officer did not handle the situation exemplarily and was wrong to detain you. Is that all you are looking for…verification that you have a valid reason to file a complaint? Or, do you have other questions?

BTW, what was the Sgt. doing while the officer was “nearly inciting a riot?”

I disagree. Although your version of events indicates that the officer could have and should have handled the situation differently I do not believe that you were improperly detained. YOU initiated the emergency call for police assistance and then elevated that call by requesting the presence of police supervisors. The officer had a reasonable ability to detain you until you have spoken with the supervisor that you requested. While I don't personally agree with the actions of the officers as you described, I do believe that they were protected in their detainment action against you.

The officer could easily explain that after attempting to handle the situation you demanded a supervisor which the officer called. You then decided to handle the situation differently. This could lead to an assumption that your initial statements were false giving rise to a charge for filing a false police report or frivilous use of the emergency response units. The officer then establishes the ability to detain you while the situation is investigated.

I agree that you were not unlawfully detained. The police do not exist to respond to your whims. When you requested the situation be escalated, you requested additional police response and should be required to remain for the response you requested.

A personnel complaint would still be the way to go. IF there was valid cause for the detention, then that would come out.

However, I do not see what you see. The sergeant had been requested by the OP because the OP did not like what the officer had to say. What suspicion of criminal activity on the OP's part is inherent in any of that? I do not see an investigation for making a false police report here. The OP and his friend called because the vendor would not release the seat. That's a pretty common sort of call, so hardly a false report unless there was no seat or the circumstances were completely fabricated which they do not appear to be.

The officer should have allowed the OP and 'W' to go. The detention appears to be unlawful.

cdw - I understand where you're coming from. I would not have handled it the way the officer did, but I still think that the police can articulate that they did have the ability to detain the OP until the supervisor arrived.The police had the ability to detain the subject until the supervisor responded because the OP excercised the advanced notification of emergency response units. Similar to if you called 911 and then decided you didn't need help anymore and just left. You could face liability for failing to remain until the emergency units that were requested arrived. The police could argue that they had similar cause to detain.

(I'm just playing the devils advocate on this one. I certainly think that it was handled wrong.)

Quote:

---

Quoting antrc170

---

cdw - I understand where you're coming from. I would not have handled it the way the officer did, but I still think that the police can articulate that they did have the ability to detain the OP until the supervisor arrived.The police had the ability to detain the subject until the supervisor responded because the OP excercised the advanced notification of emergency response units. Similar to if you called 911 and then decided you didn't need help anymore and just left. You could face liability for failing to remain until the emergency units that were requested arrived. The police could argue that they had similar cause to detain.

(I'm just playing the devils advocate on this one. I certainly think that it was handled wrong.)

---

Oh, I disagree. All because units are responding does NOT give rise to reasonable suspicion to detain the OP. Some articulation of criminal activity must exist - asking for a supervisor is administrative, not the reporting of criminal activity, and certainly does not presume that the OP is up to criminal activity as required by law.

For an investigative stop or detention to be valid, an officer must have "reasonable suspicion" that: (1) criminal activity may be afoot and (2) the person you are about to detain is connected with that possible criminal activity. (Wardlow (2000) 528 U.S. 119; Ornelas (1996) 517 U.S. 690, 695-696; Sokolow (1989) 490 U.S. 1, 7-8)

And a person who dialed 9-1-1 and then left would not, by itself, justify a detention either. If not for a valid purpose, it could certainly be a misuse of 9-1-1 (a misdemeanor in most states) but by itself dialing 9-1-1 does not give rise to reasonable suspicion for a detention nor does it mandate that a person remain on scene even if reporting a legitimate criminal offense.

antrc170, a couple points.


I do not see anywhere 911 services were utilized to request assistance either initially or when requesting the supervisor. They may have been but I do not believe it has been stated as such.

then, the OP requested a supervisor from an officer on the scene. That officer was in control of the scene. He could have terminated the call out at anytime with a simple radio call. The OP was not violating any law by leaving unless the officer on site had a valid justification to detain and since there were no crimes committed nor any suspicion of a crime, the officer on sight had no right to detain.

(Again, still playing devils advocate) The OP did mention that "tempers and voice levels escalated". The officer at the scene could claim that the OP was disturbing the peace.

Quote:

---

Quoting antrc170

---

(Again, still playing devils advocate) The OP did mention that "tempers and voice levels escalated". The officer at the scene could claim that the OP was disturbing the peace.

---

If this were one of my guys, I'd be all over them to study up on what constitutes reasonable suspicion and a lawful detention. This sort of action can cause the agency to lose a case or even get sued. Regardless of what bootstrap excuse the officer might come up with after the fact, if the incident is even half of what the OP describes it as, the detention was extremely weak at best, and entirely unlawful at worst. I suspect the latter.

Since the OP was told that the reason he had to stay was that he was being forced to stay and talk to the sergeant, and there appears to be no further investigation or even MENTION of some form of public disturbance as a crime, I don't think that this excuse would hold water and would be nothing more than a lame attempt by the officer to justify the unjustifiable.

The story as told indicates that the OP was detained solely to speak to the sergeant. Since not speaking to a police officer is hardly suspicion of criminal activity, there would appear to be no reasonable suspicion to justify any further detention.

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

If this were one of my guys, I'd be all over them to study up on what constitutes reasonable suspicion and a lawful detention. This sort of action can cause the agency to lose a case or even get sued. Regardless of what bootstrap excuse the officer might come up with after the fact, if the incident is even half of what the OP describes it as, the detention was extremely weak at best, and entirely unlawful at worst. I suspect the latter.

Since the OP was told that the reason he had to stay was that he was being forced to stay and talk to the sergeant, and there appears to be no further investigation or even MENTION of some form of public disturbance as a crime, I don't think that this excuse would hold water and would be nothing more than a lame attempt by the officer to justify the unjustifiable.

The story as told indicates that the OP was detained solely to speak to the sergeant. Since not speaking to a police officer is hardly suspicion of criminal activity, there would appear to be no reasonable suspicion to justify any further detention.

---

cdw - I completely agree. If the situation occurred as described I would be looking into serious discipline or termination. However weak the justification is, I am just presenting some possibilities. The reason given to the person has no bearing on the actual justification though. We both know that the police can and do lie to the public and suspects if it suits the immediate purpose of not escalating the situation. I've told people that the dispatch computer crashed, or that I read the wrong number the first time or some other b.s. while waiting for a ncic hit to be confirmed, etc.

Lying during the course of an otherwise lawful detention in order to preserve the peace is understandable. But, that does not seem to be the case here. I would not want to try and defend it, and I KNOW that some officers make dumb decisions out of ego rather than common sense. Such is likely the case here. The officer told them to stay because, darn it, he was in charge and wanted them to stay until his sergeant got there. Oops. Another case of the ego getting in the way of the law.

Yes, there might be a lawful justification for the detention, but it is not obvious from the story as told. And even trying to infer more into it, I find the justification would be weak at best no matter what the officer might claim. If this was indeed a civil issue then about all that is left to be said is: "Sorry, not much I can do, take them to small claims court. Have a good day."