My question involves civil rights in the State of: Ohio
My university harassed me from the years 2002 through 2014. From 2011 -- 2012, I was viciously harassed by an academic adviser. I threatened litigation. It appears that the university flagged me as a legal threat to the university police department, and now I am encountering harassment everywhere I go, including my current apartment complex. I have an abdundance of evidence including voice recordings and video recordings of threats, assaults and harassment. The police have provided admissions in my police encounters (deprived protection every time) that they are behind the harassment. This is 100% proven with the evidence I have (pretty much).
If I go to court and get to present my testimony -- with supporting evidence -- to the judge I will be able to prove, without a doubt, that the police are ordering people to do violence to me and harass me in order to protect my former university, retaliate against me, and ruin my life.
I need an immediate protection order but the court will not accept a John Doe defendant on a protection order. It looks like I can file for an injunction against a John Doe with my legal complaint but that is treated as an extraordinary remedy and the relief I need is a basic entitlement to all of mankind -- the right to be free of crime. This is not an extraordinary remedy, and I should not have to do an injunction. I need immediate relief.
So the question is -- who should I name as the respondent? I theorize that the head of the Police Department, that is the Chief of Police, or the commander in the separate district will have at the very least, authorized, or given the 'green light' for the officers to harass me with my landlord, employers, etc. Should I just name this person as the respondent and tell them to call off the attack or reveal the names of the guilty parties?
I've contacted the departments and they WILL NOT TALK but have made it clear they are involved, and that it is a 'department' matter (this is not the unlawful actions of a single officer). This suggests it would have the approval of the formal chief (and if he's giving the green light then he's the primary order giver or offender).
I need immediate relief. Please help...