Wrongfully Arrested, Violation of 4th Amendment

[L-1]

There are usually three sides to a story. In this case it would be the OP's, the Deputy's and the what really happened. We don't have the Deputy's version, so let's look at the OP's own words and try to extrapolate from there.

OP drove up in the middle of an incident in progress that was already being handled by law enforcement officers. The Deputy handling the matter apparently believed OP almost struck him with his vehicle, not only endangering him, but delaying, obstructing and interfering with the Deputy's handling of the police matter in question. It does not matter how close OP came to striking him, the Deputy perceived it to be a risk and interference. In response, the Deputy admonished OP about his driving and instructed him to get back in his car and leave the scene. Rather than comply, OP remained at the scene and attempted to engage the Deputy in a debate over how far he and his vehicle should move in order to be in compliance. This only served to further delay, obstruct and interfere with the Deputy in handing the initial incident. This is a crime in most states and OP was arrested for such.

I cannot comment on the conversation between personnel at the jail other than to suggest that one Deputy felt OP wase merely acting in Contempt of Cop, had been taught a lesson and should be kicked loose, while another still saw merit in the obstructing/delaying charge. This was merely a philosophical difference between professionals.

I don't see a big issue with the prosecutors rejection comments either. It says the arrest report was crappy. We get those periodically. When we do, and if we really want to pursue the matter, we send the package back to the arresting officer and where appropriate, have him write a supplemental report clarifying the issue or establishing whatever elements were missing. If the suspect is no longer in custody, everything is then resubmitted to the prosecutor, an arrest warrant is issued for the suspect and we go arrest him.

Remember, the Deputy does not have to be right to be right. He only has to have acted reasonably. In this case, did he have reason to believe OP's conduct obstructed, delayed or interfered with the initial incident he was involved in handling? If so, no harm, no foul.

But even if he was wrong somehow, OP - what were your $ losses? How much money did you lose because of this? You can can't get money for would have, could have, should have. It doesn't work that way.

[spokanedriver]

Lets say, for the sake of discussion, things are EXACTLY as I portrayed them. What can we, as the general public, do to protect ourselves from wrongful arrest then? If filing a complaint likely will do nothing and there is no financial consequences to the force, what are we to do?

[Harold99]

There are usually three sides to a story. In this case it would be the OP's, the Deputy's and the what really happened. We don't have the Deputy's version, so let's look at the OP's own words and try to extrapolate from there.

OP drove up in the middle of an incident in progress that was already being handled by law enforcement officers. The Deputy handling the matter apparently believed OP almost struck him with his vehicle, not only endangering him, but delaying, obstructing and interfering with the Deputy's handling of the police matter in question. It does not matter how close OP came to striking him, the Deputy perceived it to be a risk and interference. In response, the Deputy admonished OP about his driving and instructed him to get back in his car and leave the scene. Rather than comply, OP remained at the scene and attempted to engage the Deputy in a debate over how far he and his vehicle should move in order to be in compliance. This only served to further delay, obstruct and interfere with the Deputy in handing the initial incident. This is a crime in most states and OP was arrested for such.

"Extrapolate" in this instance could mean "how one officer tells another officer how to fill out an arrest report without ever asking the officer what happened."

Also, it would indeed matter how close the OP's car came to the deputy for a threat to be perceived because we expect and require a deputy's perception to be sound and reasonable. Police shoot people dead on the spot for that. His professional judgement better be spot-on.

These imaginary and scripted responses come from years on the force, and knowing how to answer questions to exonerate questionable arrests. Kinda gives me flashbacks.

[spokanedriver]

I am still pursuing this, trying to get some justice for what happened to me. What is, in my opinion, unjust. I understand their is never any guarantee, but I was put in jail overnight after agreeing to comply with the officers orders. I was unaware that I had entered their investigation area, being that the actions taken were approx. 300 meters from where I had my vehicle parked.

In my attempt to get the body cam and police report, this is the response I received from the Sheriff's office;
"After a search by SCSO staff no body cam footage was located. No additional responsive records were located for this request.

Upon review of the records you will note that some information has been redacted. An exemption log accompanies the redacted records identifying the reasons for and statutes relied upon in making each determination to redact.

This is the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office final and definitive response to this request. The file regarding this matter is considered closed."

Does this mean that I'm just out, or that I have to go another route? Can I put a complaint in for no body cam footage? The only recorded footage then is what I have on my cell phone.

**When I say pursue, I mean I am looking for the officers to be retrained on dealing with the public, a note on their file, something, ANYTHING, that at least makes them second guess their actions**

[cbg]

I am looking for the officers to be retrained on dealing with the public, a note on their file, something, ANYTHING, that at least makes them second guess their actions

Even if that happens/has happened, you will not be told. You are not entitled to know what action, if any, is taken against the officers.

[Taxing Matters]

Does this mean that I'm just out, or that I have to go another route? Can I put a complaint in for no body cam footage? The only recorded footage then is what I have on my cell phone.

**When I say pursue, I mean I am looking for the officers to be retrained on dealing with the public, a note on their file, something, ANYTHING, that at least makes them second guess their actions**

You may, of course, ask the sheriff to provide officers more training in the rights of the public or to take action against the officers for what you believe was a violation of your rights. Even if the sheriff does that, there is no guarantee the sheriff will disclose to you what was done. If you feel the sheriff has not been responsive you may support someone else for election to sheriff at the next election. You may also lobby your state legislative representatives to pass a bill that requires all peace officers in the state to get specific training in this area.

[RJR]

You point out that OP could only recover actual damages. So what is the point? A total waste of time.

Yes but this is a "False Arrest" claim. If defacto right, 1983 might only allow a nominal award IF facts justify it, however a government entity can not flip it's nose at a false arrest case due to no "actual damages", pain/suffering, loss of work etc. IF even a $1.00 is awarded, that opens the door for BIG punitive damages.

Police can't arrest, then release saying they lied, what can be done about it, sue us, you didn't lose any work, there were no hospital bills, etc. you won't get nuffin. Not so.

[cdwjava]

Does this mean that I'm just out, or that I have to go another route? Can I put a complaint in for no body cam footage? The only recorded footage then is what I have on my cell phone.

It seems that there is no body cam footage. You're going to complain because they do not have any? I suppose if the agency has a policy stating their officers MUST/SHALL use their recorders in any public contact there's grounds for a potential personnel complaint. Though, you may never find out the disposition of any complaint.

**When I say pursue, I mean I am looking for the officers to be retrained on dealing with the public, a note on their file, something, ANYTHING, that at least makes them second guess their actions**

As others have mentioned, you can't dictate the agency's actions and may not be informed of the disposition of any complaint in any event. All you can do is make the complaint and take it from there.

[budwad]

Yes but this is a "False Arrest" claim. If defacto right, 1983 might only allow a nominal award IF facts justify it, however a government entity can not flip it's nose at a false arrest case due to no "actual damages", pain/suffering, loss of work etc. IF even a $1.00 is awarded, that opens the door for BIG punitive damages.

Police can't arrest, then release saying they lied, what can be done about it, sue us, you didn't lose any work, there were no hospital bills, etc. you won't get nuffin. Not so.

Now address sovereign immunity. It's a waste of time and money perusing this.

[RJR]

Now address sovereign immunity. It's a waste of time and money perusing this.

SI does not apply.