Warning: mysql_fetch_assoc() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php on line 5

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 546

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 547

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 548
US TX: Police Deny Lawsuit Claims - Rave.ca
Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
Anonymous
New Account
Forgot Password
News (Media Awareness Project) - US TX: Police Deny Lawsuit Claims
Title:US TX: Police Deny Lawsuit Claims
Published On:2000-07-18
Source:Longview News-Journal (TX)
Fetched On:2008-09-03 15:48:48
POLICE DENY LAWSUIT CLAIMS

TYLER - A Kilgore Police Department investigator has denied that
he recklessly linked an innocent Dallas man to a 1997 drug buy in
eastern Smith County, setting off a chain of events that led to the
man being wrongfully jailed for three months in 1999.

In a July 10 answer to a federal civil suit filed by Henry Earl Clark
on March 28 in Tyler, investigator Phillip Hill denies acting with
"reckless disregard for the truth" when he prepared a report listing
Clark as the suspect in the controlled buy of $100 worth of crack
cocaine Oct. 24, 1997.

Confidential informants working for the Gregg County Organized Drug
Enforcement unit had identified a man known as "Tony" and as "Hendog"
as the black man who sold them the crack cocaine in the buy, which was
videotaped, Clark's suit says. Hill and Longview Police Department
investigator Brian Ray, also named in the suit, were assigned to the
Gregg CODE unit, the suit says.

Smith County, the Smith County Sheriff's Office, Gregg County and the
Gregg County Sheriff's Office also are defendants in the suit.

Gregg CODE unit agent Floyd Wingo said he knew that a black man who
used the alias Hendog and whose real name was Henry Clark had
previously been arrested by the Gregg County Sheriff's Office, Clark's
suit says. Hill acquired a 1995 arrest photo of Henry Clark and showed
it to an informant, who identified the man as Tony or Hendog, the suit
says.

When Ray performed two criminal records searches on Henry Clark in
late April 1998, more than five pages of criminal records turned up,
but none of the information revealed an arrest in Gregg County, the
suit says.

Instead, the records search identified Dallas resident Henry Earl
Clark, 52, the suit's plaintiff who had been convicted of several
misdemeanor offenses several years ago. However, the Henry Clark
arrested in Gregg County in 1995 is 14 years younger than Henry Earl
Clark of Dallas. Clark's suit says CODE investigators had no probable
cause to link Henry Earl Clark to the controlled buy.

"Without any information to connect the person identified by (the
confidential informant), Phillip Hill and/or Brian Ray presented
information to the Smith County Texas District Attorney's Office on or
about May 18, 1998. Phillip Hill and/or Brian Ray claimed that the
person listed in the criminal record search done on April 22, 1998,
and April 24, 1998, was the same person who distributed crack cocaine"
to the confidential informant, Clark's suit says.

"At some time unknown to (Henry Earl Clark), an official police
record, in particular, the chain of custody report, was intentionally
altered in a way that erroneously reflected that (the suspect in the
drug buy) was plaintiff Henry Earl Clark," the suit says.

Hill, Ray and Gregg and Smith counties and sheriff's offices deny this
in their responses to the suit. Though admitting that Henry Earl Clark
was jailed for three months and then released when it became clear he
was not Hendog, the defendants reject or deny the suit's other claims.
In addition, Smith and Gregg counties claim sovereign immunity as
governmental entities and say they are exempt from punitive damages.

Henry Clark was indicted June 5, 1998, by a Smith County grand jury,
the suit says. Between that date and Aug. 11, 1999, Hill, Ray and/or
the Smith County Sheriff's Office entered Henry Earl Clark's name in
the outstanding arrest warrants database, the suit says.

On that Aug. 11, Clark was on his way to work in Dallas when he was
stopped for having a faulty vehicle inspection sticker, the suit says.
Clark then was arrested by a Dallas County sheriff's officer on the
outstanding arrest warrant and taken to the Smith County Jail the next
day, the suit says.

Despite repeatedly telling Smith County authorities that he had never
been to Smith or Gregg counties, Clark was jailed until Nov. 11, when
authorities first compared his photograph with that of Henry Clark,
the alleged drug dealer known as Hendog, the suit says.

Clark's suit says no one bothered to compare his fingerprints or photo
with that of Hendog for three months. Hill and Ray also failed to show
the confidential informant a photo of Henry Earl Clark to confirm that
he was the black man who sold the crack cocaine, the suit says.

If Hill or Ray had "made the short trip to the Smith County jail in a
reasonable time frame to compare the July 8, 1995, Gregg County arrest
photograph they had in their possession with the person who was in
custody, plaintiff would have been immediately released," the suit
says.

"As a direct and proximate cause of defendants' violations of
plaintiff's Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable
seizure and ... to not be denied liberty without due process of law,
the plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer lost wages, ... lost
property, emotional distress, mental anguish and indignation," the
suit says.

Because he was jailed for three months, Clark lost his job in Dallas
and has not been able to get it back, the suit says.

Clark's suit asks for compensatory damages, punitive damages from Hill
and Ray, attorneys' fees, pre- and post-judgment interest and
prosecution costs.
Member Comments
No member comments available...