A fugitive violently resisted arrest then sued the cops for “using force”. It didn’t’ end well for him.

Share:

COLUMBUS, OH — A federal jury decided that several police officers did not violate the civil rights of an alleged fugitive who violently resisted arrest.

The suspect, Timothy Davis, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the city of Columbus and several of its police officers.

Davis claimed that several Columbus Police Department officers used improper force when they arrested him in September of 2017 on several warrants for violent crimes, including assaulting an officer.

Davis’ lawyers said that the officers had verbally abused, punched and kicked Davis as well as pulled his hair out and stripped him naked from the waist down during the arrest, Spectrum News 1 reported.

Davis’ lawsuit also accused officers of trying to block bystanders from filming the arrest, according to the report.

Spectrum News 1 also reported that the city denied Davis’ allegations, saying police acted properly when they arrested the suspect. The city also denied officers tried to block filming the arrest.

However, the city did acknowledge that remarks by one officer at the scene were “inappropriate,” but said the officer wasn’t involved in taking Davis into custody.

Two men arrested and charged with the attempted murder of a Chicago cop after shooting him during a traffic stop

According to a report by WOSU, one police officer allegedly made inappropriate comments during Davis’ arrest, although that officer was not personally involved in arresting Davis.

The officer was allegedly recorded on body camera commenting to another officer, “What did we tase him for? Why don’t we choke the f— life out of him?”

The officer was later identified by 10 WBNS as Officer Joseph Bogard, who was placed on leave for his comments regarding the arrest of Davis, according to a report.

At the time, Columbus Police Chief Kim Jacobs, who left in 2019, said in a released statement:

“I am appalled by the statements made by this officer. They are not consistent with the training of our officers. Accountability and transparency are vital to our entire community and every member of the division.”

In 2018, NBC 4 reported that four officers were eventually counseled for their use of profanity and that Officer Bogard was issued a written reprimand for making inappropriate comments that were recorded on a body camera.

WOSU reported that Bogard returned to duty in October 2017 after being given a written reprimand from Chief Jacobs.

The president of the Fraternal Order of Police, Jason Pappas, said the officers’ use of force was well within division policy.

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Pappas told 10 WBNS:

“This whole situation was avoidable if Mr. Davis would have just complied with the officers’ demands.

“He chose his course, which was to be a violent resister, and the officers were compelled, they’re required to effect the arrest and they’re required to use whatever force is necessary to effect the arrest.”

Local Fraternal Order of Police President Keith Ferrell told NBC 4 that a person’s response to an officer’s orders dictates the officer’s reaction:

“Sometimes there’s violence involved. That’s the society we live in and citizens dictate that. Not us. We respond to their actions.”

Davis was sentenced to 30 months in prison for assault and obstructing official business.

Davis’ federal civil rights lawsuit went before federal Chief Judge Algenon Marbley.

On Dec. 22, the jury returned a verdict that denied all of Davis’ claims against the police officers and the city.

City Attorney Zach Klein released a statement, saying:

“We’re grateful for the jury who took their time to consider all of the facts and evidence when deciding this case, and we respect their decision.” 

In 2018, the Columbus Division of Police said the officers involved in the altercation with Davis were cleared after an internal investigation, which noted that the officers’ actions were justified, according to a report by 10 WBNS.

The 2017 incident had unfolded on Sept. 1 in the 1600 block of East Livingston Avenue when plainclothes Columbus police officers attempted to arrest Davis, who was 31 at the time. Police say Davis had several warrants for his arrest.

A cellphone camera captured Davis resisting arrest by the officers for several minutes.

10 WBNS showed the video in 2017, in which officers are seen punching and kicking the suspect as they struggle to handcuff him.

The officers can be heard repeatedly telling Davis to put his hands behind his back, get down on the ground and stop resisting.

10 WBNS reported that an officer had deployed his taser several times, but that it was “ineffective” on Davis.

NBC 4 reported:

“A Columbus police internal investigation in 2018 exonerated all eight. The investigation described Davis as having extraordinary strength in resisting several officers’ attempts to subdue and handcuff him.

“The investigation concluded that the use of force was justified.”

The Franklin County Sheriff’s Office told 10 WBNS that Davis was transported to the jail on Sept. 1, but was admitted to the hospital the next day after complaining he was in pain.

Davis’ mother, Valerie Davis Johnson, had told 10 WBNS that her son suffered kidney damage from being kicked.

Davis’ mother did not mention her son’s previous altercations with police in Ohio and Kentucky.

10 WBNS reported that Davis had previous scuffles with law enforcement:

“In September of 2016, Davis was charged with assaulting a Columbus police officer. He was accused of punching the officer in the face.

“In March of 2017, Davis was again charged with assaulting a peace officer in Kentucky where troopers say he led them on a chase at speeds reaching 120-miles per hour.”

Law Enforcement Today reported on the case of the Waukesha Christmas parade attacker, who has an alleged history of violence. Here is that report.

WAUKESHA, WI — One of the defense attorneys for suspect Darrell E. Brooks Jr., who is accused of intentionally driving a red SUV into a crowd of people participating in a Christmas parade, filed a motion to stop defending his client in separate felony cases.

On Nov. 23, attorney Joseph T. Domask filed a notice of a motion to withdraw as counsel for Brooks at the Milwaukee County Courthouse.

Brooks is accused of killing six people and injuring 62 by intentionally driving his vehicle into participants of the Waukesha County Holiday Parade on Nov. 21.

Brooks was charged with a sixth count of first-degree intentional homicide after the death of 8-year-old victim Jackson Sparks, according to a report by FOX News.

Other victims included Virginia Sorenson, 79, LeAnna Owen, 71, Tamara Durand, 52, Jane Kulich, 52, and Wilhelm Hospel, 81.

A motive for Brooks’ alleged actions has not been provided by either law enforcement or media.

However, there are reports that Brooks expressed views sympathetic to Black Lives Matter on social media and penned violent rap songs.

Daily Mail reported some of the disturbing lyrics:

“The amateur rapper’s lyrics also include ‘f*** the pigs’ and ‘f*** Donald Trump.’      

“Another song, posted on SoundCloud, has the lyrics: ‘They gonna need a cleaner for the s*** we did, all my killers Gacey where them bodies hid.’

“The lyrics of another song read: Sliding through the city with no safety on.’

“His rap songs also make mention of AK-47 assault rifles and killing people.”

Domask’s motion referenced Case No. 21CF004596 and was addressed to the Honorable Michelle Havas and read in part:

“Relationships and familiarities, both direct and indirect, between Attorney Domask and members of Domask Law Office and individuals, families, groups, organizations and the communities affected by incidents arising on November 21, 2021 in the Waukesha County Holiday Parade have created a concurrent conflict of interest in Attorney Domask’s representation of Mr. Brooks in this case.

“Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule 20:1.7(2)(a) provides that ‘a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists if there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer.’

“The aforementioned relationships and familiarities, both direct and indirect, have created a significant risk that the representation of Mr. Brooks would be materially limited by Attorney Domask’s responsibilities to third persons as well as his personal interest in and concern for the individuals, families, groups, organizations and the communities affected by incidents arising on November, 21, 2021 in the Waukesha County Holiday Parade.

“It is verily believed that withdrawal of counsel at this stage of the proceedings will not cause undue prejudice to the defendant.

“Wherefore, Attorney Domask moves the Court for an order to withdraw from the above-referenced case forthwith.”

A few days ago, Domask had recently told FOX News Digital:

“Our hearts are broken for all families affected by the tragedy at the Waukesha Parade. The Waukesha community is dear to our hearts here, and we joined in their sorrow. And we keep all those affected by this incident in our thoughts and prayers.”

Regarding the charges in Milwaukee, Domask had also confirmed to FOX News Digital that he was still representing Brooks “at the moment.” However, his statement suggested there might be another individual representing Brooks.

According to FOX News’ report, Domask wanted to withdraw from two open cases in Milwaukee:

“Both contain multiple charges against Brooks, including one for allegedly shooting at and missing his nephew and another for driving his red Ford SUV over the mother of his child.”

Brooks will make his next appearance in the Milwaukee County Circuit Court on Dec. 20.

The names of individuals involved in the Christmas parade tragedy that Domask had familiarities with were not disclosed, according to a report by Newsweek.

Breitbart reported that Brooks’ representation for the deadly parade case includes two public defenders:

“For the massacre, Brooks is currently being represented by two public defenders, Jeremy Perri and Anna Kees.

“Kees is an Assistant State Public Defender, according to her LinkedIn profile, while Perri has been a licensed public defender for 19 years.”

In a separate report, FOX News published at least six mugshots of Brooks and noted the longevity of his criminal career:

“Brooks is a career criminal, with his record dating back to 1999.

“In 2006, he was convicted of statutory sexual seduction after having sex with a 15-year-old girl in Nevada, who became pregnant.

“He also made bail twice in Wisconsin this year alone, even though [he] has an active sex crime warrant in Nevada, court records previously reported by Fox News show.

“He was first freed in February on $500 after allegedly shooting at his nephew in the summer of 2020.

“He was out on a $1,000 bail just this month after a woman accused him of punching her and running her over with the same SUV that was allegedly used in the attack on Sunday.”

FOX News also reported that Brooks has charges in multiple states that range from domestic violence to weapons possession to drugs.

Some have noted mainstream media’s reluctance to bring up the suspect’s name in connection with the parade tragedy.

Instead, the vehicle that Brooks allegedly used seemed personified in order to distract from the person suspected of causing the parade massacre.

Another issue that has not been widely reported by legacy media is Brooks’ alleged social media posts that called for violence against white people and support for Hitler.

According to FOX News, Brooks had a Facebook account, which is now deleted, under the user name “MathBoi Fly” that contained hateful memes and messages.

Daily Mail reported on some of the now-deleted posts and included screenshots:

“A now-deleted Facebook account belonging to Darrell Brooks Jr., 39, showed the alleged killer had encouraged knocking ‘white ppl [the f**k] out’ and also appeared to support the controversial Black Hebrew Israelites.”

Daily Mail reported that Brooks was an amateur rapper who went by the stage name MathBoi Fly and had allegedly “shared a series of links and memes relating to race and white privilege in June 2020, when protests erupted over the death of George Floyd.”

The report further noted:

“In a post from June 9, 2020, Brooks wrote: ‘LEARNED ND TAUGHT BEHAVIOR!! so when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it…the old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD..’ followed by a middle finger and expletive emoji.”

Daily Mail noted:

“The posts are among several that have emerged in the wake of his arrest after he allegedly drove his red Ford SUV in a crowd of kids and elderly dancing groups during a Christmas parade in the Milwaukee suburb. 

“Brooks’s troubling track record has raised questions about his alleged motives for the killings and why he had been allowed on the streets.

“Among the brow-raising social media posts that surfaced on Tuesday was a meme about Adolf Hitler and the identity of the ‘real Jews.’”

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm released a statement on Monday admitting Brooks should not have been released on a $1,000 bond earlier this month following an alleged hit-and-run incident involving his girlfriend.

The statement read in part:

“The State’s bail recommendation, in this case, was inappropriately low in light of the nature of the recent changes and the pending charges against Mr. Brooks.

“The bail recommendation in this case is not consistent with the approach of the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office toward matters involving violent crime, nor was it consistent with the risk assessment of the defendant prior to setting of bail.

“This office is currently conducting an internal review of the decision to make the recent bail recommendation in this matter in order to determine the appropriate next steps.”

 

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
 
Facebook Follow First

 

 

Share:
Submit a Correction
Related Posts