Cop Says He Was Fired For Reporting Police Dog Attack

Ethics

The City of Hernando, Miss., illegally fired a police officer for testifying truthfully about another officer's use of unreasonable force - letting a police dog attack and bite a citizen who already was in custody - Steven English claims in Federal Court.

English says he saw a fellow officer unreasonably sic a dog on Lawson Rhoda in November 2004, after Rhoda was in custody. English says he reported the attack to his supervisor, "who instructed Plaintiff to keep his opinions to himself."

"Because supervisor Gray had instructed plaintiff to keep his opinion to himself, and because plaintiff knew that he would be fired if he disobeyed his supervisor's instruction by reporting the use of unreasonable force, plaintiff did not initially report the use of unreasonable force. Instead, plaintiff filed a police report which omitted any discussion of the dog's attack upon the suspect," the complaint states. English says his police report was accurate, but omitted mention of the dog attack. "To report this attack would have been a direct disobedience of the supervisor's instructions. However, in keeping with his duty as a citizen, plaintiff kept a complete record of the incident so that his memory would be fresh if he were asked about the incident in the future, and so that he could give an accurate statement about what occurred."

In 2007, Rhoda sued the city alleging unreasonable force. English says the city's insurance company and police chief, "Riley," questioned him about the incident, and he "truthfully answered their questions and truthfully described the criminal assault he had witnessed."

The city suspended and then fired him in retaliation, English says, on the bogus grounds that "he had not truthfully reported the use of excessive force in his police report."

He demands monetary damages. He is represented by Jim Waide of Tupelo.

Related listings

  • Bipolar Lawyer Who Stole: Suspended, Not Disbarred

    Bipolar Lawyer Who Stole: Suspended, Not Disbarred

    Ethics 07/16/2008

    An attorney will not be disbarred for misappropriating client's funds during a manic bipolar episode that lasted for 4 years, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in a 4-3 decision. Mark Belz was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1975 and had been on me...

  • Judge Blasts Curbing Frequent ADA Filer

    Judge Blasts Curbing Frequent ADA Filer

    Ethics 04/10/2008

    The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has again upheld a “vexatious litigant” order against a frequent filer of disability discrimination lawsuits -– but over the strenuous objections of nine dissenting judges.Chief Judge Alex Kozinski was particular...

  • Op-ed: Standing Up for Rule of Law in Pakistan

    Op-ed: Standing Up for Rule of Law in Pakistan

    Ethics 04/08/2008

    We have witnessed with admiration and empathy the heroism of lawyers and judges in Pakistan as they squarely faced beatings and stood up to soldiers and police to defend the rule of law.  Thedissolution of the Supreme Court, the silencing of a f...

USCIS Adjusting Premium Processing Fee

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today it is adjusting the premium processing fee for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker and Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers beginning on Oct. 1, 2018 to more effectively adjudicate petitions and maintain effective service to petitioners.

The premium processing fee will increase to $1,410, a 14.92 percent increase (after rounding) from the current fee of $1,225. This increase, which is done in accordance with the Immigration and Nationality Act, represents the percentage change in inflation since the fee was last increased in 2010 based on the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers.

“Because premium processing fees have not been adjusted since 2010, our ability to improve the adjudications and service processes for all petitioners has been hindered as we’ve experienced significantly higher demand for immigration benefits. Ultimately, adjusting the premium processing fee will allow us to continue making necessary investments in staff and technology to administer various immigration benefit requests more effectively and efficiently,” said Chief Financial Officer Joseph Moore. “USCIS will continue adjudicating all petitions on a case-by-case basis to determine if they meet all standards required under applicable law, policies, and regulations.”

Premium processing is an optional service that is currently authorized for certain petitioners filing Forms I-129 or I-140. The system allows petitioners to request 15-day processing of certain employment-based immigration benefit requests if they pay an extra fee. The premium processing fee is paid in addition to the base filing fee and any other applicable fees, which cannot be waived.