Positive LEO experiences: hey, at least two finally came clean!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jim March

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
8,732
Location
SF Bay Area
$4.5 million verdict in CHP suit

Complaint by Ramona man prompted years of malicious ticketing

By Anne Krueger
STAFF WRITER

April 27, 2004

DAN TREVAN / Union-Tribune

2004-04-27verdict.jpg

Steve Grassilli met with jurors after yesterday's verdict in El Cajon.

EL CAJON – A Ramona man maliciously ticketed over five years by California Highway Patrol officers has been awarded $4.5 million by a Superior Court jury.

Attorneys for Steve Grassilli, 44, said he was targeted by the officers after he lodged a complaint against one of them.

After yesterday's verdict, several jurors said they hoped the millions of dollars in punitive damages would send a message to the CHP. The CHP was not named as a defendant in the case, but the agency typically pays monetary awards when its officers are sued, said Greg Garrison, one of Grassilli's attorneys.

"We caught them in so many lies. I hope this shakes up the CHP like you can't believe," said juror Saudra Swanson of El Cajon. "I was totally insulted by it all."

Grassilli's attorneys, Garrison and Michael Strain, said the six-week trial revealed a pattern in which CHP officers were told to lie in court to protect their fellow officers. Two officers refused to lie, and their version of events supported Grassilli's case, his lawyers said.

Grassilli filed a complaint in March 1997 after hearing that a CHP officer had removed the catalytic converter from a pickup truck the officer owned, Garrison and Strain said.

After that, the officer, Richard Eric Barr, began ticketing Grassilli and a supplier who worked with him. Barr and Grassilli had never had any contact before Grassilli filed the complaint.

The ticketing was so frequent that Grassilli's supplier stopped working with him, ruining Grassilli's business installing 10,000-gallon water tanks for new homes.

Grassilli was stopped 13 times over five years for smog violations, having an obstructed view in his vehicle, or improperly hauling the water tanks, he said. The CHP is responsible for traffic enforcement in the unincorporated areas of the county.

Garrison said that instead of giving Grassilli a courtesy notice about an improperly registered vehicle, Barr's supervisor, Michael Toth, told officers to hold off on ticketing Grassilli for six months. Then they impounded Grassilli's truck.

"They had the right and discretion to do what they did," Garrison said. "The question is, why did they do it?"

Garrison said Barr and Toth targeted Grassilli because of the complaint involving Barr's pickup.

Deputy Attorney General David Taglienti, representing the CHP officers, said he could not comment on the case. Barr and Toth also declined to comment.

Grassilli complained about Barr's pickup after he heard one of his friends say Barr had hired him to remove the catalytic converter. Barr frequently used the truck to tow a boat for weekend excursions and removing the catalytic converter gave the vehicle more power.

The friend told Grassilli that Barr was dismissive about having the catalytic converter removed, which is illegal, Garrison said.

" 'Eric said he's got a badge, he can do whatever he wants to do,' " Garrison quoted Grassilli's friend as saying.

Grassilli filed a complaint with the CHP about Barr, and Toth told Grassilli the catalytic converter had not been removed. Prosecutors then filed two misdemeanor charges against Grassilli, accusing him of making a false complaint. A Superior Court judge took the rare move of dismissing the charges after prosecutors presented their case.

Initially, he wasn't interested in being awarded money when the case began, Grassilli said. That changed as it dragged through the court system.

"Now I want whatever I can get because I've been through seven years of gut wrenching," he said.

Yesterday, the jury, by a 9-3 vote, found Grassilli was entitled to $3 million in punitive damages from Barr. The jury also determined Toth, a CHP sergeant who retired four years ago, was liable for just more than $1 million in punitive damages.

Last week, the jury awarded Grassilli $510,000 in compensatory damages after finding his civil rights were violated by Barr, Toth and CHP Sgt. Stephan Neumann. The jurors found Barr and Toth acted maliciously, prompting the punitive damage phase of the trial against the two.

After the verdict, jurors met in the hallway of the El Cajon courthouse with Grassilli and expressed outrage at what they said were numerous lies by several CHP officers who testified.

"I saw one person up there who was honest," said juror Austin Willett of El Cajon, referring to Grassilli. "I saw others within an organization that we give power to enforce our laws caught in lies."

In closing arguments yesterday, Deputy Attorney General Taglienti urged jurors to award less than $50,000 in punitive damages, saying the officers already had been punished enough.

"These two individuals are not responsible for reforming the California Highway Patrol," Taglienti said.

In a statement from Sacramento, CHP Commissioner D.O. "Spike" Helmick said, "I am extremely disappointed and amazed at this decision. I disagree entirely with it. We will look at every way humanly possible to appeal it."

Garrison also said Barr remains on active duty in Ramona. Neumann's status is unknown.

This is the second time Grassilli's case against the CHP officers has been presented to a jury. He lost his first civil trial, but the case was reversed on appeal when judges ruled that evidence was withheld improperly from jurors.

What helped his case this time, Garrison said, was when two CHP officers, Craig Thetford and Michael Clauser, testified that they felt pressured by CHP officials to lie under oath.

Thetford said he was told to target Grassilli for ticketing, and Clauser testified that Grassilli was properly hauling the water tanks, contrary to Barr's assertions.

"They told these guys, 'You will change your testimony for the department,' " Garrison said.

As he waited for the verdict yesterday, Grassilli said he remains confident most law enforcement officers are honest. He said he is still baffled his problems with Barr escalated so far.

"When this started, it was just a slap on his hand," Grassilli said. "I never thought it would get as bad as it is."

In another notable civil suit against the CHP, the agency agreed in 1996 to pay $2.7 million to the family of Cara Knott, a San Diego college student who was murdered in 1986 by CHP Officer Craig Peyer.

A jury had awarded $7.5 million to the Knott family, but the CHP appealed. The Knotts said they agreed to the settlement to end the civil case.

Staff writer Brian Hazle contributed to this report.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne Krueger: (619) 593-4962; [email protected]
 
The CHP was not named as a defendant in the case, but the agency typically pays monetary awards when its officers are sued, said Greg Garrison, one of Grassilli's attorneys.

The CHP pays nothing. We, the people of the State of California pay
:barf:

The first money should come from the assets of the officers. Homes, cash, securities, vehicles, pensions, etc. The remaining money should come from the personal assets of the officer's supervisors, going up the line until the judgement is satisfied.
 
The ticketing was so frequent that Grassilli's supplier stopped working with him, ruining Grassilli's business installing 10,000-gallon water tanks for new homes.Grassilli was stopped 13 times over five years for smog violations, having an obstructed view in his vehicle, or improperly hauling the water tanks, he said. The CHP is responsible for traffic enforcement in the unincorporated areas of the county.
Other issues aside, thats not particularly "excessive". Thirteen times in five years? Come on....thats less than one stop every 4 months.Thats supposed to be "targeting" a driver? I have stopped and cited the same person twice in one week before.....does that mean I am now "targeting" that driver? No...it means that that person happened to commit two violations on different days in my presence.
And those of you who think I should somehow lose my house for the actions of subordinates are off kilter, to say the least.
 
TCSD: first, 13 times IS high when it's the same cops doing it.

Second, and far worse, at least two cops finally admitted that some of the charges against this dude were fabricated.

Got that? The tanks WERE strapped on correctly, but the slimeballs lied about it?

That's a worst case scenario. "Intolerable" doesn't even begin. If you have a badge, you have the ability to fabricate crimes against me. If you actually do it, and get caught by your fellow cops, 20 years yard labor is NOT excessive.

Third, several of the bosses should indeed lose their jobs AND houses, for pressuring other subordinates to cover up the actions of the others.

This is bad, OK?
 
Other issues aside, thats not particularly "excessive". Thirteen times in five years? Come on....thats less than one stop every 4 months.Thats supposed to be "targeting" a driver? I have stopped and cited the same person twice in one week before.....does that mean I am now "targeting" that driver? No...it means that that person happened to commit two violations on different days in my presence.
And those of you who think I should somehow lose my house for the actions of subordinates are off kilter, to say the least.

Only if you removed the catalytic converter in your pickup truck thats driven on streets and bragged that you have a badge and you can do anything you want to.
 
Do we not regularly see articles in the papers or in programs on TV about how cheating is common in high school and college? Do we not regularly learn of all manner of other poor behavior by various types of groups of younger people? Does it not seem that there are few if any consequences for these misbehaviors?

These people get jobs, and I submit they carry their attitudes and behaviors along with them through life. Some change as they "grow up"; some don't.

Seems to me that some of these examples go to work in law enforcement. Some of them grow up and become responsible and honorable. Some don't.

In any large group there is a cross-section of humanity. I believe that among LEOs there are far fewer of the immature and arrogant. I'd be notably surprised if there were absolutely none of the type such as Barr.

tcsd, I've thought about your comment about 13 tickets in 5 years as not being excessive. Well, I have a really large number of sports car racer friends. Yes, we've all gotten some tickets. But none of them have ever come close to this sort of record. And in my own 56 years of driving cars and trucks and with a fair amount of trailer-pulling, I haven't come close to a total of 13 tickets. I've had cars which got tickets for "Parked with intent to speed" from LEO buddies, and comments like "Why don't you enter a race and give that poor thing a rest?" At 40,000 and 50,000 miles per year, I'd say my exposure was rather high. But 13 tickets?

:), Art
 
TCSD: first, 13 times IS high when it's the same cops doing it.
So theoretically when I am working the small village PD I work part time as a side line or even out in TCSD in my full time job, I cannot ticket the same person repeatedly over a number of years? I don't mean through falsehood, but legitimately? In your mind theres some kind of quota in place for ticketing the same person a number of times?

And I still don't agree with seizing the property of supervisors.
 
Nice job of ignoring the core issue: falsified charges.

If a cop does that to me, they better go all out and kill me. Because one way or another, I won't stand for it.
 
I see TCSD is clueless as usual.

Let me summarize:

1) A couple of vindictive cops go on a rampage of intimidation

2) Hamfisted, corrupt supervisors encourage the practice and pressue LEOs to continue harassment and then to LIE, that is, Testi-Lie unde oath (here's your proof)

3) Servile prosecutors, continue the harassment by filing false charges (for filing false charges, no less)

4) Government attorneys who withhold evidence,

5) A Deputy AG who cries foul against the jury

6) And a CHP Commisioner who still doesn't quite get it, does he?

Rick
 
Nice job of ignoring the core issue: falsified charges.
Thats a whole 'nother issue. Tickets should not be used to "target" anyone specifically. However, I find it ridiculous that anyone would consider 13 tickets over 5 years to be "targeting" someone. If I was to walk around someones car and issue 13 tickets every time I stopped them for every violation on the car I could find, yeah, that would be overboard. But 13 in 5 years? No, thats not excessive, as long as the cited violations are legitimate. I could walk around every one of your cars and find at least 3 things to cite you for, unless you just drove it off the showroom floor.
 
tcsd: If I can loose MY house for ordering my employees to (hypothetically speaking of course) rob a bank, then YES you SHOULD loose everything if you order your officers to LIE UNDER OATH!

One more comment, the orgional complaint (about lack of a cat) is pretty damned assanine. And frankly, if he is going to hold the cop to that standard of adherance to motor vehicle law, then I don't see any reason why CHP should not hold him to high standards of tail-light-out law for instance.

However, it is not grounds for Law Enforcement Officers to commit crimes in trumping up false charges! That is where this crosses the line, when officers are ordered to lie under oath to cover up the fact that they are commiting felonys in stoping and ticketing withought PC or any actual crime commited.
 
tcsd chooses to focus on ticket frequency while minimizing the teensy little bit about... LYING ON THE FRICKING WITNESS STAND.

Does anyone doubt how deeply you'd be put UNDER the jail for being caught lying on the stand as a private citizen?

So arrogant... so very, very arrogant.
 
tcsd, you wouldn't write 13 tickets in five years in Texas, unless those tickets after (roughly) #5 were for "Driving without a license." :)

I've been "messin'" with cars for over 50 years. Given Texas' motor vehicle inspection laws, and given my acquaintance with many of those who do these inspections, there are many cars where you won't find your three things for which to ticket. "Three things to cite you for" cars are a definite minority.

:), Art
 
The problem with LE abuse like this is there really is no way to teach the officers a lesson. Goverment employees very rarely get fired. I don't see that his guy had much of a choice.
 
Is it possible to have 3900 posts and still be a troll?

This cop-bashing is getting out of control on this forum. I realize these anecdotes are being addressed to illustrate corrupt and abusive behaviors by LEOs throught the country.

However, is it all necessary? Obviously, we have LEOs as among the members on this forum. Obviously, from time to time, they are going to feel as if their entire livelihoods are being called into question by what is frequently little more than worst-case, extreme scenarios followed by over-zealous and rabid "piling-on" tactics by many of the forumites, and will vocally defend their choice of career; at which point more "piling-on" occurs.

I realize the LEOs on this forum sometimes try to justify inappropriate, or even totally unacceptable behavior, by their fellow cops. But it is natural to try to generally defend their occupation when it appears there is too much negative discussion and too little positive discussion devoted to them.

The author of this thread titled it: "Positive LEO experiences," which, based upon the points of his post, amount to little more than a mockery of all law enforcement across the country, and appears to be intended as some sort of bait to induce further tirades.

Enough is enough. Why risk alienating an entire group of people on these forums by rancorously beating to death what all of us already know?-- some cops are bad.
 
Thirteen tickets in five years, but could still be reasonable if the situation warranted it. The jury, when they were presented all the facts, decided it wasn't warranted.

The compensation he received was half a million dollars. He lost a distributer and a lot of business because of this.

The high punitive damage don't appear to be just because they harrassed this guy, but because they tried to cover it up, and withheld evidence.

Millions of dollars seems high to me, but something needs to be done to get law enforcement to act with honesty and integrity.

If the law enforcement officers can't handle that, they need to find different careers.
 
THRers don't pile on because of the individual incidents. THey "pile on" when LEOs on this forum defend the horrendous actions of their fellow LEOs


James
 
Jeff:

Is it possible to have 3900 posts and still be a troll?

California's law enforcement culture in particular is in some ways twisted. This is nowhere more evident than in the CCW permit system and it's enforcement.

Now, you can try and blame this on the law itself, and you'd be partially right.

Except:

Massachussets, with the same basic law, issues more than 125,000 permits for a much smaller population than California's 35mil and 40,000 permits.

Same story in Maryland: 35,000ish permits, pop. 5mil.

Iowa, same thing.

California isn't just one of the last "discretionary" states, it handles it FAR WORSE than most other jurisdictions. Only the NYPD ranks near California urban areas in gun permit rankness and that's in large part because their laws are far worse (discretionary gun ownership). Only Hawaii is worse but they hose *everybody* - it's California's law enforcement that pay the least attention to equal protection violations of ANY state's worth of cops.

You think that won't have an "overall cultural effect" in law enforcement that'll spill out into other areas?

I've been fighting this so long it's starting to get to me.
 
tcsd chooses to focus on ticket frequency while minimizing the teensy little bit about... LYING ON THE FRICKING WITNESS STAND.

I have not ignored it, it is simply another issue totally separate from the issue how many tickets this guy got.
 
The jury, when they were presented all the facts, decided it wasn't warranted.
California jury. Lets think back to some other Cali juries...like OJ's....uh huh. If these guys lied on the stand then certainly, they need to be censured. I don't tolerate lying when it comes to my job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top