Keith M. Knowlton - SBN
011565
Keith M. Knowlton, L.L.C.
9920 S. Rural Road, Suite 108
Attorney for Plaintiff
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
|
Douglas
C. Gilford,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Town
Of
corporation in the State of Arizona; Albert “Al”
Johnson, individually and in his former various capacities including Certified
Building Official and Assistant Town Manager for the Town of Quartzsite and
Rhonda Johnson, husband and wife; Martin Brannan individually and in his
former various capacities including Town Attorney, Town Prosecutor, Town
Parliamentarian for the Town of Quartzsite and Janet Brannan, husband and
wife; Jeff Gilbert individually and in his capacity of Chief of Police for
the Town of Quartzsite and Sondra Gilbert, husband and wife; Fabiola Garcia
individually and in her capacity of Police Officer and Sergeant for the
Quartzsite Police Department and Juan A. Garcia Jr., wife and husband; Xavier
Frausto individually and in his capacity of Sergeant for the Quartzsite
Police Department and Terry Frausto, husband and wife; Felipe Rodriguez
individually and in his capacity of Police Officer for the Quartzsite Police
Department and Jane Doe Rodriguez, husband and wife; Joseph Michael Winslow,
individually and in his former capacity as Council member for the Town of
Quartzsite and Jane Doe Winslow, husband and wife; Alexandra Taft individually and in her former
capacity of Town Manager for the Town of Quartzsite; Laura Bruno individually
and in her various capacities of “Interim” Town Manager and Town Manager for
the Town of Quartzsite and Joe Bruno, wife and husband; Barbara Cowell,
individually and in her former capacity as Council member for the Town of
Quartzsite and Everett Cowell, wife and husband; Norma Crooks, individually
and in her capacity as Council member for the Town of Quartzsite and John Doe
Crooks, wife and husband; Michael Jewitt, individually and in his capacity as
Council member for the Town of Quartzsite and Marie Jewitt, husband and wife;
Carol Kelley, individually and in her capacity as Council member for the Town
of Quartzsite; Mark Orgeron, individually and in his capacity as Council
member for the Town of Quartzsite and Cheryl Orgeron, husband and wife; Jose
Lizarraga, individually and in his former capacities as Council member and
Mayor for the Town of Quartzsite and Jane Doe Lizarraga, husband and wife;
Jerry Lukkasson, individually and in his former capacity as Council member
for the Town of Quartzsite and Michelle Lukkasson, husband and wife; John
& Jane Does I-X,
Defendants.
|
Cause No. 2:13-cv-00468-SRB
AMENDED COMPLAINT
42 U.S.C. § 1983
Demand Jury Trial
|
Plaintiff, Douglas C.
Gilford (“Mr. Gilford”), as and for his complaint against Defendants, alleges
as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1.
This is a federal and state action for monetary damages and
injunctive relief against the defendants named herein, in their official and/or
individual capacities. The factual basis of this complaint is that Defendants
conspired to have Mr. G ilford
unconstitutionally seized, falsely arrested and prosecuted without probable
cause, in retaliation for Mr. Gilford’s investigation of, complaints regarding
and on his blog public criticism of Defendants,
which are protected activities pursuant to Mr. Gilford’s First Amendment
to the United States Constitution’s and Article II, Sections 6 of the Arizona
Constitution’s rights to Free Speech, Freedom of the Press, Right to Associate,
Right to Assemble and Right to seek Redress of G rievances.
2.
In furtherance of the conspiracy, and in clear violation of
Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, Defendants had law enforcement from the Town
of Quartzsite falsely arrest Mr. Gilford without probable cause, had Mr.
Gilford’s person seized and or imprisoned three times (booked and released,
jailed) and prosecuted Plaintiff without probable cause .
3.
In the first prosecution, three misdemeanor counts were levied
against Mr. Gilford. The second prosecution
(filed by the Town of Quartzsite
Prosecutor G ilford complied with summons and order by the Quartzsite Magistrate Court August 29, 2011 . Mr. Gilford was then falsely
arrested without a warrant and incarcerated (instead of cite and release or
summons by complaint) in the third case, which contained an additional three
more misdemeanor charges and so Mrs. Gilford had to post Mr. Gilford’s bond.
4.
This is also an action for relief of injunctive remedy to protect
Mr. Gilford’s right to exercise his constitutionally protected First Amendment
rights. Defendants’ conspiracy is
ongoing and Plaintiff is continually exposed to further violations of his
constitutional rights. Defendants’ action have caused and will continue to
cause Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals to suffer public
humiliation, violation of constitutional rights and additional harms unless
these actions are stopped.
5.
Defendants have conspired to publically humiliate, intimidate and
criminally prosecute Mr. Gilford on trumped up charges because of his
association with other individuals and his seeking redress of grievances with
the Town of Quartzite Mass.
JURISDICTION
AND VENUE
6.
This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§§ 1331, 1343
& 1367(a), and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988.
This action also contains state tort claims that “derive from a common
nucleus of operative fact” and are so related to the federal claim that they
formed a single removable case or controversy over which this Court has
jurisdiction.
7.
Venue is proper in the District Court of Arizona pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1391(b).
PARTIES
8.
Plaintiff, Mr. Gilford is, and was at all times relevant, a
naturally born citizen of the United
States Quartzsite , Arizona Quartzsite
Criminal Case #1 of 3 (CR20110093)
Criminal Case #2 of 3 (CR20110097)
Criminal Case #3 of 3 (CR20110103).
CRIMINAL
COUNTS BROUGHT AGAINST MR.GILFORD
TOWN
|
CASE:
|
COUNT:
|
DISMISSAL /OR/ NOT
|
|
|
093
|
1
|
Harassment
|
|
|
093
|
2
|
Harassment
|
|
|
093
|
3
|
Harassment
|
|
|
097
|
1
|
Harassment
|
|
|
097
|
2
|
Harassment
|
|
|
097
|
3
|
Trespassing
|
|
|
097
|
4
|
Disorderly Conduct
|
|
|
097
|
5
|
False Reporting
|
|
|
097
|
6
|
False Reporting
|
|
|
097
|
7
|
False Reporting
|
|
|
097
|
8
|
False Reporting
|
|
|
097
|
9
|
False Reporting
|
|
|
097
|
10
|
False Reporting
|
|
|
103
|
1
|
Harassment
|
|
|
103
|
2
|
Trespass
|
|
|
103
|
3
|
Disorderly Conduct
|
|
9.
Defendant Town La Paz County , Arizona
10.
Defendants Jeff Gilbert (“Chief Gilbert”) and Sondra Gilbert are,
at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County, Arizona and
or Mohave County, Arizona. At all times relevant, Defendant Jeff Gilbert held
the position of Chief of Police for the Town and individually, and in his
official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this
Complaint arose.
11.
All actions taken by Defendant Jeff Gilbert were on behalf of the
marital community.
12.
Defendants Albert “Al” Johnson (“Mr. Johnson”) and Rhonda Johnson were,
at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County, Arizona and
or Riverside County, California.
13.
At all times relevant, Defendant Mr. Johnson held various positions
including Certified Building Official and or Assistant Town Manager for the
Town and individually, and in his official capacity, caused events to occur in
the Town out of which this Complaint arose.
14.
All actions taken by Defendant Mr. Johnson were on behalf of the
marital community.
15.
Defendants Martin Brannan (“Mr. Brannan”) and Janet Brannan were,
at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County , Arizona
16.
At all times relevant, Defendant Martin Brannan held the position Town
Attorney and or Town Prosecutor and or Town Parliamentarian for the Town and
individually, and in his official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town
out of which this Complaint arose. Mr.
Brannan is not entitled to absolute or qualified immunity because his wrongful
acts occurred outside of his role as a prosecutor and involved his role in
initially planning and investigating potential criminal actions against
Plaintiff before they began.
17.
All actions taken by Defendant Martin Brannan were on behalf of
the marital community.
18.
Defendants Joseph Michael Winslow (“Mr. Winslow”) and Jane Doe
Winslow were, at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County , Arizona
19.
At all times relevant, Defendant Mr. Winslow held the position of Council
member for the Town and individually, and in his official capacity, caused
events to occur in the Town out of which this Complaint arose.
20.
All actions taken by Defendant Mr. Winslow were on behalf of the
marital community.
21.
Defendants Alexandra Taft (“Ms. Taft”) was a single woman, at all
times relevant, residing in La Paz
County , Arizona
22.
At all times relevant, Defendant Ms. Taft held the position of Town
Manager for the Town and individually, and in her official capacity, caused
events to occur in the Town out of which this Complaint arose.
23.
Defendants Xavier Frausto (“Sgt. Frausto”) and Terry Frausto were,
at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County , Arizona
24.
At all times relevant, Defendant Sgt. Frausto held the position of
Sergeant for the Town and individually, and in his official capacity, caused
events to occur in the Town out of which this Complaint arose.
25.
All actions taken by Defendant Sgt. Frausto were on behalf of the
marital community.
26.
Defendants Felipe Rodriguez (“Ofcr. Rodriguez”) and Jane Doe
Rodriguez were, at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County , Arizona
27.
At all times relevant, Defendant Ofcr. Rodriguez held the position
of Police Officer for the Town and individually, and in his official capacity,
caused events to occur in the Town out of which this Complaint arose.
28.
All actions taken by Defendant Ofcr. Rodriguez were on behalf of
the marital community.
29.
Defendants Fabiola Garcia (“Sgt. Garcia”) and Juan
A. Garcia Jr. were, at all times relevant, wife and husband residing in La Paz
County and or Maricopa County, Arizona.
30.
At all times relevant, Defendant Sgt. Garcia held the position of Police
Officer and or Sergeant for the Town and individually, and in her official
capacity, and acted under color of state law in causing events to occur in the
Town out of which this Complaint arose.
31.
All actions taken by Defendant Sgt. Garcia were on behalf of the
marital community.
32.
Defendants Laura Bruno (“Ms. Bruno”) and Joe Bruno were, at all
times relevant, wife and husband residing in La Paz County, Arizona and or the
state of Nevada.
33.
At all times relevant, Defendant Ms. Bruno held the position of “Interim”
Town Manager and or Town Manager for the Town and individually, and in her
official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this
Complaint arose.
34.
All actions taken by Defendant Ms. Bruno were on behalf of the
marital community.
35.
Defendants Barbara Cowell (“Ms. Cowell”) and Everett La Paz
County , Arizona
36.
At all times relevant, Defendant Ms. Cowell held the position of elective
official Council member and or Vice Mayor for the Town and individually, and in
her official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this
Complaint arose.
37.
All actions taken by Defendant Ms. Cowell were on behalf of the
marital community.
38.
Defendants Norma Crooks
(“Ms. Crooks”) and John Doe Crooks were, at all times relevant, wife and
husband residing in La Paz county, Arizona.
39.
At all times relevant, Defendant Ms. Crooks held the position of
elective official Council member for the Town and individually, and in her
official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this
Complaint arose.
40.
All actions taken by Defendant Ms. Crooks were on behalf of the
marital community.
41.
Defendants Michael Jewitt (“Mr. Jewitt”) and Marie Jewitt were, at
all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County , Arizona
42.
At all times relevant, Defendant Mr. Jewitt held the position of elective
official Council member and or Vice Mayor for the Town and individually, and in
his official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this Complaint
arose.
43.
All actions taken by Defendant Mr. Jewitt were on behalf of the
marital community.
44.
Defendant Carol Kelley
(“Ms. Kelley”) was, at all times relevant, a widowed woman residing in La Paz County , Arizona
45.
At all times relevant, Defendant Ms. Kelley held the position of
elective official Council member for the Town and individually, and in her
official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this
Complaint arose.
46.
Defendants Mark Orgeron (“Mr. Orgeron”) and Cheryl Orgeron were, at all times relevant,
husband and wife residing in Yuma County and or La Paz County, Arizona.
47.
At all times relevant, Defendant Mr. Orgeron held the position of
elective official Council member for the Town and individually, and in his
official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this
Complaint arose.
48.
All actions taken by Defendant Mr. Orgeron were on behalf of the
marital community.
49.
Defendants Jose Lizarraga (“Mr. Lizarraga”) and Jane Doe Lizarraga
were, at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in La Paz County , Arizona
50.
At all times relevant, Defendant Mr. Lizarraga held the position
of elective official Council member and or Mayor for the Town and individually,
and in his official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which
this Complaint arose.
51.
All actions taken by Defendant Mr. Lizarraga were on behalf of the
marital community.
52.
Defendants Jerry Lukkasson (“Mr. Lukkasson”) and Michelle
Lukkasson were, at all times relevant, husband and wife residing in Yavapai County
and or La Paz County, Arizona.
53.
At all times relevant, Defendant Mr. Lukkasson held the position
of elective official Council member for the Town and individually, and in his
official capacity, caused events to occur in the Town out of which this Complaint
arose.
54.
All actions taken by Defendant Mr. Lukkasson were on behalf of the
marital community.
55.
Pursuant to A.R.S. §12-821.01, a Notice of Claim was timely served
on each Defendant except Bruno, Cowell, Crooks, Jewitt, Kelley, Orgeron, and
Lukkasson who are Defendants under the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and injunctions claims. As set forth herein, Plaintiff has
fully complied with the requirements of A.R.S. §12-821.01 to bring this action
against a municipality and/or its employees and or its directors.
56.
Plaintiff requests a jury trial.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
57.
Town leadership and Town police sought retaliation upon Mr.
Gilford, for exercising his constitutional rights by unlawfully charging Mr. G ilford with numerous crimes and publically
criticizing him over an ongoing period of time.
The retaliation eventually took the form of 3 criminal cases which
totaled 16 misdemeanor counts, all brought in a time period of less than 23 days
in August and September 2011.
58.
Failing to see Mr. Gilford found guilty at trial of any of the
sixteen charges, the day (July 3, 2012) he was acquitted of the falsely made
charges that had not already been dismissed, Mr. Gilford was maliciously
slapped, (only hours after his acquittals) with a Workplace Harassment
Injunction so as to exclude him from Quartzsite Town Hall (“QTH”) (except for
the most limited of circumstances) with intent to suppress his First Amendment
rights.
59.
To do any business with the Town, professionally or personally,
Mr. Gilford was reduced by the restrictions of Court Order to direct contact
with the Town only by mail, email or fax communications with Town staff.
60.
Over a two to three year period preceding Mr. Gilford’s eventual,
warrantless September
1, 2011 arrest and seizure (by the Town of Quartzsite), Mr. Gilford
became concerned about incompetence, the appearance of corruption, and lack of
transparency in the government of the Town of Quartzsite and decided to become
proactive as a citizen with the Town and with other local citizens who had the
same concerns.
61.
A result of his activities, while exercising his First Amendment
rights or seeking to exercise his First Amendment rights, Mr. Gilford triggered
the ire of the Town of Quartzsite, its officers and officials who conspired to
retaliate against him and/or conspired to interfere with Mr. Gilford’s
constitutionally-protected activities in the community and at QTH, including
those which impacted his licensed real estate activities (ability to earn a
living) and ability to make inquiries to the Town regarding real estate transactions.
62.
Before and since his (September 1, 2011 ) arrest Mr. Gilford has suffered ongoing
denial of his constitutionally protected activities or attempts to exercise
such (all events which together have caused this action).
63.
Mr. Gilford participated, beginning in late 2008,
in a loosely organized, non-partisan “reform
coalition” of Quartzsite citizens who had begun meeting (in public places)
in 2008 due to various concerns regarding the
Town’s administration and
governance. Mr. Gilford is one of several Quartzsite citizens (all prior members of
the “Citizens Coalition” such as Michael Roth, Vito Austin, Sean Austin, Edward
Foster, Patricia Workman, Jennifer Jones, Jack Jones, Richard Oldham, Dean
Taylor, Chaunce Hamilton, Hal Davidson and Russell Sias) who have since
beginning to assemble or associate as Citizens Coalition associates in 2008
eventually suffered arbitrary, malicious discrimination/harassment and/or
malicious retaliatory false arrests and seizures (since 2009, without probable
cause or legitimate government interest) by the Town of Quartzsite.
64.
Mr. Gilford, like Michael Roth, Vito Austin, Sean
Austin, Edward Foster, Patricia Workman, Jennifer Jones, Jack Jones, Richard
Oldham, Dean Taylor, Chaunce Hamilton, Hal Davidson, and Russell Sias, has
experienced invidious discrimination/harassment and/or false accusations and/or
false arrests (and/or Town interference with their legitimate business
operations) all of which have been accomplished by and through numerous town
officials, and/or town officers, and/or town employees working in combination
to retaliate against the forenamed citizens, because they were known to have associated
and assembled together as citizens (under the moniker of the “Citizens
Coalition”), and because they exercised their individual rights of freedom of
press, freedom of speech, and freedom to protest online, in public, and/or in
print.
65.
Although Mr. Gilford had
attended meetings of the “Citizens Coalition” beginning in 2008, seeking to
bring an important issue and concern to the attention of the town’s directors
and the public-at-large, Mr. Gilford became more blatantly proactive in local
town matters when he stepped into the ‘limelight’ (in April 2009) before the
town council on behalf of the “Citizens Coalition” and described a series of
arbitrary acts and omissions which Mr. Gilford and another “Citizens Coalition”
associate (Jerry Wilcox) who also spoke on the topic, believed were occurring
within the Planning & Zoning department of the Town.
66.
In October 2010, Mr. Gilford began his internet
blog and his video/audio
recording efforts of Town meetings and public forums which activities became
more frequent and organized through mid-2011.
67.
Between 2010 to early 2012, events involving Defendants Alexandra Taft, Michael Jewitt, Albert “Al”
Johnson, Martin Brannan, Jeff Gilbert, Fabiola Garcia, Xavier Frausto,
Felipe Rodriguez, Joseph Michael Winslow, Barbara Cowell, Jose Lizarraga and Jerry
Lukkasson, who were at the time employees, and/or directors, and/or officers
and/or agents of the Defendant Town of Quartzsite, came to the attention of
Attorney of La Paz County, Sam Vederman (now Superior Court Judge of La Paz
County) who observed and knew of certain events taking place in Quartzsite; and
as a result of such knowledge submitted a letter to FBI Agent Farley (dated January 3, 2012 )
in regards to the acts and omissions of Alexandra
Taft, Michael Jewitt, Albert “Al” Johnson, Martin Brannan, Jeff Gilbert,
Fabiola Garcia, Xavier Frausto, Felipe Rodriguez, Joseph Michael Winslow,
Barbara Cowell, Jose Lizarraga, Jerry Lukkasson. The letter to the FBI
described a totality of inappropriate intersecting events of Quartzsite
citizens, Quartzsite politics (Council members), Quartzsite law enforcement,
and the La Paz County
68.
The January
3, 2012 letter to the FBI reads, in part as follows:
“At this time I am requesting the FBI
conduct an investigation into the Town and the QPD. I request an investigation
because I believe there have been facts and circumstances, during the course of
my term as the La Paz County Attorney, which have led me to the belief that
certain citizens within the Town of Quartzsite may have been, and may currently
be, targeted for arrest and prosecution, simply because they are in political opposition
to the Town, QPD, Chief of Police Jeff G ilbert
or other Town officials."
* *
*
"The former Town Prosecutor, Matt
Newman, was fired after approximately twelve years as the Town prosecutor. Mr.
Newman was fired during the time he would not succumb to pressure by Town
officials, and Chief Gilbert, to prosecute certain people."
69.
On January
12, 2012 , former Town Prosecutor Matt Newman, who the Council
immediately replaced by appointing Martin Brannan, underscored Vederman’s
letter to FBI Agent Farley, when Mr. Newman filed a Refusal of Appointment to
provide public defender services to criminal defendants in Quartzsite
Magistrate Court Case No.CR20110155, stating as follows (excerpt):
“I respectfully refuse this
appointment. Moreover, I wish to inform this court that I will be unavailable
to accept appointments in Quartzsite
Magistrate Court
70.
Chief Gilbert, at all times relevant, serves as the Chief of the
Quartzsite Police Department, is directly responsible for the actions of his
officers and for disciplining (or not) his subordinates. Chief Gilbert has been
accused and investigated for a number of documented complaints by his police
officers. Chief of Police Jeff G ilbert
interacted with Mr. G ilford in a
manner that harassed on the following additional dates:
1. 2011: March 15 Chief Gilbert responded to a call from Mr. Johnson where Mr. Gilford was at QTH and had violated no law. June 28. Chief Gilbert ordered Mr. Gilford to stop video from his position (standing waiting in line to speak at a public meeting). July 8, in QTH Chief Gilbert and three officers responded to video camera complaint made by a town employee against Mr. Gilford. July 10 Chief Gilbert supervises Quartzsite Town Council meeting security, bars Mr. Gilford from attending the meeting. July 15 Chief Gilbert and Sgt. Frausto stop Mr. Gilford’s video recording of them in QTH public lobby area. August 9 Chief Gilbert singled out Mr. Gilford to command him not to video record a volunteer Town committee member while the public was assembling on the patio in front of QTH concurrent to a public Town Council meeting
2. 2012: February 28, Chief Gilbert and Sgt. Frausto enforced camera restrictions preventing Mr. Gilford from recording video or audio from a public seat during a Council meeting. There was no signage restricting such acts. August 31 Chief Gilbert (standing in his residence driveway) drew a handgun during service of process (meant for Gilbert) then taking place by Mr. Jack Jones. Jones at all times had remained on public right of way. Mr. Gilford accompanied process server and recorded video. “Get off of my property.”
1. 2011: March 15 Chief Gilbert responded to a call from Mr. Johnson where Mr. Gilford was at QTH and had violated no law. June 28. Chief Gilbert ordered Mr. Gilford to stop video from his position (standing waiting in line to speak at a public meeting). July 8, in QTH Chief Gilbert and three officers responded to video camera complaint made by a town employee against Mr. Gilford. July 10 Chief Gilbert supervises Quartzsite Town Council meeting security, bars Mr. Gilford from attending the meeting. July 15 Chief Gilbert and Sgt. Frausto stop Mr. Gilford’s video recording of them in QTH public lobby area. August 9 Chief Gilbert singled out Mr. Gilford to command him not to video record a volunteer Town committee member while the public was assembling on the patio in front of QTH concurrent to a public Town Council meeting
2. 2012: February 28, Chief Gilbert and Sgt. Frausto enforced camera restrictions preventing Mr. Gilford from recording video or audio from a public seat during a Council meeting. There was no signage restricting such acts. August 31 Chief Gilbert (standing in his residence driveway) drew a handgun during service of process (meant for Gilbert) then taking place by Mr. Jack Jones. Jones at all times had remained on public right of way. Mr. Gilford accompanied process server and recorded video. “Get off of my property.”
71.
Chief G ilbert
participated in and supervised the arrest of political-target (prior Citizens
Coalition associate of Mr. Gilford) Jennifer Jones on June 28, 2011 , while she
was invited to the podium by then Mayor Ed Foster during “call to the public.” Mayor Foster was chairing the Council meeting,
then underway. Mr. G ilford recorded the shocking arrest of Jones with a
handheld camera, and then placed the video on his blog www.QTown.us
and his Youtube.com channel; eventually the video registered over 229,000 views
on YouTube. The video also drew hundreds
of comments (on YouTube) from viewers around the world.
72.
As the video disseminated across web-platforms, it was soon
identified by Town officials as having caused concern among Town officials. Two
expressed increasing malice against Mr. Gilford, exemplified by their sworn
statements to the Arizona Attorney General made in August of 2011. Council
member Barbara Cowell: “letting” [ Mr. Gilford] “in the building with only one police officer to keep the peace could
have led to unnecessary violence.” Alex Taft: “The only other people who approached the
door were the same people who had spearheaded the disruption of prior meetings,
the same people that sent the video of the June 28 meeting to the
anti-government web sites and … attempt to recall the Council, i.e., Doug
Gilford and Ms. Jones”. “The tools that Gilford and
Jones, along with others … were harassment, heckling, making false statements,
following Council Members around with video and still cameras, and bullying.”
73.
Town Manager Taft and Council member Cowell admit in sworn
statements that Mr. Gilford was knowingly, intentionally, and particularly
excluded from the July
10, 2011 “emergency” Council meeting due to, a) his having placed
the June 28th video on YouTube, and, b) his signing a recall
petition(s) despite the fact Mr. Gilford stood at the outside door of QTH for
at least 30 minutes awaiting entry to the meeting (the locked door was being monitored
by Sgt. X. Frausto while Mr. Gilford observed Chief Gilbert at the podium
addressing the council).
74.
On July
10, 2011 during the council meeting in QTH Mr. Brannan stated as
follows. This was at approximately the same time that Mr. Gilford arrived at
the door to QTH and was excluded from entering the meeting.
"It's
at this point where the council's actions are going to be, uh, subject to great
scrutiny. Um, and so, the very first thing on the agenda is for the council to
decide whether or not an emergency exists, and if a emergency does exist,
whether it is of such severity that it would justify having a "No
Notice" meeting" from which
the public is excluded. so that's a question of fact, not a question of law,
how severe the threat is, or how severe you perceive the threat to be, but as a
matter of law, unless you perceive this threat to be of such severity that it
requires you to act immediately without public notice then I would urge you not
to make a motion, and not to vote 'aye" if, uh, if a motion is made and
seconded. So you need to tread very carefully at this point..."
75.
Weeks prior to the “Un-Open” Council meeting of July 10, 2011 ,
in late May 2011, an overwhelming majority of the police department’s sworn
officers voted no-confidence in Chief Gilbert and filed and signed written complaint
with the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board against Chief
Gilbert, alleging, among other things, that they (the officers) were being used
or expected to violate the civil rights of residents of Quartzsite.
76.
The La Paz County Attorney Vederman directly mentioned this in his
January 3, 2012
letter to F.B.I Agent Farley, writing, “One
Police Officer, now a Sergeant with the QPD, had previously contacted this
office concerned that if he carried out the order(s) of Chief Gilbert he may
violate the civil rights of a citizen or citizens.”
77.
A DPS criminal investigation of QPD chief Jeff Gilbert (DR 2011-027462)
resulted in multiple audio recorded interviews of QPD officers in August of
2011. Most of these officers were
terminated later, but all were employed by the Town at the time of their
respective DPS interviews. These
officers stated the following in their interviews:
78.
2011
08 18 DPS Interview QPD Officer William Ponce
DT =
Detective WP = William Ponce
DT: did Chief Gilbert direct you to
conduct traffic stops and arrest or cite anyone?
WP: “he directed me to, yes to all the
above, to make traffic stops, to arrest cite people.
I wouldn’t do it. I refused.”
DT: “do you know the names of some of
these individuals ?”
WP: “He directed me to arrest Jennifer
Jones on one occasion.”
DT: “for what?”
WP: “her
alleged false reporting to law enforcement when she had an incident with code
enforcement officer. Michael Roth when he had an out of state plate on the
front of his vehicle. It was an Oregon
DT: “do you remember when he asked you
to do all this?”
WP: “I want to say that Jennifer Jones …
probably within the last six months.”
Excerpt:
DT:
“The Chief has aligned himself with the Town, City Council?”
WP:
“The City Council”
DT: “totally?”
WP: “yeah pretty much”
DT: “Mayor and chief are at odds?”
WP: “right”
DT: “how about the town manager?”
WP: “she’s with the Chief”
DT: “and obviously the City Council”
WP: “yes, and the assistant town manager also is intertwined in that mess”
DT: “totally?”
WP: “yeah pretty much”
DT: “Mayor and chief are at odds?”
WP: “right”
DT: “how about the town manager?”
WP: “she’s with the Chief”
DT: “and obviously the City Council”
WP: “yes, and the assistant town manager also is intertwined in that mess”
DT:
And he was a prior?
WP:
Code enforcement officer, slash building inspector.
DT: and all the people that you were asked to target were politically against the city council and the chief?
WP: “yes. That’s when we started realizing there’s a pattern here and we weren’t going to get involved in that.”
DT: and all the people that you were asked to target were politically against the city council and the chief?
WP: “yes. That’s when we started realizing there’s a pattern here and we weren’t going to get involved in that.”
DT:
“… and we’re basically talking about Jennifer Jones, Jack Jones, basically the
List..?”
WP: “Jennifer Jones, Jack Jones, Vito Austin, Richard Oldham, Michael Roth, Sean and Laurie Austin” “Russell Sias … I heard Chief tell people that they needed to stop him … These are all people that are either running for political office or supported certain people in political offices or that were trying to run … ”
WP: “Jennifer Jones, Jack Jones, Vito Austin, Richard Oldham, Michael Roth, Sean and Laurie Austin” “Russell Sias … I heard Chief tell people that they needed to stop him … These are all people that are either running for political office or supported certain people in political offices or that were trying to run … ”
DT: about
retaliation… during the five year tenure of the chief how much retaliation have
you seen if you oppose him? When did it start?
WP:
… started about two years ago
DT:
is that because he started getting involved in the politics within the town?
WP: yup.
Everything was fine. He would … decent guy until the political … the first time
they tried to terminate him was when Steve Bennett was the mayor that is when
things changed. … that is when all this stuff started coming out. The mayor did
not like how he was doing business, the amount of money that was being spent …
DT:
… two years ago…?
WP:
yeah probably.
DT: “Prior to that point
had he ever asked you guys as officers to start targeting people or running …
WP: “No. not to my knowledge. “
WP: “No. not to my knowledge. “
DT:
he never asked you or anyone else. And you probably would have heard from
your other officers if he had been asking those officers directly to do that
correct?
WP:
yes. I believe they would have told me.
DT:
…“as soon as he started doing that you started hearing from your officers”
WP: yup.
WP: yup.
DT:
they would call you up and start asking for advice?
WP:
right.
DT:
So prior to getting into politics he never asked you guys to do that?
WP: No.
DT: and he was ok to work for … normal …
WP: No.
DT: and he was ok to work for … normal …
Excerpt: [regarding Matt Newman]
WP: “… they got rid of him because he would not prosecute the cases that we wanted … the Jennifer Jones cases. … retaliation against him for …”
WP: “… they got rid of him because he would not prosecute the cases that we wanted … the Jennifer Jones cases. … retaliation against him for …”
79.
2011 08 18 DPS Interview QPD Officer Heriberto Dominguez:
DT =
Detective HD = Heriberto Dominguez
DT:
Have you seen a change from the time you first started working with the Chief?
HD:
A change in himself?
DT:
A change in his policies, the way he does things the way he carries himself.
HD:
Well the policies keep changing as per day, I’ve never been involved in the
policy junk. The only thing I can say about him is he spends a lot of time over
at town hall and politics that’s what I say.
DT:
When in your mind did he start targeting these individuals?
HD:
The individuals that he’s targeting is when they started running for council or
voicing their opinions about running for council.
DT:
Ok and when would that have been?
HD:
Probably late 09 or the beginning of 2010
DT:
Prior to that did he ever ask others to pull people over?
HD:
That’s the only time he asked me. But other officers would say he had been
asking them.
HD:
“The chief started targeting individuals when they started running for council
or voicing their opinions about running for council”.
DT: I’m going to give you some names Jennifer
Jones, John Jones, Vito Austin, Sean Austin, Laurie Austin, Chaunce Hamilton,
Russell Sias and Michael Roth. Are these some of the individuals that (Gilbert)
may be targeting?
HD:
The ones that are political John Jones, Jennifer Jones and Sias they were
running for council at one time. Vito Austin I’m not sure what the story with
Vito was. And then Laurie Austin and Sean Austin they are the parents of the
girl Officer Starr was seeing.
DT:
do you routinely stop people for out of state plates?
HD:
Michael Roth he’s one of the political ones he has to voice his opinion he’s
got a big mouth. He was just being targeted because of his political
background.
80.
2011 08 30 DPS Interview QPD Officer Felipe Rodriguez:
DT =
Detective FR = Felipe Rodriguez
DT: now can you explain to us why you don’t have
any confidence in the chief? And why you voiced concerns? Regarding the police
department?
FR: Well I have worked under about 6 maybe 7
chief of police. I’ve never seen none of those chiefs to tell us to go target
people out in our community. And when Chief G ilbert
tells us who to target, selective enforcement. We can’t do that. If somebody
commits a crime we will go after that person and take care of the problem, but
for Chief G ilbert to tell us to
target certain people I don’t know.
DT: So during the entire time you were with
Parker PD and Quartzsite prior to Chief G ilbert
telling you that you’ve never had a
police chief or supervisor tell you to do that?
FR: (laughing) No.
DT: Why is it that selective enforcement bothers
you?
FR: Because there are certain people here in this
community that was……….regarding the chief and the city council they are pretty
vocal people here … bring issues in front of the town council and for some
reason the chief doesn’t like those people at all and he has told me and other
officers to go against these people. To find out anything we can on them, to
arrest them and do what ever we can do. And that’s what I don’t agree. I have
presented some of the peoples names he told me to target.
DT: And who would those people be?
FR:
I put here parties like Jennifer Jones, Russell Sias, Michael Roth
and Mayor Foster. What bothers me is if these people are committing any crimes
why are we waiting for them to show up at town meetings at town hall to make an
arrest. It seems to me improper to wait and make the arrest in front of all
these people at are here. So that’s something I don’t agree with either.
DT:
How many times has chief asked you to target certain people?
FR:
“Not the supervisors at all. This comes from the chief of police himself.
Michael Roth. The chief said I want him targeted, I want him pulled over, I
want him cited
DT:
Who is Roth?
FR:
Michael Roth is one of your anti town council people. He’s pretty vocal …
permanent resident … he has tried to become a council person himself.
DT:
Would the chief contact you at the station and say hey, Officer Rodriguez I
want you to target Michael Roth because of this?
FR:
Yes, in front of other officers.
DT: So is he a Snowbird does he go back to Oregon
FR: No he’s a permanent resident and I know he
has tried to become a council person himself. But he has not won any elections
himself.
DT: So would the chief contact you at the station
and say hey Officer Rodriguez I want you to target Michael Roth because of
this?
FR: Yes.
DT: And are you by yourself is it like a
briefing?
FR: Oh there is other officers. And I thin you
will hear that from other officers. To me I consider that selective
enforcement. I don’t agree to do. And why I brought this letter of lack of
confidence against Chief G ilbert.
FR: Do you want another example? On May 10 2011 we did a drug bust on the
interstate. This lady, Jennifer Jones came into the parking lot. She wants to
videotape us while we make that arrest and confiscate all those drugs. And
apparently one of the officers saw that she was there and told chief G ilbert and he got
really upset. He pounded on her window “you need to get out of the car”.
So she got on her phone and called Mayor
Foster. Foster came over and she finally opened her door and she gets arrested
for trespassing right behind town hall. I was inside with the prisoner. I could
hear a lot of screaming and yelling I thought what’s going on. So I look
outside and he is just really going off on the Mayor. And the Mayor is just
walking away from him. He wanted nothing to do with him.
DT: You mean the chief and the mayor?
FR: Yes the Chief and the Mayor, but the one that
I could hear being really loud was the chief. The Chief ordered the Mayor to
get back in his car and leave. So Mayor Foster he complied he got in his car
and left. And then, if he was to be arrested, he should have been arrested
right on the spot; I don’t know for disorderly conduct, I have no idea. Well
that arrest didn’t happen. That arrest was made here in front of all these
people when he was coming to a council meeting. The Mayor was coming to a
council meeting, he gets arrested… To me it was like a show of force; tried to
show the public who he is, you know, Chief G ilbert.
Why wait? It was five days after that incident that Mayor Foster gets arrested.
There’s a report on it and all these charges against him. Why would anybody do
that? If he committed a crime he should have been arrested behind town hall. I
didn’t agree with that either. To me that’s like a show of force to show all
these people, these citizens of Quartzsite, that he’s the chief of police, he’s
the boss.
FR: We have a promotion for sergeant and the
chief calls me into his office and says, “You know, Rodriguez, this is your
opportunity to tell me why I should elect you as a sergeant.” First I said,
“You know the morale in this department is really low.” Chief: “Well, Why?” he
said. First I said, “ Well Chief, you are too politically motivated. You need
to stay out of politics. We want you here at the police department not over at
the town hall meetings; and always going against these people. Stay out of it
chief you don’t need to be in politics.” Chief: “Oh, you don’t understand. You
have to look at the bigger picture.”
Excerpt:
Excerpt:
FR: I told Chief I have never had a Chief tell me
to target certain members of the community. I won’t do that. Chief: “those
people are trouble makers”
Excerpt:
Excerpt:
DT:
Was Chief, always this politically motivated? Or was there a time when you
actually enjoyed working for him?
FR: I did. The first 2 years he was great. He
wasn’t doing politics. He was a great guy. I really liked and respected him.
Then everything started going down hill when he started getting too much
involved with politics. And then these people who dislike him, and dislike the
town council, were causing a little bit of ruckus here at town hall and that’s
when he started getting upset and asking us to screw with them, you know.
DT:
So approximately how long has this been going on that the chief has asked you
to target certain people that oppose him or the town council?
FR: I can go back
about 3 years.
81.
2011 08 18 DPS interview QPD Officer Michelle Norris:
DT =
Detective MN
MN:
JG will go after people who are not on his political side.
MN:
I’ve seen him target people, if it’s someone that he doesn’t care for in town
he makes it known. It’s not a big secret of who he likes and who he don’t like.
The chief made multiple comments about Vito Austin. Chief came up to me and
told me he wanted him (Vito) cited because he had Washington plates on his
truck, but it was ok when (Vito) was doing work at the department on the wall
and stuff, but now it’s not ok?
MN:
there was an Injunction for harassment against Jones for blogging. “I want you
to go down and arrest her (Jones) right now.”,
You want me to arrest her right now for something written on a blog that
may or may not have been her?” And in addition to that, we don’t go and arrest
people off of orders like that ever. If it’s an assault, yes to where someone’s
life is in danger or is being threatened. There is no urgency here.
MN: He (Gilbert) also asked me one time, he
said the Joneses were leaving Greasewood Creek because it was the end of the
season and he wanted to know where they were storing their stuff because he
wanted to know who was going to help them out and store their stuff. And if we
see them on the road, I don’t know if any of their stuff is plated or if they
have drivers’ licenses, “if you see them on the road stop them, I want you to
identify them”. Because I (Gilbert) don’t believe Jack Jones is who he says he
is. He had multiple contacts with him and he (Gilbert) was trying ever way he
could to identify the guy because he didn’t believe through his contacts
because someone had dropped off something in a bag and said, “I think Jones
prints are on this send it to the crime lab.” And I believe he did! This is
coming from people dropping it off at the department. They’re not law
enforcement; they didn’t collect that properly. So he had been trying to identify
him.
82.
2011 08 18 DPS interview QPD Officer Stephen Frakes:
DT =
Detective SF = Stephen Frakes
SF:
Wanted me to target a guy named Vito Austin.
DT:
Did he say why?
SF:
No, originally. NO. He kept saying, I know he’s doing something illegal.
SF:
The Chief was constantly after us, “Find something on Vito, Find something on
Vito.” The Chief, at the office, was always going, “I’ll buy you dinner, I’ll
do this”
DT:
If you find something on Vito?
Frakes:
Yeah.
SF:
Then he came to me and wanted an investigation on voter fraud. Primarily Vito,
Vito’s wife, Ed Foster, Russell Sias. I told him that’s a conflict of interest,
and he kept telling me “no its not”. I talked to Bagby, and he agreed with me,
and Chief Gilbert pressured on Bagby, and finally Bagby to Gilbert, “Okay, I’ll
have Williams do the case.”
DT:
Did the Chief allege to how he knew about the voter fraud, or what the voter
fraud was?
SF:
No.
83.
2011 08 11 DPS interview QPD Officer J. C. Kemp:
DT =
Detective JK = J. C. Kemp
JK: on a barking dog. They entered a residence without a warrant. So at that time they was a she was nasty about it you know she made a big stink about it and everything like that and the Chief was gone at the time to FBI uh was going to FBI training things. So when he got back I was called in too in front of the chief by my sergeant and my sergeant asked me directly JC do we ever enter a residence without a warrant just for the welfare of a dog. I said absolutely not. If you’re that concerned about a dog you got to go get a warrant. and that was the first time I ever heard about it. I actually picked the pieces of this later on. And the Chief shook his head and he says see I told you, you can’t do it. You know, explaining to the Chief of Police that there was no reason for those officers to enter. And that apparently Sgt. Frausto gave them the OK to enter. So I think that’s what the problem was. The woman made such a stink that uh the Chief said he would look into it and when he finally did at a town meeting I believe or some kind of public deal he told the town council that he had investigated the matter and that it was completely unfounded that there was any wrong done by the officers. And we knew from the beginning that there was something wrong. Because otherwise why would he even have bothered to question us?
DT:
so that stirred the pot even more for Jennifer Jones.
JK:
Right. She knew that a warrantless search had been done and all she was asking
for then was an apology from the Chief of Police and from those officers. OK
but now all of a sudden you just you just gave her a soap box and trust me that
thing has been brewing for three years. So, ever since that time.
DT:
OK
JK:
None of the officers were disciplined and I don’t know where they became the
justification but it actually it actually got to the point where the La Paz County
DT:
the last time I checked exigent circumstances don’t apply to dogs.
JK:
Yeah. So she was in the right. And half the town at least half the town knew.
So because she is very vocal wild dirty person. Nobody in the other half of the
town knew didn’t take her seriously. The town council did not take her
seriously. Everybody just she ended up having to go get a lawyer on her own
to try and fight it come up with money to pay a lawyer. And the lawyer
took one look at her and looked at how she dressed in all these tie dyed
clothes and said you know what you pay me a whole bunch of money I’ll represent
you. Since then mistakes have been made where he is working for her pro bono
now. So it’s uh it’s that kind of deal he’s but he started that shit himself.
JK:
In an effort to change that, and because now that she has a soapbox and people
that will listen to her. She is trying to turn that into a political career
here. So during that time she was running for office, during this election
where the mayor was running, I believe it was at that time. And I actually have
one of the council members who told me (when I reported this to ‘em) you know
“Well this isn’t actually the chief’s fault. It’s the council members who are
telling him “hey you go, get them. Go get them. They are talking bad about us.
Go after them. Go get ‘em”. You know. And I said well that doesn’t make it
right. He knows what the law is and he knows he can’t target specific people
just because they are running against you in office. And she goes well you just
got to understand the circumstances. I said well (laughs) circumstances is
there is wrong and there is right.
Cowell
told me “this isn’t the chief’s fault. He was told by people like Joe Winslow
and Jerry Lukkasson go after them. Go get them.” That’s why he did the ACJIS
violations was because he was told to by the Council. That’s what she was
trying to tell me.
JK: So,
one of the instances was that is that after five o’clock at night which is
after the business hours of this town and after the business hours of her dog
grooming business which was parked on a private lot they sent Mr. Johnson over
there to take photographs to try to find any kind of violation town code
violation they could charge this woman with.
DT:
So he basically works code enforcement?
JK: Yeah. At that time he was only the code enforcement officer.
JK: Yeah. At that time he was only the code enforcement officer.
JK: why
did chief want stops? Selective enforcement. Prevent running for office.
Personal reasons. On behalf of the City Council.
84.
2011 08 18 DPS Interview QPD Officer Ruben Villafana:
DT =
Detective RV = Ruben Villafana
RV:
make arrests make traffic stops = problem with chief. aggressively talked bad
about certain people in community. Mayor, Jennifer jones Jack Jones. Gilbert
claims officers made alliance with the domestic terrorism people .. referring
to … the list.
RV:
…mainly it is his political involvement in the town. Telling us to target
people in the community, make arrests, make traffic stops
DT:
did the chief any of his command staff or other officer threaten you in
any way?
RV:
no.
DT:
as far as picking a side at any time?
RV:
Yeah they he’s always, you know, pretty much aggressively talk bad about
a certain people in the community which is you know, like the mayor, and Jennifer
Jones, and Jack Jones and you know certain individuals and as far as recently,
yeah, he has ever since we made our allegations; he says we made an alliance
with what he calls the “domestic terrorism people”.
DT:
and he is referring to the Mayor and his?
RV:
yeah the Mayor …
DT:
basically the “List”
RV:
yes.
DT:
Has he ever said why he doesn’t like these people?
RV:
Pretty much because they are outspoken in the community. They are, I
would say, they are just basically not afraid of him.
DT:
and do these people question his decisions at times?
RV:
Yes. Oh Yeah. Definitely. Many times.
DT:
Why?
RV:
They are outspoken, and not afraid of him. Question his decisions
85.
2011 08 18 DPS Interview QPD Officer Alejandro Rubacalva:
DT =
Detective AR
AR: Chief JG would ask officers to
keep tabs on certain officers so he could target them.
86.
2011 08 30 DPS Interview QPD Officer Herlen Yeomans:
DT =
Detective HY = Herlen Yeomans
HY: Told to stop Ed Foster by Gilbert.
For parking in a handicapped parking space. Turns out Foster has a handicapped
permit…get another call from Gilbert who is parked at Pilot watching and tells
him to get Foster. Gilbert wanted him to harass Foster.
87.
2011 08 18 DPS Interview QPD Officer Michelle Norris:
DT =
Detective MN
MN: License plate was run because it was parked in front of Jones’s business.
MN: JG turned political. “that’s my job”
MN: JG involved offices in political events. Ice cream social
88.
2011 08 24 DPS Interview QPD Evidence Technician Linda Conley:
DT =
Detective LC = Linda Conley JG =Chief
Gilbert
LC: JG wanted to run the Joneses after they returned from a trip
To see if they had done anything wrong while they were gone.
DT: All these times you have run Jennifer Jones and her husband Jack Jones had you run them through the ACJIC system you’re not sure they were ran for criminal purposes or they were not ran for criminal purposes do you have knowledge that at times they were ran for criminal investigative purposes and other times you’re not sure?
LC: Well yeah one time the chief said let’s do a criminal history on these guys to see if they did anything while they were gone. Because they were ‘snowbirds’. What reason is that. That’s not a valid law enforcement reason to run these guys to see if they did anything while they were gone for 4 months.
LC: JG was politically active and only ran people who were opposed to him.
be
more targeted because opposed council or chief
LC:
And what really triggered this whole thing off was Sergeant Frausto asked
me to run a license plate and he has asked me since then to run a license plate
and I’ve run them. And it came back to my neighbor. They are an older couple,
they are snowbirds they are only here part of the year. But this year they had
their daughter live with them. And she had a big dog and I have a big dog. I
have snowbirds that live behind me and they are not real fond of my big dog.
They have complained about my dog barking. I went home at lunch time and my dog
is laid out sound asleep. The dog across the street was barking. So I called
Frausto to come be a witness my dog is asleep and their dog is barking. When
Frausto asked me to run the plate and it came back to the Skeltons and I asked
somebody complained about their dog again? Frausto said No they were seen
driving into Jennifer Jones’s business. That’s not a legitimate reason to run a
license plate because a vehicle goes into a dog grooming business. …
DT:
During the time the chief became politically active. And those people we
talked about getting ACJIS run on them. Had the chief had ACJIS run and
computer related inquires on anybody else in town who had done more serious
crimes?
LC:
No, not that I can remember. If there were serious things I would
probably remember it. I can’t think of anybody that he had me run. He may have
had run Dispatch on serious stuff, he didn’t have me run them.
89.
Upon information and belief, on August 2, 2012 (at QPD headquarters) Chief
Gilbert and two police department employees (one probationary) discussed prior
members of the “Citizens Coalition,” namely, the Plaintiff (in this action)
Douglas Gilford, Jennifer “Jade” Jones, and Michael “Mike” Roth who each had been
arrested by the Town between June and September 1, 2011 and are now suing the Town
for arrests without probable cause.
90.
Police recruit Anton Coetzee was hired by QPD part-time on October 17, 2011 ,
about a month or so after eight ‘whistle-blower’ police employees (seven being
sworn officers) had been fired.
91.
It is Mr. Gilford’s understanding and belief that an audio of the Gilbert-Garcia-Coetzee
August 2, 2012
conversation (excerpts below) exists/existed in the public record of the Town
of Quartzsite
92.
It is Mr. Gilford’s further understanding and belief that the
below (partial) transcription of the conversation (from a transcription submitted
by ex-QPD police clerk Janet Brannan to the Governor’s Office of Arizona around
September 20,
2012 ) represents dialogue between Chief Gilbert, (now ex)
Quartzsite Police Officer Anton Coetzee, and Coetzee’s then supervisor Sgt.
Fabiola Garcia.
93.
The August
2, 2012 transcript (as provided by Ms. Janet Brannan to the
Governor of Arizona) is part of the Arizona
Chief Gilbert: “Um, you know the other thing I’ll just talk
about real quick is, you know, uh, the politics of the, you know, town and
stuff and uh, you know, I, I just, you know, ignore them.
Anton Coetzee: Night time
Chief Gilbert: Yeah
you might not be here in another couple of weeks, or a few weeks or whatever
and, and you know, all the new guys have had their initiation pretty much I
think with, with uh, Jade or one of them, right; Jade or Foster or, or Gilford
or somebody.
Anton Coetzee: Roth, Roth... I know
Chief Gilbert: Roth,
Sgt.
Garcia (Coetzee’s then supervisor): or Douglas
Anton Coetzee: Yes
Chief Gilbert to Anton Coetzee: Yeah
Sgt.
Garcia (Coetzee’s then supervisor) to Coetzee: Well Brady had it with him, but Lancaster
Chief Gilbert to Anton Coetzee: Yeah, three or whatever
Sgt.
Garcia (Coetzee’s then supervisor) to Coetzee:
Because Jade introduced it, Ed Foster was there, Mike goes yeah, O.K
Chief Gilbert to Anton Coetzee: But, the bottom line is
that, um, you know, a year ago, two years ago, um, you know, my attention was
pulled away from the department because, not because I was involved in the
politics, shit, because I had to try to support the Town Manager and the
council people asking for help..”
94.
At the time of the above three-way conversation regarding Mr. Gilford,
Mr. Gilford was concurrently being denied normal access to QTH, since July 3, 2012
based upon a spurious claim filed by the Town, through Defendant Mr. Johnson, in
the Town’s Magistrate Court requesting a Workplace Harassment Injunction Order
against Mr. Gilford, which was granted immediately upon filing (the same day) July 3, 2012 by
Judge Lawrence King. Judge King had been previously removed from all of Mr.
Gilford’s Quartzsite Magistrate Court
95.
In his aforementioned August 2011 interview with the Arizona
Department of Public Safety, then QPD Officer James Kemp alleged that then-Quartzsite
Code Enforcement Officer Mr. Johnson, had (in 2010) gone to the residence of
Quartzsite citizen Jennifer Jones (who like Mr. Gilford, is a prior “Citizens
Coalition” associate) for a purpose to “rile
her up,” basically to harass Ms. Jones (without probable cause) under a
pretense of enforcing “zoning regulations.”
96.
This episode of harassment of Jones (by Mr. Johnson) was quite
similar in verbal nature, physical manner, selective interfering with and physically-obstructionist
actions of Mr. Johnson toward Mr. Gilford which have been displayed by Mr.
Johnson when Mr. Gilford has attempted (during 2011) to conduct legitimate
visits and business at QTH for personal and business reasons.
97.
On or about July 13 to19 of 2011, Mr. Gilford filed four separate
factual complaints with the Quartzsite Police Department, one being a complaint
that Assistant Town Manager Al Johnson
interfered with Mr. Gilford’s business in QTH on July 13 2011 .
98.
On August
19, 2011 , on behalf of the Town, Town Prosecutor Martin Brannan
charged Mr. Gilford in Criminal Case #2
of 3 (CR20110097) with filing a false report for filing the complaint
regarding the July
13, 2011 events involving Mr. Johnson.
99.
On September
1, 2011 , Mr. Gilford approached a business window at QTH and exchanged
greetings with three employees on the business-office side of the
partition-window. Mr. Gilford reached
for a self-service display of blank Public Records Request forms, took a
standing position at the counter, and proceeded to use the ledge surface to
prepare a Request form for a public record he was seeking.
100. Mr.
Johnson was not in sight. However, once again as before, Mr. Johnson presented
himself in front of Mr. Gilford and insisted on interfering with Mr. Gilford although
Mr. Gilford was seeking direct assistance from no one. In this instance Mr. Johnson approached the
window from the office-side and insisted Mr. Gilford communicate with Mr. Johnson
while Mr. Gilford was still attempting to complete the paperwork.
101. Mr.
Gilford felt an imminent need he may need to document the developing circumstances
due to the insistent demand from Mr. Johnson that he must then and there “assist”
Mr. Gilford and that Mr. Gilford must submit to his “assistance”, despite the
fact Mr. Gilford had asked for no help whatsoever. Mr. Gilford powered-up a camera device which he
almost always has with him, but he did not
activate the device into record mode.
102. Upon
seeing the camera in Mr. Gilford’s hand, Mr. Johnson suddenly snatched the
camera from Mr. Gilford’s hand by force and then held it behind his (Mr.
Johnson’s) back so Mr. Gilford could not retrieve it. Suffering unlawful seizure of his personal
property (without warrant or just cause), Mr. Gilford decided to call 911 so as
to get his camera back. While Mr. Gilford was already in the call process with
911, to report his camera had been snatched, Mr. Johnson set the camera back on
the counter near Mr. Gilford. Mr. Gilford remained in the lobby area on the
opposite side of the partition from Asst. Town Manager Johnson, and was still
connected to dispatch when Mr. Johnson began making sounds similar to that
which a bleating-goat might make.
103. At 15:38 Mr. Gilford retrieved his
camera from the counter ledge and departed to the outside of the building to
await a police response the dispatcher said would be forthcoming, outside the
building.
104. Concurrent
to Mr. Gilford awaiting a QPD officer arrival outside the building, Mr. Johnson
separately contacted QPD Sgt. Xavier Frausto regarding the matter.
105. Ofcr.
Rodriguez arrived on the scene. Unbeknownst to Mr. Gilford, he had actually been
waiting to be falsely arrested by Quartzsite Police Ofcr. Rodriguez who had
been ordered by Sgt. Frausto to immediately arrest Mr. Gilford on the spot for
charges of trespassing, harassment, and false reporting.
106. Afterwards,
Officer Rodriguez took Mr. Gilford’s personal property (which included private
papers and Mr. Gilford’s camera) and Mr. Gilford’s personal papers were passed
by Defendant Officer Rodriguez to Defendant Sgt. Fabiola Garcia, who then disappeared
with Mr. Gilford’s personal papers.
107. During
the seizure of Mr. Gilford by Officer Rodriguez, the following warning was
heard by Mr. Gilford and captured on Mr. Gilford’s audio recorder:
“Turn
around for me you’re under arrest. Now you have – you gonna go to jail and you
gonna get booked in. You gonna feel what it is to be in custody. OK, sir? And
next time you come here, and I’m working, once again I’m gonna take you back to
jail.”
108. At
trial (July 3, 2012), in Criminal Case #3 of 3 (CR20110103), relating to Mr.
Gilford’s September
1, 2011 false arrest, prosecutor Mr. Jones asked Officer Rodriguez
pertinent questions and received responses, as follows:
MR.
JONES: Did you think that you had probable cause to arrest Mr. Gilford for
trespass?
OFFICER
RODRIGUEZ: Uh, I had not done an
investigation with … I was just under orders to make the arrest
by Sergeant Frausto.
MR.
JONES: So you didn’t really make any independent judgment of your own whether
or not the probable cause existed?
OFFICER
RODRIGUEZ: Before I arrived at Town Hall, I have, a received a phone call from
Sergeant Frausto to make an arrest and then I got a text message from Sergeant
Frausto … I need to arrest Mr. Gilford
also certain charges.
MR.
JONES: No further questions.”
109. A total of
sixteen misdemeanor counts (without probable cause) were pending upon Mr.
Gilford’s September
1, 2011 arrest, brought by the Town in a twenty three (23) day
period. The alleged plaintiffs and/or alleged victims (in all sixteen counts)
were either elective officers of the Town or employees of the Town of Quartzsite
Prior to hisSeptember
1, 2011 arrest for which Mr. Gilford was charged with three counts
(trespassing, harassment, false reporting) in the Town’s Magistrate Court,
Criminal Case #3 of 3, (CR20110103), Mr. Gilford was already being maliciously
prosecuted for thirteen other misdemeanor charges in two cases: Criminal Case
#1 of 3 (CR20110093) & Criminal Case #2 of 3 (CR20110097) in the same
court. Criminal Case #1 & Criminal Case #2 were previously filed against
Mr. Gilford by the Town Prosecutor (respectively filed August 10 and August 19, 2011 ).
Prior to his
110. Mr.
Johnson (then serving as Assistant Town Manager) announced at a “Town Hall”
panel-styled meeting of Town Officials and staff (in late Fall 2011) that Judge King was an “Ivy League” graduate and
that “[t]he games are over at Quartzsite
Magistrate Court,” suggesting new Town Magistrate, Judge King, would be
making future judicial rulings and managing the court under some kind of
special influence of the 1. Town council (who selected Judge King as their
unelected Magistrate) and 2. other Town officials (Prosecutor and police chief)
who did not have such influence over pro tem Magistrates serving the Town Magistrate Court
111. The
same day of the dismissal and/or acquittal of the remaining of the initial
sixteen charges, the Town immediately, acting through Assistant Town Manager
Johnson swore out a statement to obtain a Workplace Harassment Injunction
against Mr. Gilford. The petition for the injunction included false information
about Mr. Gilford’s past conduct at QTH and speculative fears (colorfully
described rhetoric) about Mr. Gilford’s potential future conduct claiming Mr.
Gilford to be “emboldened” by the trial results (his acquittals that same day)
would exercise his constitutional rights (especially First Amendment rights) in
some speculative future manner that might harm the Town (or harm other imagined
others).
112. On July 3, 2012 , the
same day Judge Sherwood Johnston III acquitted Mr. Gilford of false reporting,
harassment, and disorderly conduct a Workplace Harassment Injunction was
granted by Judge Lawrence King excluding Mr. Gilford from QTH and its premises
until Mr. Gilford had the order quashed.
113. Mr.
Gilford, a real estate broker who often needs access to QTH (especially the
Planning and Zoning department to inspect maps and documents relating to his
professional real estate services for clients) was thereby excluded from access
in his normal course of business to the complete services of his local government
(other than by email, mail or fax) for several weeks until Mr. Gilford finally
obtained legal representation to defend himself and to get the Injunction
quashed.
114. Defendant
Martin Brannan (“Mr. Brannan”), pursuant to his own “whistle-blower” complaint
to the Arizona State Personnel Board, admits he was hired to be a “hard
ass town attorney” (who had replaced longtime Town prosecutor Matt
Newman). Mr. Brannan well-served as a means to effect civil conspiracy against
the political targets, including Mr. Gilford, as Mr. Brannan provided an
alternative to the Town’s repeated and frustrated attempts to cause the
prosecution of the political targets of the Council with felonies because County
Attorney Vederman was refusing to prosecute numerous felony arrests and
investigations being forwarded to him by the Town in regards to the “targets.” In his January 3, 2012 letter (to FBI Agent Farley)
Vederman addressed the issue:
“ 1.
Chief Jeff Gilbert has requested felony charges against certain citizens for
which I believe no criminal conduct occurred, or, at the very least, did not
rise to the level of felony conduct: Russell Sias (Aggravated Assault on a
Peace Officer), Jennifer Jones (Influencing a Witness), Michael Roth (Resisting
Arrest) and Ed Foster (Obstructing a Criminal Investigation). 2. It
is my belief that the arrest of Ed Foster (the former Town Mayor) for conduct
that arose out of the same incident
in which Chief Gilbert requested Mr. Foster be charged with felony Obstructing
a Criminal Investigation, was a
politically motivated arrest…(sic) 4. Chief Gilbert formally requested that
this office no longer prosecute misdemeanor cases in which the QPD is involved
and his request occurred after Mr. Newman was fired. 5. Chief Gilbert has requested that this
office conflict off of certain
felony cases, referred to this office by the QPD, in which there is no conflict
of interest.”
115. January 15, 2012 , Mr.
Brannan issued a “Town Attorney” press release to the public labeling and naming
several citizens (prior “Citizens Coalition” associates) as “self styled
activists.” All those named in the press
release by Mr. Brannan were at the time being prosecuted (without probable
cause) for various alleged misdemeanor offenses by the Town, namely, Mr.
Douglas Gilford, Ed Foster, Jennifer Jones, and Michael Roth.
116. Days
later, on January
24, 2012 , during a public council meeting in progress, Mr. Brannan
read a prepared statement affording Mr. Brannan an opportunity to call Mr.
Gilford a liar. Mr. Brannan was then present at the Council meeting in his
capacity as the Town Attorney and Town Parliamentarian.
117. Indeed,
Mr. Brannan was only underscoring and participating in the ongoing conspiracy
to politically target and charge prior “Citizens Coalition” associates with
criminal counts (without probable cause)
and expressed the malice and animosity which then town council members (
who hired him to be “hard ass”) held
against the most ‘vocal’ associates of the prior organized “Citizens Coalition.”
118. By
the time of Mr. Brannan’s hiring in Spring of 2011, for more than two years
prior Citizens Coalition associates had been recording (via Audio/video) Town
activities, publishing about Town activities, protesting about Town activities,
and speaking out about Town activities, in the face of being invidiously
discriminated against and distinctly labeled on June 22, 2010 , by Council member Joe
Winslow as a “radical organization” operating
“a conspiracy to commit sedition,” as
“dedicated nihilists,” and “anarchists.”
Criminal Case #2 of 3 (CR20110097)
119. On
or about July 13-19 of 2011, Mr. Gilford filed four separate factual complaints
with the Quartzsite Police Department regarding Town Manager Taft, Police Sgt.
Fabiola Garcia, Council member Jose Lizarraga, and Assistant Town Manager Mr.
Johnson.
120. On August 19, 2011
on behalf of the Town, Mr. Brannan brought charges against Plaintiff for False
Reporting (6 counts), Harassment (2 counts), Disorderly Conduct and Trespassing
in QTH. July 3, 2012 ,
Judge Johnston III acquitted Mr. Gilford on all remaining charges for no prima
facie case.
121. Defendant
Fabiola Garcia (“Garcia”) at all times relevant, held the position of Officer and or Sergeant in the QPD and acted
under color of state law in causing events to occur in the Town out of which
this complaint arose.
122. Sgt.
Garcia has stepped up to assist in the arrests of political targets when other
Quartzsite officers either refused to arrest and/or refused to pen criminal
reports against the targets, upon the request of the Chief.
123. On
or about July 13-19 of 2011, Mr. Gilford filed four separate factual complaints
with the QPD. Plaintiff complained that Police Sgt. Fabiola Garcia refused to
assist Mr. Gilford on July 13, 2011 while Mr. Johnson harassed Mr. Gilford at
the QTH and blocked Plaintiff’s path to the business counter in QTH. Garcia was
present and did not respond to Mr. Gilford’s plea to curb Mr. Johnson’s
behavior.
124. On August 19, 2011 ,
on behalf of the Town, Town Prosecutor Martin Brannan charged Mr. Gilford in Criminal Case #2 of 3 (CR20110097)
with filing a false report for filing the complaint regarding the July 13, 2011
events involving Sgt. Garcia.
125. Mr. G ilford was approached and engaged without cause by
Sgt. G arcia on August 23, 2011 outside of
QTH for being “offensive” (in her opinion) because Mr. Gilford was taking a
photo of a bulletin board bearing public notices. Sgt. Frausto assisted Sgt. G arcia in the interference with Mr. Gilford on August 23, 2011 .
126. Defendant
Xavier Frausto (“X. Frausto”) at all times relevant was employed as a Sergeant
in the QPD.
127. Frausto
interacted with Mr. G ilford in a
manner that harassed Mr. Gilford on the following dates:
1. 2011: July 8 In QTH Sgt. Frausto and Chief & 2 officers respond to video camera complaint made by a town employee against Mr. Gilford. July 10 Sgt. Frausto barred Mr. Gilford and Jennifer Jones from entry to QTC council meeting underway in QTH. July 12, Mr. Gilford accosted in QTH by Sgt. Frausto who inquires “do you have business?” July 15 In QTH Sgt. Frausto denied Mr. Gilford use of video camera near public business window. July 15 Later in day QTH Sgt. Frausto forbade Mr. Gilford on his second visit to use video camera in entire building. August 23 Outside QTH Sgt. Frausto approached Mr. Gilford: “But don’t be taking peoples’ pictures …”. August 23 (2nd contact) In doorway of QTH Sgt. Frausto refused to take Mr. Gilford’s report of assault. “… Close the door – air conditioning.” September 1 Sgt. Frausto commanded Mr. Gilford’s arrest after Mr. Johnson made a complaint about alleged video camera use in QTH.
2. 2012: February 28 Sgt. Frausto enforced camera restrictions against video camera or audio recorder from public seat at Council meeting (no sign posted of rules in room). February 28 (2nd incident) Frausto insisted that Mr. Gilford not video record him from the press area either. June 4 Sgt. Frausto forbade Mr. Gilford the right to video record him on duty at Quartzsite Council Meeting .
1. 2011: July 8 In QTH Sgt. Frausto and Chief & 2 officers respond to video camera complaint made by a town employee against Mr. Gilford. July 10 Sgt. Frausto barred Mr. Gilford and Jennifer Jones from entry to QTC council meeting underway in QTH. July 12, Mr. Gilford accosted in QTH by Sgt. Frausto who inquires “do you have business?” July 15 In QTH Sgt. Frausto denied Mr. Gilford use of video camera near public business window. July 15 Later in day QTH Sgt. Frausto forbade Mr. Gilford on his second visit to use video camera in entire building. August 23 Outside QTH Sgt. Frausto approached Mr. Gilford: “But don’t be taking peoples’ pictures …”. August 23 (2nd contact) In doorway of QTH Sgt. Frausto refused to take Mr. Gilford’s report of assault. “… Close the door – air conditioning.” September 1 Sgt. Frausto commanded Mr. Gilford’s arrest after Mr. Johnson made a complaint about alleged video camera use in QTH.
2. 2012: February 28 Sgt. Frausto enforced camera restrictions against video camera or audio recorder from public seat at Council meeting (no sign posted of rules in room). February 28 (2nd incident) Frausto insisted that Mr. Gilford not video record him from the press area either. June 4 Sgt. Frausto forbade Mr. Gilford the right to video record him on duty at Quartzsite Council Meeting .
128. Frausto
testified at the July
3, 2012 trial of Mr. Gilford, regarding the September 1, 2011 arrest and
seizure of Mr. Gilford, as follows:
MR.
CAMPBELL: Did you receive a phone call from Mr. Johnson September first?
SGT. FRAUSTO:
Yes.
MR. CAMPBELL:
What did Mr. Johnson tell you
SGT. FRAUSTO:
That Mr. Gilford was in there causing a commotion at town hall.
MR. CAMPBELL:
What else did he tell you?
SGT. FRAUSTO: Nothing. That’s the best I
can recall.
MR. CAMPBELL: Did
he tell you that Mr. Gilford had a video camera in the town hall lobby?
SGT. FRAUSTO: I
can’t recall that.
MR. CAMPBELL: Do
you remember giving me a statement last week?
SGT. FRAUSTO:
Yes.
MR. CAMPBELL: Do
you remember telling me in your statement that Mr. Johnson told you that Mr.
Gilford was videoing in the lobby?
SGT. FRAUSTO: If
I did I can’t recall that.
MR. CAMPBELL: In
response to Mr. Johnson’s phone call did you give an order to Officer Rodriguez?
SGT. FRAUSTO: Yes
I did.
MR. CAMPBELL:
What was that order?
SGT. FRAUSTO: To
place Mr. Gilford under arrest.
MR. CAMPBELL: You
made that order without doing any investigation on your own other than hearing a phone call from Mr. Johnson?
SGT. FRAUSTO:
Well the ..he did in the past
MR. CAMPBELL: As
it pertains to September first did you …….. the incident as it was reported to you by Mr. Johnson
September first 2011 did you do any more investigation
about that particular incident before you ordered the arrest of Mr. Gilford
SGT. FRAUSTO: No
like I say I was going by what he did in the past.
MR. CAMPBELL:
Judge I would move to strike anything about incidents in the past. There’s
no evidence …
THE COURT:
Sustained.
129. September 1, 2011 , at
the jail while Mr. Gilford was being booked, Officer Rodriguez completed a
“Release Questionnaire” containing the officer’s “Probable Cause” for the
arrest. Upon information and belief, Sgt. Frausto
instructed Officer Rodriguez as to how to word the Probable Cause statement to
make it appear Mr. Gilford had trespassed at QTH after being allegedly told “to
leave,” which is an absolute falsehood.
130. After
getting a phone call from Mr. Johnson (confirmed by Sgt. Frausto and Mr.
Johnson’s testimony at Mr. Gilford’s July 3, 2012 trial), Sgt. Frausto ordered
Defendant Felipe Rodriguez to arrest Mr. Gilford (confirmed by Sgt. Frausto and
Ofcr. Rodriguez’ testimony at Mr. Gilford’s July 3, 2012 trial) without probable
cause or even minimal investigation of the facts.
131. Defendant
Felipe Rodriguez (“Ofcr. Rodriguez”), at all times relevant was employed as a
police officer in the QPD. Ofcr. Rodriguez was party to the group of Quartzsite
police officers who in May 2011 had
filed a complaint with AZPOST (as a group) against Chief Gilbert, complaining
that they were being used or expected to violate the civil rights of certain
targeted citizens.
132. In the
DPS criminal investigation of Chief Gilbert, Ofcr. Rodriguez made the pertinent
statements set forth above that he was being used by Chief Gilbert to violate
citizens of the Town of Quartzite
133. Ofcr.
Rodriguez testified at the trial (July 3, 2012) of Mr. Gilford’s September 1, 2011
arrest charges, that he had no probable cause, nor true material facts to
support the charge of trespassing, despite Ofcr. Rodriguez’s Probable Cause Statement alleging
trespass.
134. Only
the falsehood in the Probable Cause Statement about Mr. Gilford being told “to
leave” and allegedly “refusing to leave” QTH on September 1, 2011 , gave the arraigning
judge a basis to hold Mr. Gilford on the false trespassing arrest &
trespassing charge.
135. Defendant
Joseph Michael Winslow (“Winslow”), at all times relevant, was an elective
official, a Town Council member for the Town of Quartzsite
136. When
(on June 22, 2010 )
Council member Winslow called for the resignation of then Mayor Ed Foster (a
prior “coalition” associate who had been elected Mayor in early 2010) for editing/publishing
the online Quartzsite-focused news website, the “Mineshaft,” Council member
Winslow stating at the June 22, 2010 council meeting to the public (excerpt from
beginning of council member Winslow’s
statement) the following:
“I'm asking for the Mayor to resign his
office for the following reasons; for
continuing to align himself with the reform coalition group as its nominal head, this is
diametrically opposed to the mission of this town, and as editor of the newspaper,
The Mineshaft
Members of this radical organization
are engaged in an ongoing conspiracy to commit sedition, and have been for at
least year. Their objective is the elimination of all elected town officials
and selected town staff, I.E., the town manager and chief of police, among
others; and replace them with their anarchist counterparts, by any means
necessary.
Their methods vary, but for the most
part consist of disruption during council meetings by shouting or talking
loudly in hopes of gaining a forum to argue their views. Lately, the have been blocking
access to the public podium by attempting to intimidate citizens who wish to address
the council. It's easier to intimidate by leaning on the wall than sitting in a
chair, f you enjoy that sort of thing. Other methods include dissemination of
false information, such as disinformation, misinformation, perception
management, and when all else fails, outright lies.
The Mayor and members of this group have brought several lawsuits against the
town, its staff, and members of the council. To date all have been dismissed,
either due to a lack of evidence or because they were lacking in merit. This group, while represented by Hal
Davidson, has threatened to recall any council member who does not resign.
As Mr. Davidson has a lot of experience
in this area, being responsible for at least five recall elections at the cost
to the town of thousands of dollars, I take his threat seriously. I cannot,
however, take Mr. Davidson seriously. I react poorly to threats. I refuse to
resign
The Mayor, and members of his group of
dedicated nihilists, have submitted many, many
public information requests over the last year or so. These inquiries are part
of a fishing expedition and partly an attempt to divert town staff from other
more pressing duties, I.E. serving the people of Quartzsite.” End transcription excerpt.
137. Approximately
one year later (May 18, 2011), at a “Town Hall” meeting the Town and Winslow
rhetoric was still flowing against the “dissidents:”
May 18, 2011
“Town Hall meeting”
Meeting: Panel includes Joe Winslow (JT), Alex Taft (AT), Al Johnson (AJ), Commentator {CO}
JW: can I mention the cost involved?
AT: sure
JW: the last year.. we spent on THE DISSIDENTS for lack of a better word.. its $46,000.
AT: I need to correct that. It’s not the dissidents it’s our Mayor.
JW: Oh it’s just one man I stand corrected.
AT: yeah.
JW: that’s his cost… the other thing.. interesting is that we have a whole stack of Freedom of Information requests like that. For the most part RIDICULOUS. EXCEPT we had one of our staff put it all together and it started to make no sense to me. This is all going in one direction which basically is bad for the Town . not going to get into that. If you stop and think about all the man hours required to respond to those FOI requests that means we are paying somebody about 8, 8, 10 dollars an hour to spend all day two days a week whatever researching each one of the damn things. Like I said there is a stack like that and there is no way you can quantify that. You can’t say it is 800 man hours. Ten thousand man hours. Nobody really knows. As far as the chief was in here … you know as far as the department doing their job ... they are being threatened you need to know that Council as it consists … we have been threatened with lawsuits you name it. We are still here. We are still going to do our job.
JW: nobody is going to bully us. I am going to talk to Mr. Vederman about how he could ignore our requests for a year and a half or two years … investigate these people and they come down on us in response to a letter that the Mayor sent.
CO: How do you hold steady while sustaining blows of persecution? What are your secrets for staying the course? JW: I am a saint. [laughter]
AJ: where else can you get this
entertainment for free?
JW: free?
AJ: I am not going to say it is an
adrenal run actually it is a drain. … you have no idea what comes
through that door. [back patting session] … overwhelming…can’t pay for this kind of experience… you
would like to see it end. I was the one who asked
that a list be compiled of the mayor’s request forms. I went through each and every one of them. I gave them to the
town manager. Some of it is just you
know it’s RIDICULOUS. Some of it is
pretty well aimed. And you really wonder where
some of this information how THEY get some of this
information. There is almost like a
psychological side of it. But uh I got to
tell you it is fun day you …. (refers
to AT town manager)
Criminal
Case #1 of 3 (CR20110093)
138.
On July 27, 2011 , elective Council
member Joe Winslow walked past Mr. Gilford in the parking lot of QTH. Events
which followed led to Winslow making a written complaint to QPD for harassment
against Mr. Gilford.
139.
Prosecutor Brannan wrote “The Quartzsite
Town Prosecutor accuses” Mr. Gilford of 3 counts of harassment in a criminal
complaint in Quartzsite Municipal Court (Formerly Quartzsite Magistrate Court)
on August 10,
2011 .
140.
At about 9:00 in the morning on July 27, 2011 , Mr. Gilford was
talking with Stephen Frakes, a certified peace officer, and Linda Conley,
police evidence technician in the QTH parking lot. Mr. Gilford had a political
sign (“Go. Quit. Resign.”) in the back of his parked truck to which Winslow
dedicated five handwritten lines in his victim witness statement / written
complaint. Winslow alleged that people would have to “walk around it” even
though the truck was properly parked “front and center” where all could see in
a marked space, nothing projecting.
141.
Council member Winslow passed by on foot. Mr. Gilford asked
“Councilman could I please ask you a question?” Winslow rebuffed Mr. Gilford’s
request and Mr. Gilford returned to his previous conversation. Later that day,
Winslow reported this brief exchange with Mr. Gilford to Sgt. Frausto in a written
harassment complaint.
142.
Hours later, at around noon
that day, Mr. G ilford went to the
local post office to pick up his mail. Council member Winslow showed up just
after Mr. G ilford. Mr. G ilford
asked “Hello Councilman. Could you please tell me why the Council has not put
the Chief on suspension?” Again Winslow
rebuffed Mr. G ilford, now with
colorful speech. Despite the fact that Winslow arrived after Mr. G ilford, more than two hours after the morning's
event, Winslow later reported this exchange with Mr. G ilford
in writing to QPD.
143.
Sgt. Frausto’s Incident Report in this case led to charges
including one for misdemeanor Harassment - Following. Mr. G ilford left the Post Office at about 12:10 pm , before Winslow. He drove
down Main Street
144.
Minutes later Mr. G ilford’s
name was heard by others on a police scanner radio receiver. Upon information and
belief, Sgt. Frausto and Chief G ilbert
were inside the restaurant with at least one Council member, Barbara Cowell
(police vehicles and Cowell’s vehicle in parking lot).
145.
Winslow made a written police complaint about Mr. G ilford for this event. Winslow and Sgt. Frausto
alleged two criminal acts of harassment against Mr. Gilford in the written police
report.
146. Defendant
Alexandra Taft (“Taft”), at all times relevant, was employed as Town Manager
for the Town of Quartzsite
147. On
or about July 13-19 of 2011, Mr. Gilford filed four separate factual complaints
with the Quartzsite Police Department. Plaintiff complained that Town Manager
Taft had violated her own posted rule regarding no camera use in QTH on July 12, 2011 .
148. On August 19, 2011 ,
on behalf of the Town, Town Prosecutor Martin Brannan charged Mr. Gilford in
Criminal Case #2 of 3 (CR20110097) with filing a false report for filing the
complaint regarding the July 12, 2011 events involving Ms. Taft.
149. On Aug 22, 2011 , in
a sworn statement made by Ms. Taft and soon after submitted to the Arizona
Attorney General’s Office (AG) pursuant to an investigation then underway at
the AG’s Office. Then-Town Manager Taft alleged an event where Mr. Gilford had sought
to attend a July
10, 2011 Council meeting and was summarily denied entrance and
participation by the police officer guarding the locked door to the Council
Chambers. Taft’s sworn statement described the circumstances of July 10, 2011 at
QTH, and made defamatory accusations regarding Mr. Gilford, placing him in a
false light, as follows:
“The perception of an emergency brewing began within a day or two
of the June 28th meeting. Other Town Officers and employees
and I had heard rumors that the
video of Ms. Jones had gone “viral” and vicious comments were being posted
about the police and the Council online. The websites we monitor, i.e., Ms.
Jones’, Doug Gilford’s, Mayor Foster’s and Richard Oldham’s, all had statements
of an incendiary nature regarding the meeting.”
“The only other people who approached the door were the same
people who had spearheaded the disruption of prior meetings, the same people
that sent the video of the June 28 meeting to the anti-government web sites and
the same people who had tried repeatedly, with the Mayor’s support, to unseat the
council through a failed attempt to recall the Council, i.e., Doug
Gilford and Ms. Jones.”
“The tools that Gilford and Jones, along with others like Dean Taylor and Michael Roth, were harassment, heckling, making false statements, following Council Members around with video and still cameras, and bullying. Those tactics were not limited to council; they included staff and people who supported the council and attended the meetings peacefully. This is why the doors remained locked.”
“We only had one officer on duty.”
“The tools that Gilford and Jones, along with others like Dean Taylor and Michael Roth, were harassment, heckling, making false statements, following Council Members around with video and still cameras, and bullying. Those tactics were not limited to council; they included staff and people who supported the council and attended the meetings peacefully. This is why the doors remained locked.”
“We only had one officer on duty.”
150. Thomas
W. Jones (“Jones”), at all times relevant, was employed and/or contracted with
the Town as Special Prosecutor to temporarily replace Town Attorney/Prosecutor Brannan
in the prosecution of Mr. Gilford.
151. Jones
insisted on prosecuting Mr. Gilford for at least one count to get a retaliatory
conviction the Town wanted, no matter what. The March 2012 emails between the Town Manager
and Jones about Ed Foster’s charges show the Town Manager was involved in
trying to “shop” for a prosecutor on behalf of the Town.
152. Tom
Jones made a “pick a card” style plea offer to Mr. Gilford at the March 28, 2012 mediation
conference requested by Judge King. Just Mr. Jones and Mr. Gilford met in a
room. Mr. Gilford’s perception is that Mr. Jones’ plea offer indicated that he
might have been trying to satisfy Town
Manager Taft by procuring at least one conviction in Mr. Gilford’s case.
153. Mr.
Gilford will always remember Mr. Jones for his “pick a card” plea offer. If Mr. Gilford would just plead guilty to any
one of the counts against him (of thirteen then pending), Mr. Jones would move
the court to dismiss all the others.
154. Defendant
Laura Bruno (“Bruno”) at all times relevant, since her appointment as “Interim”
Town Manager and as the regular Town Manager, has overtly acted to suppress Mr.
Gilford from exercising his First Amendment rights.
155. Bruno
issued a letter on October
10, 2012 to Mr. Gilford stating restrictions which unreasonably
restrict his use of a video recording camera. The letter instructs or warns Mr.
Gilford, “While at Town Hall meetings …
you may not videotape the audience … unless you have the express permission of
each individual ….” This is directly
contrary to Arizona
156. Given
Bruno’s policy/rule at QTH Council and other meetings, that camera and video
recording (even with a camera no larger than a cell phone) may only be done
from the rear of the meeting room, it is physically impossible to video record
only the public officials at the front of the room without capturing part or
all of all those in the public seats in the camera lens. Mr. Gilford owns a
small handheld snapshot-sized camera (with a footprint about the size of a cell
phone) and certainly the use of an item this size, if held against the face while
seated in his chair in the audience, is no more objectionable to others than
wearing sunglasses over the face.
157. Prohibiting
operation of small cameras / recorders from a public seat at a council meeting serves
no legitimate governmental interest nor public safety nor public health purpose.
158. On February 8, 2013
Mr. Gilford, accompanied by Quartzsite Council Member Patricia Workman, entered
QTH for a 9 am appointment
to view a public record which he earlier had formally requested on October 2, 2012 .
Now both were seated together at a table with an attendant because the Town
forces the public to inspect public records while accompanied by a Town staff person.
Mr. Gilford began to take notes and to read the document aloud to Council
member Workman. Ms. Bruno approached Mr. Gilford and insisted that no audio
recording was to be done. Mr. Gilford and Council member Workman left the
building without finishing the planned review. No signs were seen posted in the
building forbidding audio recording.
159. On April 8, 2013 Ms.
Bruno’s appointee (Town Clerk T. Frausto) then enforced Ms. Bruno’s ‘no audio
recording of any kind policy’ in the same room used in the event of February 8, 2013
(above). Ms. Frausto said something to
Mr. Gilford to the effect of “you understand you are not to be recording? I am
not to be recorded, Alright?” Mr. Gilford asked Ms. Frausto, a question to the
effect, “What would happen if I did record, would you arrest me?” Her answer
was vague, more or less, stating, “I can file something against you” which Mr.
Gilford took to be something on the order of a criminal charge or an
injunction, having previously experienced both from the Town. Ms. Frausto did
not make that clear.
160. Mr.
Gilford has the statutory right to tape record any conversation he is part of
pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-3005 and 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(c).
161. Patricia
Anderson, at all times relevant, has served in her capacity as former Town of Quartzsite Council
162. On January 3, 2012
in his letter to F.B.I. Agent Farley, then La Paz County Attorney Vederman (now
Judge) commented about Council member Anderson taking a public position in
regard to Mike Roth (prior member of the Citizens Coalition), quote:
The
Town, through Council member Patricia Anderson, publicly criticized this office
for declining to prosecute Michael Roth for an incident that took place at a
Town Council meeting in June 2011. It is the same incident in which Chief Gilbert
requested this office charge Mr. Roth with felony Resisting Arrest.
163. QPD
Police Clerk Linda Conley Letter dated June 25, 2011 , describes the politicking going on in the
Quartzsite Police department in the 2010 election cycle. Conley writes:
Chief G ilbert
has involved himself and the department in town politics against Town Policy.
When Patricia Anderson was running for a council seat, she came into the office
for a meeting with the chief. He came out of his office with a stack of
business type cards, political campaign paraphernalia of Anderson
164. Barbara
Cowell, at all times relevant, was a member of the Town Council.
165. On Aug 25, 2011 , a
sworn statement was made by Ms. Cowell and soon after submitted to the Arizona
Attorney General’s Office (AG), pursuant to an investigation then underway at
the AG’s Office. In the statement, Council
member Cowell (who was and is a real estate agent with a competing agency to
Mr. Gilford’s real estate agency) alleged an event where Mr. Gilford had sought
to attend a July
10, 2011 Council meeting and was summarily denied entrance and thereby
participation at a locked door to the Council Chambers (the door then being
guarded from the inside by Quartzsite Police Sgt. Xavier Frausto). Cowell’s August 25, 2011 sworn statement to
the Arizona Attorney General alleges circumstances of the July 10, 2011 council
meeting at QTH, and makes defamatory accusations regarding Mr. Gilford,
placing him in a false light, and outright suggests that “letting” Mr. Gilford “in the building with
only one police officer to keep the peace could have led to unnecessary
violence.” Cowell further
stated:
“There were only three people who
approached the door while the meeting was in session. One was the mayor who
refused our invitation to come in. The other two were Ms. Jones, who under our
town code was prohibited from attending this meeting after having been removed
from the last one, and Doug
Gilford, who was responsible for
posting the video on the internet in the first place”
“Mr. Gilford has a history of allegations of harassment and
disorderly conduct, following Council
Members around and shouting questions at them after being asked to stop,
intimidating people by getting in their faces and has a reputation of being
capable of violence. Under the circumstances, letting either of those two
people {meaning Mr. Gilford and Jennifer Jones} in the
building with only one police officer to keep the peace could have led to unnecessary
violence.”
166. Defendant Norma Crooks, at all times
relevant, in her capacity as Town of Quartzsite Council member, conspired with
other Council members presently on the Town Council, as named in the caption
above, to create and sustain unconstitutional policies and/or
unconstitutionally vague policies with no legitimate government interest of the
Town regarding the use of audio recording, video recording, and camera-type
devices in public access areas of QTH, Town campuses,
and facilities of the Town, so as to have such
policies inflicted upon Mr. Gilford by Town administrative management
and/or Town employees when Mr. Gilford attempts to assert his First Amendment Constitutional rights
on Town properties in non-private areas of the Town properties.
167. Defendant Michael Jewitt, at
all times relevant, in his capacity
as Town of Quartzsite Council member, conspired with other Council members
presently on the Town Council, as named in the caption above, to create and
sustain unconstitutional policies and/or unconstitutionally vague policies with
no legitimate government interest of the Town regarding the use of audio
recording, video recording, and camera-type devices in public access areas of QTH,
Town campuses, and facilities of the Town so as to have such
policies inflicted upon Mr. Gilford by town administrative management and/or
Town employees when Mr. Gilford attempts to assert his First Amendment Constitutional rights
on Town properties in non-private areas of the Town properties.
168. On August 2, 2011
Mr. Jewitt called Mr. Gilford to demand that a video recorded interview which Mr.
Jewitt had permitted to be made by Mr. Gilford - be removed from public display
on the internet on Mr. Gilford’s website blog and or YouTube. Mr. Gilford
declined to respond to the request. Mr. Jewitt:
“Yeah. I guess I will come knocking on your door. You know. It’s that easy. OK.”
“Yeah. I guess I will come knocking on your door. You know. It’s that easy. OK.”
169. On August 9, 2011
Mr. Jewitt received a seat on the Town Council by appointment.
170. Defendant Carol Kelley, at all times
relevant, in her capacity as Town of Quartzsite Council member, conspired
with other Council members presently on the Town Council, as named in the
caption above, to create and sustain unconstitutional policies and/or
unconstitutionally vague policies with no legitimate government interest of the
Town regarding the use of audio recording, video recording, and camera-type
devices in public access areas of QTH, Town campuses,
and facilities of the Town so as to have such policies inflicted
upon Mr. Gilford by Town administrative management and/or Town
employees when Mr. Gilford attempts to assert his First Amendment Constitutional rights
on Town properties in non-private areas of the Town properties.
171. Defendant
Jose Lizarraga, at all times relevant was elected in the capacity of a Town of Quartzsite Council May 24, 2011 .
172. On August 19, 2011 ,
on behalf of the Town, Town Prosecutor Martin Brannan charged Mr. Gilford in Criminal Case #2 of 3 (CR20110097)
with filing a false report for filing the complaint regarding the May 24, 2011
events involving Mr. Lizarraga.
173. In
Spring of 2010 the regular, non-partisan Council elections were scheduled and
various recall efforts were begun against some of the Council members; recall
petitions and open demands to resign were being initiated and/or circulated and
signed by a number of citizens who had been publicly associated with the “Citizens Coalition”. When Mr.
Gilford signed a recall petition in 2010 against then-seated Council member
Jerry Lukkasson, soon after (upon
finding Mr. Gilford had signed a recall petition against Mr. Lukkasson) Mr.
Lukkasson contacted Mr. Gilford to inform him that he would not be doing any
further real estate business with Mr. Gilford (Mr. Gilford is a real estate
professional).
174.
Defendant Mark Orgeron, at
all times relevant, in his capacity as Town of Quartzsite
Council member, conspired with other Council members presently on the Town
Council, as named in the caption above, to create and sustain unconstitutional
policies and/or unconstitutionally vague policies with no legitimate government
interest of the Town regarding the use of audio recording, video recording, and
camera-type devices in public access areas of QTH, Town campuses,
and facilities of the Town so as to have such policies inflicted
upon Mr. Gilford by Town administrative management and/or Town
employees when Mr. Gilford attempts to assert his First
Amendment Constitutional rights on Town properties in non-private
areas of the Town properties.
COUNT ONE
MALICOUS PROSECUTION
(State claim)
(Defendants
Gilbert, Taft, Lizarraga, Frausto, Garcia, Rodriguez,
Johnson,
Winslow, and Brannan.)
175.
The allegations and paragraphs set forth above are fully
incorporated herein by this reference.
176.
Defendants Gilbert, Frausto, Garcia, Rodriguez, Johnson, Winslow,
Taft, Lizarraga and Brannan conspired together to bring and brought criminal
prosecutions against Plaintiff that terminated in Plaintiff’s favor. Said Defendants acted as the complaining
witnesses and or prosecutors, actuated by malice and without probable cause.
177. Case
#1 as set forth above, was instigated by Winslow who called on Frausto, who in
turn wrote up a police report, alleging Mr. Gilford harassed Winslow. While
Frausto only listed two events, Mr. Brannan charged Mr. Gilford with three
counts of harassment.
178. In
Case 3 Mr. Johnson made a personal call to Sgt. X.Frausto, resulting in Frausto
ordering his officer Rodriguez to arrest Mr. Gilford.
179. All
prosecutions against Mr. Gilford were terminated with the acquittal and or
dismissal of Mr. Gilford. In case #1, Special Prosecutor Jones himself acted to
dismiss all the charges after Mr. Gilford admitted to all the allegations but
showed he had not committed a crime. In
cases #2 & #3, Judge Sherwood Johnston III found Mr. Gilford not guilty of
all remaining charges at trial.
180. The
above described Defendants actions proximately caused Plaintiff injury and
damage in an amount to be proven at trial.
181. As a
result of these arrests, Plaintiff suffered incarceration, injury to reputation,
emotional distress and had to hire a criminal defense attorney to defend him in
Criminal Cases #2 & #3 as set forth above.
182. The
Town of Quartzsite
COUNT TWO
MALICOUS PROSECUTION
(42 U.S.C. § 1983)
(All
Defendants)
183. The
allegations and paragraphs set forth above are fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
184. Defendants
and each of them, acted under color of state law, and engaged in conduct that
was the proximate cause of a violation of Plaintiff’s rights under the First,
Fourth, and/or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States
of America, including but not limited to his right to be free from retaliatory
arrest for asserting claims against public employees and the Town and from arrest,
incarceration and/or criminal prosecution without evidence of probable cause,
thereby violating Plaintiff’s civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
185. Defendants,
and each of them, under color of state law, conspired together to bring and
brought criminal prosecutions against Plaintiff that terminated in Plaintiff’s
acquittal and or dismissal. Said
Defendants acted as the complaining witnesses and or prosecutors, actuated by
malice and without probable cause.
186. Case
#1 was instigated by Winslow who called on Frausto, who in turn wrote up a
police report, alleging Mr. Gilford harassed Winslow. While Frausto only listed
two events, Mr. Brannan charged Mr. Gilford with three counts of
harassment.
187. In
Case #3, Johnson contacted Frausto. Soon Frausto ordered his officer Rodriguez
to arrest Mr. Gilford.
188. All
prosecutions against Mr. Gilford were terminated in the acquittal and or
dismissal of Mr. Gilford. In #1, Special Prosecutor Jones himself moved to
dismiss all charges after Mr. Gilford admitted to all the allegations but
showed he had not committed a crime.
189. At
trial in cases #2 & #3, Judge Sherwood Johnston III dismissed two charges
(moved by the attorneys) and ruled not guilty.
190. The
malicious prosecution of Plaintiff directly resulted from Town of Quartzsite
policies, practices, procedures, customs and/or was ratified by the Town of
Quartzsite’s directors, also known as the Common Council; and that such a policies,
practices, procedures, customs and/or ratifications, or the Town of
Quartzsite’s directors’ failure to properly train and supervise its employees,
was the proximate cause of violations of Plaintiff’s rights under the First,
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of
America.
191. Defendants’
actions proximately caused Plaintiff injury and damage in an amount to be
proven at trial. As a result of these
arrests, Plaintiff suffered incarceration, injury to reputation, emotional
distress and had to hire a criminal defense attorney to defend him for Case #2
and Case #3, financial damage of posting bond and consequential damages
suffered by Mrs. Gilford in driving at night on dark highway, stuck in soft
shoulder after attempting to respond to jailer’s call suggesting she return to
the jail to post the bond. The jailer initially disallowed bond payment in
error on Mrs. Gilford’s earlier visit.
192. Plaintiff
is entitled to bring this cause of action against the Defendants pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983.
193. Plaintiff
is entitled to recover his attorneys’ fees incurred in this matter pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1988(b).
194. Plaintiff
is entitled to punitive damages.
COUNT THREE
FALSE ARREST – FALSE
IMPRISONMENT
SELECTIVE PROSECUTION
(42 U.S.C. § 1983)
(All Defendants)
195. The
allegations and paragraphs set forth above are fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
196. In
committing the above referenced actions and/or omissions, Defendants, and each
of them, conspired together and acted under color of state law, and engaged in
conduct that was the proximate cause of a violation of Plaintiff’s rights under
the First, Fourth, and/or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the
United States of America, including but not limited to, his right to be free
from selective prosecution, retaliatory arrest for asserting claims against a
public employee and arrest, incarceration and/or criminal prosecution without
probable cause, thereby violating Plaintiff’s civil rights under 42 U.S.C. §
1983.
197. Defendants
conspired to make false allegations to arrest Plaintiff and to commence and
prosecute criminal charges against Plaintiff and that Defendants filed and
pursued the criminal charges knowing the falsity of the allegations made.
198. Defendants
retaliated against Plaintiff because of his criticism of Town employees and his
making lawful complaints to law enforcement to Town regarding misconduct.
199. Defendants
selectively prosecuted Plaintiff to prevent his exercise of his First Amendment
rights.
200. When
Plaintiff complained to Quartzsite police officer Felipe Rodriguez that Mr.
Johnson had taken the video camera out of Plaintiff’s hands without his
permission (felony theft in Arizona
201. The Defendant
Town of Quartzsite, the Quartzsite Prosecutor’s office and the Quartzsite
Police Department intentionally maintain and or engender policies, practices,
procedures, customs (and or have ratified such conduct) that are deliberately
indifferent to properly training its law enforcement officers regarding law and
or precedent related to illegal search and seizure, selective prosecution,
retaliatory confrontations, probable cause, false arrest, imprisonment,
wrongful prosecution, conspiracy and harassment and that lack of such a policy,
practice, procedure or custom to train officers was the proximate cause of a
violation of Plaintiff’s rights under the First, Fourth and Fourteenth
Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America.
202. As a
result of the Defendants’ actions alleged above, and in violation of
Plaintiff’s rights under Federal and State law, Plaintiff suffered damages in
an amount to be determined at trial.
203. As a
result of these arrests, Plaintiff suffered incarceration, injury to
reputation, emotional distress and had to hire a criminal defense attorney to
defend him for Case #3.
204. Plaintiff
is entitled to bring this cause of action against the Defendants pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983.
205. Plaintiff
is entitled to recover his attorneys’ fees incurred in this matter pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1988(b).
206. Plaintiff
is entitled to punitive damages.
COUNT FOUR
42 U.S.C. § 1983
PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDMENT AND
ARTICLE II, SECTIONS 6 OF THE ARIZONA GUARANTEED RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH, FREEDOM
OF THE PRESS, RIGHT TO ASSOCIATE, RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE AND
RIGHT TO SEEK REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES
(All defendants)
207. The
allegations and paragraphs set forth above are fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
208. At
all times relevant to this Complaint as set forth in Plaintiff’s factual
allegations, Plaintiff was exercising his First Amendment rights under State
and Federal Constitutional law. Plaintiff also filed several police reports
against town officials/employees, exercising his free speech and redress of
grievances.
209. As a
proximate result of exercising his First Amendment right, defendants retaliated
by falsely accusing Plaintiff of criminal activity and having Plaintiff
arrested and prosecuted without probable cause.
210. In
committing the above referenced actions and/or omissions, Defendants and each of them, conspired together and acted under color of state law, and
engaged in conduct that was the proximate cause of a violation of Plaintiff’s
rights under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of
America, including but not limited to, his freedom of speech right, his right
to contact his Town officials, his right to seek redress for grievances, his
right to express his opinions or concerns and his right to be free from retaliatory arrest
and/or prosecution without probable cause for or while exercising his First Amendment rights and/or
asserting claims against public employees, thereby violating Plaintiff’s civil
rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
211. Defendant
Town of Quartzsite and the Quartzsite Police Department maintain policies,
practices, procedures, customs (or have ratified such conduct) that are
deliberately indifferent to and/or have failed to properly train its law
enforcement officers regarding illegal search and seizure, retaliatory
confrontations, probable cause, false arrest, imprisonment, wrongful
prosecution, conspiracy and harassment and that such a policy, practice,
procedure or custom and/or training was the proximate cause of a violation of
Plaintiff’s rights under the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
Constitution of the United States of America.
212. As a
result of the Defendant’s actions alleged above, and in violation of
Plaintiff’s rights under Federal and State law, Plaintiff suffered damages in
an amount to be determined at trial.
213. As a
result of these arrests, Plaintiff suffered incarceration, injury to
reputation, emotional distress and had to hire a criminal defense attorney to
defend him for Case #3.
214. Plaintiff
is entitled to bring this cause of action against the Defendants pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983.
215. Plaintiff
is entitled to recover his attorneys’ fees incurred in this matter pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1988(b).
216. Plaintiff
is entitled to punitive damages.
COUNT FIVE
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL
DISTRESS
(State Claim)
(Defendants Chief Gilbert, Taft, Lizarraga,
Frausto, Garcia,
Rodriguez,
Johnson, Winslow, and Brannan.)
217. The
allegations and paragraphs set forth above are fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
218. All Defendants’
acts and conduct as set forth above is extreme and outrageous, including but
not limited to using their position of power over Plaintiff to have him falsely
arrested and prosecuted because he was critical of those managing the Town of Quartzsite
219. Defendants’
actions were intentionally done or at a minimum recklessly done to injure
Plaintiff and to chill his exercise of his First Amendment and Equal Protection
constitutional rights.
220. Defendants’
actions caused severe emotional distress to Plaintiff.
221. Defendants
acted jointly and in concert and conspired and agreed together to cause
Plaintiff severe emotional distress by having him arrested and prosecuted
without probable cause because of his criticism of Defendants and the false and
malicious statements made by Defendants about Plaintiff, as set forth herein,
that were at a minimum defamatory and designed to hold Plaintiff to a false
light by the public.
222. Plaintiff
served a Proof of Claim on Defendants Chief Gilbert, Taft, Lizarraga, Frausto,
Garcia, Rodriguez, Johnson, Winslow, and Brannan and therefore, pursuant to
A.R.S.§ 821.01 can pursue these Defendants for this claim.
223. The
Town of Quartzsite
224. Plaintiff
has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
225. As a
result of Defendants actions, Plaintiff suffered incarceration, injury to
reputation, emotional distress and had to hire a criminal defense attorney to
defend him for Case #3.
226.
Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages.
COUNT SIX
CIVIL CONSPIRACY
(All Defendants)
227. The
allegations and paragraphs set forth above are fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
228.
Defendants conspired together and agreed to work together to
commit the above tortuous and unconstitutional acts, including but not limited
to bringing false allegations of criminal conduct against Plaintiff and to
arrest him and prosecute him without probable cause. The purpose was to intimidate and stop
Plaintiff from investigating and criticizing and or complaining about the
Defendants.
229.
Defendants and each and every one of them agreed and/or combined
to engage in a civil conspiracy to commit the unlawful, unconstitutional and
tortuous acts described in this complaint.
230.
Defendants, and each and every one of them, combined to engage in
a civil conspiracy against and/or injury to Plaintiff as described in this
Complaint.
231.
Defendants, and each and every one of them, combined to engage in
a civil conspiracy that was furthered by overt acts.
232.
Defendants, each and every one of them, understood, accepted,
and/or explicitly and/or implicitly agreed to the general objectives of their
scheme to inflict the wrongs against and/or injury to Plaintiff as described in
this Complaint.
233.
Defendants, each and every one of them, combined to engage in a
scheme that was intended to violate the rights of Plaintiff.
234.
The acts set forth in this Complaint, constitute pattern of
activity to provide false information to the Court to obtain criminal
prosecution and/or conviction of Plaintiff knowing they had no probable cause
to do so.
235.
As a result of Defendants acts, Plaintiff was arrested, charged
and criminally prosecuted without probable cause, all of which ended in
Plaintiff’s favor.
236.
Further, Plaintiff has been seriously emotionally impacted the
acts of Defendants done in furtherance of their conspiracy.
237.
Plaintiff was forced to hire a criminal defense attorney.
238.
Defendants caused Plaintiff injury and damages in an amount to be
proven at trial.
239. As a
result of Defendants actions, Plaintiff suffered incarceration, injury to
reputation, emotional distress and had to hire a criminal defense attorney to
defend him for Case #3.
240.
Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages unless precluded by
State law.
COUNT SEVEN
NEGLIGENT
HIRING, RETENTION OR SUPERVISION
241.
Plaintiff incorporates herein by this
reference all the preceding numbered paragraphs as though fully set forth
herein.
242.
The Town of Quartzsite Quartzsite
243.
The Town of Quartzsite
244.
The Town of Quartzsite
245. As a
result of Defendants actions, Plaintiff suffered incarceration, defamation,
injury to reputation, emotional distress and had to hire a criminal defense
attorney to defend him for Case #2 and #3.
246.
The Town of Quartzsite Quartzsite
247.
Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against the Employers.
COUNT EIGHT
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
248. The
allegations and paragraphs set forth above are fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
249. As a
result of the conduct of Defendants described above, Plaintiff has been denied
his constitution and civil rights and in violation of Arizona Statute,
wrongfully prohibited from videotaping open meetings and tape recording
conversations he is a party to. These
restrictions are intentionally made vague so that Plaintiff will not know what
he can and cannot do so Defendants can press additional wrongful criminal
charges against him.
250. Plaintiff
has no plain, adequate or complete remedy at law to address the wrongs
described herein and remains exposes to criminal prosecution for videotaping or
tape-recording conversations he legally has the right to do.
251.
Plaintiff therefore seeks injunctive relief restraining Defendants
from continuing to engage in.
PUNITIVE DAMAGE
STATEMENT
(All Defendants)
252.
The allegations set forth above are fully incorporated herein by
this reference.
253.
The acts of the Defendants toward Plaintiff amount to conduct that
shocks the conscience, especially since most of the defendants swore an oath to
uphold the most basic principles of our legal system and Constitution. The
actions of the defendants were entered into with an evil mind and therefore,
punitive damages are appropriate for all counts.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Douglas C. Gilford
demands the following relief, jointly and severally, against Defendants as
follows:
A. Compensatory general and special damages in an amount according to
proof at time of trial;
B. Punitive damages;
C. Reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses of litigation;
D. Costs of suit necessarily incurred herein;
E. Prejudgment interest according to proof; and
F. A preliminary and permanent injunction
prohibiting Defendants from stopping Plaintiff from attending open meetings,
video (recording) taping open meetings from the audience and (audio) tape
recording conversations he is a party to with public employees providing
service to the public and open counters in public buildings.
G. Such further relief as the Court deems
just and proper.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 18th day of June, 2013.
KEITH M. KNOWLTON, L.L.C.
/s/ Keith Knowlton
By:
________________________________
Keith
M. Knowlton
Attorney
for Plaintiff
WOW!
ReplyDeleteMy Gods! I'm surprised that the State hasn't taken Receivership of Quartzsite! It's been awhile since I've looked at the Quartzsite ongoing drama. I'll continue looking around. This is just unbelievable!
ReplyDelete