The St. Louis Police Use the City Courts to Conceal Police Misconduct

We have uncovered the root cause of St. Louis police officer-involved shootings.

If You Signed A “Release Form” In The Past Ten Years in the City of St. Louis Municipal Court Contact Kingdom Litigators or The Legal Solution Group, LLC

Since before 2009, the City Counselor municipal prosecutor’s enforced a blanket policy and practice called the “Rec.” This practice mandates that a municipal prosecutor cannot recommend amending or dismissing a resisting arrest case without a signed “Release” from the defendant. A ‘Release,’ also known as a “release-dismissal form,” is a contract whereby the defendant agrees not to sue or institute any complaint against the City or police officer, and in exchange, the prosecutor will amend or dismissal the defendant’s resisting arrest charge… In the 2012 transfer of SLMPD control to the City of St. Louis, Chief Dan Isom trained and ordered officers to normally charge “resisting arrest” cases in municipal court over the state court in an updated special order 8-01 (C) §7… So no one would ever review the incidents for police misconduct and the victim agrees to remain silent.

Buried within thousands of executed release agreements festered one clear pattern and widespread SLMPD practice, “If you run, record or protest, you will pay.” Meaning, if you run, record, or protest a police officer, that officer will use excessive to deadly force as a means of punishment for your actions and charge you in municipal court with resisting arrest where the prosecutor must obtain a release to silence any complaint or lawsuit. SLMPD Officers could use excessive to deadly force with impunity and escape any investigation or civil liability…the Rec & Normal practice became the perfect protection system—until now.

Notably, blanket Rec practices have been unenforceable under federal law since 1993. Town of Newton v. Rumery 480 U.S. 386, (1987) Cain v. Darby Borough, 7 F.3d 377, 383, (3d Cir. 1993); Kinney v. City of Cleveland, 144 F. Supp. 2d 908, 919 (N.D. Ohio 2001)) (collecting cases). Prosecutors knew this federal law but enforced this blanket practice for its psychological deterrent effects, not its legal effects. As one prosecutor explained, “the releases are largely psychological although probably unenforceable.” The executed release agreements are key to uncovering and remedying dozens of police misconduct patterns.

Every release signed under this blanket practice is unenforceable, and our federal attorneys must review the underlying facts of your specific case to determine whether you must file suit. Email us immediately at intake@kingdomlitigators.com or call the Legal Solution Group, LLC (314) 736-5770.

Resources:

Release Form

Release Policy

SLMPD Normal Policy

Lakenia Mahdi v. Julian L. Bush et al., 19-cv-00183. (Putative Class)

Jamal White v. Adam Feaman, and the City of St. Louis et al., 18-cv-00518, (EDMO).

Dennis Ball-Bey, as next of friend, to Mansur Ball-Bey v. Ronald Vaughn and Kyle Chandler, and the City of St. Louis, et al., 18-cv-01364. (EDMO).

Jorveis Scruggs v. Ryan Murphy and City of St. Louis et al., 19-cv-00948 (EDMO).

Vonderrit Myers v. Jason Flanery, GCI Security, and the City of St. Louis et al., 1622-CC0041(EDMO).


Leave a Comment