Ahmad v. City of St. Louis
| Decision Date | 15 November 2017 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 4:17 CV 2455 CDP |
| Parties | MALEEHA AHMAD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs' motion for temporary injunction, which is fully briefed. The Court held a hearing on the motion on October 18, 19, and 23, 2017. Eighteen witnesses (including four of the plaintiffs) testified on behalf of the plaintiffs, and three witnesses testified for defendant. The parties also submitted video, photographic, and documentary evidence. By agreement both sides also submitted additional affidavits and declarations, which they asked the Court to consider as evidence. Counsel made extensive closing arguments at the conclusion of the hearing.
After careful consideration of all of the evidence, briefs, and arguments of the parties, the Court will grant plaintiffs' motion in certain respects, as set out more fully below and in the accompanying Preliminary Injunction.
On September 15, 2017, the Circuit Court for the Twenty-Second Judicial Circuit of Missouri issued its findings and verdict in State of Missouri v. Stockley, Cause No. 1622-CR02213-01. The decision prompted some members of the public to engage in protest activity around the St. Louis metropolitan area, including within the City of St. Louis. The protests, which began on the morning of September 15, 2017 and have continued to occur regularly since the verdict, concern not only the verdict itself but broader issues, including racism and the use of force by police officers. The participants often express views critical of police. This case concerns the response to some of these protests by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department2 during the weekend of September 15-17, 2017.
Protest activity began shortly after the announcement of the verdict on the morning of September 15, 2017. Protesters assembled in front of the state courthouse downtown near Tucker and Market streets. They did not have a permit to protest because the City of St. Louis does not require, and will not provide, a permit for protests. Police voluntarily blocked off that intersection to vehicular traffic to allow protesters to march in the streets. The protest was peaceful. Later that day, the protesters moved down Tucker toward City Hall and the old policestation at Tucker and Clark. Corresponding streets were again blocked by police to allow protesters to march in the streets. Defendant's witnesses testified that during this time period protesters became violent and began throwing objects at police officers. Plaintiffs' witnesses testified that the protests remained peaceful, they were not violent, and they did not witness any other protesters become violent.
Eventually protesters blocked one or more city buses containing police officers so the buses could not exit the area. Some protesters, including plaintiff Maleeha Ahmad, were intentionally blocking a bus to prevent it from leaving as an admitted act of civil disobedience. Lieutenant Timothy Sachs, commander in charge of the Civil Disobedience Team, was in charge of deploying defendant's tactical units and ordered the police officers to get off the bus and form a line to move the protesters away from the bus so it could leave. Police officers had shields for their bodies and on their helmets. Officers from the bicycle unit came to assist, placing their bikes in front of and beside their bodies as they moved forward and ordered the protesters to "Get Back!" The police moved the crowd north of Clark. Some officers sprayed hand held mace3 at and on the protesters, including plaintiff Ahmad. The evidence is disputed as to whether any warnings were given before the deployment of mace at this time. Ahmad was not arrested for refusing to move when ordered to do so. The bus was eventually able to exit the area. Officers were injured in this encounter, and some arrests were made.Plaintiff Alison Dreith, who was not blocking the bus, testified that she was maced in the face by a police officer without warning. Darrell Smith gave similar testimony about being maced by officers around this time period without any warning. Dreith and Smith testified that they were not behaving violently, were not violating any orders of the police when they were maced, and were not arrested.
A police vehicle parked in front of the police station was vandalized around 5:00 p.m. by a person jumping on it. The person engaged in the vandalism fled the scene when police approached, and the vehicle was moved. Keith Rose testified that other than the one person who broke the vehicle's windshield, no one else in the area was participating in violent activity. Rose heard police Sergeant Brian Rossomanno declare an unlawful assembly because the flow of traffic was being impeded. Police were continuing to block streets to prevent vehicular traffic from moving through this area at the time. Rose was immediately maced in the face with no warning by an officer he was filming. No dispersal order had been given at the time. Dana Kelly-Franks testified that around this time police began marching aggressively in a line with their shields held in front of their bodies. She was frightened for herself and children who were in the area. She testified that a police officer knocked her over with a shield and maced her simultaneously without any warning. She stated that she was standing on the sidewalk at Clarkand was not behaving violently or engaged in any criminal activity at the time. She was not arrested. Plaintiff Joshua Wedding testified similarly that he was also maced by an officer marching in this line without any warning. Wedding testified that he was not behaving violently, was not violating any orders of the police when he was maced, and was not arrested. Wedding was filming the police at the time he was maced, and that video footage was introduced into evidence as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 5. It is consistent with his account of events. Eventually the streets were reopened to vehicular traffic as protest activity died down for the evening in the downtown area and moved to the Central West End.
Rose attends many protests as a legal observer, and testified that in his experience, going back to 2014, St. Louis City police officers declare unlawful assemblies, issue dispersal orders, use force, and deploy chemical agents against those protesting police conduct, but not against other types of protesters. Rose attended a women's march in January of 2017, an LGBTQ march in February of 2017, and an immigrants' rights march in 2017. Police blocked traffic, sometime for hours, at each of these events to allow the protesters to march in the streets, and no unlawful assembly or dispersal orders were given at any of these protests. These protests were peaceful. Rose testified that he has never engaged in any violent activity at any protest he has attended but has nevertheless been subjected to chemical agents without warning only at protests critical of police. SarahMolina testified that she was subjected to the use of chemical munitions without warning by City police officers in 2015 while protesting police conduct.
Defendant's tactical unit was deployed to the Central West End on the evening of Friday, September 15, 2017, when protesters converged upon the home of the mayor of the City of St. Louis and began throwing objects at the house and at police officers. This protest was declared an unlawful assembly, police used a loudspeaker to order protesters to disperse, and protesters were warned that chemical munitions could be used if they did not comply. Plaintiffs do not challenge the police response to the protest at the mayor's house.
Sachs testified that some of these violent protesters left the mayor's house on Lake and continued to roam the Central West End area. Some officers were injured, including some who received serious injuries, by objects being thrown at them. Sachs believed he heard gun shots and thought that the protesters were deploying chemical agents. He observed property damage. A dumpster fire was reported and attributed to protesters. The suspects for that fire were later arrested. Tactical units formed lines and moved down the streets of the Central West End, seeking to disperse protesters. Megan Green testified that she was protesting at the mayor's house, heard the order to disperse, and left the area to return to her car. After seeking shelter in a church, she was allowed to pass through the police line at Lindell but as she was walking to her car away from the protest area police in atactical vehicle drove by and sprayed her with chemical agents without warning. She was not engaged in any criminal activity and was complying with the dispersal order at that time. Legal observer Steven Hoffman testified that he was subjected to chemical agents without warning as he was complying with the dispersal order because he was filming police activity. He testified that he was not engaged in any criminal activity and was complying with all police orders at the time. Central West End business owner Chris Sommers was not participating in the protest activity and testified that he was subjected to chemical agents by police officers because he was standing on the sidewalk outside his restaurant filming police activity and expressing his displeasure at the large police presence in the neighborhood. Rossomanno testified that he threw the inert smoke bomb which landed near Sommers. He stated that he was trying to throw it at protesters further down the street, but that it fell short and did not reach its intended target. An unidentified person standing next to Sommers picked up the smoke bomb and lobbed it back toward police. At that point, chemical agents were intentionally dispersed in Sommers's direction, and police officers rushed toward Sommers. Sommers and his...
To continue reading
Request your trial