Jordan v. Garrison
| Decision Date | 08 April 2014 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-CV-0723 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana |
| Parties | RICKEY ALLEN JORDAN v. MARTHA S. GARRISON, ET AL |
A civil bench trial was held on Tuesday, February 18, 2014 on the remaining claims in the above captioned matter. This Court's factual findings, legal standards and legal analysis is set forth below.
Summary of the Facts:
At some point in late 2009 or early 2010, Richard Wood moved in with plaintiff, Rickey Allen Jordan in exchange for Wood's work on Jordan's home, which was built on high piers with storage space underneath. Wood brought his work tools to Jordan's property, where he stored and used them. Jordan afforded Wood the use of his camper/trailer to store some of those tools. Thus, Jordan's camper/trailer housed Wood's tools, but it was Wood's padlock on the camper/trailer.
This arrangement worked well until Wood left for a period of time. It was obvious from the testimony that there was still residual enmity between the two. The record is not clear about the precise reason for the dissolution of the living-working arrangement between these individuals; however, it is clear from the testimony and the inferences therefrom that Wood was entirely justified in seeking the help of Deputies Garrison and Pye in retrieving his personal items on Jordan's home property on May 16, 2010.
On or before May 16, 2010, Jordan stated to Wood that Wood's personal tools werenot on the property and that he was not to come back to the property. Wood had been told by a neighbor of Jordan's that much of his equipment, including his large steel "job box," had been removed from the property by Jordan. (Testimony of Richard Wood). From the testimony it is obvious that their personal and work relationship had soured, and that Wood's property was taken away as retaliation or possibly leverage.
On May 16, 2010 Caddo Parish Sheriff Cpl. Martha Garrison was the training officer for Deputy Michael Pye, who started the field training program two weeks previously. As the officers were driving on Ferry Lake Road in Oil City, Louisiana near Jordan's home, they were waved down by Wood. (Testimony of Garrison and Pye).
Wood told the officers that he had extensive and valuable tools and equipment at Jordan's residence, which Jordan refused to return. Wood also reported that some of his tools and equipment had already been removed from the location by Jordan. Wood also stated that he had received a message from a neighbor of Jordan that Jordan had in fact removed Wood's personal property from the location. (Testimony of Garrison, Pye, and Wood; CPSO Report of Witness Tyler statement, Exhibit 1; see also interview of witness Tyler at Mobile Video System - hereafter referred to as "MVS" - 11:34:40).
Cpl. Garrison and Deputy Pye drove the short distance to Mr. Jordan's residence, and Mr. Wood followed on foot. Based on Wood's statements, the deputies were investigating possible criminal activity by Jordan, as well as assisting Mr. Wood and avoiding potential escalation. . The Court viewed the patrol car's dashcam video as part of the bench trial.
Based upon the demeanor and level of detail of the information provided by Wood, he appeared to be sincere in his description of what had occurred and appeared credible to the deputies. (Testimony of Garrison and Pye).
The patrol unit used by Garrison and Pye is equipped with a mobile video system ("MVS") with a remote audio recording device and in-car audio recording. Under these circumstances, when a trainee is being utilized, the trainee uses the remote microphone. Deputy Pye's microphone was activated and a copy of the recording is Joint Exhibit 101. (Testimony of Garrison and Pye).
Deputy Pye and Cpl. Garrison went to the property of Jordan and questioned Jordan regarding the information provided by Wood. Jordan made numerous statements that Cpl. Garrison and Deputy Pye later determined were false, including the following (the time referenced is set forth on the MVS recording).
10:54:25 Plaintiff: I don't know what he's got left here.
10:54:33 Garrison: What happened to the other tools?
Plaintiff: I don't know. He said somebody stole some of them, there some of them missing, I don't have any idea.
10:54:38 Garrison: Did you take them somewhere?
Plaintiff: No, sir, I didn't take anything.
10:54:43 Plaintiff: No, I didn't take nothing of his stuff anywhere.
10:55:50 Garrison: You have some of his tools at your shop?
Plaintiff: No I don't have anything. Everything was right here....
10:57:58 Pye: Does he have anything inside the house that of his?
Plaintiff: No sir, not that I know of.
Pye: He didn't have a computer or anything?
Silence.
Pye: Did he have a computer inside the house?
Plaintiff: Yes, I have a computer.
Pye: Is it his?
Plaintiff: It was his, I don't know what we were going to work out on that or what.
11:06:00 Garrison: Who paid for that computer?
Plaintiff: I have no idea....
Garrison: Do you know if you paid for it or not?
Plaintiff: I don't know.
10:58:21 Wood: Big yellow job site box? It was sitting right there.
Plaintiff: That's been gone for way before you left, I assumed you took that with you or whatever. You didn't take that with you to wherever you went?
Wood: No.
Plaintiff: Well I don't, I have no idea what stuff was here. He had a key to all, I didn't have a key to any of it. That's his air compressor. I tried to get him to put those doors up because he said people were getting his stuff, so I don't know. He left here. I didn't know nothing. As far as I am concerned, I mean, me and him are through.
10:59:40 Garrison: When will you be available for us to check your shop?
Plaintiff: This is his stuff.
Garrison: But he's got stuff missing.
Plaintiff: Well I don't know what...All I know is, you see, anybody could have got it. He told me they were getting it. I have no idea where it all is.11:00:24 Garrison: For him to be okay, and say that you don't have any stuff in your shop, then that's what we want to look in for tomorrow. And that's okay with you?
Plaintiff: Well I mean, I don't have nothing there.
11:13:34 Garrison: Are you going to let him get his stuff?
Plaintiff: What stuff does he have?
(Testimony of Garrison and Pye; MVS at times stated). The Court notes that these recordings demonstrate plain inconsistencies with Jordan's subsequent statements to the deputies. The Court concludes that these statements by Jordan were outright lies and purposeful evasions.
Despite these statements, it was obvious that there had been extensive equipment there and that other equipment owned by Wood was missing; Jordan finally but reluctantly admitted that some of Wood's personal property had been removed. Specifically, the camper trailer containing Wood's personal property had been moved by Jordan to Vivian (MVS at 11:08:50); and that the computer at the residence had been purchased by Wood (MVS at 11:03:25). Jordan moved the trailer to the property of a third-party, not to Jordan's business in Vivian. This Court infers and concludes from the testimony that Jordan moved the camper trailer in an attempt to hide Wood's property and made it very difficult, if not impossible, for Wood to ever recover his property.
Wood also reported to the deputies that a neighbor, Tyler, had witnessed Jordan leaving with the large yellow job box on the back of his truck while pulling a camper, and that another neighbor, Fontenot, had told Glenn Tennis that he had helped Jordan load the job box onto Jordan's truck. Wood's other statements had been corroborated, so the deputies believed Wood to be truthful (Garrison testimony; Pye testimony; Woodtestimony). (See also Tyler interview regarding seeing Jordan remove the job box at MVS 11:34:15).
Cpl. Garrison asked Jordan whether he would allow them to confirm that Mr. Wood's property was not at his shop in Vivian. Jordan gave evasive answers regarding that as well, including the following:
(MVS at 10:59:40). Jordan's statements were, again, intentionally evasive. He later indicated that they could do so Monday, but would not provide further information. (MVS at 11:00:11).
(MVS at 11:00:30).
(MVS at 11:08:17).
Cpl. Garrison spoke to her supervisor on her cell phone to discuss the circumstances, and the supervisor confirmed that an arrest was appropriate for theft. (Garrison testimony; see Garrison on cell phone, MVS at 11:10:40). There is no evidence in th record of any attempt by Jordan to call or notify any lawyer.
Cpl. Garrison requested again that Jordan allow Wood to remove his property from Jordan's shop in Vivian or he would be arrested, and in response Jordan stood and placed his hands behind his back to communicate that he should be arrested instead.
(MVS at 11:13:08).
Based upon the factual information obtained from Jordan's clearly suspicious evasive and contradictory statements, Cpl. Garrison and Deputy Pye believed that there was probable cause that Jordan had committed a theft of Wood's property in violation of La. R.S....
To continue reading
Request your trial