McIntyre v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cnty.
| Decision Date | 03 March 2020 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION No. 18-2545-KHV |
| Parties | LAMONTE MCINTYRE and ROSE LEE MCINTYRE, Plaintiffs, v. UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF WYANDOTTE COUNTY AND KANSAS CITY, KANSAS, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Kansas |
On September 20, 2019, Lamonte McIntyre and Rose Lee McIntyre sued the Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas ("Unified Government"), Roger Golubski, Dennis Ware, James Brown, Clyde Blood, W.K. Smith and Daphne Halderman (as special administrator of the estates of James Michael Krstolich, Dennis Otto Barber and Steve Culp, who are deceased).1 Second Amended Complaint And Jury Demand (Doc. #74). Plaintiffs allege that defendants arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned Lamonte for a crime that he did not commit, and they bring various claims under 42 U.S.C § 1983 and state law. This matter is before the Court on Unified Government's Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim (Doc. #78), Defendant Officers' Motion To Dismiss (Doc. #86) and Defendant Golubski's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #103), all filed October 18, 2019. For reasons stated below, the Court sustains each motion in part.
The second amended complaint alleges as follows:
I. Golubski's History Of Misconduct
Since the early 1980s, Roger Golubski used his power as a police officer to exploit sex from vulnerable black women in the north end of Kansas City, Kansas. To do so, he threatened arrest and prosecution, fixed tickets, made warrants disappear and paid money and drugs. He would often fixate on particular women, harassing them continually for months or even years. These predilections and abuses were well known among other officers and supervisors within the Kansas City, Kansas Police Department ("KCKPD"). They knew - and even joked about - Golubski's practice of arresting black prostitutes, forcing them to have sex (often at the precinct house itself) and then releasing them without pressing charges.
In addition to sex, Golubski used these women as informants to help him clear cases. Known by other KCKPD officers as "Golubski's girls," the women would provide critical evidence which resulted in convictions in many of Golubski's investigations - evidence which the officers knew was unreliable because it was the product of coercive relationships. Golubski also worked closely with drug kingpins in Kansas City, Kansas. In exchange for money or drugs, Golubski fixed investigations, including framing innocent people for crimes that the drug gangs had committed. Despite this being common knowledge, the KCKPD never reprimanded him. In fact, before he retired, the KCKPD promoted Golubski to captain. Although many kept quiet out of fear of retaliation, since his retirement several current and former KCKPD officers have blown the whistle on Golubski's conduct - at least two have given sworn statements which describe the sexual exploitation and the permissive supervision that allowed it to continue.
Rose McIntyre was one of Golubski's victims. In the late 1980s, Rose was sitting in a carwith her former boyfriend when Golubski pulled up and demanded that she accompany him to his unmarked squad car. There, he threatened to cause trouble for Rose and her boyfriend if she did not allow him to perform oral sex. Rose - a mother of five children who had never been arrested - surrendered to the threat and went to the police station the next night, where other officers took her directly to Golubski's office. There, he renewed his threat. During the ensuing sexual assault, another officer opened Golubski's door, saw what was happening and left without saying anything. For weeks after the assault, Golubski harassed Rose - calling her two or three times a day and telling her that he wanted a long-term relationship and that he promised to pay for sex. Rose repeatedly rejected his advances, but Golubski's harassment did not stop. As a result, Rose had to move to a new home and change her phone number. At the time, she believed that this marked the end of Golubski's terrorizing.
II. The Murders Of Doniel Quinn And Donald Ewing
Neil Edgar Jr. - better known as "Monster" - worked for a Kansas City drug kingpin. On April 15, 1994, Monster murdered Doniel Quinn and Donald Ewing with a shotgun as they sat in a parked car. The double murder was part of a planned hit - Monster would receive $500 to murder Quinn, who was suspected of stealing drugs from a stash house. After the murders, Monster escaped in a car driven by Marlon Williams, who also worked for the kingpin. Although Monster's role in the murders was widely known in the community - two leaders of the drug gang have since sworn under oath that he killed Quinn for money - neither Monster nor Williams were ever prosecuted. Monster is currently serving 33 years for an unrelated murder and other drug offenses. In 2014, Williams was shot to death while leaving a court appearance.
Lamonte McIntyre is Rose's son, and was 17 years old when the Quinn and Ewing murders occurred. He did not have any knowledge about or involvement in the murders. When theytranspired, Lamonte was with his family, a fact which five family members have since confirmed under oath.
III. The Investigation
Defendants did not conduct their investigations of the Quinn and Ewing murders to bring the guilty parties to justice. Whether to retaliate against Rose for spurning sexual advances, to protect Monster's drug bosses from prosecution or to quickly close a double homicide, defendants framed Lamonte for crimes that he did not commit. To do so, defendants fabricated evidence, withheld exculpatory evidence and deliberately chose not to take basic investigative steps which would have exonerated Lamonte.
Golubski had sexual relationships with two of the eyewitnesses to the murders - Ruby Mitchell and Stacy Quinn. Knowing that Golubski had had sexual relationships with Mitchell, Stacy Quinn and other women in the community, officer Steve Culp specifically chose Golubski to investigate the double murder. Based on Golubski's open and notorious practice of soliciting false evidence from these women, Culp understood that Golubski would use any means necessary - including misconduct - to solve the case. Culp closely monitored the investigation and approved each investigative step, including the deliberate fabrication of evidence.
Mitchell observed the shootings from her front door, but could not identify the killer. She did, however, provide officer James Michael Krstolich a description of the killer, which did not resemble Lamonte. Later, Golubski drove Mitchell to the police station for further questioning. During the car ride, Golubski made sexually suggestive comments and veiled threats to gain her cooperation, with the implication that he would charge her with solicitation if she did not comply.
Shortly after this interaction, Golubski and Krstolich used coercion and suggestion to forceMitchell to falsely identify Lamonte in a photo array. The array only had five photos, three of which were Lamonte and two of his close relatives. Golubski and Krstolich later fabricated a false story to explain why they used the name and photo of Lamonte - who had no connection to the murders - and how Mitchell - who did not know Lamonte - was able to identify him by first and last name. According to Golubski and Krstolich, Mitchell stated at the station that she had recognized the shooter as a man named Lamonte. They therefore showed her five photos of men named Lamonte, and she identified McIntyre by his full name. This story is false for several reasons. Not only was McIntyre the only "Lamonte" among the five photos, Mitchell could not have identified McIntyre - a complete stranger - by his first and last name. Indeed, Mitchell could not have identified anyone by his first and last name because she did not recognize the shooter. Contrary to this fabricated story, Mitchell knew to identify Lamonte because Golubski and Krstolich fed her the information. Golubski and Krstolich later falsely represented to the prosecution in written and oral reports that the identification had originated with Mitchell. They did not disclose to prosecution, Lamonte or his defense counsel that the identification was the product of suggestion and coercion.
Lieutenant Dennis Barber - the supervisor of Golubski and Krstolich - reviewed and approved their written reports despite having reason to know that the identification was unreliable and the product of misconduct. Barber later reported that he was directly responsible for obtaining Lamonte's name and photograph and that he had heard from numerous sources that Lamonte was the killer. This was a lie to bolster the false identification - Barber had no sources implicating Lamonte.
Later, Golubski and detective Dennis Ware visited eyewitness Niko Quinn, and attemptedto use coercion and suggestion to elicit a second false identification. To do so, they used the same suggestive array that they had showed Mitchell. When Niko could not identify the shooter, Ware pointed to Lamonte and revealed his name, indicating that she should choose him. Niko refused, however, to make the false identification. Golubski and Ware then falsified details of this identification procedure in written and oral reports to the prosecution, and failed to disclose any of the suggestive or coercive techniques to Lamonte or his defense counsel. Culp fully reviewed and approved the false reports.
Approximately a week later, Golubski met Niko Quinn alone behind a high school track, and used a combination of threats and financial promises to coerce her into identifying Lamonte. When she complied, Golubski helped her move to a new home. Golubski later falsely represented to the prosecution that Niko had identified Lamonte without coercion or suggestion, and he never disclosed that h...
To continue reading
Request your trial