Cop Says He Was Fired For Reporting Police Dog Attack
Ethics
The City of Hernando, Miss., illegally fired a police officer for testifying truthfully about another officer's use of unreasonable force - letting a police dog attack and bite a citizen who already was in custody - Steven English claims in Federal Court.
English says he saw a fellow officer unreasonably sic a dog on Lawson Rhoda in November 2004, after Rhoda was in custody. English says he reported the attack to his supervisor, "who instructed Plaintiff to keep his opinions to himself."
"Because supervisor Gray had instructed plaintiff to keep his opinion to himself, and because plaintiff knew that he would be fired if he disobeyed his supervisor's instruction by reporting the use of unreasonable force, plaintiff did not initially report the use of unreasonable force. Instead, plaintiff filed a police report which omitted any discussion of the dog's attack upon the suspect," the complaint states. English says his police report was accurate, but omitted mention of the dog attack. "To report this attack would have been a direct disobedience of the supervisor's instructions. However, in keeping with his duty as a citizen, plaintiff kept a complete record of the incident so that his memory would be fresh if he were asked about the incident in the future, and so that he could give an accurate statement about what occurred."
In 2007, Rhoda sued the city alleging unreasonable force. English says the city's insurance company and police chief, "Riley," questioned him about the incident, and he "truthfully answered their questions and truthfully described the criminal assault he had witnessed."
The city suspended and then fired him in retaliation, English says, on the bogus grounds that "he had not truthfully reported the use of excessive force in his police report."
He demands monetary damages. He is represented by Jim Waide of Tupelo.
Related listings
-
Bipolar Lawyer Who Stole: Suspended, Not Disbarred
Ethics 07/16/2008An attorney will not be disbarred for misappropriating client's funds during a manic bipolar episode that lasted for 4 years, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in a 4-3 decision. Mark Belz was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1975 and had been on me...
-
Judge Blasts Curbing Frequent ADA Filer
Ethics 04/10/2008The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has again upheld a “vexatious litigant” order against a frequent filer of disability discrimination lawsuits -– but over the strenuous objections of nine dissenting judges.Chief Judge Alex Kozinski was particular...
-
Op-ed: Standing Up for Rule of Law in Pakistan
Ethics 04/08/2008We have witnessed with admiration and empathy the heroism of lawyers and judges in Pakistan as they squarely faced beatings and stood up to soldiers and police to defend the rule of law. Thedissolution of the Supreme Court, the silencing of a f...

USCIS Will Begin Accepting CW-1 Petitions for Fiscal Year 2019
On April 2, 2018, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will begin accepting petitions under the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)-Only Transitional Worker (CW-1) program subject to the fiscal year (FY) 2019 cap. Employers in the CNMI use the CW-1 program to employ foreign workers who are ineligible for other nonimmigrant worker categories. The cap for CW-1 visas for FY 2019 is 4,999.
For the FY 2019 cap, USCIS encourages employers to file a petition for a CW-1 nonimmigrant worker up to six months in advance of the proposed start date of employment and as early as possible within that timeframe. USCIS will reject a petition if it is filed more than six months in advance. An extension petition may request a start date of Oct. 1, 2018, even if that worker’s current status will not expire by that date.
Since USCIS expects to receive more petitions than the number of CW-1 visas available for FY 2019, USCIS may conduct a lottery to randomly select petitions and associated beneficiaries so that the cap is not exceeded. The lottery would give employers the fairest opportunity to request workers, particularly with the possibility of mail delays from the CNMI.
USCIS will count the total number of beneficiaries in the petitions received after 10 business days to determine if a lottery is needed. If the cap is met after those initial 10 days, a lottery may still need to be conducted with only the petitions received on the last day before the cap was met. USCIS will announce when the cap is met and whether a lottery has been conducted.