Police Brutality Wrongful Shooting Lawsuit Filed by SIL Featured in News

Police Brutality Wrongful Shooting Lawsuit Filed by SIL Featured in News

The police brutality lawyers at Scottsdale Injury Lawyers recently filed a new excessive force lawsuit. The lawsuit names the City of Mesa and one of its officers, Drew Lawrence. The lawsuit alleges that the officer used excessive force when he shot a woman who was experiencing a health crisis and was confused.

The lawsuit further claims that the City of Mesa Police Department and its officers have a history of using excessive force. The lawsuit alleges that the police chief, Ken Cost, and his supervisory officers failed to adequately train their officers on the use of lethal force. Worse yet, the lawsuit alleges that the Department has a long history of condoning the excessive force used by its officers and failing to terminate or punish those officers who are guilty of doing so.

The Lawsuit Was Featured in the News

The lawsuit is of great public importance as it contains allegations of repeated problems with the City of Mesa Police Department. Local media reported on the lawsuit. It was recently featured in an article published by Phoenix New Times. A link to the article can be read here.

The Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit Alleging Excessive Force

The lawsuit was filed in federal court and alleges claims arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This federal law allows citizens to file claims against local and state government actors who violate their constitutional rights. This includes those working for local or city police departments. Since the statute is a federal law, the federal court has jurisdiction over the claims.

This federal law allows citizens to file claims against local and state government actors who violate their constitutional rights.

The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. The case was assigned to the Honorable Judge Michael T. Liburdi. Judge Liburdi was appointed to the federal bench to serve as a judge by President Donald J. Trump. The case is assigned case number 2:24-CV-00670. The case is entitled Taneysha Carter v. Officer Drew Lawrence, Et al.

The Lawsuit Alleges Violations of the Fourth Amendment

The lawsuit filed by our civil rights lawyers alleges violations of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment sets forth as follows:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unlawful search and seizure. The use of excessive force is considered the seizure of a person to which the Fourth Amendment applies. Notably, many individuals think of a seizure as the wrongful taking of property or personal belongings. However, it also applies to the seizure of the personal right to be free from the use of excessive force.

A Summary of The Excessive Force Lawsuit Against the City of Mesa

The case arises from the attempted murder of a distraught, African-American woman, Taneysha Carter, by City of Mesa police officer Drew Lawrence. On July 7, 2022, Ms. Carter was experiencing a health crisis and sought the help of Officer Lawrence. In doing so, she followed him in her Mercedes SUV to the Mesa police station where they both entered a gated parking area.

Ms. Carter was in desperate need of assistance. She believed Officer Lawrence was leading her to safety and that he wanted her to follow him. As a result, she did so.

Inexplicably, it appears that Officer Lawrence believed she followed him to attack him. This assumption was wholly unreasonable as the officer had no communication with Ms. Carter. It is believed that he thought this simply because Ms. Carter was black. Notably, he did not try to communicate with her nor do anything in an attempt to figure out what she needed.

The First Excessive Use of Force

As she entered the parking area, Ms. Carter was following Officer Lawrence’s patrol car too closely. As a result, the front of her vehicle came into contact with his rear bumper when he slowed his vehicle. Without any explanation or warning, Officer Lawrence accelerated and then exited his vehicle while it was still moving.

Like a movie, Officer Lawrence rolled out of his moving vehicle, then drew his firearm and unloaded eight to nine shots into Ms. Carter’s stopped vehicle while she sat inside.  Ms. Carter’s vehicle was not moving, was not approaching Officer Lawrence and could not be perceived as an immediate threat at the time he discharged the bullets from his duty pistol. One of the bullets struck Ms. Carter in the back left shoulder area.

The Second Use of Excessive Force

Terrified for her life, Ms. Carter then exited her vehicle and began running away. With her back turned, Officer Lawrence attempted to kill her. He fired 2-3 additional shots from a cover position from over 100 feet away. Ms. Carter crumpled to the ground as a result.

Lawrence used lethal force and attempted to kill Ms. Carter in violation of the law and her civil rights.

When Officer Lawrence discharged his duty weapon a second time, it was obvious Ms. Carter was unarmed and not a threat to him or anyone else. She was heading into a fully confined gated area and no one else could be seen in her immediate vicinity. She was also headed in the opposite direction from where Officer Lawrence was positioned. Officer Lawrence used lethal force and attempted to kill Ms. Carter in violation of the law and her civil rights.

The Officer Violated Department Policies and Did Not Follow His Training

No reasonable officer would take the actions that Officer Lawrence did that night. His actions were contrary to Arizona POST training and his Department’s written policies and procedures. Nevertheless, the City of Mesa Police Department did not terminate him and did nothing to punish him.

The City of Mesa Police Department’s Long History and Culture of Excessive Force

The City of Mesa Police Department has an established history of excessive force incidents involving its officers. It also has an established history of its officers using lethal force on individuals who were experiencing a behavioral health crisis. The City of Mesa Police Department has a policy, practice and custom of failing to adequately train its officers in the permissible uses of force and on how to handle individuals who are mentally ill or experiencing a behavioral health crisis. It also has a proven pattern of failing to reprimand or terminate officers who used unwarranted lethal force.

The Claims Alleged in the Police Brutality Lawsuit

The acts and omissions alleged in the lawsuit deprived Ms. Carter of her Fourth Amendment right to be free from the use of excessive force. Ms. Carter sued Officer Lawrence in his individual capacity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for these constitutional violations.  She also sued the City of Mesa and its police department for their failures pursuant to Monell v. Department of Social Services.

The Exact Allegations Alleged Against Officer Lawrence in the Lawsuit

The below allegations are set forth verbatim in the lawsuit:

6. On July 7, 2022, Taneysha Carter experienced a health crisis in the late afternoon while she was in Phoenix, Arizona.
7. Ms. Carter was experiencing heat stroke and became ill and confused.
8. Due to her health crisis, police and fire personnel were called to her location at a Quick Trip gas station located in Phoenix.
9. Police and fire personnel made contact with her at the gas station but ultimately did not provide her with, or take her for, medical treatment.
10. Afterward, Ms. Carter drove to Mesa, where she lived at the time, but was still ill and confused.
11. Ms. Carter spotted a City of Mesa police patrol unit and began following it hoping that the officer driving it would help her. The officer driving that patrol unit was Officer Lawrence.
12. Ms. Carter was driving a white 2015 Mercedes ML 350 SUV. Ms. Carter activated her hazard lights and positioned her vehicle directly behind Officer Lawrence’s patrol unit. Ms. Carter was hoping that Officer Lawrence would see her hazard lights and stop his vehicle to assist her.
13. Instead, Officer Lawrence drove his vehicle for approximately five minutes and several miles during which time Ms. Carter followed him. Ms. Carter believed that Officer Lawrence was leading her to a location to help her.
14. Eventually, Officer Lawrence arrived at the Mesa Police Department and brought his vehicle to a stop near a gated parking area. Ms. Carter stopped her vehicle directly behind his.
15. Officer Lawrence did not turn on his sirens, exit his vehicle, call in to dispatch for back up or attempt to speak to Ms. Carter over his P.A. system at any point in time when Ms. Carter was following his patrol unit or behind him.
16. Officer Lawrence then opened the gate and drove his patrol unit inside the gate to a fenced-in parking area.
17. Ms. Carter believed that Officer Lawrence wanted her to follow him and was taking her to safety inside the gated parking area.
18. She continued to follow his patrol unit inside the gate. While doing so, she was following very close to his patrol unit. As a result, when she drove into the gated parking area, her front bumper made contact with the rear of his patrol unit.
19. Officer Lawrence then accelerated and exited his patrol unit while it was still moving.
20. Ms. Carter’s vehicle was at a complete stop as Officer Lawrence stood up, turned in her direction and then fired eight to nine shots at her from a distance of over 35 feet away.
21. At the time that Officer Lawrence fired these shots, he had not activated his body worn camera as required by City of Mesa Police Department policy.
22. Several of the bullets penetrated Ms. Carter’s driver-side windshield and entered the cabin of her vehicle. Upon information and belief, one of the bullets struck Ms. Carter in the left back shoulder area.
23. Ms. Carter ducked down in her driver’s seat and waited until she heard no further gunfire. Then, after sufficient time passed and scared for her life, she made the decision to exit her vehicle in an attempt to run to safety.
24. After Officer Lawrence fired the initial shots, he moved to a cover position by a forensic services van.
25. When Ms. Carter exited her vehicle, Officer Lawrence could see her. He could see that she was unarmed and running in the opposite direction.
26. He could see that the area toward where she was running was completely enclosed by a fence.
27. Officer Lawrence could see no other individuals in the direction she was running for whose safety he would be concerned.
28. Officer Lawrence had time to deliberate and make a decision on what to do.
29. Officer Lawrence was at the police station where several other police officers were present.
30. Officer Lawrence made the decision to not call for any of those other officers to assist him.
31. Officer Lawrence was equipped with a taser and made the decision not to use it.
32. Officer Lawrence made the decision to use lethal force and discharged his firearm two to three more times.
33. Officer Lawrence was more than 100 feet from Ms. Carter when he employed lethal force and discharged his firearm two to three more times.
34. Officer Lawrence did so after making the decision to not give any warnings or commands.
35. Upon information and belief, Ms. Carter was again, or in the alternative struck for the first time, in the upper back and she collapsed to the ground.
36. Ms. Carter had two bullet wounds in her upper back after being shot by Officer Lawrence.

The History of Excessive Force, Failure to Train and Lack of Oversight at the Department

The lawsuit filed by our civil rights lawyers claims that the City of Mesa has an established history of excessive force incidents involving its officers. The lawsuit also highlights a pattern of City of Mesa police officers using lethal force on individuals who were experiencing a behavioral health crisis. The lawsuit alleges that the Department failed, and currently fails, to properly train its officers in the permissible use of force and on how to handle individuals who are mentally ill or experiencing a behavioral health crisis.

The lawsuit alleges that the failures of the Department are systemic and rampant. It is claimed that many excessive force incidents were not properly investigated. Even worse, that the officers responsible for those incidents were not discharged from duty or adequately punished.

The Past Incidents of Excessive Force Alleged Against the City of Mesa Police Department

• On January 18, 2016, a City of Mesa police officer shot and killed Daniel Shaver. Shaver was crying and begging for officers not to shoot him as he crawled unarmed toward them at their request. The City of Mesa paid 8 million dollars to settle an excessive force lawsuit against it and the officer involved with respect to that incident.
• On April 20, 2017, City of Mesa police officers shot and killed Sariah Lane who was 17 years old. She was not armed and not suspected of any crime. The City of Mesa paid 2.45 million dollars to settle an excessive force lawsuit against it and the officers involved with respect to that incident.
• On April 1, 2018, City of Mesa police officers physically assaulted and beat James Wright for refusing to provide his identification. Wright was unarmed at the time and not suspected of any serious crimes. The City of Mesa paid $175,000 to settle an excessive force lawsuit against the officers involved with respect to that incident.
• On May 23, 2018, City of Mesa police officers physically assaulted and beat Robert Johnson. Johnson was compliant with the commands given by officers and was not suspected of any serious crimes. The City of Mesa paid $350,000 to settle an excessive force lawsuit against it and the officers involved with respect to that incident.
• On December 6, 2019, a City of Mesa police officer shot Randy Sewell in the buttocks and shattered his femur. Sewell was unarmed and not suspected of a serious crime. Sewell was charged with resisting arrest because of the recommendation of City of Mesa officers. A jury found him not guilty of that charge. The City of Mesa paid 1.75 million dollars to settle an excessive force lawsuit against it and the officers involved with respect to that incident.
• On September 25, 2020, City of Mesa police officers shot and killed Angel Benitez who was 20 years old at the time. Benitez was unarmed and shot by multiple officers as he was following their instructions to exit the vehicle he was in. The City of Mesa paid $250,000 to settle an excessive force lawsuit against it and the officers involved with respect to that incident.
• On September 5, 2021, a City of Mesa police officer employed lethal force on Diego Varela. Varela attempted to evade the officer causing his vehicle to brush the officer’s patrol unit. After Varela and his vehicle passed the officer, and was no longer a threat to his safety, the officer discharged multiple rounds from his firearm at Varela.
• On July 2, 2022, a City of Mesa police officer employed lethal force on an eighteen-year-old who was pulled over on a routine traffic stop. The officer did not activate his body worn camera as required by Department policy. As the officer asked the teenager to exit his vehicle, the teenager began driving away. As the vehicle was leaving, the officer discharged two rounds from his firearm at the teen and his vehicle. At the point the shots were fired, the officer was approximately 20-30 feet away from the vehicle and it did not pose a safety threat.
• On October 2, 2022, City of Mesa police officers physically assaulted and beat Daniel Barraza until he was unconscious. Barraza was unarmed, compliant with the officers’ commands and not suspected of any serious crimes. An excessive force lawsuit is currently pending against the City of Mesa and the officers involved with respect to that incident.
• On September 29, 2023, City of Mesa police officers shot and killed Thomas McGinty who was suicidal and experiencing a behavioral health crisis. Officers failed to de-escalate the situation and chose not to employ less lethal force. The family of McGinty has retained an attorney to advance a claim for excessive force.
• On December 15, 2023, City of Mesa police officers shot David Dimas. Dimas was self-harming himself and experiencing a behavioral health crisis. Two officers employed less-lethal force while a third employed lethal force discharging multiple rounds from his firearm into Dimas.

Contact an Experienced Police Brutality Lawyer

If you or a loved one was the victim of police brutality or suffered a constitutional violation by law enforcement, contact our office today. Our experienced civil rights lawyers have set records with the results we have obtained in our civil rights cases. We have repeatedly prevailed in difficult civil rights cases and obtained high value results for our clients. This includes both through settlement and trial. A consultation is free and we only earn a fee if we recover for you. An experienced lawyer is available now to discuss your case.

About the author: The content on this page was provided by Scottsdale personal injury attorney and civil rights lawyer Tony Piccuta. Piccuta graduated with honors from Indiana University-Maurer School of Law in Bloomington, Indiana (Previously Ranked Top 35 US News & World Report).  Piccuta took and passed the State bars of Arizona, California, Illinois and Nevada (all on the first try). He actively practices throughout Arizona and California. He is a trial attorney that regularly handles serious personal injury cases and civil rights lawsuits. He has obtained six and seven figure verdicts in both state and federal court. He has been recognized by Super Lawyers for six years straight. He is a member of the Arizona Association of Justice, Maricopa County Bar Association, Scottsdale Bar Association, American Association for Justice, National Police Accountability Project and Consumer Attorneys of California, among other organizations.

Disclaimer: The information on this web site is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information on this page is attorney advertising. Reading and relying upon the content on this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you are seeking legal advice, you should contact our law firm for a free consultation and to discuss your specific case and issues.

References:

[1] https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-4/

[2] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2958398500325696309&q=monell+v+new+york+city+dept+of+social+servs&hl=en&as_sdt=6,32