Total Pageviews

Thursday, September 12, 2019

Immunity Claim Rejected

Blogger Comments:  By now, unless you live under a rock, don't watch TV or read papers, you are aware that the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the federal District Court's ruling denying immunity for our former sheriff and her former deputies.  The Blog received a copy yesterday,  but too late to post.  All the local TV channels headlined the story last night and this morning.  Today the Decatur Daily published a long and detailed discussion of the decision and the facts that led up to it.  Here's the link:

Some pertinent quotes deserve your attention:

In their appeal, Franklin and the other defendants argued that the conduct alleged by (former Warden) Bradley was within the scope of their employment, and that they were therefore absolutely immune from liability.
“This view requires an extraordinarily broad view of absolute immunity that would effectively immunize any conduct when the sheriff flashes his or her badge,” according to the panel of three appellate judges. “The district court correctly rejected this view because Alabama law does not provide such infinite immunity.”
“The alleged activities paint a picture of a lengthy conspiracy to defraud the taxpayer, use public funds for personal gain, and punish anyone who threatened to publicize their activities,” according to the decision by judges Charles Wilson, Joel Dubina and Frank Hull.
“It is hard to think of a better example of knowingly violating a plaintiff’s constitutional rights than the allegation, which we are bound to accept as true, that the defendants facilitated the installation of an unauthorized keylogger on (Glenda Lockhart’s) computer, misled a judge to secure an invalid search warrant, then raided Bradley’s home,” the appellate court ruled.

No comments: