Spokane7
61°
May 7, 2009 in City
Case against sheriff’s deputies dismissed
A federal judge has ruled in favor of Spokane County in a suit brought by a man who claimed that sheriff’s deputies beat him inside a Spokane Valley bar on Super Bowl Sunday 2003.
U.S. District Judge Fred Van Sickle dismissed all of the claims made by Douglas L. Myser, essentially saying the case had no merit. Van Sickle heard the case and issued his written decision earlier this week.
Myser alleged that he suffered memory loss and post traumatic stress disorder since the Jan. 26, 2003 confrontation between him and three Spokane County Sheriff’s deputies: Jeff Shover, Mark Gregory and Brett Peterson. Myser and his attorney, John Muenster, claimed that the deputies threw him to the floor and later drove him to an undisclosed location where the deputies beat him unconscious.
But Van Sickle ruled that Myser did not provide corroborating evidence to show he was assaulted in the bar. And, Van Sickle noted that photographs taken at the jail don’t suggest he suffered any more injuries than the confrontation with deputies at the bar.
Spokane County Risk Manager Steve Bartel said he was pleased with Van Sickle’s ruling.
“It’s still appalling for me how much money taxpayers have spent in defending a lawsuit we felt from the beginning had no merit,” Bartel said.
Doney’s sentence upheld 
terrymr on May 07 at 2:40 p.m.
I guess the sheriffs deputies should take pictures next time they take somebody down an alley to beat them.
CONCERNEDREADER on May 07 at 3:48 p.m.
Before assuming that this guy’s lawsuit had any basis (and the federal judge found it had no basis at all), check out the court’s opinion… . from the time that the police left the bar with the drunk guy (it was a crowded bar on superbowl and many witnesses were able to verify the time they left) until they got to the police station downtown, 13 minutes had elapsed. The bar was in the valley 9 miles from the police station, so the police had enough time to find a dark alley, stop, pull this guy out of the police car, beat him unconscious, pick him up and get him back into the car, and make it to the police station in 13 minutes ? A time that was logged and independently verfied as well ? No way. Another person suggested in his comment to the previous article posted in the spokesman that the public should read the trial transcript before assuming the police did something wrong in this case … the public should also go and check out the courts very long and detailed decision
George_Sands on May 07 at 3:52 p.m.
Terry thats only the SPD who they take pictures with their City Cell Phone Camera, before they bone some chick in the back of a car, and then drive home drunk in an SPD car.
Oh I forgot even if they did take pics the SPD Detectives would “forget” to take their Camera Memory cards and then
would be too stupid to realize the perps switched the cards on them afterwards.
Bartel should realize that justice isn’t free especially when its provided by three rogue deputies. Guess he should learn to let the County Public Information officer speak publicly instead of increasing the appearance of foolish comments. Bartel should remember its OUR money and not his.
I’m thinking we should put GPS locators on Law Enforcement Officers since as a percantage they commit more crimes than the public and its OUR money and time they are working on.
bobbydee on May 07 at 4:17 p.m.
George. GPS devices have memory cards also. The tracks can be erased very easily by anyone. Kinda like 911 tapes.
terrymr on May 07 at 4:36 p.m.
I was somewhat kidding with my original comment, but it’s hard to know what corroborating evidence a person could provide in this kind of situation - they authorities don’t tend to document it for you and you’re stuck with no means of doing it yourself.
lewis8457 on May 07 at 6:12 p.m.
people of Spokane dont bother suing the police you wont win regardless if they were in the wrong or not.
eagleproducer on May 08 at 10:45 a.m.
George said “bone.”
keepontruckin on May 12 at 12:25 p.m.
I think this guy can take this to the 9th district court of Appeals if he wants .It may not be the last that we hear about this. It seems to me if he did not have a case he would not have taken this to trial. That costs a lot of out of pocket money for something that has no substance!!! I think once again we have a typical Spokane cover up. I hope this guy is in it for the long hall. We need someone with perseverance to bring this city to some justice. I don’t think justice was served here.
CONCERNEDREADER on May 12 at 1:39 p.m.
As stated in another comment - this was a federal case, so no this is not a typical spokane cover up - Judge Van Sickle is a federal judge appointed for life - he has no reason to be pressured into any decision - he based his decision on the evidence presented at trial. There is a certain burden that Myser must prove in order to prevail and the judge found he did not meet that burden. If you dont like the decision, dont blame the judge or Spokane - complain to the law makers and legislature and have them rewrite and change the laws and requirements that a plaintiff must meet in such a case.
How do you explain acquitals and defense verdicts then - I guess based upon your logic that someone who did not have a case would not have taken it to trial ? So you are saying that every case that lands up in trial in district, superior or federal court has merit and the plaintiff deserves to win simply because that person obviously would not have taken the case to trial if it were meritless ? Have you ever served jury duty ?
Cover up ? So you are saying that all the patrons and staff at the crowded bar that the alleged incident occurred at on superbowl sunday were also bought off or coerced and part of the cover up too when they testified that what Myser said happened at the bar NEVER happened ?
keepontruckin on May 12 at 3:49 p.m.
Maybe he will prove that burden of proof n the court of appeals . It seems to me to be a waste of his money not to take it all the way. As I stated before why would he throw away all that money to go to trial if he did not have a good case ? If this was an open and shut case why did it take so long for the judge to make a decision? It seemed like this decision took a few weeks for it to be made didn’t it?? This was not just a open and shut case or we would of heard about it back in April when the whole thing went to trial. I think the County is probably breathing a sigh or relief and hoping he will not appeal it. Hold your breath Bartles or what ever that risk manager that was commenting in the papers name is. The fat lady may not be singing yet. For him to be shooting off his mouth to the papers very well may be premature.
CONCERNEDREADER on May 12 at 5:36 p.m.
There were articles printed about the trial in April……
I cant speak for Judge Van Sickle, but given the trial took almost 2 weeks, I am betting that: first, given the amount of information and exhibits that needed to be reviewed, a decision would take a few weeks to issue; second, given the fact that any decision a judge makes lately that even remotely involves the police department or a police officer invokes accusations against the judge and cries of conspiracy, I am sure that he wanted to make sure and take his time to ensure the decision was based on all the evidence and that the decision was correct and just; and lastly, given that this did involve an excessive force claim, and again going back to the issue of the judge potentially been accused of bias or conspiracy, I am sure that he wanted to issue the most detailed decision as possible. Remember, this was not a situation where a jury was requested by either party, so the judge must make findings of fact and conclusions of law - check out the court file - the decision was close to 12 pages long and addressed every witness testimony, most exhibits and specifically set forth who the Judge found credible, who he did not find credible and why.
keepontruckin on May 12 at 5:51 p.m.
You seem to know a lot about the law concerned reader. So how long does he have to appeal this if he chooses to do this??
CONCERNEDREADER on May 12 at 7:41 p.m.
That I do not know.
keepontruckin on May 13 at 11:32 a.m.
I guess from what I hear it is 30 days.
kristiankaren on June 21 at 5:15 p.m.
Well it looks like an appeal is on the way!!!