WORCESTER – A new civil lawsuit, filed on Feb. 2 in U.S. Federal District Court, alleges that Worcester Police “enforce and sanction a policy, practice, and/or custom of unconstitutional stops and frisks of City residents.”
The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States requires law enforcement to have reasonable, articulable suspicion to detain an individual and conduct a frisk or pat down. The lawsuit alleges Worcester Police officers “have been, and are engaged in, rampant stops and frisks of individuals.”
The lawsuit also claims officers in Worcester “often have used, and continue to use, race and/or national origin – not reasonable suspicion – as determinative factors in deciding to stop and frisk individuals,” in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
As reported by This Week in Worcester, the Department of Justice announced in November that it launched an investigation to assess whether Worcester Police Department (WPD) engages in a pattern or practice of excessive force or engages in discriminatory policing based on race or sex.
The lawsuit names the City of Worcester, former City Manager Edward Augustus, Chief of Police Steven Sargent, and Worcester Police Department members David Doherty, Bruce Carter, Jason Gaumon, Alex Maracallo, Michael Higgins, Patrick Bennett, Peter Bissonnette, and Lisa Carlson.
Joseph Hennessey represents the plaintiff, Marilene Rodriguez. Hennessey formerly served as a police officer for 23 years before becoming a defense attorney.
The lawsuit says that Rodriguez picked up her mother on the morning of January 20, then pulled over to the side of the road to make a phone call. While stopped, two other individuals entered her vehicle. Officers Maracallo and Carter allegedly ordered the stop of the vehicle driven by Rodriguez, reporting that they suspected a drug transaction had, or was about to occur.
All four individuals in the vehicle were minorities, according to the lawsuit.
During the stop, the complaint claims that officers searched Rodriguez and her vehicle without consent, that Maracallo, a male, physically patted her down, and that a female officer, Carlson, “subjected Ms. Rodriguez to having her breasts manipulated without any consent as they stood on the side of Main Street and in a parking lot of a grocery store as cars and pedestrians passed.”
After officers searched Rodriguez, the lawsuit claims she began recording officers as her vehicle was searched without consent, but Carter “forcefully removed the phone from Ms. Rodriguez,” telling her, “she was not recording.”
The complaint says that no drugs were found and no incident report was generated until Rodriguez’s attorney requested copies of the report.
The lawsuit also claims that the Worcester Police Department does not maintain records of stops that do not amount to an arrest or citation.
The complaint alleges the following violations by all defendants:
- Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution against unlawful seizure;
- Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution against unlawful search;
- Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution
- Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S. Code § 1981
- Civil Conspiracy (42 U.S.C. Section 1983
- Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
The complaint also makes separate claims against specific individuals:
- Violations of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment right against illegal search and seizure by Higgins, Maracallo, Bissonnette, Carlson, Bennett, and Carter.
- Assault and Battery against Carter, Maracallo, and Carlson
- Filing of false police reports against Carter, Maracallo, Higgins, Carlson, and Bennett
There are also claims against the City of Worcester, Augustus, and Sargent for violations of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment for:
- “Devising, implementing, enforcing, adopting, sanctioning, and ratifying.” suspicionless stops and frisks
- “Failing to properly screen, train, and supervise WPD officers”
- “Failing to adequately monitor and discipline WPD and its officers”
- “Encouraging, sanctioning and failing to rectify the WPD”s constitutional abuses”
The complaint does not specify an amount of damages sought.
The claims in the complaint are allegations and the first step in initiating civil litigation. The City of Worcester and the Worcester Police Department do not comment on ongoing litigation.
