‘Posed No Threat’: Ohio Cop Beats Black Teen After Female Officer Trips During Mall ‘Disturbance’ He Wasn’t Even Involved In, Lawsuit Says
A female cop in Ohio tripped and fell on the ground during a “disturbance” at a Cleveland shopping mall last month, prompting a male cop to bash a Black teen over the head who had nothing to do with the disturbance, according to a lawsuit filed last week.
The lawsuit was filed by Theodore Jenkins Jr., the father of the boy who is not named in the lawsuit, accusing Cleveland police of not only using excessive force against the teen but also maintaining a long-established pattern of using excessive force against Black people, violating their Fourth and 14th Amendment rights.
While the lawsuit does not name the female cop who tripped or the male cop who beat the teen with a baton, it lists as defendants Cleveland Police Chief Dorothy Todd and Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, accusing them of promoting a culture of violence within the police department.
“First, this case alleges that Defendant Cleveland Police Department and Defendant John Doe, Cleveland Police Officer used excessive force against Plaintiff, causing substantial injury,” the claim states.
“Second, that Defendant Cleveland Police Department, along with Defendant Dorothy A. Todd and Defendant Justin Bibb, violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution by adopting customs and policies that encouraged police officers to use excessive force against people of color.
Atlanta Black Star reached out to both the father and the attorney for more details, but has not yet heard back from them.
The Disturbance
The incident occurred on March 12 outside Tower City, a mixed-use facility in downtown Cleveland that features stores, restaurants, and other forms of entertainment.
Cleveland attorney Bruce D. Taubman, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the teen’s father, described the incident as follows:
When Cleveland Police Officers responded to the disturbance, responding officers noticed a female police officer on the ground.
Responding officers thought the female officer on the ground said Plaintiff was the one who tripped her.
The responding officers then targeted Plaintiff who was not involved and posed not threat to the officers.
Defendant John Doe, Cleveland Police Officer struck Plaintiff in the head with a baton even though Plaintiff did not do anything to provoke such a reaction by the officers.
Right after Defendant John Doe struck Plaintiff on the head, the female officer informed Defendant that he misheard her and Plaintiff did not trip her
The teen, who is also referred to as John Doe in the lawsuit, suffered a concussion and “various musculoskeletal injuries.”
The lawsuit describes the teen as a “dedicated student-athlete with good grades and aspirations to attend college” who plays on an Amateur Athletic Union basketball team.
“Plaintiff’s head injury has caused him to not be able to fully participate in his academics and his athletics,” the lawsuit states.
“Plaintiff also suffered mental and emotional injury due to this traumatic event as he is suffering from a traumatic brain injury.”
“This widespread tolerance of excessive force by police officers constituted a municipal policy, practice, or custom and led to Plaintiff’s assault and injury,” the claim states.
Consent Decree
The Cleveland Police Department’s reputation for abusing and killing Black people without just cause made international news in 2014 after a Cleveland cop shot and killed Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old Black boy who was playing with a toy gun in a public park.
But the police department had already been the subject of a federal investigation by the United States Department of Justice that began in 2013, resulting in a consent decree that required the department to make specific changes to decrease violence and increase trust within the community.
According to the 59-page report by the USDOJ:
The pattern or practice of unreasonable force we identified is reflected in CDP’s use of both deadly and less lethal force.
For example, we found incidents of CDP officers firing their guns at people who do not pose an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury to officers or others and using guns in a careless and dangerous manner, including hitting people on the head with their guns, in circumstances where deadly force is not justified.
Officers also use less lethal force that is significantly out of proportion to the resistance encountered and officers too often escalate incidents with citizens instead of using effective and accepted tactics to de-escalate tension. We reviewed incidents where officers used Tasers, oleoresin capsicum spray (“OC Spray”), or punched people who were already subdued, including people in handcuffs.
Many of these people could have been controlled with a lesser application of force. At times, this force appears to have been applied as punishment for the person’s earlier verbal or physical resistance to an officer’s command, and is not based on a current threat posed by the person.
This retaliatory use of force is not legally justified. Our review also revealed that officers use excessive force against individuals who are in mental health crisis or who may be unable to understand or comply with officers’ commands, including when the individual is not suspected of having committed any crime at all.
Ignoring the Previous Consent Decree
The report also mentions that a prior federal investigation into the Cleveland Police Department ten years earlier resulted in proposed changes that were implemented for only a short period before things got back to their normal abusive practices.
The current pattern or practice of constitutional violations is even more troubling because we identified many of these structural deficiencies more than ten years ago during our previous investigation of CDP’s use of force.
In 2002, we provided initial observations regarding CDP’s use of force and accountability systems and, in 2004, we recommended that the Division make changes to address some of the deficiencies we identified.
In 2005, we found that Cleveland had abided by that agreement and it was terminated. It is clear, however, that despite these measures, many of the policy and practice reforms that were initiated in response to our 2004 memorandum agreement were either not fully implemented or, if implemented, were not maintained over time.
The 2014 consent decree once again required the Cleveland Police Department to implement policy changes regarding bias-free policing and use of force among other changes.
But 11 years later, it does not appear that it has implemented those changes.
And now that Donald Trump is president, Ohio Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno is asking Attorney General Pam Bondi to end all consent decrees, including the one in Cleveland.
The Trump administration has already announced it has put a freeze on consent decrees on the Louisville Police Department, which was launched following the killing of Breonna Taylor, as well as the one on the Minneapolis Police Department, launched following the murder of George Floyd.
“Law enforcement offices need to be able to do their jobs and enforce the law without politicians holding them back,” Moreno said in a statement to local media.
“That’s why I’m urging Attorney General Bondi to finally reexamine consent decree policies like we’ve seen in Cleveland, to help restore public safety.”