|
|
|
Suit filed against Town of Pocola |
|
Monday, 07 December 2009 |
By Laura Young
Managing Editor
Nearly three years after four employees with the Pocola Police Department were fired from the force, a civil law suit has been filed in the United States District Court in Muskogee.
The suit names the Town of Pocola, Board of Trustees of the Town of Pocola and Jerl Mitchell, Buddy Williams and Melinda Frick as the defendants in the case which was filed Nov. 25.
Plaintiffs in the case are Jose Guzman, Eric Helms, Nena Kent, Jason Sargent and Raymond Smith III.
The defendants first took their complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. EEOC then deferred the case to the Department of Justice for investigation. DOJ then returned the case back to the EEOC for the plaintiffs to file the right to sue documents.
At the time of the initial incident Jerl Mitchell served as mayor of the town of Pocola, Buddy Williams served as a member of the board of trustees as was Melinda Frick. All are being named as liable individually and in his or her official capacity.
The cause of the action is based on discrimination and retaliation based on race. The plaintiffs also allege wrongful termination.
According to court documents filed by Martha J. Cherbin of the law offices of Bonds, Matthews, Brennan and Bonds of Muskogee, the Statement of Facts are as follows (some statements may be considered offensive to readers).
All of the plaintiffs were former employees of the police department of the Town of Pocola.
Guzman is of Hispanic descent and therefore a member of a protected class and the Town of Pocola was the employer at the time of termination. Mitchell was mayor and Williams and Frick were serving as trustees at the time of termination.
Documents state that on or about Sept. 10, 2006, Mitchell informed Guzman that, “I don't like Mexicans, I don't like Niggers and I don't like you, Guzman!” and that he would place him on the next agenda to be fired.
Mitchell made the statement in front of Smith and Sargent.
Mitchell made racially discriminatory statements about Guzman, by referring to him as a “wet back.” Mitchell also made gender based discriminatory statements about Kent by referring to her as a “slut.”
Police Chief Helms confronted Mitchell regarding the racial and gender based discriminatory statements, and was informed that Mitchell was going to retaliate by having them all fired. Thereafter, all of the Plaintiffs were terminated in retaliation for protected activity.
Smith and Sargent witnessed the exchange between Guzman and Mitchell when the racial and national origin comments were made by Mitchell. Smith and Sargent submitted statements to the Chief of Police regarding what they had observed and, thereafter, retaliatory harassment and intimidation began by Mitchell and the named members of the Board of Trustees. Guzman was terminated due to his race, and Smith, Sargent and Helms were all terminated in retaliation for protected activity.
On or about March 13, 2007, Smith confronted Mitchell about Mitchell threatening to pull the city's gasoline business from a local store if campaign signs for a candidate for city council supported by the Fraternal Order of Police were not removed. Mitchell informed Smith that he would put him next on the agenda to be fired.
Smith was fired on March 22, 2007, in retaliation for the exercise of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, as well as in retaliation for participating in protected activity with respect to the racial discrimination against Guzman.
Smith attempted to appeal his termination to the Board of Trustees. However, the minutes state that his request for an appeal died for lack of a second.
The actions of the board in refusing to give Plaintiff Smith an opportunity to be heard and his right to appeal his termination constitutes a violation of Smith's Fourteenth Amendment right to due process, as well as wrongful termination.
The town is a governmental entity acting under the color of state law and is liable for racial discrimination and retaliation. The town is also liable for the terminations because such action was approved and taken through the direction of the town's officials having final decision-making authority with regard to the termination of police officers.
Mitchell was either the official decision maker for the City of Pocola, or his acts were approved and acquiesced in by the Town of Pocola and the Board of Trustees for the Town of Pocola, such that it is liable along with him for such discrimination and retaliation.
At the direct cause of such discrimination and retaliation, the Plaintiffs have suffered lost income, past, present, and future, dignitary harm such as humiliation, financial distress, anger, public embarrassment and other non-pecuniary losses.
Such actions were willful and wanton as Mitchell and the individual members of the board are individually liable for punitive damages in an amount equal to or exceeding the actual damages sustained.
The actions of Mitchell are within the scope of his authority and office as mayor, the town is liable for his actions.
The actions of the Board of Trustees were within the scope of their authority as decision makers for the Town, in voting to terminate the plaintiffs, the Town is liable for their actions.
The actions were taken by state actors utilizing the color of their public positions to discriminate against Guzman, and retaliate against the others, and treat them unequally in their positions as police officers, violating their rights to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Plaintiffs are entitled to recover actual damages against all defendants.
Smith stated, "After all this time we are glad that our side of the story can now get out. They have had their say, now we get to have ours."
|
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 08 December 2009 )
|
|
|
