|
Law Enforcement Expert Witness
Tad Leach has been retained as an Expert Witness
by law firms/attorneys in Boise, Coeur d'Alene and Lewiston, ID; Spokane, WA;
Atchison, KS
and Salt Lake City, UT.
Areas of Expert Witness experience in Idaho
State and Federal
Court Cases:
Use of force (appropriate to use force,
was force utilized excessive and use of pepper spray) - Federal and Idaho State Court recognized.
Policy and procedural issues (did a law
enforcement officer/s follow department and/or commonly accepted law
enforcement policy and procedures).
Police practices issues (did a law enforcement officer/s
follow commonly accepted law enforcement practices).
Synopsis
Of Sample Cases
Case No.: 04-2584-RDR
Reindl v. City of Leavenworth, et al.
United States District Court - District of Kansas
Statute: Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States
Constitution and Title 42 USC Section 1983.
Plaintiff's Allegations:
1. Officer utilized excessive
force in attempting to handcuff the subject.
2. Other officers failed to prevent the use
of excessive force.
Leach Expert Witness Report and deposition for Plaintiffs:
1. Officer utilized unreasonable
(therefore excessive) force in attempting to
get the subject to
comply with his order to put his hands behind his back.
2. Other officers failed to prevent the use
of unreasonable force.
Case Disposition: Pending.
______________________________________________________________
Case No.: CIV-99-244-N-EJL
Beier v. City of Lewiston (ID) and Nez Perce County (ID), et al.
United States District Court - District of Idaho
Statute: First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the
United States Constitution and Article 1 of the Idaho Constitution and Title
42 USC Section 1983.
Plaintiff's Allegations:
1. Officers lacked probable cause to
arrest the Plaintiff (NOTE: The Ninth
Circuit Court of
Appeals held there was no probable cause for the arrest).
2. Officers employed unreasonable,
excessive and unwarranted force to
unlawfully seize
the Plaintiff, including the use of pepper spray.
Leach Expert Witness Report and court testimony for Defendants:
1. A reasonable officer would have
believed he had probable cause to
arrest the
Plaintiff.
2. Officers utilized only the force which
was reasonable and necessary to
overcome resistance
by the Plaintiff.
Case Disposition: Plaintiff awarded one dollar ($1.00) for the
unlawful arrest.
All other charges dismissed.
______________________________________________________________
Case No.: CV-02-00072
Athay vs. Bear Lake County (ID) and Rich County (UT), et al.
Sixth Judicial District of the State of Idaho
Statute: Idaho Constitution: Article 1, Sections 1,3,17 & 21.
Plaintiff's Allegations:
1. The defendant law enforcement officers
pursued a suspected DUI suspect
in such a manner as to
"shock the conscience".
2. The defendants failed to terminate the
pursuit, thus precipitating an accident
which caused a severe
injury to an innocent driver.
Leach Expert Witness Report conclusions for Defendants:
1. The defendants were justified in starting
and continuing the pursuit, due to
the ongoing danger to the
public created by the offender's dangerous
driving prior to the
pursuit.
2. The defendants would have been negligent in
their duty had they failed to
attempt to remove the
dangerous driver from the road.
Case Disposition: Dismissed.
______________________________________________________________
Case No.: CV02-00341
Castleberry vs. Clearwater Deputy Joe Newman
and Officer Jerald Hiner of the Orofino City Police Department
Second Judicial District of the State of
Idaho - Clearwater County
Statute: Title 42 U.S.C. Sections 1983 & 1988 and the Idaho
Tort Claims Act.
Plaintiff's Allegations:
1. The
defendant law enforcement officers made an unreasonable physical seizure
of the Plaintiff.
2. The Defendants
used excessive force against the Plaintiff.
Leach Expert Witness Report and court testimony for
Defendants:
1. The Defendants
were making a lawful arrest and would have been derelict in
their duty had they failed to protect the victim from further assault by the
Plaintiff.
2. The Defendants
utilized force that was reasonable and necessary to effect the
arrest.
Case Disposition: Defendants Acquitted.
______________________________________________________________________
Case No.: CIV00-497-N-EJL
Liiv vs. City of Coeur d’Alene, et al.
United States District Court – District of Idaho
Statute: Title 28 U.S.C. Sections 1331,
1332 & 1343 and
Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.
Plaintiff’s Allegations:
A municipal ordinance making it a misdemeanor to
“cross a police-line during a parade”, is functionless, purposeless and
unenforceable, except against opponents of the Aryan Nations.
The Plaintiff was falsely arrested by law
enforcement officers (Defendants) for crossing a police-line during a
parade.
Defendants utilized excessive force in making
the arrest.
Leach Expert Witness Report conclusions for
Defendants and court affidavit:
The ordinance in question has numerous valid law
enforcement purposes/functions; including, but not limited to: isolation of
crime scenes/investigations, accidents, hazardous situations, dangerous
areas/situations and crowd control.
Defendants had probable cause to arrest the
Plaintiff for crossing a police-line during a parade.
Defendants used minimal force (compliance
techniques) to arrest the Plaintiff, who was uncooperative during the
arrest. These tactics were appropriate and necessary under the
circumstances.
Case disposition: Summary Judgment for
Defendants.
Case No.: CIV00-0631-N-EJL
Michael Lamastus, et. al. vs City of Post Falls, et. Al.
United States District Court – District of Idaho
Statute: Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.
Plaintiffs’ Allegations:
Law Enforcement officers (Defendants) violated
plaintiffs’ right to privacy by unlawfully entering the Plaintiffs
residence.
Defendants unlawfully arrested Plaintiff for
failure to produce identification and resisting arrest.
Defendants used unreasonable and excessive force
against the plaintiffs in making the arrests (physical force and pepper
spray).
Leach Expert Witness Report conclusions for
Defendants:
Defendants were attempting to arrest one of the
Plaintiffs for a violation of state statute occurring in their presence.
They lawfully entered the Plaintiff's residence to consummate the arrest when
he escaped inside the dwelling.
Based on the nature of the reported incident
being investigated (underage consumption of alcohol), Defendants were
obligated to pursue the complaint and, therefore, to demand that the
Plaintiff supply identification as required by state statute. As he actively
resisted arrest, that additional charge was appropriate, as were other
obstructing charges against other Plaintiffs who attempted to thwart the
initial arrest.
The force used by the Defendants was reasonable
and necessary under the circumstances.
Case disposition: Dismissed.
Other cases issues:
Unreasonable and warrant less seizure; illegal
search; and negligent hiring, supervision, training and retention.
United States District Court – District of
Idaho; retained by law enforcement Defendants.
Failure to properly and adequately investigate
before searching Plaintiff’s residence; failure to enter Plaintiff’s
residence in a reasonable and/or lawful fashion and use of excessive or
unnecessary force in restraining Plaintiffs and in conducting the search.
United States District Court – District of
Idaho; retained by law enforcement Defendants.
Wrongful termination.
United States District Court – District of
Idaho; retained by county and law enforcement Defendants.
Citizen use of force to defend property.
First Judicial District of Idaho – Kootenai
County; retained by citizen Defendant.
CLIENTS/REFERENCES
"In my dealings with Mr. Leach, he has
always been open and frank, pointing out both the strengths and weaknesses
of the case at hand. I have appreciated his ready availability and his
promptness in performing all tasks. Mr. Leach brings to the table
common-sense, experience and a wealth of knowledge. The result is a
thorough, accurate and fair assessment of the case at hand."
Randall R. Adams
Quane Smith L.L.P.
Coeur d'Alene, ID
"Tad is extremely knowledgeable on law
enforcement issues. He has the technical background in law enforcement
issues, but brings with it a large dose of common sense. Tad also is very
organized and eloquent. As a result, he can present himself well in front of
an audience, including a jury."
James A . Davis
Attorney at Law
Boise, ID
"Tad Leach is a thorough researcher and
excellent strategist. He brings an added dimension and depth to every trial
team. Tad is what every defense trial team needs to forge victory in the
most difficult cases!"
David Lefkow, Partner
Holland and Knight
Chicago, IL
[ GO
BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
] |
