Pubdate: Wed, 09 Jul 2003
Source: Richmond Times-Dispatch (VA)
Copyright: 2003 Richmond Newspapers Inc.
Contact:  http://www.timesdispatch.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/365
Author: Mark Bowes

SUIT OVER POLICE SEARCH SETTLED

$30,000 Paid To Black Motorist And Lawyers Over Traffic Stop

A $20 million lawsuit filed against a state police field supervisor accused 
of illegally detaining and repeatedly searching a black motorist two years 
ago in Hanover County has been settled for $30,000.

Samuel H. Brown and his attorneys received a $30,000 check to settle the 
suit in mid-February. The Times-Dispatch obtained a copy of the check from 
the state Division of Risk Management.

The suit was settled about two weeks after U.S. District Judge Robert E. 
Payne indicated Brown's case had merit but probably would not bring a 
significant monetary award if it went to trial. He urged both parties to 
quickly resolve the case "rather than airing your dirty laundry," according 
to a transcript of a Jan. 14 hearing.

Payne seemed sympathetic to Brown's case and had strong words for the 
assistant attorney general who defended Sgt. William C. Blydenburgh's 
actions. Part of the Aug. 8, 2000, traffic stop was recorded by a video 
camera in another officer's car, unbeknownst to Blydenburgh.

A copy of that videotape was anonymously passed to local lawyer Frank G. 
Uvanni, who eventually took Smith's case along with Richmond attorney David 
L. Epperly Jr. The Times-Dispatch also was provided a copy and published an 
August 2002 story about its contents and the subsequent lawsuit.

In sworn statements, two officers who assisted Blydenburgh during the 
traffic stop indicated Blydenburgh acted inappropriately and sometimes 
illegally, and at one point urged one of the officers with a drug-detection 
dog to fabricate a "false alert" for narcotics in Brown's car.

"I have never seen a case like this . . . , where two sworn officers of the 
Virginia State Police come in and demonstrate how badly another Virginia 
State Trooper has acted," Payne told Assistant Attorney General Edward M. 
Macon at the January hearing. "Why on Earth should this case not go to a 
jury to decide who is telling the truth?"

At the time of the disputed traffic stop, Blydenburgh instructed state 
troopers how to lawfully conduct drug-interdiction stops and headed a team 
that patrolled Virginia's interstate highways looking for drug couriers.

In seeking dismissal of the case, state authorities argued that 
Blydenburgh, as a state officer, was entitled to qualified immunity even if 
he made a mistake in judgment. Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that 
excuses law-enforcement officers from civil liability unless their conduct 
violates clearly established law.

During the Jan. 14 hearing in federal court, Payne repeatedly questioned 
and at times expressed strong skepticism of the state's defense and 
interpretation of the traffic stop, the transcript shows.

Brown, then a lumber salesman, was driving south on Interstate 95 on his 
way home to Florence, S.C., when Blydenburgh pulled him over for an object 
dangling from his rear-view mirror and the tint on his car windows.

At Blydenburgh's urging, Smith removed a graduation tassel with an 
eight-ball charm from his mirror. Then Smith asked to be allowed to go, but 
he was detained for more than 90 minutes during a futile search for drugs.

"[I]t's ridiculous what you all have done in this case, and the way you 
have handled it," Payne told Macon during the January hearing.

"You have a serious problem here," Payne added. "You have two sworn 
officers of the law who have identified serious infractions of the law, 
potentially on the part of another law-enforcement officer who is supposed 
to be a leader, a man who was disciplined, apparently, for this event, and 
you all have managed to wiggle, waggle and shake around and avoid the truth 
coming out. Now I'm convinced about that."

Payne frequently expressed strong misgivings about the state's version of 
events. For example, he scoffed at Macon's contention that Smith was 
"acting increasingly nervous" as Blydenburgh questioned him and searched 
his vehicle.

"He wasn't acting nervous," said Payne, who viewed the tape. "He's acting 
agitated and frosted at the conduct he was encountering. That's what you 
see. . . . That man's body language bespeaks irritation at the police for 
harassing him."

About a month before the hearing, Magistrate Judge David G. Lowe issued a 
report about the case and recommended that Blydenburgh be granted qualified 
immunity for stopping Brown and the initial search of his vehicle. But he 
said a jury should decide whether a violation occurred during subsequent 
interior and exterior searches of Brown's car, and to Blydenburgh's "pat 
down" of Smith before he was allowed to go.

Questions also were raised about whether Blydenburgh had a racial bias 
against blacks, and whether that played a role in Smith's stop.

Payne noted that in sworn statements taken from officers on Blydenburgh's 
team, the sergeant was said to have frequently referred to blacks as "jakes."

In addition, Payne noted, Blydenburgh's fellow officers said he made 
"racial and derogatory slurs over the state police radio while having 
face-to-face conversations with citizens during police contact."

Macon dismissed allegations that Blydenburgh had any racial animosity, 
pointing out that Blydenburgh is married to a black woman.

Blydenburgh was eventually removed from the drug-interdiction team he 
supervised and transferred to a supervisory position in the state police 
office in West Point.

The attorney general's office and Smith's attorneys declined comment on the 
case or its settlement. As part of the agreement, both parties agreed the 
case was resolved "without any admission of liability by the defendant," 
and that "neither party will be considered a prevailing party." 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Thunder