Appeals Court Bizarrely Redacts Qualified Immunity Decision To Hide How Compliant The Plaintiff Was
from the wtf-even-is-this-bullshit dept
This is truly strange. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals somehow decided it was a good idea to redact its decision finding (partially) in favor of a person whose rights were violated by DC Metro police officers. What could have been a straightforward recognition that cops exceeded their boundaries was, at least temporarily, presented misleadingly, thanks to the government’s desire to hide this information.
And it was the government. Although I haven’t been able to locate a motion to seal, the only parties that could have been interested in hiding evidence of the plaintiff’s compliance with police officers would have been the parties being sued. Short Circuit was the first to highlight the redactions, and the first to post the unredacted version when it went live.
As has been noted by many, but most notably by Fifth Circuit Appeals Court judge Don Willett, qualified immunity is a rigged game the government almost always wins. Burying narrative that indicates the plaintiff did not deserve the treatment they were subjected to by armed government employees does nothing more than allow the government to present its narrative without fear of being contradicted.
Here’s the background on the lawsuit. Xingru Lin, a bus ticketing agent in DC, attempted to prevent Yokasty Rodriguez from sneaking onto a bus bound for New York. Lin ordered Rodriguez off the bus and attempted to photograph her. A scuffle ensued, instigated by Rodriguez. However, it was Rodriguez who decided to get police involved, falsely claiming Lin had assaulted her.
DC Metro Police arrived. Lin, already at a disadvantage due to her native language (Mandarin), attempted to speak to the Metro PD’s translators. While she was on the phone with the PD’s translators, officers “grabbed Lin, pressed her against the wall, and then forced her to the floor and handcuffed her.”
A short while after this, officers viewed security camera footage and determined Rodriguez has instigated the fight. They removed Lin’s cuffs and discussed how this altercation should be handled. They determined that Rodriguez should be arrested for attempting to board the bus and assaulting Lin. Then, one officer decided Lin should be booked as well, if not just for assault (in an altercation she did not instigate) but for resisting arrest by being allegedly less than compliant with the handcuffing while she was still seeking help from a PD interpreter. In the end, Lin was booked on both charges, prompting this lawsuit.
The lower court sided with the police officers and the city, saying there was enough probable cause to support the arrest even the arresting officer’s supervisor felt was unwarranted. The case bumped up to the DC Appeals Court, which reversed some of the lower court’s decision. And that’s good, because it means Lin can continue her civil rights lawsuit.
But it’s the manner in which the court did it that’s extremely concerning. Its initial release of its decision [PDF] was heavily redacted. And what those black bars hid was everything the Appeals Court had observed that indicated Lin, despite her language barrier and failed attempt to secure the help of a translator, cooperated fully with police officers.
It wasn’t until a few days later that the court released an unredacted version. The redactions the Appeals Court decided to include in its initial release are extremely disturbing. What’s excised from the first release is extremely telling.
The first extended redaction appears on the fourth page of the decision. It truncates the narrative into incomprehensibility, allowing the reader to draw incorrect conclusions about the interaction between Lin and Metro PD officer Corey Vullo.
Here’s what’s revealed by the unredacted version [PDF], with redacted phrases in bold.
When Officer Vullo approached the office, Lin immediately opened the door for him. Lin Opening Br. 4. While holding a cellphone to her ear, she nodded her head, gesturing for him to come in. Lin Opening Br. 4. Although Lin communicated that she was on the phone with the police, Officer Vullo demanded that she hang up. Lin Opening Br. 4.
With this information redacted, the reader is left to imagine how Lin initially responded to Officer Vullo’s presence. They are also led to imagine Lin may have been speaking to anyone other than the PD itself, perhaps explaining Vullo’s demand she terminate the call.
The redactions continue on the next page and they are even more extensive. Once again, the original redactions are in bold text.
As Lin was indicating to Officer Vullo that she could only speak Mandarin, Officer Johnson entered the travel agency and promptly ordered Lin: “Turn around, turn around, you understand turn around don’t you?” Lin did not understand. Officer Johnson moved her to a chair by twisting her arm behind her back, forcing her to sit down. Once on the chair, she sat calmly while Officers Johnson and Vullo held her arms. Lin’s colleague, who was also in the room, attempted to explain that Lin had actually been trying to call the police for help, but Officer Johnson shouted him down.
The two officers then yanked Lin out of the chair and pushed her against the wall. Security footage shows that Lin stood motionless as the two officers held her. At this point, two more officers, Officers Albert Salleh and John Merzig, entered the travel agency and immediately joined in restraining Lin.
The next page is about fifty percent redaction bars. Again, the only content removed is evidence on the record showing Lin’s compliance, which includes statements made by the government in its own filings.
Officer Vullo then talked to Rodriguez, who was still standing outside. Rodriguez stated that she “was just gonna go say bye” to her boyfriend when Lin told her she “ha[d] to go.” Rodriguez claimed that she tried to reassure Lin that she was not getting on the bus, but that Lin shouted at her to “get out right now.” Rodriguez then made an illustrative pulling motion with her hand. According to Rodriguez, Lin then exclaimed that she would call the police and scratched her face.
While Officer Vullo spoke with Rodriguez, Officer Merzig viewed the travel agency’s outdoor and indoor security footage in a back room. Lin’s colleague helped Officer Merzig play the security footage and provided his perspective on the evening’s events.
The security cameras showed at least three different angles on the bus. When Officer Merzig observed footage of Rodriguez sneaking onto the bus, he reacted with, “Hmm. Yeah, no. I just, I just saw her go on.” As the officer continued watching the recordings, Lin’s colleague explained that the physical altercation between the two women happened after the bus left. He then enthusiastically gestured at the footage and emphasized that it was Rodriguez who had attacked Lin, not the other way around. Officer Merzig agreed that the security video footage demonstrated that, contrary to Rodriguez’s story, the assault occurred after the bus had departed, and Rodriguez was “the aggressor.”
So, pretty much anything that didn’t support Officer Vullo’s decision to charge Lin with assault and resisting arrest was (initially) omitted. That this was done in hopes of protecting PD officers (but especially Officer Vullo) is made clear by the next set of redactions.
Officer Merzig brought Officer Vullo back to view the footage. After seeing the videos, Officer Vullo agreed with Officer Merzig that they would have to cut Lin loose. Officer Zhang Deposition Tr. 225:14–225:19 (Jan. 17, 2019), J.A. 1521; D.C. Ex. 2 at 18:39–18:41. Officer Merzig replied, “Yeah, oh yeah, I mean, that’s my opinion.” Ex. 2 at 18:41–18:44. They determined that Rodriguez should be arrested for
unauthorized entry of a motor vehicle and assault. The officers then removed Lin’s handcuffs.The police investigation shifted to determining if Lin should be arrested for assaulting a police officer on the theory that she resisted arrest when they tried to handcuff her. Officer Vullo told the supervising officer on scene, Sergeant Christopher Ritchie, that Lin had pulled and yanked when they tried to arrest her. Sergeant Ritchie then questioned the other officers on the scene about the handcuffing. Gov’t Br. 5. Officer Johnson reported: “She wasn’t flailing at us, she was just not allowing us to handcuff her.” Gov’t Br. 6. Sergeant Ritchie asked, “So she was actively resisting you?” Officer Johnson replied: “Passively, yeah.” Gov’t Br. 6; D.C. Ex. 4 at 20:04– 20:06. Officer Merzig interjected, “She was pulling away.” Gov’t Br. 6; D.C. Ex. 4 at 20:07–20:08. Subsequently, Sergeant Ritchie reviewed the footage from both the incident with Rodriguez and the handcuffing.
The redactions here are key. First, it infers (by omission) that Officer Vullo had not seen the security camera footage that other officers agreed cleared Lin of assault charges. It also memory-holes Vullo’s admission that Lin would need to be “cut loose.” It also eliminates evidence of Lin’s resistance, which was passive at best — again, according to officers’ own (redacted) statements.
I don’t know what the government argued that persuaded the court to release an opinion containing one-sided redactions. But no matter what it argued, the Appeals Court should have told it to GTFO. The end result is a blow to the court’s credibility and sends the unfortunate message that this court is willing, however temporarily, to obscure evidence of government wrongdoing.
Filed Under: corey vullo, dc circuit, dc metro police, qualified immunity, redactions, xingru lin, yokasty rodriguez
Comments on “Appeals Court Bizarrely Redacts Qualified Immunity Decision To Hide How Compliant The Plaintiff Was”
Government: 'The facts don't support our case, hide them.'
When you go out of your way to hide evidence in a legal filing that’s a pretty damning admission that even you know the facts are not on your side, so well done both court and government for showing just how much you are willing to bend over backwards to cover for a corrupt cop.
Its bad enough they can get away with murder on video, but to see a court going the extra mile to redact the record to pretend there was any justification to what was done is a whole nother level of fuckery.
Of course until some cop screws with the wrong persons kids or grandkids then its going to be a huge problem.
QI is anathema to justice & needs to go.
I mean its not that much older than Roe v Wade, so obviously there is no historical 17th century english law that says we can ignore when the knights ravish the bar wench because they knew no better.
Indeed, the courts has little credibility as an institution as an instrument of democracy nowadays in my opinion. They are routinely protecting and enabling governmental abuse and violation of human rights under the guise of qualified immunity. The Checks and Balances system is broken as the courts are shrinking from own constitutional duty to limit the power of the government. Indeed they are more about serving the government rather than limiting its power as this case illustrates. They are enablers of governmental abuse, they are not a solution but part of the problem of governmental abuse.
The American people should reject the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of the Constitution as this is just an unilateral declaration. This ultimacy has no support in the Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not the Supreme Court. Congress has power in the Checks and Balances system too. The American people should reject this badly conceived and anti-democratic doctrine of Supreme Court and push to legislate qualified immunity out of existence through the Congress. Never mind a constitutional crisis. Its not the Congress or the Executive who went too far. Its the Supreme Court who is going too far. The American people should not accept the rule of an unelected black-robed despotic oligarchy. Thomas Jefferson warned that was an bad idea. This unchecked power of the Supreme Court through their doctrine of qualified immunity is a threat to democracy, democratic values, and human rights. The Supreme Court should not make up laws but only apply laws. It is past time to hold the Supreme Court accountable for its enabling role with the governmental abuse and violations of human rights.
Re:
The American people should reject this badly conceived and anti-democratic doctrine of Supreme Court and push to legislate qualified immunity out of existence through the Congress. Never mind a constitutional crisis.
Congress could end it with the stroke of a pen, no constitutional crisis needed. Qualified immunity has never been a constitutional question at all, merely an application of both US civil code and pre-existing British common law.
Re: Re:
And yet we see that congress will do nothing because people don’t care because they don’t know. How the government manages to silence these issues is particularly concerning. Cable companies/big media are working with the CIA to block these stories from TV and major news publishers. The corruption runs deep. Rather than direct control, they use plants to exert pressure on institutions to make them twist the way they want. They disable targeted organizations by manufacturing social outrage. The problem is getting the evidence needed to bring a court case.
Re: Re: Re: Where does it hurt?
Proof that when you hire the stupid..stupid stuff happens… And proof that there is not a situation that calling the cops doesn’t make it worse..
Re:
Are you suggesting there be somewhere else to appeal a Supreme Court decision, or what?
Re: Re:
Why do I distinctly get the feeling that an answer to that question will be a bit sovcit.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Who Is the Most Relentless Supreme Court Critic of Qualified Immunity?
Justice Thomas, of course.
He refers to the same civil rights statutes to which I refer when I argue that a racist/elitist social medium platform must be nailed for discrimination
Unlike Thomas’ depraved white racist Techdirt critics, Thomas is nothing if not consistent.
Re:
Yes, how dare people claim different things are different, that’s so inconsistent of them. And, apparently, racist, because reasons.
Re:
Could you elbaborate on how common carriage implicates qualified immunity?
I’m honestly surprised people haven’t been shooting up the courts at this point. I suppose it’s a result of ignorance and cushy lifestyles held by the well-informed. I can’t imagine this lasting forever but we’ll have to see.