Lawsuit: Cops Trashed An Attorney's Home In Retaliation For Successfully Defending A Suspect Against Murder Charges

from the system-never-likes-being-beaten dept

An attorney in Virginia found out what happens when you make cops angry. According to Cathy Reynolds' lawsuit, the Roanoke PD targeted her for some extra attention after she successfully defended her stepson from murder charges.

Prosecutors really wanted Darreonta Reynolds for murder, but security camera footage from the convenience store where the shooting took place appeared to show Reynolds shooting Jean De Dieu Nkurunziza in self-defense when Nkurunziza came after him with a gun. The jury agreed with the defense's case, acquitting Reynolds after ninety minutes of deliberation.

This apparently angered someone somewhere in the Roanoke Police Department because this is what happened next. From the lawsuit [PDF]:

Just three days after D. Reynolds acquittal, Defendants targeted Ms. Reynolds for retaliation. Defendants broke down the front door of Ms. Reynolds‘ home after she had offered to let them in, "searched" Ms. Reynolds' home for an individual by destroying her personal possessions, including those entirely irrelevant to a search for a person and left Ms. Reynolds traumatized, knowing that she could be targeted by police for engaging in constitutionally protected activity.

There may be some open dispute about the motivation for these actions, but the actions themselves can't be denied. The raid drew a crowd, some of whom filmed the PD's violent entry into the unlocked house -- the same house Reynolds had left unlocked and invited the officers to search. It also attracted the attention of a local news crew.

The lawsuit fills out the details of the raid. And the narrative throws a considerable amount of shade at the participating officer with one impeccably worded paragraph.

Despite both screen door and storm door at the front entrance of Ms. Reynolds' home remaining unlocked, SWAT officers used an entry tool attached to the front of an armored vehicle to puncture the screen door and rip it free from Ms. Reynolds' home in its entirety.

In so doing, SWAT officers damaged the screen door beyond repair, heavily damaged the door frame surrounding the front entry, and tore vinyl siding from the exterior of Ms. Reynolds' newly remodeled home.

SWAT officers then entered Ms. Reynolds' home by turning the doorknob of the storm door which remained on Ms. Reynolds' home, still unlocked, and pushing the door open in the manner a door is designed to operate.

Nice.

But that wasn't the end of the destruction. Remember, officers were searching for a 17-year-old murder suspect, not an easily hidden amount of contraband.

During the search of Ms. Reynolds' home, SWAT officers opened and searched all the drawers in Ms. Reynolds' kitchen and detached Ms. Reynolds' appliances from the walls of her home.

SWAT officers flipped the mattresses off all the beds in Ms. Reynolds' home and tore all of the clothes from the closets in the bedroom.

SWAT officers tore the cushions off Ms. Reynolds' furniture and emptied the contents of open soda cans onto the floor.

What the fuck.

On top of that, Reynolds alleges the warrant affidavit was nothing but a bunch of lies stitched together carelessly to give the PD permission to destroy her house -- a warrant rendered unnecessary by Reynolds' consenting to a search hours earlier. The narrative in that affidavit involves an ATF officer, their CI, and the assumption that the most likely place for a wanted murderer to be hanging out would be at the house of an attorney who had just successfully defended someone from a murder charge.

Given the timing and the three hours of apparently gleeful destruction, this certainly looks retaliatory. And, of course, it will be portrayed by the PD as just regular old cop stuff completely unrelated to local prosecutors and PD detectives "losing" a murder case. The end result of these efforts can't be denied. Neither can the violent entry which was captured by citizens' cameras. All that's left is the defensive assertions of "reasonable" officers -- all of which felt tearing apart an attorney's house was the best way to locate a human being.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: cathy reynolds, darreonta reynolds, intimidation, police, police brutality, roanoke, search warrant, swat teams, virginia


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 4 May 2021 @ 3:59pm

    Not wrong, but that's not a good thing

    And, of course, it will be portrayed by the PD as just regular old cop stuff completely unrelated to local prosecutors and PD detectives "losing" a murder case.

    Petty retaliatory vindictiveness and violence on the part of police arguably is standard and expected behavior for the goons in blue these days, but the fact that there's nothing surprising about their actions certainly doesn't excuse what they've done.

    Hopefully the judge will see through the 'just cops doing cop things' bullshit, even better if they face personal penalties for acting like petty thugs though I suspect that yet again the public will be on the hook for any resulting fines, assuming there even are any.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 5 May 2021 @ 3:19am

      Re: Not wrong, but that's not a good thing

      Hopefully the judge

      The judge will do jack shit, even if they are sympathetic, at best. "Bad PD. That was wrong. Use the taxpayers money to pay a penalty." Is the best the Attorney can hope for. While remembering, as the article implies, not to defend her clients too well in the future.

      It's far beyond time for these fucks to be shot dead. They are no better than terrorists. The only difference is the fact they wear a badge and have legal immunity for their actions. Actions that no real officer of the peace should ever be caught doing. Get rid of them.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        ECA (profile), 5 May 2021 @ 10:03am

        Re: Re: Not wrong, but that's not a good thing

        But isnt this Considered Terrorism?
        Could we add Racial Hatred?

        But you see, the STATE has the insurance on the police, the cops themselves Couldn't Afford to pay for it.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 May 2021 @ 5:23pm

    No, your honor, it is not reasonable to assume the 17 year old murder suspect was hiding in my silverware drawer. I will concede that he might have been hiding in the collection of mason jars by the still in the basement, but the police tampered with that evidence.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 May 2021 @ 5:38pm

    Cops are... really not great at putting up arguments for why they shouldn't be defunded.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 4 May 2021 @ 6:24pm

      Re:

      It's a matter of balance you see, as they're amazing at providing arguments for why they should be defunded and the money redirected towards groups not staffed by criminals.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 5 May 2021 @ 5:53pm

        Why they should be defunded

        I think this incident demonstrates what will happen to those officials and bureaucrats who cut their budget shortly after they do so.

        Our police state is daily showing the power they intend on using if ever we actually challenge it.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 5 May 2021 @ 5:17am

      Re:

      Eh, or you could look at it differently.

      You could also make the case that "defending* will remove any reason they have to not do this to everyone, instead of just those that piss them of, or have the wrong genetics (or what ever other petty reason they can come up with).

      Anyone who doesn't pay the protection fee would liable to be unprotected.... Hmmmm where have I heard of that sort of behavior before.

      -* In this case by "defund" I mean "any reduction in monetary awards"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      DMNTD, 5 May 2021 @ 4:05pm

      Re:

      "Should'nt be abolished". Fixed it for ya.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Stephen T. Stone (profile), 4 May 2021 @ 5:45pm

    Everyone involved with that “raid”, including the supervising officers and any judge(s) who signed off on it, should all lose their jobs and their pensions.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      sumgai (profile), 4 May 2021 @ 7:37pm

      Re:

      ^^^ .... and their freedom to move about at will for a goodly length of time.

      I can't help but wonder about that old lawyer joke, and how it needs to be updated for modern times:

      95% of all cops are giving the rest of them a bad reputation.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 4 May 2021 @ 5:46pm

    In a rational world they would have already been fired.

    But hey its gonna be a bumper day for defense lawyers who are going to look for every case these officers touched & file lots of cases.

    They are willing to use their position & the legal system to punish someone for successfully defending someone in court... what are they willing to do to citizens when no one is filming.

    Oh and they had no problem lying to the court to get a warrant so how can we trust any testimony they've ever offered?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 5 May 2021 @ 3:21am

      Re:

      what are they willing to do to citizens when no one is filming.

      Given that they are perfectly willing to execute people even when they are being filmed, I'd hazard a guess around necrophilia.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 4 May 2021 @ 6:14pm

    Let's hope justice prevails

    Angry cops in serious need of therapy.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 May 2021 @ 7:23pm

    Roid rage, much?

    Drug test the police - that level of stupid rage makes a tantruming toddler look like a stoic.

    Start with the fact the video did the heavy lifting to show that the late Mr. Nkurunziza "shot first" to get a 90 minute deliberation. Then go to the shitload of reasonable doubt suggesting they likely intimidated witnesses in past cases - if they are doing so to defense attorneys in a public way it strains credibility that it was the first time they engaged in retaliation and intimidation. Add being proven liars giving grounds for appeal in past cases.

    About the only way they could be more self-sabotaging would be practicing for a circular firing squad with live ammo.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Daydream, 4 May 2021 @ 8:10pm

    I think I've got cognitive dissonance of some kind.
    On one hand, it's not worth sacrificing human lives for wealth, whether it's gold, oil or drugs or whatever.
    On the other hand, I kind of wish that these assholes had gotten shot while they were in the process of maliciously vandalising an innocent person's house.

    Well...I suppose for a mental compromise, I'd be happy to see them arrested.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Christenson, 4 May 2021 @ 8:14pm

    Drug tests for violent cops

    A drug test after a cop uses force ought to be mandatory state law, though I can see unintended consequences...just as with banning menthol ciggys.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    K`Tetch (profile), 4 May 2021 @ 11:46pm

    I'll tell you what SHOULD happen, but won't, *ever*

    Ok, so they have committed criminal acts of

    Threats to Damage building (VA law 18.2-83 - a Class 5 felony)
    Use of Threatening language over public airways (18.2-427 - Class 1 misdemeanor)
    Prohibited Criminal Street Gang participation (18.2-46.2 - class 5 felony)
    (the police here would fall under the definition of such a group under 18.2-46.1 ""Criminal street gang" means any ongoing organization, association, or group of three or more persons, whether formal or informal, (i) which has as one of its primary objectives or activities the commission of one or more criminal activities; (ii) which has an identifiable name or identifying signor symbol; and (iii) whose members individually or collectively have engaged in the commission of, attempt to commit, conspiracy to commit, or solicitation of two or more predicate criminal acts, at least one of which is an act of violence, provided such acts were not part of a common act or transaction." which defines them pretty accurately here)

    Assault and battery (18.2-57 class 1 misdemeanor)
    Assault and battery by mob (18.2-42 class 1 misdemeanor)
    Stalking (18.2-60.3 class 1 misdemeanor)
    Burning or destroying personal property (18.2-81 as it was over $200 in value, it's a class4 felony)
    burning or destroying dwelling house (18.2-77 'felony')
    Entering a dwelling with intent to commit larceny, assault or other felony, while armed (18.2-91 Class 2 felony)
    Conspiracy to commit felony (18.2-22 Class 5 felony)
    Forging public records (18.2-168 class 4 felony)
    Forgery of other writings (18.2-172 class 5 felony)
    Perjury (18.2-434 class 5 felony - includes a ban on ever holding an office of honor profit or trust, which should include law enforcement)
    inducing another to give false testimony (18.2-436, same as the line above)
    Use of police radio during commission of a crime - this is getting fun! (18.2-462.1 class 1 misdemeanor)
    obstructing justice (18.2-460 class 1 misdemeanor)

    So, by my quick reckoning,
    1 class 2 felony, 1 class 3 felony, 2 class 4 felony, 7 class 5 felonies, one felony of indeterminate classification, and 6 class 1 misdemeanors.
    But they're cops, so none of that applies to them, because they're ABOVE THE LAW.

    Actually holding cops to account by not only charging them with that, but by adding the aggravating factor of 'doing it while employed as a cop' (on or off duty - they should be naturally held to a higher standard) and an extra aggravating factor of 'doing it under color of law' - combined they should push things to the maximum of the sentencing ranges.
    But they won't, because prosecutors are afraid that cops will do this to them.

    Finally, lets bring some accountability elsewhere. Judges are all too quick to take sloppy, poorly worded and often improper filings from cops. Be a lawyer and submit too many pages in a motion and a judge will start sanctioning the lawyer, but a cop can lie to their face, give them incomplete paperwork and they'll sign off and not give a shit.
    If cops submit fraudulent paperwork, judges need to get penalised too. If they grant paperwork that's incomplete, or improper (like the bullshit boilerplate on the no-knock raid that killed Brianna Taylor for instance, that should have disqualified it from ever being granted) then we should be looking at criminal charges for malfeasance in office. Maybe then they'll start doing their job as diligently there as they do elsewhere.

    None of this will happen though, because you can't expect the law to be beholden to the law. Where's the fun in being a cop if you have to follow the rules too, might as well stack shelves.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Damien, 5 May 2021 @ 4:40am

    They battering tamed her unlocked front door. They dumped soda cans out on the floor while searching for a person. ANYONE who straight faced claims their actions were anything but retaliation is either lying or a fool.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 5 May 2021 @ 6:45am

    Strategy

    I have a question that’s only partly flippant. When these idiots show up on your doorstep, at what point does preemptively shooting them become a reasonable strategy? If you’re Black, at least, there doesn’t seem to be a sure way to avoid getting shot yourself. Cops use the “but I was scared” defense all the time. Thoughts?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Rocky, 5 May 2021 @ 9:09am

      Re: Strategy

      Never actually, for various reasons.

      The only excuse you could have is the castle doctrine, ie a group of people breaks down your door without identifying themselves as police or federal officers and you shoot them you might get away with it, that is, until the moment they start shooting back which usually means, sadly, that anyone in your home is fair game.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      AR Libertarian (profile), 5 May 2021 @ 2:19pm

      Re: Strategy

      That's been on my mind too.

      A group of people stood around and did nothing while 3 cops murdered George Floyd.

      At what point are you justified in using force to prevent a crime? If it were not the cops, I know when. Why doesn't the same standard apply when faced with homicidal cops?

      If I do nothing while watching a black man get lynched, I am as guilty as the lynchers. Even if the lynchers are wearing a uniform.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 6 May 2021 @ 2:16am

        Re: Re: Strategy

        "If I do nothing while watching a black man get lynched, I am as guilty as the lynchers. Even if the lynchers are wearing a uniform."

        Welcome to the United States of America, where interfering with said lynchers will see you strung up as well.

        Nowhere is this as true as with the cops themselves. Two of the officers killing George Floyd had records. The other two were idealistic young rookies faced with the choice - help murder a man or face the ostracism and contempt of the people you'll have to trust to have your back.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 6 May 2021 @ 2:19am

      Re: Strategy

      "When these idiots show up on your doorstep, at what point does preemptively shooting them become a reasonable strategy?"

      Never. At the point where you are singled out for a search, stopped in a vehicle, or with the cops poised outside your door all that remains is to find some way - any way - which might see you alive at the end. In no few cases the cops literally want you dead and are looking for any excuse they can use when questioned.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Peter, 5 May 2021 @ 7:56am

    But for video

    1. Successful proved self defence

    2. Showed indescrimate destruction of property.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 5 May 2021 @ 12:11pm

    to locate a human being.

    If the crime victim and her family were all waiting outside while the vandalism was taking place, can it really be said that there were any human beings inside the residence at all?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 6 May 2021 @ 5:31am

    i have to ask, was the person being sought found in any of the sofa cushions or,perhaps, in one of the kitchen cabinet draws, of maybe he had managed to disguise himself as a pair of the house owners knickers and hide in the bedroom closet! i mean, come on! if there isn't all hell to pay over this, not just against the officers taking part but those in positions of authority who gave the 'go-ahead' for this, it shows yet again just how broken the system is and how much closer we are to a Police State! that is oh, so scary!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 6 May 2021 @ 6:35am

    Who ordered the hit??

    There is your verdictive person.
    I believe the cops were in on it but cops aren't smart enough on their own to come up with a plan. Somebody higher up knew about this before it happened. It shouldn't be to hard to figure out who had the most to loose because of the acquittal.

    Perhaps the DA didn't like taking one on the chin.
    Follow the money.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 May 2021 @ 4:16am

    I think we should be advocating for this to be done to any lawyer that defends cops.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 9 May 2021 @ 9:27am

      SWATTING Lawyers

      Police defenders are doing their job, though there's something to be said about improving jury selection.

      But swatting judges who side with police and err towards them (and against the public), and swatting prosecutors who cheat or who fail to go after officer misconduct. Yeah, the fantasy of having them SWATTED has its appeal.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.