0

Police shooting victim wants $2m

Theon Hall, who is seeking $2m in damages.

Theon Hall, who is seeking $2m in damages.

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Senior Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

A 20-year-old man will seek $2m in damages after police shot him “without justification” in January and caused him injuries and “emotional distress”.

The Tribune understands that the officers were punished following a Police Disciplinary Tribunal hearing earlier this year but remain on the Royal Bahamas Police Force.

Attorney Bjorn Ferguson said he will seek $2m for his client, Theon Hall, for the violation of his constitutional rights, damages and consequential loss for personal injuries experienced, exemplary damages, aggravated damages and punitive damages.

Police Constables Stanley Cooper and Varian Clarke are listed as defendants on the writ with Police Commissioner Paul Rolle and Attorney General Carl Bethel.

Mr Ferguson said yesterday: “In a democratic society agents of the state and agencies of the state cannot just abuse their powers. They are subject to the law and I think over time we have not held them fully accountable for their acts and because of that it seems to be a situation where they are very comfortable in their wrong behaviour and conduct. It’s all about accountability. They hold us accountable and we must hold them accountable.”

According to the lawsuit, Mr Hall and a friend left the Cheetahs Night Club on Bay Street around 3.40am on January 3 and were at a red light when a black Honda CRV vehicle pulled behind them, its horn blowing.

When the light turned green and the plaintiff began to drive off, the black CRV allegedly pulled alongside the passenger’s side of his vehicle and an unknown passenger began demanding that the plaintiff pull over the vehicle and get out of the car.

“The unknown passenger of the black CRV was dressed in plaid and held a gun in his hand, aiming it directly at the plaintiff, while shouting repeatedly,” the lawsuit says. “The plaintiff was in fear of his life and inquired as to why he must get out of his vehicle. The unknown passenger of the black CRV demanded once again, that the plaintiff must get out of the vehicle. As the plaintiff proceeded to exit the vehicle he heard the sound of the unknown passenger of the black CRV gun cock back and the unknown passenger continuously shouting and demanding that he get out of the vehicle.

“During this time the plaintiff, who was in fear of his life, still had his vehicle in drive gear with his foot on the vehicle’s brakes. He slightly turned his body and used his right hand to shift the vehicle gear from drive into park, so he may be able to exit the vehicle, he then heard two loud bangs and immediately he felt his body get extremely cold and then he felt really hot. His left hand dropped and went dead. He then felt excruciating pain and he was dumbfounded for a few seconds and in shock as he did not understand why this unknown passenger of the black CRV, whom he did not know or never seen before was trying to kill him.

“Survivor (mode) quickly struck and his instincts were to get out of there and to get police assistance right away. The plaintiff used his right hand to shift the gear of the vehicle into drive and pressed gas and turned south onto Elizabeth Avenue swerving around the black CRV and he drove straight up the hill near the 66 Steps and stopped his vehicle by the security booth for safety where he saw an unknown female security guard and informed her that he had just been shot. He then saw the unknown male who had shot him headed up the hill towards him. The plaintiff also saw officers from the Royal Bahamas Defence Force and he told them that he had just gotten shot and needed some help and that the unknown assailant who shot him was headed towards him now and he pointed at the unknown passenger of the black CRV who had shot him, who was now standing by his vehicle.”

The lawsuit adds: “The unknown passenger of the black CRV, who shot him proceeded to walk away to the corner, however, the defence force officers stopped him and asked him to lift up his shirt. When the unknown passenger of the black CRV lifted his shirt the plaintiff was astonished to see the black handle with the silver top of the gun in his waist and more particularly was in shock and awe to see a police badge. One of the defence force officers assisted the plaintiff to the Accident and Emergency Department of the Princess Margaret Hospital so he could receive urgent medical care.”

Mr Hall was allegedly shot in his left arm with the bullet hitting a bone and grazing his right arm. He was released from hospital on January 6 but readmitted on January 26 to undergo open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF).

According to the lawsuit, he continues to feel pain and will require further medical attention. He was not arrested in connection with the incident.

The lawsuit alleges that, among other failures, the officers failed to identify themselves as police and failed to provide reasonable justification for why the plaintiff should pull over his vehicle.

Officers, the suit argues, used “unreasonable, unnecessary and unlawful force” against the plaintiffs.

“…Bearing in mind the age of our client, a young man in his prime, he has suffered grave emotional harm and experiences anxiety and depression and has become an insomniac,” the lawsuit said.

Comments

KapunkleUp 3 years, 6 months ago

The RBPF has been operating without real accountability for a long time. Past (and current) governments do not seem to be interested in bringing transparency and accountability to the police force, and by extension, the prison. These acts will continue and innocent people will suffer.

4

GodSpeed 3 years, 6 months ago

Good luck but this ain't the states.

0

joeblow 3 years, 6 months ago

The real question is whether or not the police were on duty at the time of the shooting. If they were not, how is that the business of the RBPF? The lawyer must be getting a nice percentage of the hoped for award.

0

Chucky 3 years, 6 months ago

The cops had guns “but reason of employment”, Government is liable.

1

Sign in to comment