A recent ruling by a federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Tyrone Cameron, a Des Moines man who was bitten by a police dog while attempting to evade arrest on a murder charge. The court found that the use of force was justified given the circumstances surrounding the incident.
Key Takeaways
- Tyrone Cameron was wanted for the April 2022 murder of Jeffrey Gillom.
- He attempted to escape by jumping from a second-story roof but was apprehended by police.
- A police dog was deployed, resulting in a bite that lasted approximately 15 seconds.
- The court ruled that the force used was not unconstitutional, considering Cameron's actions and the severity of the charges against him.
Background of the Incident
In April 2022, Tyrone Cameron was implicated in the shooting death of Jeffrey Gillom. When police arrived at a residence to apprehend him, Cameron attempted to flee by jumping off a second-story roof. Officers quickly released a police dog to assist in his capture, leading to Cameron being bitten during the arrest.
Cameron was later acquitted of the murder charge but faced further legal issues, resulting in a conviction for carrying a weapon related to the incident. He is currently serving a 10-year prison sentence.
The Lawsuit
Cameron filed a lawsuit against the city, claiming that the police used excessive force by unleashing the dog without warning and that they delayed in removing the dog once they reached him. His attorneys argued that these actions violated his constitutional rights.
However, Chief District Judge Stephanie Rose ruled in favor of the city, stating that the circumstances justified the use of force. The judge noted that Cameron's criminal history, the serious nature of the charges, and his dramatic attempt to escape all contributed to the decision.
Court's Rationale
In her ruling, Judge Rose highlighted several key points:
- Severity of Charges: Cameron was wanted for murder, which warranted a more aggressive approach by law enforcement.
- Attempt to Flee: His decision to jump from a roof indicated a clear intent to evade arrest, justifying the use of a police dog.
- Duration of Bite: The bite lasted only about 15 seconds, significantly shorter than in other cases where police have been found liable for excessive force.
The judge referenced previous cases where police liability was established, noting that Cameron's situation was markedly different. In those cases, suspects were either hiding or bitten for extended periods, which was not applicable here.
Additional Controversy
The case gained further attention when body cam footage revealed a Des Moines Fire Department first responder suggesting that the police should have allowed the dog to continue biting Cameron. This comment drew criticism, and the fire chief later announced that the responder was no longer employed by the department.
Conclusion
The court's decision underscores the complexities surrounding the use of police dogs in apprehending suspects. While the ruling affirms the legality of the officers' actions in this instance, it also raises questions about the protocols in place for deploying police dogs and the treatment of suspects during arrests. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, this case may serve as a reference point for future discussions on police conduct and the use of force.
Sources
- Judge rejects suspect's suit over Des Moines police dog's bite, The Des Moines Register.
