Jump to content
Mephistophilis

Ronald McDonald vs Blaine County Sheriffs Office

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

1.Defendant: Blaine County Sheriffs Office

 

 

2.Statement of Claim: In two separate incidents both BCSO and SASP peace officers failed to provide adequate medical aid to a detained suspect, including failures to remove tazer firearm prongs, resulting in long term acute injuries. These medical problems were caused by the negligent discharge of firearms from the officers on both occasions, and exasperated by a failed medical response by officers at Bolingbroke Penitentiary during the 2nd incident.

 

4. Time and Fine: Appropriate time, fine and retribution to the city of $15,000 for failure to follow BCSO, SASP policy involving the discharge of tazer firearms (and court mandated refresher training for all peace officers on the obligations to be met when discharging tazer firearms). $40,000 in damages to Mr. Ronald McDonald for medical bills, quality of life damage from long term medical issues, and court/representation fees.

 

 

5. Witnesses:

Lt. Elizabeth Cunningham, P-21

Tony Blu

Amelia Davies

Officer Alex Miller, BCSO

Officer Gina Hayes, SASP

Officer Katarina Katts, BCSO

Officer Oliver Queen, BCSO

 

 

6.Evidence:

 

Exhibit 1A: Mr. Ronald McDonald's statement regarding recollection of Incident 1

 

Exhibit 1B: Mr. Tony Blu's statement regarding recollection of Incident 1

 

Exhibit 1A: Mr. Ronald McDonald's statement regarding recollection of Incident 2

 

Exhibit 2B: Ms. Amelia Davies' statement regarding recollection of Incident 2

 

Representation: Mr Ronald McDonald will be represented by Mr Robert Billig of Rodeo Law & Asc.

Edited by Mephistophilis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

DOHSEAL.png.0494e555d7c714c427b12518cd05d96b.png

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF SAN ANDREAS
FOR THE COUNTY OF BLAINE
COURTROOM 1 HON. TRAVIS TAPPS
RONALD MCDONALD,
Plaintiff,
VS.
BLAINE COUNTRY SHERIFFS OFFICE,
Defendant.
___________________________________
NO. 05152020001

 

This case is here and by docketed for Trial:  22 MAY 2020 time TBD


The Plaintiff (Blaine  County Sheriffs Office | @Cas) is here notified of this complaint being filed against them and is asked for their response to the complaint.

Failure to provide response to complaint within the next 48 hours (1800 CDT 17 MAY2020) will see this case proceed to Discovery regardless of response. 

 

FYI - @Mephistophilis

 

Edited by TravisTaps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,
I've hired York Law ( @Country, @GoddessNextDoor) to represent BCSO. Please allow them some more time to go over the case since we only came to an agreement yesterday.
Thanks,
Cas Roberson,
Sheriff Blaine County Sheriffs office

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could the prosecution please iterate on the statement of claim and provide a date and time for these alleged incidents? Without such dates, it would be practically impossible to request a subpoena on relevant documents thereby limiting the defenses availability of evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Country said:

Could the prosecution please iterate on the statement of claim and provide a date and time for these alleged incidents? Without such dates, it would be practically impossible to request a subpoena on relevant documents thereby limiting the defenses availability of evidence.

 

@Mephistophilis - please provide the missing detail as per the time and location of this complaint.  Failure to do so within the next 24 hours will see this case dismissed. 

 

@Country / @Mephistophilis - Assuming the missing information is supplied we will now be moving to the DISCOVERY stage of this suite.   Please submit any and all subpoena request post haste. 

 

-- Hon. Tapps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please find below the times and locations of the incidents mentioned in the case.

 

1st Incident: At approximately 22:15 GMT+1 5th May 2020 (hill overlooking Sandy Shores, taken to Sandy Shores PD)

2nd incident: At approximately 20:45 GMT+1 8th May 2020 (shoreline close to Paleto Bay, taken to Paleto Bay PD)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Additional information regarding locations:

 

Both incidents occurred following a pursuit from Harmony Dealership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Country said:

 

@Country Subpoena APPROVED 

 

NOTE:  In order for an affidavit to be considered as evidentiary, then the person writing the affidavit must be sworn that the statement is truthful and must be signed by the author as well as a witness.

 

- Hon. Tapps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we please extend the discovery phase as my last two subpoenas are taking longer than usual to be processed by the subpoenaed parties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Country said:

Can we please extend the discovery phase as my last two subpoenas are taking longer than usual to be processed by the subpoenaed parties?

 

Discovery will continue up 2 hours prior to the scheduled trial date / time.  Do you require more then that? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please ensure the subpoena attached to this case is actually signed by the presiding Judge. The parties holding the subpoenaed information will not provide you with the subpoenaed information without the signature. 

 

@TravisTaps please ensure you get your signature on the actual subpoena. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still awaiting the final subpoena.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TravisTaps I, David Tindell, Will now be representing Mr. McDonald in this case. I would like to request 5 days of continuance on this case for proper discovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...