Attorney Cass T. Casper of the Disparti Law Group secured a major win resulting in the reinstatement of correctional officer David Beltran who was wrongfully terminated over false claims of excessive force.
Every day, officers who took an oath to protect and serve are tasked with split-second decisions such as when to use force to detain a person. Officer Beltran’s actions successfully aided in securing a detainee who had just escaped his cell and charged at officers.
This case is a shining example of when a reasonable use of force is required to keep the public as well as other officers safe. The Cook County Sheriff’s Merit Board terminated Officer Beltran for alleged excessive force, but the evidence from command staff and fellow officers was overwhelming that his use of force was necessary and proper.
Casper and his team fiercely fought to reverse the Merit Board’s unlawful decision and will continue to fight to make Officer Beltran financially whole after over 6-years of lost wages.
In this Article:
- A Dangerous Altercation With an Escaping Inmate
- Desmedt’s Use-of-Force Continuum Model
- The Detainee Was an Aggressive and Moving Resister
- Reasonable vs Excessive Force
- Judge’s Decision: Lack of Credible Evidence
- Wrongful Termination Attorneys Seek Justice for All
A Dangerous Altercation With an Escaping Inmate
The altercation with the detainee lasted for one chaotic, highly volatile minute. This means the officers involved had but a few seconds to act quickly in a dangerous situation that could have escalated to putting other inmates and officers in harm’s way.
Here’s what happened:
– A detainee (who tried to light his cellmate on fire the day prior) managed to escape his cell and took at least 2 swings at Beltran and struck him at least once.
– Beltran and two other officers tried to handcuff the detainee, yet he continued to resist and ignored Beltran’s verbal warning to “stop resisting”.
– Beltran tried to gain control of the detainee’s arm for handcuffing as well as determine whether he had weapons, such as a shiv, in his clenched fist. To do this, he administered a total of 8 knee strikes to the detainee’s upper arm in order to stop the detainee from clenching his fist and stiffening his arm.
– When the detainee finally stopped resisting and the officers gained control, Beltran immediately stopped administering the knee strikes. The detainee did not suffer any injuries during the altercation.
– Following the incident, Beltran followed department procedure by completing a use of force report and cooperating in an Office of Professional Review (OPR) interview.
– Several years later, the Merit Board terminated Officer Beltran without a sufficient factual and legal basis.
Desmedt’s Use-of-Force Continuum Model
Correctional officers are trained using the Desmedt use-of-force model at the academy and may receive subsequent training throughout their careers. This model outlines the levels of officer response that offer several de-escalation alternatives to using a firearm. The steps include:
- Social Control
- Verbal Control
- Weaponless Control Techniques
- Pain compliance holds
- Control (short stick) instruments
- Stunning Techniques
- Direct Mechanical Techniques
- Neck Restraint Immobilization Techniques
- Electrical Shocking Devices
- Chemical Agents
- Impact Weapons
- Firearms
Officer Beltran accurately followed this model during the dangerous incident. The knee strikes were only meant to defeat resistance, not cause any tissue damage, which it did not.
The Detainee Was an Aggressor and Moving Resister
Desmedt’s use of force model distinguishes moving (active) vs non-moving (passive) resisters. A reasonable use of force can be used on aggressive and moving resisters. Beltran’s decision to administer the knee strikes came when the detainee refused to unclench his fist and release his left arm from underneath his body to be handcuffed.
Once the arm was released, the detainee continued to resist arrest by stiffening his arm. Stiffening one’s body is considered “moving resistance” because it actively prevents an arrest.
During his OPR interview, Beltran made clear that he used knee strikes to stop the detainee from stiffening his arm and to complete the arrest.
Reasonable vs Excessive Force
Excessive force refers to any use of force that goes beyond what is reasonably necessary to gain compliance from a subject during an incident. “Reasonableness” takes into consideration the situation and the officer’s knowledge at the time of the incident.
The law requires individuals to comply with lawful commands, and if they resist, officers may use force but only what is necessary to overcome resistance.
As simple as this definition is, determining the line between reasonable and excessive force can be ambiguous. However, in Beltran’s case, several highly trained and qualified officers examined the footage and unanimously determined that Beltran used a reasonable amount of force required to handcuff the escaping detainee.
Judge’s Decision: Lack of Credible Evidence
After the altercation, Officer Beltran adhered to department procedures for incidents involving the use of force. He was open and forthcoming in explaining his decision to administer the knee strikes.
Casper expertly defended Beltran, arguing that the Merit Board’s decision to terminate was against the manifest weight of evidence. In other words, the Merit Board did not have enough evidence to show that excessive force was used.
The manifest weight of evidence standard exists so that a verdict is based on evidence rather than personal bias. This is an important standard to meet, particularly in complicated use-of-force cases that can easily become subjective and lead to the end of a career.
Fortunately, after a 6-year battle, the judge found in favor of Beltran, reversing the Merit Board’s decision to terminate.
Wrongful Termination Attorneys Seek Justice for All
This case demonstrates how the use of force can be essential in maintaining safety and control. And that termination should never be the automatic response, as doing so risks unjustly removing dedicated law enforcement officers, such as Officer Beltran, who are committed to their duty to protect.
Fostering a culture of learning and growth from such incidents, rather than resorting to immediate termination, can lead to more effective law enforcement and a more just system.
Wrongful termination lawyer Cass T. Casper recognized that Officer Beltran’s termination was unlawful and fought relentlessly to set things right.
“David Beltran did the best he could under dangerous and difficult circumstances. There were no injuries to the detainee, and David had really good reasons for using the knee strikes – to help handcuff a detainee who had just escaped from his cell and who might have been carrying a shiv. I am proud to represent David, and I’m very, very happy that the Court saw this case our way.” – Cass T. Casper
Public service employees who believe they were wrongfully terminated can contact Disparti Law Group for a FREE case review. Call (312) 600-600 and find out why thousands say… “Larry wins”!
