Gay Man Arrested in Sting Seeks Damages
Gay Man Arrested in Sting Seeks Damages
by Amy Wooten
Copyright by The Windy City Times
2007-08-22
A local gay man arrested last year during a prostitution sting operation recently filed suit, seeking damages as a result of being unlawfully seized, maliciously prosecuted and defamed by several Chicago police officers.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, cites several Chicago police officers for depriving Dion Contreras of his rights during the sting. According to the suit, Contreras was not soliciting the arresting officer for sex, but was arrested anyway. The suit also states that that police allegedly falsified police reports and then faxed them to Contreras’ employer.
According to the suit, in June 2006, a police officer dressed as a civilian in an unmarked car pulled over to speak with Contreras, who was walking down the street past a gay bar in Boystown.
The officer allegedly said to Contreras, “I’ll give you $20 for a blowjob.”
The suit states that Contreras made it clear to the officer that he was not selling his body, but that he offered to perform the sexual act for free.
The officer was part of a sting operation called “Operation Angelo.”
The suit alleges that although the officer knew that Contreras was not a prostitute, he signaled for other officers to make an arrest.
“What makes this case particularly egregious is that there was clearly a conscious choice by these officers to violate Mr. Contreras’ civil rights,” said Contreras’ attorney Jon Erickson. “Because he needed high arrest numbers, the arresting officer chose to manufacture charges and then falsify police reports.”
Contreras was charged with prostitution and possession of a controlled substance ( cocaine ) . The prostitution charge was dropped in August 2006, and the drug possession charge was dropped in November 2006.
The suit states that the charges against Contreras were forwarded to his job, and the officers allegedly gave false information in phone interviews with his employer. Contreras, who worked as a criminal specialist for the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, was placed on leave and then suspended.
“There is no set of circumstances that can justify faxing an arrest report to an arrestee’s employer,” Erickson said. “It is illegal and can only demonstrate a willful and wanton attempt to defame and cause harm to my client.”
by Amy Wooten
Copyright by The Windy City Times
2007-08-22
A local gay man arrested last year during a prostitution sting operation recently filed suit, seeking damages as a result of being unlawfully seized, maliciously prosecuted and defamed by several Chicago police officers.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, cites several Chicago police officers for depriving Dion Contreras of his rights during the sting. According to the suit, Contreras was not soliciting the arresting officer for sex, but was arrested anyway. The suit also states that that police allegedly falsified police reports and then faxed them to Contreras’ employer.
According to the suit, in June 2006, a police officer dressed as a civilian in an unmarked car pulled over to speak with Contreras, who was walking down the street past a gay bar in Boystown.
The officer allegedly said to Contreras, “I’ll give you $20 for a blowjob.”
The suit states that Contreras made it clear to the officer that he was not selling his body, but that he offered to perform the sexual act for free.
The officer was part of a sting operation called “Operation Angelo.”
The suit alleges that although the officer knew that Contreras was not a prostitute, he signaled for other officers to make an arrest.
“What makes this case particularly egregious is that there was clearly a conscious choice by these officers to violate Mr. Contreras’ civil rights,” said Contreras’ attorney Jon Erickson. “Because he needed high arrest numbers, the arresting officer chose to manufacture charges and then falsify police reports.”
Contreras was charged with prostitution and possession of a controlled substance ( cocaine ) . The prostitution charge was dropped in August 2006, and the drug possession charge was dropped in November 2006.
The suit states that the charges against Contreras were forwarded to his job, and the officers allegedly gave false information in phone interviews with his employer. Contreras, who worked as a criminal specialist for the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, was placed on leave and then suspended.
“There is no set of circumstances that can justify faxing an arrest report to an arrestee’s employer,” Erickson said. “It is illegal and can only demonstrate a willful and wanton attempt to defame and cause harm to my client.”
posted by Carlos T Mock at 4:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home