Judge rejects civil trial delay in suit against police officers over Columbus man’s death
A judge has rejected delaying a trial in the lawsuit against three Columbus police officers accused of using excessive force against Hector Arreola, who died after his arrest in 2017.
In refusing to delay the trial set for Aug. 9, U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land also wrote that pursuing murder charges against the officers in a criminal probe could not be sustained, under Georgia law.
Attorneys for Officers Michael Aguilar, Brian Dudley and Aaron Evrard asked that the civil court proceedings be delayed because District Attorney Mark Jones has appointed a special prosecutor to present evidence in Arreola’s death to a grand jury.
That prosecutor, Christopher Breault, was sworn in May 20. Jones said he hoped Breault would be ready for a grand jury review before the current court term ends in two months.
The officers’ attorneys argue the criminal investigation hampers their defense in the civil suit, as the officers otherwise would testify if they weren’t compelled to use their Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.
In Land’s ruling Thursday, he wrote that the deadline to file charges under Georgia’s statute of limitations has run out on lesser crimes, so the officers can be charged only with murder.
“And quite frankly,” the judge added, “the evidence in the present record, which is relatively complete, indicates that a charge for murder could not be sustained in good faith under Georgia law.”
The jury would have to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the officers either purposefully caused Arreola’s death or caused it while committing another felony, Land said.
“Although a theoretical argument based upon a strained view of the evidence could be made that some evidence exists to support a charge, any reasonable prosecutor would ultimately conclude that the state could not carry its burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” he wrote. “Accordingly, it is unlikely that defendants will ever face a criminal prosecution for murder.”
He added: “This court must presume that the prosecutor will act in good faith and will follow the law.”
Informed of Land’s decision Thursday evening, Jones said it does not alter his plans for a criminal investigation.
“I think it’s up to the grand jury,” he said.
Circumstances of Arreola’s death
At 3:40 a.m. on Jan. 9, 2017, Arreola called police to check on his mother at her Moss Drive home, though she was in no danger. He called back at 4:55 a.m., and was in his car outside his mother’s home when Aguilar and Dudley came back to the house.
When he became paranoid and started knocking on a neighbor’s door, the officers tried to arrest him, initiating a struggle that led to their handcuffing him face down and pressing on him as he writhed and cried out. He went into cardiac arrest en route to the hospital, where he was pronounced dead the next day. He was 30 years old.
The lawsuit alleges the cardiac arrest resulted from brain damage caused by the force the officers used in restraining him.
Though Officer Evrard was not involved in the initial struggle, he helped Aguilar restrain Arreola later as Dudley left to get leg shackles.
The evidence in the civil trial includes body camera video and depositions from the officers and from Arreola’s mother, who witnessed the arrest.
On Thursday evening, the district attorney said he still thinks a grand jury should review the evidence.
“I think normal people agree that if a guy is handcuffed and restrained and he’s saying he can’t breathe, repeatedly, you have to stop using force,” Jones said.
He said he would review Land’s decision.
Excessive force used?
In recounting the evidence in an earlier court ruling, Land wrote that officers began struggling with Arreola at 5:25 a.m., before pinning him face down. They got handcuffs on him at 5:29 a.m., and Evrard arrived a minute later, taking Dudley’s place.
Land found that in four minutes and 27 seconds, Arreola said he could not breathe 16 times. After applying handcuffs, the officers remained on his back for two minutes and 14 seconds, Land determined.
Any force the officers used after Arreola was handcuffed and stopped resisting is excessive, under the law, Land wrote.
“The ultimate question ... is whether there is enough evidence in the record from which a reasonable jury could conclude that Hector ceased resisting when he was handcuffed,” Land wrote.
The lawsuit was filed by Columbus attorney Mark Post, a former prosecutor for the district attorney’s office. He represents Arreola’s parents, Rodrigo and Concepcion Arreola, and their son’s child, a minor identified only as “S.A.”
The suit seeks compensation for medical and funeral expenses, attorneys’ fees, the value of Hector Arreola’s life, and any other award a jury deems justified.
The three officers are being sued individually, though the city is paying for their defense.
Attorney Jim Clark represents Aguilar; Pete Temesgen represents Dudley; and Neal Callahan represents Evrard. All three officers still are employed with the police department.
The attorneys had another reason to delay the trial, in their court motion: They cited the publicity the case has drawn, as the prospect of a criminal investigation loomed.
Land said he would gauge the impact of that during jury selection, and added:
“It would be helpful, however, for all parties not to contribute to poisoning the potential jury pool, which could lead to a later continuance or mistrial.”