Federal Lawsuit Alleges Racism Within Bristol Police Department Ranks
A Bristol police officer has sued the city and police chief, alleging race-based discrimination.
May 30, 2019 at 05:49 PM
4 minute read
An Hispanic police officer has sued the city of Bristol and its police chief, Brian Gould, alleging fellow officers and supervisors disciplined, harassed and retaliated against him because of his ethnicity.
In his federal lawsuit filed Tuesday afternoon in Connecticut, Adam Quinn alleges colleagues scrutinized his work, and Internal Affairs repeatedly falsely investigated him solely because he is a minority officer in an overwhelmingly white police department.
News outlets reported officers arrested Quinn in 2016 and charged him with second-degree breach of peace related to a workplace threat. Quinn's history also includes a 30-day suspension for insubordination and charges related to improper use of force.
But Quinn claims bigotry prompted the actions against him. According to his lawsuit, the police department has 122 employees, but only two black and two Hispanic officers, including Quinn, who's been on the force for seven years.
The complaint alleges violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act. It claims “the defendants recklessly, intentionally and maliciously discriminated” against Quinn, and treated him differently than other employees.
Quinn is suing Gould in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as police chief of the central Connecticut town. His lawsuit claims Gould “acted intentionally or recklessly” by not putting an end to the alleged harassment.
Gould's office referred all comments to Bristol Corporation Counsel Wyland Clift, who told the Connecticut Law Tribune the town is gearing to refute the allegations.
“We are defending the lawsuit,” Clift said, adding the city retained attorney David Monastersky, of Howd & Ludorf, to represent it and Gould.
The lawsuit cites among the examples an alleged department edict to scrutinize Quinn's response time to police calls “so that they could fabricate discipline against” him.
“The plaintiff has been disciplined more harshly than non-Hispanic officers regarding the use of force,” it claims.
At one point, the lawsuit alleges, a senior member of the department “ordered its white, non-Hispanic personnel to document every little thing on Quinn so that it could further discipline him, up to termination.”
Quinn's lawsuit notes an arrest warrant, which, according to news reports from January 2016, involve Quinn allegedly making a threat in the workplace. He was charged by his own department, according to a news account from WVIT-TV, with second-degree breach of peace. What followed is unclear, as a clerk with the New Britain courthouse told the Connecticut Law Tribune Thursday there was no public record of the outcome of the charge.
Quinn also notes he was the subject of five internal investigations.
The city's attorney, Monastersky, told the Connecticut Law Tribune Thursday the suspension stemmed from three separate investigations and included two charges of improper use of force and one of insubordination. Monastersky also said there were at least five internal and administrative investigations against Quinn, who was “exonerated for some,” but not others.
Quinn remains on the police force.
“The defendants have imposed, and continue[] to impose, punishment upon and discipline upon the plaintiff in retaliation for his complaints, and because of his Hispanic race and/or heritage,” the complaint alleges.
Colleagues also made derogatory comments, according to the lawsuit, which cited an example of a supervisor allegedly saying: “Hey, we just arrested another Jose and maybe we should send his wetback ass back to Mexico.”
Representing Quinn is New Haven solo practitioner William Palmieri, who did not respond to a request for comment.
The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages as well as attorney fees.
Judge Victor Bolden is scheduled to hear the case.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
State High Court Adopts Modern Standard for Who Keeps $70K Engagement Ring After Breakup
Mass. Judge Declares Mistrial in Talc Trial: 'Court Can't Accommodate This Case'
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250