Magistrate recommends against tossing case against sheriff
A federal magistrate judge has recommended against dismissing an indictment accusing an Atlanta-area sheriff of violating the civil rights of people in his custody
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A federal magistrate judge has recommended against dismissing an indictment accusing an Atlanta-area sheriff of violating the civil rights of people in his custody.
The federal indictment against now-suspended Clayton County Sheriff Victor Hill says he violated the civil rights of five people who were being held at the county jail. Prosecutors say he used excessive force against the men when he ordered them held in a restraint chair without justification and as punishment.
Lawyers for Hill had argued that the sheriff's use of a restraint chair does not amount to excessive force under any clearly established law and argued before U.S. Magistrate Judge Christopher Bly that the charges should be dismissed.
In a Dec. 29 filing, Bly disagreed. The idea “that a law enforcement officer may not use force against a detainee who is complying—is neither novel nor new," he wrote, adding that the indictment alleges that Hill “used force against pretrial detainees who were complying with law enforcement instructions.”
Bly noted that Hill's lawyers argued “that there is no case law making clear that the use of restraint chairs amounts to the use of force at all, let alone excessive force.” Bly wrote that he "simply cannot agree that placing someone in restraints, to a degree that they cause physical pain and bodily injury (as is alleged as to each of the detainees), does not amount to the use of 'force.'”
Bly recommended that the motion to dismiss be denied and certified the case ready for trial.
Drew Findling, an attorney for Hill, said in a phone interview that he will ask the U.S. district court judge who gets assigned to the case to review the magistrate judge's decision.
“We’re not losing sight of the fact that, reviewing the facts of the case itself, that the sheriff is completely innocent of those charges,” Findling said.
The indictment alleges that the men were improperly held in a restraint chair for hours even though they had complied with deputies and posed no threat. They suffered pain and bodily injury as a result, prosecutors have said.
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp in June suspended Hill until the charges against him are resolved or until his term of office is over, whichever comes first. A Fulton County Superior Court judge last month declined Hill's request to order the governor to reinstate him as sheriff.
Hill has previously said the case is politically motivated. His lawyers have argued that the U.S. Department of Justice has never brought criminal charges for any behavior similar to what’s alleged in the indictment and that prosecutors targeted him because of his controversial past as sheriff in Clayton County, just south of Atlanta