Former inmate suing jail: Rodriguez says K-9 attack violated his rights
    By CHRISTOPHER MELE, Staff Writer
    Times Herald-Record
    October 28, 1998

    WHITE PLAINS – Orange County Jail promotes and covers up the use of excessive force, a former inmate attacked by a police dog charges in a federal lawsuit.

    Michael A. Rodriguez charges the jail violated his constitutional rights when two correction officers allegedly commanded a K-9 named Maverick to viciously attack him on Aug. 5, 1996. The dog bit the former Montgomery man 50 times, leaving wounds three-quarters of an inch to two inches deep that needed 10 stitches to treat, according to his lawyer.

    The incident spurred investigations by five local, state and federal agencies and ultimately led to an end to the use of canines for inmate control at the jail. Rodriguez maintains that correction officers Earle H. Smith Jr. and William Burke had no reason to sic the dog on him.

    The federal lawsuit, filed in June, charges that the jail failed to exercise "reasonable care" for setting guidelines and rules to protect inmates from improper treatment.

    In an official report about the incident, Smith maintained that Rodriguez tried to punch him.

    Smith's lawyer, Kevin Preston, said he was recently retained and that it would be premature to comment. Smith declined comment.

    Lawyer Patrick Burke, who is representing William Burke, said "everything he did was perfectly proper" and that Rodriguez's claims were "not legally justified." William Burke, a former canine handler who quit his job in 1996, could not be reached. He and his lawyer are not related.

    County taxpayers are footing the bills for the $115-an-hour defense lawyers for Burke and Smith. That's because it's an "open question" whether they were acting in the scope of their employment, County Attorney Richard B. Golden said.

    "There were different accounts of the incident among various witnesses, including Rodriguez, Smith, Burke and others," Golden said.

    Rodriguez ended up in the jail after being charged with assault outside a Village of Montgomery bar. Rodriguez said that he was a bystander when the fight spilled outside. Rodriguez's lawyer, Arlindo B. Araujo, said the victim mistakenly identified Rodriguez as his attacker.

    Officials have said that the Montgomery assault victim was friends with one of the jail officers and that set the stage for the dog attack. Rodriguez said he did what he was told while in jail.

    "Everything was 'yes sir,' 'no sir,' to the officer,'' Rodriguez said. When he was told to face the wall, one of the officers leaned into him and whispered: " 'You think you're tough, kicking people while they're on the ground?' I replied, " 'No sir, I'm innocent, sir.' "

    When the dog began attacking, Rodriguez said he turned to the wall to protect his face. "All I could do was scream,'' he said.

    Rodriguez had been charged with assault for allegedly attacking the correction officers and for the incident in Montgomery. Both sets of charges were dismissed. Rodriguez met with federal prosecutors about possible criminal or civil rights charges, but Araujo said prosecutors lost interest because the attack did not show a pattern of conduct. Spokesmen for the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI, which was also investigating, did not respond to requests for comment.

    The Orange County District Attorney's Office had investigated but closed the case after Rodriguez did not respond to requests for an interview, said Dan Scribner, chief investigator.

    "There was insufficient evidence to warrant criminal charges against any member" of the jail, Scribner said. Araujo said he had no "specific recollection'' of his client being asked for an interview.


    FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. NoNonsense English offers this material non-commercially for research and educational purposes. I believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, i.e. the media service or newspaper which first published the article online and which is indicated at the top of the article unless otherwise specified.

    Back to Repression and Police Dog Abuse