A panel from the 5th Circuit court has made a determination that a detective from Jackson police doesn’t have the privilege of qualified immunity in an incident where she falsely arrested a man who was proven to be not guilty. The court, a subdivision of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, has recently voiced concerns about misuse of the principle of qualified immunity. Critics opine that it has frequently shielded law enforcement officers engaging in misconduct.
The detective from Jackson police, who was charged with wrongful arrest, was not covered by the qualified immunity, as per the ruling of the 5th Circuit judges. On the date of 13th of February 2020, Avery Forbes’ household in Jackson was startled by Nicholas Robertson knocking on their door, moments before he was fatally shot. A couple of months post this incident, the police apprehended Samuel Jennings concerning a different matter.
Samuel Jennings astounded the police by providing information that he learnt from Desmond Green confessing to the killing of Nicholas Robertson. This revelation bemused Green, who insisted to the police that he did not have any knowledge of Robertson, let alone being involved in the murder. However, despite Green’s protestations, both Detective Jacquelyn Thomas and the team of prosecutors in Hinds County pushed the grand jury to press formal charges against Green.
Green, who was alleged to have committed an armed robbery, which, when combined with the murder, constituted a charge of capital murder, was held in custody without the option to post bail. Accused of a crime, he did not perpetrate, Green found himself in prison for two long years. Two years after his incarceration, Samuel Jennings stepped back from his previous statement, leading to the release of Green after 22 months of imprisonment.
The case against Thomas by Green alleges that the detective based her commitment on the testimony of an informant from within the prison who was under the influence of drugs, manipulated the process of photo identification for suspects and intentionally excluded evidence from the grand jury which could have established his innocence. Thomas retorted to these charges by pleading for the dismissal of the case, anchored on her belief in the principle of qualified immunity.
This legal doctrine of qualified immunity, crafted in 1967 by the U.S. Supreme Court, served to safeguard Jackson police officers, who had arrested ministers entering a ‘whites-only’ waiting room, from any legal backlash – by arguing that the officers were acting with good intentions. U.S. District Judge Carlton W. Reeves, however, rejected the plea to dismiss the case against Thomas.
In contrast to Thomas’ claim, Judge Reeves held the view that it was the jury, not judges, who should deliver the verdict on whether officers were answerable for any kind of misconduct. Thomas didn’t let this deter her and sought to challenge Judge Reeves’ decision to uphold the case, by appealing to the 5th Circuit court. She claimed that as a law enforcement officer, she was protected against unintentional errors in judgment.
In a turn of events that took place in March 2022, Jennings admitted to providing false testimony to Detective Thomas due to his impaired condition under the influence of drugs and to pursue his own goal of being released from jail. Soon after Jennings’ confession, the prosecutors decided to drop the capital murder charges against Green which consequently resulted in his release from jail.
A year after being set free, Green filed a lawsuit against both Detective Thomas and the city, accusing them of having wrongfully and intentionally arrested and prosecuted him without sufficient evidence. Defending herself, Thomas maintained that the indictment against Green by the grand jury justifies her claim to qualified immunity.
Yet, the judges from the 5th Circuit court did not concur with Thomas’ assertion. They ruled that she wasn’t qualified for immunity from Green’s allegations under the Fourth Amendment related to false arrest and Fourteenth Amendment tied to due process. However, the judges partially sided with Thomas, awarding her qualified immunity in relation to Green’s claim of intentional prosecution.