Channels, Fall 2017

Channels • 2017 • Volume 2 • Number 1 Page 57 The Right Balance: Qualified Immunity and Section 1983 Jana Minich History and Government — Cedarville University Introduction fficer Garrison and his K-9 (police dog), accompanied by another officer, were in pursuit of a robbery and assault suspect. 1 Garrison knew that the suspect was African American, bald, and approximately five-foot, ten inches tall. It was late at night, and the K-9 was tracking the scent of the suspect to an apparently abandoned home near a known homeless camp. Christopher Maney, who had been in the homeless camp, mistook the police for violent enemies of some of the camp’s inhabitants and fled in fear. As he hid behind bushes in the dim light of the streetlamps, he never heard the officers’ warnings that they were using a K-9. As Garrison and his dog closed in on Maney, the K-9 gave signs that he was near the suspect. Garrison shortened the leash on the K-9 and headed for the abandoned house. Suddenly, the dog leapt into the bushes concealing Maney and began biting him on the head. Garrison almost immediately ascertained that the Caucasian, non- bald man under attack was not the African American, bald suspect. However, for seven to ten seconds, the K-9 continued to bite Maney while Garrison refused to call off the dog. Garrison repeatedly commanded the besieged Maney to show his hands, which he was using at the time to struggle against the attacking dog. When it was all over, Maney was severely injured and bleeding profusely. Maney subsequently sued Garrison for allowing the dog to continue to bite him even though it was clear that he was not the suspect the officer sought. What happens in Mr. Maney’s lawsuit may seem straightforward at first. After all, it is essentially a common tort—a lawsuit for wrongdoing or negligence. However, this case is different because it does not encompass only the concerns and interests of the parties involved. This is a lawsuit against a police officer, and that means it has the inherent ability to affect other officers who find themselves in positions similar to Garrison’s. Thus, there are really three perspectives in play. From Maney’s point of view, this was a violent aggression that, while admittedly an accident, was prolonged even when the officer knew that he was innocent. The appellate court acknowledged that Maney was “guilty at worst of being in the wrong place at the 1 Maney v. Garrison, No. 14-7791 (4th Cir. March 9, 2017) (unpublished). All facts of the case found on pages 3-8 of the opinion. O