CO: Colorado Jail Guard Must Stand Trial for Opening Accused Sex Offender’s Cell, Subjecting Him to Assault

Source: prisonlegalnews.org 7/1/24

On December 13, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado denied summary judgment to a jail guard who allegedly failed to protect a pretrial detainee from assault by another detainee. But the Court dismissed a municipal liability claim against Colorado’s Chaffee County, even though the guard had been disciplined before—three times—for failing to keep cell doors locked.

Jason Harter, then 34, was arrested and booked into Chaffee County Detention Center (CCDC) on February 20, 2020, on charges of kidnapping, forcible rape of an individual under the age of 15, and enticement. The nature of his charges put guards, including Victoria Stover, on notice that it was important for other detainees not to hear about them. CCDC Cmdr. Tracy Jackson emphasized this in an email to guards on March 10, 2020, advising that they needed to stop any harassment by other detainees. Jackson further advised staff that she had personally addressed two detainees and informed them that harassment of Harter would not be tolerated.

After an altercation with detainee Joshua Mullins on July 16, 2020, Harter was moved to a single cell and placed in protective custody lockdown. That same day, he sent a kite about another detainee in the cellblock identified as Alan Stephen, then also 34, describing him as an “extremely violent person,” who had previously been charged with murder and had given Harter “certain looks.” Harter was displeased when guards failed to promptly act, so he started kicking his cell door and attempted to flood his cell. Guards moved him to administrative confinement (AC) as discipline.

Read the full article

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

11 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Nothing surprising about the incident I just read. Nor that the court didn’t find any fault on the sheriff’s department, though I disagree with the reasoning. This sort of thing happens to those accused of sex crimes in nearly every county jail in the US. They avoid liability by simply having rules in place, even though most of them privately look the other way when those rules are broken.

It’s nice that the plaintiff here did get a liability claim against the CO that let it all happen. But realistically, he won’t get much compensation from her. And that’s assuming he prevails, and it wouldn’t surprise me if he doesn’t.

The court is the biggest enabler of poor behavior by those in badges, courtrooms, and the legal community overall when they deviate from rational and reasonable thinking when required on matters such as this. A fox guarding the hen house situation. No wonder their opinion numbers are so low.

i hope the gent wins and wins big, but have to agree with Dustin, the gent is lucky he has gotten this far and with the court thinking they way they do, compensation could be rather small all things considered.

Last edited 3 months ago by TS

There is a lot of enabling by the courts that allows these prison cops’ misconduct to go unpunished.

In the unlikely event that this case ever reaches a trial, it will be equally unlikely that a jury will
award the plaintiff/victim a money award (based upon the nature of HIS crime which WILL be disclosed to the jury). In light of this, I think the plaintiff/victim should instead seek a settlement wherein the defendant/CO agrees to permantently end her career as a CO, and further agrees not to seek any future employment as a CO in any other jurisdiction, and/or any employment that would put her in contact with anyone in custody.

Sounds like some wicked dame was playing God in the control room. “I’ll leave the door cracked just an eensy bit. Just enough space for that psycopath to slip in and beat that chomo to a pulp. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!”