The U.S. Supreme Court has stepped into a technically complicated legal case out of Napoleon that will stand as a rebuke of overzealous police work, while also exposing Ohio municipalities to more lawsuits.
The justices, helped along by briefs from multiple “friends of the court,” as well as the defendant and plaintiff parties, ruled that Henry County jeweler Jascha Chiaverini has a right to sue the city of Napoleon and its police department for malicious prosecution.
Read more Blade editorials
The city’s case is that Mr. Chiaverini, who manages a jewelry store, bought a stolen ring and earring for $45. He was uncooperative and resistant in returning the stolen jewelry to its rightful owners, who had quickly called him and even told him the name of the thief.
The police of Napoleon, including the chief, put in much effort at investigating the case and returning the jewelry to the owners, overzealously so.
The city brought three charges against Mr. Chiaverini — receiving stolen property, selling jewelry without a license, and money laundering, a felony. They searched his shop, took items, and put him in jail for three days.
In the end, the county prosecutor let the case drop.
An essential element of a money-laundering charge is that the defendant must be aware that he bought stolen merchandise. There was no solid evidence of that. An investigating officer claimed that Mr. Chiaverini admitted knowing the ring and earring were stolen, but Mr. Chiaverini denied making that admission, which the police added later to their report, which looks suspicious.
In his $3 million suit in Henry County Common Pleas Court in 2017, naming the city, its former police chief, two other police officers, and the couple whose jewelry was stolen as defendants, Mr. Chiaverini charged police “wrongfully and maliciously” arrested him.
The district judge, Jeffrey Helmick, and the appeals court in Cincinnati, decided that even if the felony case didn’t hold up, the other two cases justified his detention.
Three Democratic justices joined forces with three moderate Republican justices to rule that police can’t use an invalid criminal charge to throw someone in jail, even if they might have been able to do that with other charges.
The ruling is framed as a victory for victims of overly aggressive police, and it is that. The police department clearly overreacted with a felony charge and jail detention, considering that the thief himself was merely issued a summons. The police chief suggested that the additional charges were brought out of fear that Mr. Chiaverini would melt down the jewelry rather than return it.
The dispute was an opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify a legal question, and has tackled it in hairsplitting detail. Yet, the court was divided 6-3, with one justice saying the wrong constitutional amendment was in play.
Police should be held accountable when they game the system to take advantage of a defendant.
Whether Mr. Chiaverini’s suffering and lost reputation are worth $3 million, or much less, considering his refusal to graciously and immediately return the stolen items, will be decided by the jury when the case gets to court in Henry County.
Most Popular
Comments / 0