Rynearson v. Richter Trial

file:///Users/richardrynearson/Desktop/110915%20jury%20trial%20rynearson%20v%20richter.txt[11/12/15, 7:29:42 PM]

1

1 November 9, 2015. Digital 958.

2 MR. MALDONADO:

3 THE COURT: Thank you. Please be seated.

4 MR. MALDONADO: 11-C V 705, Richard Rynearson.

5 MR. MALDONADO: Rynearson, Your Honor.

6 THE COURT: Rynearson, thank you. Versus Edwin

7 Richter. Appearances, please.

8 MR. MALDONADO: Javier Maldonado for plaintiff.

9 A. Juan Gonzalez for plaintiff, Your Honor.

10 MR. MALDONADO: In Rynearson is present, Your Honor.

11 MR. RALLS: Good morning, Your Honor, mark recalls

12 for Edwin Richter along with Philip Leal with my office and

13 Edwin Richter is present.

14 THE COURT: Thank you. We need to take up I guess

15 whatever exhibits are going to be introduced?

16 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor. I think at this

17 time, the only one that comes in the case in chief is

18 Plaintiff's Exhibit 1. Defendants 1 as well, it is the

19 plaintiff report, it is the police report prepared by officer

20 Richter.

21 THE COURT: Any objection to plaintiff's 1 which is

22 defendant's 1?

23 MR. RALLS: I don't have any objection to that, Your

24 Honor.


25 THE COURT: That's admitted.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

2

1 THE COURT: Do I have an exhibit list from you,

2 Mr. Maldonado?

3 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor.

4 THE COURT: I need to get it reprinted, it didn't

5 get to my book. Can you get me a copy?

6 COURTROOM DEPUTY: Yes, sir.

7 THE COURT: Are there any other plaintiff's exhibits

8 that are unobjected to?

9 MR. MALDONADO: Plaintiff's Exhibit -- well,

10 actually, the only other exhibit I have, Your Honor, that the

11 Court ruled on on October 22nd was Plaintiff's Exhibit 5. And

12 Mr. Ralls did object to it and the Court ruled on it, I am

13 debating whether I will use it.

14 THE COURT: Okay. Then we will reserve that one

15 until you decide whether to use it and if so whether there is

16 an objection.

17 MR. RALLS: Well, Your Honor, I don't know if he is

18 going to tie it right before voir dire to.

19 To use it or not so if we need a bench, can we have

20 a bench conference before he decides to use it?

21 THE COURT: Do you intend to, Mr. Maldonado, to

22 refer to number 5?

23 MR. MALDONADO: No, Your Honor.


24 THE COURT: Then that takes care of that.

25 THE COURT: Any objections or any exhibits from the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

3

1 defendant that we are ready to enter into now or are they all

2 objected to.

3 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I think the only exhibit

4 that the defendants are going to have is Exhibit number 1, the

5 police report.

6 THE COURT: Okay. That takes care of exhibits,

7 then, for now.

8 MR. RALLS: Having said that, Your Honor, of course

9 unless something changes during the course of the trial. In

10 that event we will approach the bench.

11 THE COURT: Okay.

12 MR. MALDONADO: And I was going to ask for a

13 clarification for that, Your Honor. There was, if the Court

14 remembers, an issue about exhibits relating to the

15 September 2011 refusal to obey am order. There is a reprimand

16 letter, the Court kept it out, but I reread last night the

17 transcript and the Court said, look, you know, if I see that

18 the evidence on the promotion on the May 2010 promotion is

19 weak, I will change my mind. The Court has ruled that the

20 promotion issue -- we can't raise that in front of the jury

21 and request damages. So I just want to confirm that that


22 means that any exhibits relating to 2011, September 2011,

23 refusal to obey an order won't come in.

24 THE COURT: What I ruled on last time was strictly

25 motions in limine. Motion in limine, so those aren't final

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

4

1 evidentiary rules, they are just rulings on motions in limine.

2 And so what I ruled was that the failure to obey bay, obey a

3 lawful command was not coming in at this point in time and I

4 granted the motion in limine on that point, so that goes --

5 that ruling would prohibit the defendant from referencing that

6 issue in front of the jury unless they first approach me and

7 we discuss why it is relevant and not 403 at that time. And

8 that was the sole extent of the ruling, just so the record is

9 clear.

10 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor. Anything

11 else from the plaintiff?

12 MR. MALDONADO: Not relating to the limine or the

13 exhibits, Your Honor, I just want to bring to the Court's

14 attention that Mr. Rynearson came early this morning and was

15 waiting outside, two jurors one or two jurors did approach him

16 asking what time the Court opened? And I just wanted to let

17 the Court and Mr.

18 MR. RALLS: Know.

19 THE COURT: Thank you thank you, there were no

20 further discussions other than that.


21 MR. MALDONADO: No, Your Honor, I don't believe so.

22 THE COURT: Okay. That's fine.

23 THE COURT: How much time did I give you all on voir

24 dire?

25 MR. MALDONADO: Twenty minutes.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

5

1 THE COURT: Twenty minutes each? And what was the

2 time on the opening?

3 MR. MALDONADO: Fifteen.

4 MR. RALLS: Fifteen.

5 THE COURT: Okay.

6 MR. MALDONADO: On voir dire, Your Honor, is the

7 Court going to limit the lawyers to remain at the podium or

8 can we walk around?

9 THE COURT: If you stay to the podium that helps

10 Mr. Myers in recording.

11 MR. MALDONADO: Okay.

12 THE COURT: If you -- when I leave the bench, it

13 will take the jurors about 15 or so minutes to get up here,

14 Mr. Myer can assist you in repositioning the podium that way.

15 You can move your chairs to face that direction as well. And

16 we will conduct voir dire that way. Any other questions?

17 MR. RALLS: No, Your Honor.



19 COURTROOM DEPUTY: They are ready do you want them

20 to come up.

21 THE COURT: Yes. Go ahead and bring them up.

22 THE COURT: I will take the bench again once the

23 jury is in place.

24 (Brief recess.)

25 #04: Test test go forward to 8:03. Ralls Mr. Ralls

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

6

1 practice strokes. Woehr Barnes test test Ms. Barnes,

2 Mr. Barnes, Ms. Barnes, Mr. Barnes, Paiz Sherner, Ortegon,

3 Ortegon, Ortegon, Ortegon, Ortegon, Boatwright, Hammoudeh,

4 Cunningham, Isaac.

5 MR. GONZALEZ: Test test test test Hewitt, LeBaron,

6 boss stick Noack, Noack, Hammoudeh. Boatwright, Boatwright,.

7 THE COURT: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

8 Welcome to federal court here in San Antonio. On behalf of my

9 colleagues I would like to thank you for your presence here

10 today in answering the call to jury service. I know you all

11 are very busy, I know you all have things to do, work, places

12 to attend to, home affairs to attend to, and so I give you my

13 word we are going to make this a very efficient proceeding for

14 you all and for those of you who are selected as jurors in

15 this case, I am zero known for making sure we move along. So

16 your time will be well used, and I know some of you don't want

17 to be here, a couple of your colleagues already wrote me


18 little notes wanting to be excused. I understand it is an

19 imposition, but I also are tell you this. For those who

20 ultimately are serving as jurors in the case and at the

21 conclusion of their case, I mean, almost without exception I

22 always get people coming up to me afterwards saying, you know,

23 I didn't want to be here initially but it turned out to be a

24 really valuable experience, I learned a great deal, and they

25 walk away from the experience a little bit better for it, and

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

7

1 so hopefully that will be your situation as well, if you are

2 selected here. I know some of you have traveled some distance

3 to get here. Our San Antonio division serves 14 counties, so

4 some of you have come some way here and I thank you for that.

5 Now, we are going to be picking a jury for a civil case here.

6 It is going to be a very short trial. Maybe two, three days

7 at most. And we are going to be here in a somewhat Dar --

8 well, if you have been reading the papers I was going to say

9 somewhat comfortable building. We have been having actually

10 mold and led issues, shows that are selected to be jurors,

11 don't drink the water here. We will have bottled water for

12 you, and if you are drinking the water fountains I would

13 suggest you don't do that either. We are in the 1968 world's

14 fair building. And I in start asking some questions, anybody

15 here attend the 1968 world's fair. I have one hand. Do you


16 remember what this building was, sir? This was the U.S.

17 pavilion, so if you walked into this building building, it

18 didn't have any courtrooms, offices, it was like an early Imax

19 theer the, so you walked into the middle of the building and

20 they projected sights and sounds of these United States

21 against the bare walls and that's what this building was. It

22 was built to be a temporary building and I think we have

23 exhausted the temporariness of this building now, but needless

24 to say, it is still somewhat comfortable. We got the air

25 conditioning on, and we will be in good shape. Now, I will be

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

8

1 asking you a few questions here to get started, then I am

2 going to turn it over to the lawyers so they can ask their

3 questions here. If you will do me a favor. If you are going

4 to respond to a question if you could please stand, say your

5 name, say your juror number, and speak very clearly the

6 because we have Mr. Myers over here taking down everything we

7 say and to assist him in that process, it would help if you do

8 stand and do speak up. Now, some of you might be concerned

9 about being a juror. You know, can I get this right? I don't

10 like making decisions. You know, the realization is, we make

11 decisions every day. How many people on the panel right now

12 are parents? You know, almost everybody here. You know, the

13 reality is, as a parent we make decisions every day. We told

14 our kids at one point in time, yes, you can do that, no you


15 can't do that, so this is a little more complicated than that,

16 but, you know, the reality is, decision making is an inherent

17 part of our life and this is no different. But with that said

18 does anybody here hold any kind of religious belief that

19 prohibits you from serving as a juror and making a decision in

20 a civil case? Anybody here hold that kind of religious

21 belief? No hands. Okay. More questions. Again, my name is

22 Xavier Rodriguez, my courtroom deputy here is Becky Greenup, I

23 was going to say in the plaque but they are both wearing

24 black, Becky wear your hands, Karl Myers over here is my court

25 reporter, he is taking down everything we say. Reuben Aguilar

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

9

1 in the back is the bail HIV, or the courtroom security

2 officer, hiding back over here is mare I didn't Kate Farrow he

3 is a law clerk and brand-new lawyer who serves with me for a

4 year as an interim training and providing me some assistance

5 and research. Anybody here know either me or any of my staff?

6 No hands. Good. Continuing with introductions.

7 Mr. Maldonado, if you would please stand. Mr. Maldonado is

8 the attorney who represents the plaintiff in this case,

9 Richard Rynearson. Mr. Maldonado, can you introduce who is at

10 your name, Juan Gonzalez my co-counsel and Richard Rynearson,

11 my client, the plaintiff.

12 THE COURT: Thank you, gentlemen. You can take a


13 seat.

14 THE COURT: Anybody here know Mr. Maldonado,

15 Mr. Gonzalez or Mr. Rynearson? No hands. Good. Mr. Ralls,

16 if you could please stand. Mr. Hauls is an attorney

17 representing Edwin Richter. If you can introduce Who is at

18 your table, good morning, Your Honor, my name is mark recalls

19 this is my legal assistant Philip Leal and I am proud to the

20 represent retired police officer Edwin Richter.

21 THE COURT: Thank you. Anybody here knows

22 Mr. Ralls, Mr. Leal or Mr. Richter? No hands. Good. Let me

23 explain so you a little bit about what this civil case may be

24 about and I will give you this very brief introduction, just

25 so you know what this case may be about and whether we can

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

10

1 determine whether you would be a suitable juror to sit in this

2 case. This is a civil rights dispute. It is arising out of a

3 traffic stop in which the plaintiff, Richard Rynearson was

4 pulled over by the defendant, then police officer now retired

5 Edwin Richter. Officer Richter alleges that Mr. Rynearson

6 failed to signal when changing lanes, but when Mr. Rynearson,

7 he maintains he was in compliance with the traffic laws at all

8 time. Mr. Rynearson, the plaintiff claims that when he was

9 asked why he had been stopped, officer Richter stated he want

10 to verify that Rynearson had a valid driver's license because

11 supposedly his vehicle had out of stateliness plates.


12 Mr. Rynearson also alleges that he had his driver's license

13 and insurance ready to hand to officer Richter, but that when

14 he asked the officer if the stop was lawful, officer Richter

15 responded by arresting him. Officer Richter, on the other

16 hand, claims Mr. Rynearson repeatedly refused to provide his

17 license and proof of insurance and that gave him probable

18 cause to arrest him. Mr. Rynearson is suing then officer

19 Richter for allegedly violating his Fourth Amendment right to

20 be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and he

21 alleges that his First Amendment right to be free from

22 retaliatory arrest was violated. Officer Richter maintains

23 that because he had probable cause to detain Mr. Rynearson he

24 is entitled to qualified immunity for all of his actions.

25 That is a brief background about what I believe you are going

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

11

1 to hear in this case. That said, let me ask some questions

2 regarding these allegations. Has anybody here on the panel

3 ever been employed by the San Antonio Police Department in any

4 capacity? Law enforcement officer, administrative role,

5 anything like that? Anybody here formerly or currently

6 employed by the San Antonio Police Department? No hands.

7 Anybody here have a member, a close family member, a six

8 blink, a mother, a father, your son or daughter who is

9 employed by the San Antonio Police Department? Oh, is a quiet


10 group. This is going to be hard to bust. Okay. Let's expand

11 the question. Anybody here or a close family member of yours,

12 anybody, law enforcement, I will use that phrase very broadly,

13 military police, FBI, DEA, Bexar County sheriff's department,

14 any sheriff's department, any police department, anybody here

15 have an association or their family member has an association

16 with the police department of one type or another? Okay.

17 Finally hands. Let's go one by one. Mr. Barnes.

18 A. Yes, my knew, her mother is with the FBI.

19 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. And who else did I

20 see up there, Mr. Woehr.

21 A. Yes, my wife is in the army.

22 Q. Is she a plaintiff, police, miss Milan Lucic triparticular

23 police four the army?

24 A. He is a doctor.

25 Q. I am sorry, I want to go with police departments first.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

12

1 But your point might come up in a minute. I thought a saw a

2 couple more hands there. Number, I am sorry, I can't see your

3 number?

4 A. Sticks.

5 Q. Ms. Sherner?

6 A. Yes. My son-in-law and my brother-in-law are both retired

7 police officers.

8 Q. Okay city?


9 A. My son-in-law was Marion.

10 Q. Marion Texas, right outside of San Antonio?

11 A. Uh-huh and my brother-in-law is -- New York.

12 Q. Thank you, Ms. Sherner. Mr. Ortegon, did you have your

13 hand up?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Second row. Yes, Ms. Boatwright?

16 A. My father was in the military police.

17 Q. And is he still in or is he retired?

18 A. He retired.

19 Q. Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Anybody else on that row?

20 Q. This side over here, any hands? Ms. Hewitt?

21 A. Yes. I don't have family members, but I was a prosecuting

22 attorney at the DA's office for almost 20 years, so I have

23 many friends that are police officers and in all of the

24 agencies.

25

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

13

1 BY MR. MALDONADO:

2 Q. Thank you, is that with Bexar County?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Thank you. And anybody else on that row? Ms. Noack?

5 A. My husband -- is a sheriff of -- he is retired now.

6 Q. Thank you. And Ms. Hildebrand?


7 A. Several close friends with Comal County.

8 Q. Okay. In the sheriff's department or police department?

9 A. Sheriff's department.

10 Q. Thank you. And Mr. West.

11 A. My son, stepson Border Patrol in Laredo, and my cousin

12 retired from San Antonio Police Department.

13 Q. Thank you, sir.

14 Q. And Mr. Isaac?

15 A. My cousin's husband worked for.

16 Q. Bexar County?

17 A. No, in Houston.

18 Q. Harris County, Houston. Thank you, Mr. Isaac. Now, the

19 question for almost all of you who raised your hand, the

20 question is, for those of you who have a close family member

21 who is law enforcement of some type or another, Mr. Richter,

22 of course, was a police officer in San Antonio, he is now

23 retired. Can everyone on this panel who raised their hand

24 treat Mr. Richter's testimony just like anybody else's

25 testimony or the mere fact that he is a police officer, would

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

14

1 that incline you to believe him more and cause you to be --

2 and I hate to use the word bias because no one likes to say I

3 am biased if I asked who is biased here, nobody is going to

4 raise their hand, eight but we are trying to treat both sides

5 fairly here, Mr. Rynearson and Mr. Richter. So for those of I


6 don't you who identified yourselves as having some

7 relationships or close family members with police officers or

8 law enforcement officers, the fact that Mr. Richter is a

9 former San Antonio police officer, is that going to cause you

10 a problem in this case in frequent both sides equally?

11 Anybody here think this is not the case for them? Ms. Hewitt.

12 Thank you. For that honest response. I will get back to you.

13 Anyone else? Thank you. Before I gave you this little

14 summary about this case, had anybody heard about this case

15 beforehand? No hands. Good. Prior jury service, has anybody

16 here ever served on a grand jury? A grand jury is a little

17 different than what we have here. The grand jury is the body

18 of individuals who decide whether to bring a charge against

19 somebody and later, and then later they are actually tried in

20 a courtroom. Has anybody here ever served on a grand jury?

21 No hands. Okay. With regard to prior jury service here, has

22 anybody here ever served on a civil or criminal jury in which

23 a police officer was a defendant? Mr. West.

24 A. I guess. That was DWI.

25 Q. And was the police officer accused of driving while under

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

15

1 the influence?

2 A. No, no. It was the opposite, he was the -- the police

3 officers pulled the person over for --


4 Q. Okay, (16) so he was just just the arresting officer?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Okay. Thank you. (That was 16. Anybody here actually

7 determined the guilt or innocence or liability of a police

8 officer in a previous civil case? No hands. Okay. Other

9 than Ms. Hewitt, is anybody here a lawyer or been to law

10 school? No hands. And with that, ladies and gentlemen, I am

11 going to turn this over to the lawyers to ask their questions.

12 Again, if you could speak up, you are doing a good job so far,

13 whenever you need to respond to a question, they may have of

14 you. And we will start with Mr. Maldonado first.

15 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor. Good

16 morning. And again thank you very much for being here today

17 to help us decide these issues. I hope you will find them

18 like myself very interesting. I am going to ask you some

19 questions. I want to know about you. I want to know what

20 your ideas or opinions are. There is no -- I know in -- there

21 is no -- this is a judgment free zone so I get to go in there

22 and nobody judges me if I move slowly. This is a judgment

23 free zone, nobody is going to judge you for what you say.

24 Anybody here ever served in a criminal jury?

25 A. Number 3, number 11, number 14, 15. Number 3. Do you

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

16

1 remember what was the burden of proof in that case?

2 A. Whether or not the police officer had reason to pull a


3 certain vehicle over, I think.

4 Q. Right. And do you remember being told or learning through

5 the process that in order to find -- and this was a criminal

6 case, correct?

7 A. Uh-huh.

8 Q. Learning that in order to find the defendant guilty you

9 had to find beyond a reasonable doubt?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Yes. Has anybody else heard that phrase, beyond a

12 reasonable doubt. Okay. Excellent. Do folks understand that

13 in these sorts of cases that standard, in civil cases that

14 standard doesn't apply? Do folks understand that beyond a

15 reasonable doubt is not the standard in this case? Can you

16 tell I see what your understanding was beyond a reasonable

17 doubt? Juror number 3?

18 A. Well, that there was no doubt at all whether there was

19 innocence or guilt or reason to believe the officer had the

20 right to pull his vehicle over.

21 Q. Okay. And juror number 3, do you know what the standard

22 of proof -- juror number 2, what the standard of proof is in a

23 civil case?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Anybody knows? Number 15, what is the standard?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

17


1 A. It is a preponderance of evidence.

2 Q. Preponderance of the evidence. Has anyone hear not heard

3 that phrase? Can you raise your hands? Number 4, number 7,

4 number 12, 8, and 9. Juror number 15, do you have an

5 understanding of preponderance of the evidence? Standard?

6 A. My understanding is there is enough evidence where it

7 appears that the, what is it, the person is guilty or not.

8 Q. Right. And so whether there is enough evidence that a

9 fact was proven, so more likely than not, some people say

10 51 percent. Anyone here does not understand that standard?

11 Once I put it that way? So you will hear from both sides, and

12 then you will say, you know, more likely than not it happened,

13 or based on the evidence we think 51 percent the fact was

14 proven or not proven. Anyone here does not understand that

15 standard? So what we have here today is a case about a civil

16 rights claim. A claim that a constitutional right was

17 violated, and that claim has been brought against a police

18 officer. Anybody here think bringing a lawsuit, a civil

19 rights lawsuit against a police officer where the standard of

20 proof is 51 percent, preponderance of the evidence, that that

21 is too low or too easy? Jury number 5?

22 A. No.

23 Q. June number 9?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Anybody here -- anybody here think that from what you have

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

18


1 read in the media, when you listen -- what you listen to on

2 the radio that police officers are unfair he sued for

3 violations of civil rights, juror number 7?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Job number 1?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Juror number 2?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Anyone think that a person is asking for trouble if the

10 person questions an officer about his duties? Anybody have

11 any interactions with a police officer where they were ticked

12 or issued a citation? Anyone? Almost everyone. Number six,

13 do you believe that you are asking for trouble if you ask a

14 police officer to explain himself?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Anyone here thinks -- have folks heard in the news or

17 overtime in the radio that people filed civil rights cases or

18 cases about constitutional violations, have people heard that?

19 They are familiar -- are you familiar with it? Anybody here

20 think that too many of those cases are being filed? Juror

21 number ten?

22 A. No.


24 A. No.

25 Q. June number 12?


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

19

1 A. No.


3 A. No.

4 Q. Any of you, have you heard that people in civil suits can

5 get what are called damages for emotional or mental pain and

6 anguish? Juror number 18 have you heard that?

7 A. No, I haven't.

8 Q. Number 4, have you heard that people in civil rights cases

9 can get damages for mental pain and anguish?

10 A. No.


12 A. No.

13 Q. Does anybody not know what mental pain and anguish is?

14 Juror number ache?

15 A. I am sorry. Can you repeat the question?

16 Q. Do you know when I use the phrase mental pain and anguish,

17 do you understand generally what that means?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Do you think people should not get money for that?

20 A. I think people should.

21 Q. Anybody shares juror number ache's opinion that they

22 should get money, that individuals who have suffered mental

23 pain and anguish as a result of their rights being violated

24 that they should get compensated for that?


25 JURORS: Yes?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

20

1 MR. MALDONADO: Anybody who does not share this

2 belief? Remember there is a judgment free zone. Anybody who

3 thinks that juries are giving too much money to plaintiffs?

4 Juror number 14.

5 A. No.


7 A. No.


9 A. No.

10 SPEAKER: I do.

11 Q. Number 11?

12 A. Number 11.

13 A. I think sometimes they get excessive.

14 Q. They are getting excessive?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. (11).

17 Q. And anybody share juror number 11's opinion?

18 Q. Oh, number six. Anybody think that these sorts of cases,

19 civil rights cases, are brought simply by individuals who want

20 money? Number 1?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Number 9?

23 A. Repeat question.


24 Q. Sure. Do you think that these civil rights cases are

25 brought by individuals who just want money?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

21

1 A. No.

2 Q. Number six?

3 A. No.

4 Q. For those people that said, yeah, you know, people should

5 get compensated for mental pain and anguish, any of you think

6 that in order for you to award money damages for mental pain

7 and anguish that you need to hear from a doctor saying that

8 the plaintiff suffered mental pain and anguish? Juror number

9 12?

10 A. I think we should be able to make that decision when we

11 listen to the people.

12 Q. Juror number 5 you were going to say something?

13 A. I think a doctor would need to relay his information,

14 whether there was actually suffering.

15 Q. Okay. Juror number 4, do you share that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. So if anybody else here thinks, and I don't want to put

18 words into juror number 5's mouth, anybody here else think

19 that simply the plaintiff getting up there and saying, you

20 know what? This was really traumatic for me, you know, this

21 is not an excessive organization case but let me give you an


22 example this was really traumatic, I was slammed against the

23 car, I was thrown to the ground, I, you know, every time I

24 think about that, I can't help crying. Anybody else here

25 thinks that in order for you to compensate that individual you

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

22

1 would need to hear from the doctor about that trauma, juror

2 number -- juror number 18, 19, and 20. Anybody shares that

3 opinion with 18, 19, and 20? Juror number 2?

4 A. I would have to review a it case by case.

5 Q. Sure. Juror number 3?

6 A. In some instances, maybe.

7 Q. Okay. Juror number 8?

8 A. I think a doctor is unnecessary.

9 Q. I didn't hear that?

10 A. I think a doctor is unnecessary.

11 Q. Thank you. Number 7, do you share that opinion?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Number six?

14 A. I think in some cases you would need to have a little bit

15 more collaboration or than somebody just standing up there and

16 saying this happened.

17 Q. Sure? And do you have an idea of what sort of those cases

18 are, just so we get an understanding of that?

19 A. I am sorry?

20 Q. Do you have an understanding on what sort of cases do you


21 think I need to hear from a doctor?

22 A. I think if it was someone saying that they were in such

23 mental anguish that it was affecting their lives, then I would

24 like to see some collaboration of that.

25 Q. Sure?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

23

1 A. If it was -- I was very upset that this happened and I

2 didn't seek any medical attention because it wasn't that, that

3 difficult, then maybe not.

4 Q. Sure. Thank you, thank you juror number 6. Juror number

5 11?

6 A. In some instance I would think if there was that much

7 trauma a psychiatrist or a doctor, I think that would make it

8 more believable.

9 Q. Okay. That is very good. Anybody share juror number 11's

10 opinion? Number ten, number 5, number six, 20, 19, 17, 18,

11 14.

12 A. Can I add to that too, I would it is think (11) if they

13 would need to -- a psychiatrist or something that they went go

14 actually go help themselves to try to improve, like I say just

15 I want the money.

16 MR. MALDONADO: Sure, sure. Excellent. Let me ask

17 a another, a different question. What about anybody thinks

18 here that in order to compensate someone for violation of


19 their constitutional right, let's say you try to go to the

20 county Clerk's Office and fill out and submit a paper and you

21 are just close the door and say we are not going to let you

22 file any of your paperwork, not today, we are not allowing

23 people over 40 to file their a let's say voter registration,

24 anybody think for that sort of violation that they shouldn't

25 get any damages?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

24

1 JUROR: I don't understand the question.

2 Q. Sure. I am suggesting 11:59 and 59 seconds if they close

3 the door for everybody.

4 Q. Just for people over 40?

5 A. 11:59 and 59 seconds for the day?

6 Q. For the day, you are not going to -- people over 40 you

7 can't come in. And so-so and so this is not mental anguish,

8 mental damages just your right was violated, do you think in

9 those cases, look, there is no blood, no broken bones, no

10 money, anybody here thinks they should should get any money in

11 this case Tutu I would just go the next day and proceed with

12 life.

13 Q. Anybody think that way number 7, number 4, number 3,

14 number 13, 12, and 11. Number 9.

15 JUROR: I am sorry.

16 Q. Seventeen and 18. Let's take it differently, let's say

17 anybody here thinks that if you were -- if you go to can the


18 clerk's office and the clerk uses excessive force, they slap

19 you, no broken bones, no blood, nothing, you just get slapped,

20 and it was by a public official, so, you know, you were

21 filling out a form, they used excessive force, anybody here

22 think they shouldn't get money because there was no blood, no

23 long-term damage to a person's psyche? Number 2?

24 You know, personally, I wouldn't want to go through

25 the halls.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

25

1 Q. Okay?

2 A. And I would just, you know, take it on the chin and get on

3 down the road.

4 Q. Sure. Anybody share number 2's opinion?

5 A. 1313 I would want to defend myself and slap them back.

6 Q. I didn't hear that June 13?

7 A. I would slap them back.

8 Q. Okay. That's one way to handle it. But anybody think

9 that, you know, if you are sitting on the jury you shouldn't

10 get money for that, number 17?

11 A. I would seek reprimand, I wouldn't need money for it.


13 A. Number 18, same thing.

14 MR. MALDONADO: Nineteen and 20.

15 A. 1313 and that is a joke, I wouldn't want money but I would


16 want something done 11 I coo kind of agree with her as well,

17 it doesn't have to be in the form of money 1919 Twenty20 at

18 this agree with number 13. I would just slap them (19 or 20).

19 MR. MALDONADO: Anybody here, anybody here thinks

20 that federal courts like this one, shouldn't be the place

21 where we decide, you know, constitutional violations? Number

22 one?

23 A. Can you repeat that question?

24 Q. Sure. Do you think that questions about -- that your

25 rights were violated, that they shouldn't be hurt here in

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

26

1 federal court?

2 A. 11 no, I think they should be heard here in federal court,

3 sure.

4 Q. Does anybody here not share that opinion? Anybody here

5 think that only certain constitutional -- certain cases about

6 constitutional violations should be heard here? So for

7 example, remember my, we talked about the lady slapping you at

8 the clerk's office, that you think that sort of case shouldn't

9 be heard here? Anybody beliefs that that sort of civil rights

10 claim should not be heard here? Number 3?

11 A. Well, I don't -- I don't know why it shouldn't. Sure.

12 Q. Oh, I was just thinking, I don't know if you were one of

13 the persons who said, you know what, you know, that is not the

14 sort of case where I would --


15 A. That is up to the individual, if someone wanted to pursue

16 the case and end up here, I don't see a problem with it.

17 Q. Must be 2?

18 A. This is the venue for all such cases, should somebody want

19 to file. It is an individual choice.

20 Q. Okay. Number six?

21 A. Yes, I think the system --

22 Q. Okay. Do most people here agree that police officers have

23 a difficult job? Anyone here who does not believe that? All

24 right. Anyone here believe that because officers have a

25 difficult job it should be more difficult to sue police

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

27

1 officers? Juror number 2?

2 A. I don't have a strong opinion on that. I would have to

3 look at it on a case-by-case basis.

4 MR. MALDONADO: Juror number 1?

5 A. Yeah, could I hear the question again?

6 Q. Sure. You agree that police officers have a difficult

7 job? Right?

8 A. Yes, yes, absolutely.

9 Q. And do you think that because they have a difficult job it

10 should be Hora difficult to sue them for civil rights claims?

11 A. No, I don't think it should be more difficult to sue them,

12 no.



14 A. No.

15 Q. Juror number ten?

16 A. No, nothing.

17 Q. Number 11?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Twelve?

20 A. (Shakes head.)

21 Q. 8?

22 A. No.

23 Q. (Indicating).

24 Q. Anyone here ever filed a complaint against a law

25 enforcement officer?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

28

1 Q. Anyone here ever had a close family member file a

2 complaint against a police officer, and by close, family

3 member, I mean spouse, siblings, parents or children?

4 THE COURT: And you have two minutes.

5 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor.

6 Q. Anyone here ever been disrespected or harassed by a law

7 enforcement officer? Juror number six?

8 A. No.


10 A. No.



12 A. No.

13 Q. Anyone here believe that -- strike that. Anyone here

14 believe that the First Amendment claims or protections have

15 gone too far in this country? That people are shrouding

16 themselves in the First Amendment too quickly or too easily,

17 juror number 14?

18 A. To some degree, yes.

19 Q. Anybody shares that, juror number 2?

20 A. To some degree.


22 A. I do.

23 Q. Number six?

24 A. I am not sure. I am not sure.

25 Q. Anyone here believes that because police officers enforce

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

29

1 the law they are more likely to tell the truth, juror number

2 3?

3 A. Yes, I do.


5 A. Not necessarily.


7 A. Not necessarily.

8 Q. Number 9?

9 Q. Did I run out of time?


10 THE COURT: You have 30 seconds.

11 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor. Thank you,

12 jurors.

13 THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Ralls.

14 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor. Good morning

15 again, ladies and gentlemen.

16 JURORS: Good morning.

17 Q. I also want you to be here to help us decide these issues

18 here today.

19 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-* I don't think this is going to be a

20 very long trial. I think we may be finished by tomorrow some

21 time so hopefully we will keep it moving. I need to follow up

22 with some questions that plaintiff's counsel didn't ask you

23 about complaints or lawsuits against police officers. You all

24 said that nobody had -- none of you are none of your family

25 members had actually filed a complaint against a police

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

30

1 officer, correct? There is nobody here that has happened?

2 Has anybody ever been, anybody ever filed a lawsuit against a

3 police officer? Whether, either you all or somebody on your

4 family or a close friend, family member? No? Okay. Has

5 anyone here been a witness in a case against a police officer?

6 Juror number 20?

7 A. Kind of it didn't get to court, it had to do with internal

8 affairs.


9 Q. Okay. Thank you.S Ms. Hewitt? All right. Has anybody --

10 we were talking about bad experiences. Has anybody here ever

11 had a bad experience with a police officer regarding a traffic

12 ticket? Whether you felt that the officer was rude or

13 discourteous or you shouldn't have gotten the ticket?

14 Anything like that? Nobody? Has anyone ever had an encounter

15 with a police officer or seen an encounter of somebody else

16 having an encounter with a police officer where you thought

17 that that police officer abused his authority in any way?

18 That he went beyond the bounds. Okay. Let's see, number 17.

19 And you are Ms. Hildebrand?

20 A. (Witness nods head).

21 Q. And Ms. Noack?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You did also?

24 A. How about Ms. LeBaron did you raise your hand.

25 A. (Witness nods head.)

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

31

1 Q. That is 16, 17 and 18. Has anybody else seen something

2 like that?

3 THE COURT: Ses is.

4 THE COURT: It was 17, 18, 19.

5 Q. Oh. Thank you, Your Honor. Juror number 3. Can you tell

6 us what you saw? 33 it was on telephone, I mean you see it on


7 telephone, you know, not in person but.

8 Q. Gotcha?

9 A. But you have seen it on telephone.

10 Q. All right. Actually that was going to be one of my later

11 questions so let's go ahead and address that now. In has been

12 obviously a lot of media coverage about the police in the last

13 couple of years at least I guess , you know, this va whole

14 different situation to be decided on, the facts and evidence

15 that are presented before you in this courtroom. Is there

16 anything about what you all have seen on telephone, on media

17 coverage regarding police that would make you, the judge

18 didn't want to use the word bias, biased, but let me ask, this

19 would make you lean one way or the other, as far as the police

20 are concerned? That would make you lean against the police

21 for some reason you could not be fair? Mr. Miller?

22 A. No, I can be fair.

23 Q. (3).

24 Q. This case, by the way is going to be decided on the facts

25 and the evidence that is presented before you in this case and

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

32

1 that will be the testimony from the witness stand and any

2 documents that are introduced into evidence. So everybody, is

3 everybody comfortable that you can put aside all of that

4 information that you may have seen on telephone or through any

5 kind of media coverage and decide it just on the facts and


6 evidence in this case? All right. Now, everybody says that,

7 or almost everybody said that you received a traffic citation

8 in the Arizona. And has it been the -- everybody's experience

9 that when an officer comes up to your car that he typically

10 introduces himself and tells you what you have been pulled

11 over for? Mr. Barnes, has that been your experience?

12 A. Yes, it has.

13 Q. Okay. Mr. Miller?

14 A. Uh-huh. Yes.

15 Q. Ms. Paiz?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Okay. Ms. Moody?

18 A. They ask if I know why they are pulling me over first.

19 And when I say no, then they respond with what I tell them.

20 Q. All right. And typically or has it been your experience

21 that when a police officer pulls you over for a citation that

22 is it that he has asked for your driver's license and your

23 insurance, proof of insurance? Jurors modding.

24 Q. Has anybody here ever refused for whatever reason, whether

25 you thought the stop was legal or illegal or just didn't like

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

33

1 the looks of a police officer, anybody refused to provide the

2 officer with your license and insurance when you were asked

3 for it? Has anybody resisted the officer and said, look, I


4 don't think this is a legitimate stop, why are you, you know,

5 why are you pulling me over and refuse to give your license or

6 insurance? Nobody? Anybody know of anybody that has done

7 that, a family member, close friend? This case, I will tell

8 you is going to involve an arrest arising out of a traffic

9 violation, that is a failure to Signal a lane change. Is

10 there anybody here that believes that a person should never be

11 arrested for a simple traffic violation?

12 A. Just for a simple traffic violation?

13 Q. Right?

14 A. Yes.

15 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, may we approach and that

16 was number 12.

17 THE COURT: Come on up.

18 MR. MALDONADO:

19 (Bench conference, as follows:)

20 MR. MALDONADO: Mr. Ralls is getting, is asking

21 questions about the facts of the case and in voir dire,

22 specific facts and my understanding voir dire is that is not

23 allowed.

24 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I have to ask those kinds of

25 questions dash to show bias.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

34

1 THE COURT: You haven't crossed any boundaries at

2 this point, you can continue.


3 (End of bench conference.).

4 MR. RALLS: All right, Mr. Taylor, I think you were

5 following up on my question about the traffic citation.

6 A. For a simple violation, why would somebody be arrested?

7 Q. Well, I can't really answer that?

8 A. I mean, the question was, should anybody be arrested for a

9 traffic violation, I say no, they should be ticketed and sent

10 on their way.

11 Q. Under no circumstances in your opinion should they ever be

12 arrested for a traffic violation?

13 A. I don't see if anybody is in danger or, I mean it depends

14 -- you know, I don't see how somebody could be arrested to are

15 a traffic violation. I mean just ticket them and let them go.

16 Q. 1414 you said a simple violation?

17 MR. RALLS: Right, well I am talking about, so I

18 think that jury is going Judge is going to instructs you at

19 the end of this case that a police officer can arrest somebody

20 for any kind of violation of the law committed in the

21 officer's presence. And that would include traffic

22 violations, except for, I believe that would include traffic

23 violations except for speeding and there is one other I can't

24 think of, but so that -- I think that is what the law is going

25 to be instructed to you. So is there anybody here who can't

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

35


1 follow that law if you are instructed by the Court that -- and

2 officer, an officer can make an arrest for a traffic

3 violation. Is there anybody here who can't -- that would just

4 disagree with the Court and couldn't follow his instruction on

5 that 11 I am not familiar with that law at all, I honestly

6 didn't think they had a rights to a arrest you for a simple

7 infraction of traffic law. So --

8 Q. Number 7?

9 A. Indicating.

10 Q. Let, let in let me ask you this, Mr. Barnes, would that

11 prevent, I mean, if the Judge were to instruct you that that

12 is the law, would you be able to follow that instruction of

13 the Judge?

14 A. 11 absolutely, absolutely.

15 Q. No question about that?

16 A. No question about that.

17 Q. How about Mr. Woehr, am I pronouncing your name correctly?

18 A. Ware. Ware it is German.

19 Q. Would you be able to follow that instruction?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Is there anybody here in the panel that would hot be

22 able to a follow that instruction if, in fact, the judge

23 instructs you to that effect?

24 A. 1212 can you clarify something, the you say if a person

25 got pulled over for a violation, an officer has a right to

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

36


1 arrest that person? Is that correct?

2 Q. I believe that is what the judge is going to instruct you?

3 A. Okay. I believe that is wrong, I believe that should be

4 some kind of law that should be changed but we are not here to

5 dispute that but I don't see where that could be -- that just

6 seems wrong.

7 Q. Okay. Well, if you were selected on this jury, and the

8 jury instructed you that that is the law and that you were to

9 follow that law, would would you be able to follow the Court's

10 instruction?

11 A. I would have a hard time following that because my blood

12 pressure is pumping right now thinking somebody could arrest

13 you for taking a wrong corner or turning down the a wrong way

14 street I would have a zero problem with that, yes, sir. (12]

15 Q. And do you think that would prevent you from being fair

16 and impartial in this case?

17 A. I mean if that was the case he got arrested because he

18 turned down, he didn't turn on his traffic light or turned his

19 signal on or something, yeah, I would, I mean, yeah, I guess I

20 would have a problem with that.

21 Q. Okay. Well, thank you, Mr. Taylor for your candor in that

22 regard. Is there anybody else that feels the way that

23 Mr. Taylor does? That feels like you could not be fair and

24 impartial and follow the law as the judge instructs you if, in

25 fact, he instructs you that way? Are you sure? That is an


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

37

1 important question, anybody -- this is voir dire it means to

2 tell the truth you are not being judged here. Okay 77 I would

3 have a problem with it.

4 Q. All right. Mr. -- I am sorry. Juror must be 7. And

5 would that prevent you, Mr. Ortegon from being a fair and

6 impartial juror in this case?

7 A. They, it would just bother -- it is just ridiculous, that

8 is ridiculous.

9 Q. All right so you would not be able to follow the Court's

10 instructions?

11 A. 77 no. Not like that.

12 Q. All right. Well now we are gaining some ground here, so

13 that is important to me, in this case, is there anybody else

14 that would not be able to fool the Court's instructions in

15 that regard? And this is -- this is very important to my

16 client is everybody sure about that? Okay. So I take it that

17 no one here knows anybody that has been that ran arrested for

18 a traffic citation or traffic violation; is that correct? Let

19 me change gears here and ask you some questions. The evidence

20 in this case, first of all, all of you are going to be the

21 judges of the facts in this case, the judge is going to be the

22 judge of the law, but you are going to have to judge the facts

23 in this case. And in doing so you are going to have to

24 determine the credibility of witnesses in this case. I will


25 tell you that the plaintiff in this case, the evidence is

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

38

1 going to show that the plaintiff in this case is -- or at

2 least at the time of this incident was a major in the United

3 States Air Force, does just the fact that he was a major in

4 the United States Air Force, would that affect your ability to

5 judge his credibility in this case? Would that make anybody

6 believe that he was more of a credible witness than you might

7 otherwise think he would be, just because he is an officer in

8 the Air Force? Yes, ma'am?

9 A. Sixty-six I think it might.

10 Q. Ms. Sherner? Your husband is a retired U.S. army?

11 A. (Witness nods head).

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And what was his job in the army 66 he was -- he is a

14 nurse anesthetist.

15 Q. So all right. Do you believe that the fact that the

16 plaintiff in this case is a major or was at least a major in

17 the Air Force, do you think that would render you unable to be

18 fair and impartial in this case?

19 A. I think I would be able to be fair but I can't -- it might

20 influence me a little bit.

21 Q. It would not be a level playing ground between possibly

22 between the defendant and the plaintiff in this case in your

23 mind?


24 A. Probably not.

25 Q. All right. Is there anybody else that feels that way now

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

39

1 that Ms. Sherner has shared her feelings about it? Does that

2 prompt anyone else to share any feelings? Okay. I will also

3 tell you that the evidence is going to show that the plaintiff

4 in this case, Mr. Rynearson, was a pilot in the Air Force and

5 flew, deployed a number, on a number of occasions to Iraq and

6 Afghanistan and flew a gunship in close air support for

7 frowned troops over there. Would the fact that, knowing that,

8 would that influence anybody's opinion with regard to giving

9 Mr. Rynearson's testimony greater credibility than you

10 otherwise would give it?

11 JUROR: Raising hand.

12 Q. Jury 18 raising hand.

13 Q. Anybody else? Yes, sir.

14 A. I would any I would give a little more credibility knowing

15 what he has been charged with, having the responsibilities and

16 being a major and (this is 11) and pilot and stuff like that.

17 Q. All right.

18 A. It would weigh a little more --

19 Q. Would it -- would it affect your ability to be a fair and

20 impartial juror in this case?

21 A. Probably not.


22 Q. You could -- do you think you could set that aside and

23 just decides on the facts that you hear?

24 A. I would think so) all 11).

25 Q. Is there anybody else that it might affect? Some or a

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

40

1 little or a lot? Yes, sir. Mr. Ware?

2 A. My wife has (2] has received Woehr support from air assets

3 while on the ground in Iraq, so I have tremendous respect for

4 that, but I would be able to set that aside and just look at

5 the facts of this case.

6 Q. Okay.Ly also tell you that Mr. Rynearson has received a

7 number of commendations for his service as a pilot in the Air

8 Force, including the distinguished flying cross and some other

9 medals. How -- would that affect anybody's ability to --

10 knowing that, would that make you five his testimony greater

11 credibility than you might otherwise give his testimony?

12 Okay. Nobody? All right. Is there anybody here that is

13 familiar with the intersection of Losoya and Commerce streets

14 here in San Antonio?

15 A. Anyone else.

16 A. Phen Fen I probably passed it a 100 times but --

17 Q. All right?

18 THE COURT: You have two minutes.

19 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor,.

20 Q. We talked a little bit about the burden of proof in this


21 case. The burden of proof in this case is going to be on the

22 plaintiff to prove each and every allegation against the

23 defendant in this case by a pend. A and that means at least

24 51 percent or, more likely than not. That includes not only

25 the liability facts, that is, whether he was, in this case

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

41

1 unlawfully arrested, but also the damages facts, so the

2 plaintiff is required to prove by a preponderance of the

3 evidence, starting at zero, every dollar of damages that he is

4 claiming in this case. Is there anybody here that believes

5 that you could not make the plaintiff -- that you could not

6 put the plaintiff to that burden of proof as far as damages

7 are concerned in this case? I will also tell you that there

8 are going to be times that counsel make objections in this

9 case and when we make objections it is because we believe that

10 we have a solid reason for not -- for that evidence not coming

11 in for some reason, not because it is to hide any evidence,

12 but is there anybody here that would hold, hold it against us,

13 hold it against me if I made an objection to evidence on

14 behalf of my client?

15 THE COURT: And your time has expired.

16 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor.

17 THE COURT: If the lawyers would come up, please.

18 (Bench conference, as follows:)


19 THE COURT: Do you want me to bring up anybody else

20 here for further questions, any motions to strike for cause?

21 THE COURT: Should we just go down the road, row

22 anything on number one? Nothing. Anybody on number 2,

23 nothing. Anybody on number 3? Nothing. Anything on number

24 4? Nothing. Anybody on number 5?

25 MR. GONZALEZ: Judge on number 5, I think that

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

42

1 person said they need a doctor to see about damages which is

2 not the standard of the law.

3 THE COURT: Let me bring her up.

4 THE COURT: Ms. Moody. Could you come up. Hi, how

5 are you, come up a little closer, if you can. Ms. Moody, as

6 part of this case, the testimony that the jurors were going to

7 hear is going to be something to the effect that, and the

8 jurors are plea to believe or disbelieve as they see fit but

9 some of the evidence may be from Mr. Rynearson that he

10 suffered mental anguish as a result of the alleged actions

11 that took place in the case.

12 JUROR: Okay.

13 THE COURT: I don't believe the jurors are going to

14 hear any medical testimony from, pardon me any testimony from

15 a medical doctor or psychiatrist or psychologist.

16 JUROR: Okay.

17 THE COURT: The law provides that a plaintiff can


18 testify as to their own mental anguish that they allegedly

19 suffered.

20 JUROR: Okay.

21 THE COURT: If that's all that takes place and

22 Mr. Rynearson is the sole person who provides testimony about

23 mental anguish.

24 A. Yes, sir.

25 THE COURT: Would you be willing to consider that or

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

43

1 would you reject it because you think that there has to be a

2 medical doctor.

3 JUROR: No if the law states he can testify to his

4 own anguish then I will follow the law.

5 THE COURT: Any questions?

6 MR. GONZALEZ: No.


8 THE COURT: Thank you.

9 MR. GONZALEZ: The same thing for number 4. Number

10 4. That same irk, 4, 5 and 6 have those issues.

11 THE COURT: Do you want me to bring 4 up or not is.

12 MR. GONZALEZ: Yes, please.

13 THE COURT: Ms. Paiz.

14 THE COURT: Hi, how are you, ma'am? Good.

15 Ms. Paiz, the law in these types of cases is that a plaintiff


16 can testify as to their alleged mental anguish that they

17 allegedly suffered. I believe what is going to take place in

18 this case is that Mr. Rynearson is going to take the stand, he

19 is going to testify as to what allegedly happened to him, he

20 is going to testify as to what allegedly he suffered mentally

21 as a result of the actions. The defendant will have a chance

22 to cross-examine Mr. Rynearson. Mr. Question to you is,

23 assume that's what happens and assume that Mr. Rynearson

24 doesn't call any medical doctor to the stand. Would you be

25 willing to consider Mr. Rynearson's allegations of mental

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

44

1 anguish or would you require some kind of medical doctor to

2 testify?

3 A. No --

4 THE COURT: You could hear his testimony and.

5 A. Yes.

6 THE COURT: And you could consider that.

7 A. Yes. Give it a chance and see.

8 THE COURT: You would not require a doctor?

9 A. (Shakes head.)

10 THE COURT: Do you have any questions.

11 MR. GONZALEZ: I have one Judge, in these type of

12 civil rights cases if you heard or do you have an opinion as

13 to whether or not mental anguish damages can be given?

14 JUROR: Can be given.


15 MR. GONZALEZ: For a civil rights case?

16 JUROR: This is the first time in a civil rights

17 case so --

18 MR. GONZALEZ: If the judge tells you that mental

19 anguish damages can be given, if you find that there was a

20 violation, can you follow his instructions?

21 JUROR: Oh, yes.

22 MR. GONZALEZ: No questions, Judge.

23 THE COURT: Anything?

24 MR. RALLS: No.

25 THE COURT: Thank you, ma'am.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

45

1 THE COURT: Ms. Sherner. Hi, ma'am, how are you.

2 A. Fine, thank you.

3 Q. Ms. Sherner, you were asked some questions about whether

4 or not the fact that Mr. Rynearson is a major in the Air Force

5 would play a role in your deliberations?

6 A. Uh-huh.

7 Q. Can you hear all the evidence in this case that he

8 presents and the defense presents and just make a decision

9 based upon that and disregard the fact that he is a major or

10 does that pose a problem for you in this case?

11 A. I guess it is hard to say until you are actually in the

12 position to hear everything, but I just -- I think -- it


13 speaks to his character. I guess I would have -- and police

14 officers are in the military so I feel like I am sort of in

15 the middle there. I would do my best to not let it enter. I

16 can't promise that it wouldn't, though.

17 THE COURT: All right. And you are right, until you

18 are actually in there who knows what will happen, you are

19 right.

20 A. I don't know. I would just have to wait and see.

21 THE COURT: Any questions.

22 MR. GONZALEZ: And just on the mental anguish

23 aspect, Judge.

24 THE COURT: Go ahead.

25 MR. GONZALEZ: And, ma'am, if the evidence was

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

46

1 presented and you believed there was a violation, but no

2 doctor, testified, would you still be able to give mental

3 anguish damages if a court instructed you that those are still

4 open, even without a doctor?

5 A. If he instructed me, yes.

6 THE COURT: Mr. Halls.

7 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Ms. Werner, how long, you

8 said that your husband is retired from the army and how long

9 was he in?

10 A. Thirty-three years.

11 MR. RALLS: And he retired as an officer.


12 A. Colonel.

13 MR. RALLS: Colonel, so are, given that, are you

14 sure that you can set that aside and not let that influence

15 your deliberations in this case as to credibility, as far as

16 the credibility of the major Rynearson?

17 JUROR: If you asked me for yes or no I will have to

18 say that I don't think I could.

19 MR. RALLS: That you could not? To.

20 JUROR: I would try any very best, but if I had to

21 say yes or no, I probably would be more biased toward him than

22 toward the other.

23 MR. RALLS: That's fine. That's what we need to

24 know.

25 THE COURT: Thank you, ma'am.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

47

1 MR. GONZALEZ: Judge I have a question, obviously

2 people will come here, they don't come here as clean slates,

3 they come in with their backgrounds, like car salesmen, it is

4 harder to belief than a policeman, that's not the standard, I

5 think framing it that way is confusion confusing to the jury.

6 THE COURT: Right. She cuts both ways, I mean, and

7 so if there is an agreement to strike her, I will strike her,

8 but otherwise, she is a potential liability to both sides. So

9 do you want me to agree, do you want an agreement to strike


10 her or not?

11 MR. RALLS: Wells --

12 THE COURT: So there is a motion to strike from the

13 defendant, that is denied. She says she can try. She

14 equivocates but nevertheless, you know, if push came to yes or

15 no, she will say I am somewhat buys add but everybody comes in

16 with buy asses her previous other testimony was she would try

17 to be fair and set it aside so the motion to strike for cause

18 is denied.

19 THE COURT: The next one is Mr. Ortegon. I mean,

20 that one seemed clear.

21 MR. GONZALEZ: I am sorry, Judge.

22 THE COURT: Mr. Ortegon.

23 MR. GONZALEZ: It is clear he would be stricken, I

24 didn't catch that, Judge.

25 THE COURT: He clearly said he was unable to follow

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

48

1 the law.

2 MR. GONZALEZ: Judge, I would like to talk about

3 that, if the issue was who would have a problem if a police

4 officer arrested arrests you for a minor traffic violation,

5 everybody and their mother is going to say they do. The issue

6 is.

7 THE COURT: I will bring in I him up. Mr. Ortegon.

8 Could you come up? Spa.


9 MR. GONZALEZ: It is a different situation between

10 whether --

11 THE COURT: Hi, how are you.

12 A. Fine, how are you.

13 THE COURT: Good. Mr. Ortegon, at the end of the

14 case, I give a written instructions to the jury about what the

15 law is, and the jury is the judge of the facts, so they decide

16 whether this happened or whether that happened. But the judge

17 gives the instructions on what the law is. And the oath that

18 the jurors take is that they will abide I by the law, whether

19 they agree with it or not. So with that said, if I gave an

20 instruction that said that police officers can arrest somebody

21 for a traffic violation, can you follow that law?

22 JUROR: If -- honestly, I would have a problem with

23 it, I am not going to lie to you. That just sounds so wrong,

24 that because somebody doesn't put on a turn signal.

25 THE COURT: There are a lot of things about this job

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

49

1 I have to do whether I agree with it or not too and the same

2 thing answer with the jurors. You have to -- we wouldn't have

3 a rule of law if each juror got to decide what they think the

4 law should be.

5 A. I understand.

6 THE COURT: So if that is going to be the law my


7 sole question is can cow follow it or this is not the right

8 case for you?

9 JUROR: This is not the right case for me.

10 THE COURT: Thank you, sir.

11 A. I apologize.

12 THE COURT: No, not at all,.

13 MR. RALLS: Thank you.

14 THE COURT: Thanks.

15 THE COURT: Number 7 is stricken for cause.

16 THE COURT: Why do they have the numbers this way,

17 it is weird.

18 COURTROOM DEPUTY: At the at the bottom. That is

19 what they are on the sheets. Adjust disregard that.

20 MR. GONZALEZ: Your Honor, on this issue, there is a

21 distinction, so our position is clear between an officer has

22 the discretion to arrest somebody, as opposes as opposed to an

23 officer must I think that is a distinction that may be

24 confusing so many of these folks.

25 THE COURT: Well, I mean, but.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

50

1 MR. GONZALEZ: And, Your Honor, I think it is within

2 the juror's privy to say, in that circumstance should the

3 officer, because.

4 THE COURT: But if he has the discretion and he

5 exercises that discretion that doesn't vitiate his qualified


6 immunity for the action.

7 MR. GONZALEZ: Unless the reason he did it, Judge is

8 for impermissible reason.

9 THE COURT: The bottom line is, though -- well, I am

10 not going to debate this right now. Let's continue on.

11 MR. GONZALEZ: Yes, sir.

12 THE COURT: Number 8, anybody want to call her up?

13 MR. GONZALEZ: No.

14 THE COURT: Mr. Ralls.


16 THE COURT: Number 9.

17 BY MR. MALDONADO:


19 MR. GONZALEZ: June number 9 they have a position if

20 there is a violation that somebody should just get over it as

21 opposed to going forward.

22 THE COURT: Do you want me to call her up?

23 MR. GONZALEZ: Yes.

24 THE COURT: Ms. Hammoudeh.

25 THE COURT: Hi, how are you, ma'am.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

51

1 JUROR: Hi.

2 THE COURT: Ms. Hammoudeh, so you sort of got a

3 little idea of what this case is going to be about, the


4 plaintiff is alleging that his civil rights were violated, and

5 so the jury gets to decide those facts, they get to decide

6 whether his rights were violated and if they decide his rights

7 were violated, they get to decide how much if anything he

8 should recover. And so in this case, what I believe is going

9 to happen is that Mr. Rynearson is going to testify as to the

10 mental anguish that he allegedly suffered, and so the jury has

11 to evaluate that, consider that, and then decide how much, if

12 anything, they decide to award him if they previously found

13 that his rights were violated are you with me so far?

14 A. Right.

15 Q. If all that takes place and the only damages that are

16 alleged by Mr. Rynearson are for mental anguish, if you were

17 on the jury and if you and the other jurors agreed that there

18 was a violation of civil rights, could you award Mr. Rynearson

19 son mental anguish damages?

20 A. Yes.

21 MR. GONZALEZ: No questions, Judge.

22 MR. RALLS: Nothing, Your Honor.

23 THE COURT: Thank you, ma'am. Anybody want to call

24 unnumber ten, Mr. Cunningham.

25 MR. GONZALEZ: No, Judge.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

52

1 MR. RALLS: I do, Your Honor. I mean -- -- since

2 his wife is in the Air Force and has deployed --


3 THE COURT: Mr. Cunningham.

4 THE COURT: Hi, how are you, sir. Mr. Cunningham,

5 in this case, you have heard that Mr. Rynearson is a major in

6 the Air Force, I think your spouse is retired oh you are

7 retired, okay, you are retired Air Force, and so your spouse

8 is still in now.

9 A. She is retired.

10 Q. Both retired, okay. Given Mr. Rynearson's status as an

11 Air Force officer, can you, you know, set that aside and

12 listen just to the facts of this case?

13 A. Without a question.

14 THE COURT: So his status doesn't bother you.

15 A. Not at all.

16 THE COURT: Okay. You cub pair to both sides.

17 A. Yes, sir.


19 MR. RALLS: No, Your Honor, no questions.


21 Number 11 and 12, Mr. Miller and Mr. Taylor, what do

22 you guys want to do?

23 MR. GONZALEZ: I would like 11 to be stricken,

24 Judge. He says that jurors -- bring your voice down, the act

25 cows sticks,.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

53


1 MR. GONZALEZ: Bring him up or make a marksman.

2 THE COURT: You would hike to seen him strike.

3 THE COURT: Yes.

4 THE COURT: He runs both ways, Mr. Ralls what do you

5 want to do with him?

6 MR. RALLS: I think he is -- I have no objection --

7 THE COURT: To striking?

8 MR. RALLS: No, I do have an objection to striking.

9 THE COURT: Well, we will bring him up. Mr. Miller.

10 (You will need to get Audiosync for the bench conference.

11 THE COURT: How are you, sir? Good, Mr. Miller. A

12 couple of questions came up. One is, the status of

13 Mr. Rynearson and him being a major in the Air Force.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Can you judge this case solely -- I mean major, other than

16 introduction, that has nothing to do with this case?

17 A. Right.

18 Q. So could you set that aside and just listen to the facts

19 of this case and evaluate those facts a and judge both sides

20 fairly?

21 A. I think so.

22 Q. Okay. And then finances. And monetary, I think what the

23 evidence is going to be in this case, surprised as jurors I

24 hear it at the same time as I do so I don't know for sure but

25 I think what the evidence is going to be in this case is that

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

54


1 Mr. Rynearson will take the stand, he is going to testify as

2 to the allegations that he thought happened to him that day,

3 the the Evans lawyers will have an opportunity to

4 cross-examine, Mr. Richter will be able to tell his side of

5 the story, the jury, they are the judges of the facts, they

6 will decide who to believe and what happened and whether

7 someone, whether Mr. Rynearson's rights were violated, air

8 they find that his rights were violated, then they will move

9 to the question of damages. I believe the only evidence of

10 damages is going to be Mr. Rynearson testifying as to the

11 mental anguish that he suffered as a result of the alleged

12 actions. If that is the only testimony, as a matter of law,

13 plaintiffs can testify as to their mental anguish, they don't

14 need a medical doctor to testify?

15 A. Okay.

16 Q. If that is the state of the law and that's what I instruct

17 the jury, and if you were on the jury, and if you pound

18 liability, could you award Mr. Rynearson damages?

19 A. Yes, reasonable. I mean, I guess I have my own.

20 THE COURT: Each, everybody is going to have their

21 own idea about what is reasonable so the jury will have to

22 figure that out.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. But actually that is part of my definitions in the

25 instruction is that, you know, I give instructions on how the


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

55

1 jury should calculate the damages and they can't be

2 speculative and guesswork and they can't be arbitrary, so each

3 juror will have to decide among themselves and then

4 collectively with a group agree to a number.

5 A. Okay.

6 Q. Can you do all of that?

7 A. I think I can.


9 MR. GONZALEZ: No Judge.




13 JUROR: Okay.

14 THE COURT: Any motions on Mr. Miller?



17 THE COURT: Okay. Next one, Mr. Taylor.


19 THE COURT: This is Mr. Taylor, number 12.

20 MR. RALLS: I move to strike.

21 THE COURT: He was another one unable to follow the

22 law on and his blood pressure was up already, do you remember

23 him.

24 THE COURT: You don't agree to that?


25 MR. GONZALEZ: I just want to preserve the issue.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

56

1 When counsel is up there, he generalizes do you agree do you

2 agree with, I don't agree with that necessarily.

3 THE COURT: I will bring him up. Mr. Taylor.

4 THE COURT: Hi, sir, how are you, good, Mr. Taylor,

5 so you have a little idea about what this case is going to be

6 about, Mr. Rynearson is claiming his civil rights were

7 violated, Mr. Richter has a different story, the jury is going

8 the hear both sides of that. Now, at the end of the case, I

9 am going to five written instructions on the law that the jury

10 is to apply, so the jury decides the facts, they decide what

11 happened at that stop, who did what, and whether or not

12 Mr. Rynearson's rights were violated, the jury decides all

13 that. But they side it based upon what the judge's law is,

14 and if I give an instruction that a police officer can arrest

15 somebody for certain traffic violations, can you an pied by

16 the instruction or if you didn't like that law, what would you

17 a hard time following that instruction?

18 A. I would have a hard time following the law, I think the

19 law is wrong and needs to be changed and I would make a stand

20 on it to be honest with you. It is wrong.

21 THE COURT: , you know, there are a lot of things

22 about my job that I don't like either.

23 A. Sure.


24 THE COURT: But I mean that's what the rule of law

25 is about, so -- but so what you are telling me this is not the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

57

1 right case for you,.

2 A. Definitely not. And I have no problem with officers, and

3 I have ultimate utmost respect for them but that is wrong.

4 THE COURT: Counsel any questions.

5 MR. GONZALEZ: No, Your Honor.




9 THE COURT: Any motions with regard to Mr. Taylor.

10 MR. RALLS: I move to strike.

11 MR. GONZALEZ: It seems like a gray area.

12 (Laughter.)

13 MR. GONZALEZ: No objection.

14 THE COURT: Mr. Taylor is stricken. Anybody want to

15 call up number 13, Anderson?

16 MR. RALLS: No, Ms. Anderson. No.

17 THE COURT: Fourteen, Johnson.


19 MR. GONZALEZ: Yes, she thinks the doctor would be

20 necessary. I will bring him up. Mr. Johnson.

21 JUROR: Yes, sir.


22 THE COURT: Hi, how are you, sir, Mr. Johnson, you

23 have heard a little bit about what about what this case is

24 about, Mr. Rynearson is claiming his civil rights were

25 violated, Mr. Richter said something different happened there.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

58

1 The jury is going to hear all that. And they will decide who

2 to believe, whether Mr. Rynearson's theory is -- meets that 50

3 plus one threshold or not. You answered a couple of questions

4 and I want to make sure I got your answers there. If the jury

5 finds that is the first part, if the jury finds that the

6 rights were violated, they can consider how much if anything

7 to award Mr. Rynearson in damages, now I think the only

8 evidence in this case is going to be is Mr., is Mr. Rynearson

9 is going to take the stand and say what he thinks happened to

10 him, the defendant will cross-examine, the jury makes up their

11 mind about who to believe, Mr. Rynearson, I think is also

12 going to testify as to how much mental anguish he allegedly

13 suffered and the defendant will cross-examine him on that

14 issue too, but ultimately if the jury finds that his rights

15 were violated, they will get to decide whether or not to award

16 any mental anguish damages. I don't think any medical doctor

17 is going to testify and I will instruct the jury that a

18 medical doctor is not necessary. The plaintiff can testify

19 Taos his own mental anguish. If that is what takes place, and

20 if you find along with the rest of the jury that his rights


21 were violated, could you award damages?

22 JUROR: How do you Judge the amount? I mean there

23 has to be some sense of measure.

24 THE COURT: Right an that what makes awarding mental

25 anguish damages a little difficult. And so I give the jury a

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

59

1 bit of fines and advice on that, but ultimately it is their

2 decision on what to do, so you have your own idea probably

3 about damages and any, as any others would and collectively

4 the jury is going to reach a decision. But could you award

5 mental anguish?

6 JUROR: Possibly I mean --

7 THE COURT: And also, another question you raised

8 was about First Amendment rights and you thought maybe that

9 was being argued a little more common than you would like. In

10 this kind of a case, could you hear all the evidence in this

11 case and then decide this case based only on what you hear in

12 this lawsuit?

13 JUROR: Well, yes, yes, I mean --

14 THE COURT: And then if there was enough evidence to

15 staff you and the jurors that there was liability, could you

16 find the defendant liable?

17 JUROR: That goes without saying, yes.



19 MR. GONZALEZ: Basically, you really want to hear

20 from a doctor before you would give mental anguish? Is that a

21 fair statement?

22 JUROR: I am used to dealing, you go through life,

23 everything is measured, how much anguish do you suffer? How

24 do you measure.

25 MR. GONZALEZ: So unless you hear from a doctor it

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

60

1 would be different.

2 JUROR: Sure.

3 MR. GONZALEZ: No more questions, Judge.


5 MR. RALLS: I don't have any questions, Your Honor.

6 THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Johnson.

7 MR. GONZALEZ: Zero move to strike, Judge.

8 MR. RALLS: No. I think he can be fair and

9 impartial and listen to the evidence and rule on mental

10 anguish.

11 THE COURT: In response to my questions, he said he

12 could consider it, he raises a legitimate questions about how

13 you measure. I mean, and so that is legitimate, he is not

14 requiring a doctor, though. He would prefer a doctor, but he

15 is not requiring it. And so the motion to strike is denied.

16 Okay. Know moving on to 15, Isaac, any objections

17 pardon me not objections, anybody want to call him up.



19 THE COURT: Sixteen, west.



22 THE COURT: Number 17?

23 THE COURT: Are we going to get there? Let's see.

24 MR. GONZALEZ: How many strikes are we going to be

25 allowed? Two or three?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

61

1 THE COURT: I was going to give four each so that is

2 takes us to 17.

3 COURTROOM DEPUTY: Seventeen.

4 THE COURT: There is going to be a juror of six, I

5 was going to give.

6 COURTROOM DEPUTY: Six?

7 THE COURT: The jury is six. I was going to give

8 four strikes each, so that is eight. We have already stricken

9 two. So that is taking us up to 16; is that right?

10 COURTROOM DEPUTY: Yes.

11 THE COURT: One, two, three, four, five, six,

12 strike, strike, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,

13 eight, yes so we need to -- we are finished.

14 MR. GONZALEZ: We don't need 17?

15 THE COURT: We do not need 17, now how many days do


16 you think we are going to be, can we be finished by tomorrow.

17 MR. RALLS: I think so.

18 THE COURT: Do we need an alternate juror or not?

19 MR. MALDONADO: Only if the jurors have personal

20 issues about family, hospital, travel, we didn't ask about

21 travel.

22 THE COURT: And I already excused somebody on travel

23 issues.

24 MR. MALDONADO: Day-care stuff.

25 THE COURT: Let's go to Ms. Hillenbrand and see

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

62

1 whether we need one alternate just to be on the safe side, I

2 hate to lose anybody. Ms. Hillenbrand, could you come up,

3 please? Hi, how are you, ma'am.

4 MR. RALLS: Hi.

5 THE COURT: Good. There was a question about

6 whether police were out of bounds change speaker ID, if police

7 were out of bounds, I don't remember the exact question

8 anymore. Have you had a personal experience where anybody in

9 your close family circle, a family, I mean a personal

10 experience with a police officer who acted inappropriately?

11 A. Yes. My husband and I we were in a wedding and there was

12 a confrontation going on with a friend of his concerning

13 another person, he was trying to deescalate the situation, and

14 the officer rather than coming to find out what was going on,


15 saw it as a squabble and sent them both out, kicked them out,

16 I felt it was not right, but he didn't have the opportunity to

17 explain himself, and it was a situation, it left a sour taste

18 in our night for the rest of night because --

19 THE COURT: Right.

20 A. Maybe he was trying to help, because he was trying to

21 help, not give a problem.

22 THE COURT: Given the past experience with your

23 husband that he encouraged, could you listen just to this

24 case, the facts of this case, Judge this case all by itself

25 and set that past experience aside or has that left such a bad

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

63

1 taste in your mouth that this is not a academy case for you?

2 JUROR: I feel like I probably could.

3 THE COURT: You can still be fair?

4 JUROR: Yes, I think so. I mean, I understand it

5 from another perspective too. He didn't know what was going

6 on, maybe he didn't care to at the moment.

7 THE COURT: Any questions.



10 MR. RALLS: Yes, Your Honor. Yes, ma'am. This case

11 is going to, I mean, it sounds like you have got a little

12 frustrated with that police officer.


13 A. Uh-huh.

14 Q. Maybe acted too quickly?

15 A. Uh-huh.

16 Q. In this case, does it, it involves actions that took place

17 pretty quickly that you may find somewhere in the time time

18 frame to what you encountered, do you think given that, that

19 that seems like maybe you felt the officer was inpatient

20 impatient or somebody, if we have evidence in this case that

21 it happened very quickly, do you think that that would creep

22 back in and make you unable to be fair and impartial in this

23 case?

24 JUROR: I don't think so. I think just it is going

25 to come down to the case and scenario, the situation, in that

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

64

1 situation, it wasn't right but it doesn't mean it is always

2 that way.

3 MR. RALLS: Okay.

4 THE COURT: Thank you, ma'am. Any motion on number

5 17.



8 THE COURT: Yes. So we are going through number 17.

9 We will seat seat a jury of seven. Six in the, six and an

10 alternative, each get four strikes and we have stricken number

11 7 and stricken number 12 for cause. Do you want to keep them


12 in the room while you do your strikes or do you want me to

13 give them a break.

14 MR. MALDONADO: Can you give them a break, Judge.


16 THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, I am going to give

17 the lawyers an opportunity here too exercise their strikes and

18 then us to prepare the jury list. That is going to take about

19 ten minutes. So let me go ahead and give you all a break. If

20 you step outside, men's and ladies rooms are right down over

21 here. If you will stay on this floor, it won't take but ten

22 minutes here to finish this up and I will bring you all back

23 in. There is no one else selecting jurors.

24 COURTROOM DEPUTY: No.

25 THE COURT: And that way I can quickly dismiss those

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

65

1 of you who I can dismiss and then seats the others who will

2 serve as jurors. Don't drink the water. And otherwise, you

3 know, be careful about -- another problem with this building

4 here being a theatre is that there is no way I can keep you

5 guys from inadvertently encountering witnesses. So if you

6 will please keep among yourselves. Don't speak to anybody

7 else who is not wearing a juror button and that way, a

8 inadvertently there may be witnesses in this case outside, so

9 if you engage in an innocent discussion with somebody, you


10 could be inadvertently speaking with a witness in this case,

11 and that could cause appearance problems. So please keep to

12 yourselves and continue associate with anybody else out there.

13 I will bring you back or let's just say ten minutes after the

14 hour, please come back and sit down in your exact location

15 here and then I will be able to dismiss those who I can

16 dismiss. You all are excused for a break. All rise.

17 (Brief recess.)

18 MR. MALDONADO: Test.

19 MR. RALLS: Test.

20 MR. MALDONADO: Test

21 Q. In will will will will will in in will?

22 THE COURT: Thank you. Please be seated.

23 Ms. Greenup, if you will read the names of the impaneled

24 jurors, please.

25 COURTROOM DEPUTY: As I call your name, please come

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

66

1 forward. Ronald Barnes. Meghan moody.

2 Priscilla Boatwright.

3 Harold Cunningham.

4 Kazan is a Anderson.

5 Julian Isaac.

6 Larry west.

7 THE COURT: Any objections from the plaintiff?

8 MR. MALDONADO: None, Your Honor.


9 THE COURT: Any objections from the defendant?

10 MR. RALLS: None, Your Honor.

11 THE COURT: If you will swear them in, please.

12 COURTROOM DEPUTY: If you will raise your right

13 hand, please.

14 (oath administered to the jury)

15 COURTROOM DEPUTY: Thank you.

16 THE COURT: Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, to

17 those of you who were not selected, I want to give you my

18 thanks for your presence here today. You know, often times

19 unfortunately it happens more at the Bexar County courthouse

20 than it does here that people do not show up for jury service,

21 and one of the unpleasant tasks that I have but that I do, is

22 fine individuals who do not show up for jury service. You

23 know, after all the sacrifices that other men and women do for

24 our country the least we can do is jury service and so thank

25 you for responding to jury service. I appreciate you

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

67

1 answering the call. We do not have any other cases in this

2 courtroom for trial today, so you are going to be excused. If

3 you will go back down to the jury assembly area, you can turn

4 in your badge numbers, and your badges, pick up any excuses

5 that you need for work, and unfortunately, though, that does

6 not excuse you from calling in for the rest of the month, you


7 still need to do that, but you are off for today. And thank

8 you so much for your service. And you all are excused at this

9 time. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury -- you can stay here

10 if you like or go downstairs.

11 THE COURT: Members of the jury, you have now been

12 sworn in as the jury to try this case, and as the judge, I

13 will decide all questions of law and procedure. As the jury,

14 you are the judges of the facts. At the end of the trial, I

15 will instruct you on the rules of law that you must apply to

16 the facts as you find them. You may take notes during this

17 trial. This is going to be a short trial. I really don't

18 think there will be a need for notes. You I might actually

19 disswayed you from taking notes but if you want to take notes,

20 you are welcome to. The only reason I am dissuading you from

21 taking notes is sometimes we get so involved in the note

22 taking we have got our face buried in the notepad, and a lot

23 of this, about being a juror is you evaluate the credibility

24 and the believability of witnesses and so you actually need to

25 see people as opposed to burying your face in a notepad the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

68

1 facts are not very complicated here, so, but, again if go uh

2 want to take notes you are welcome to do so, and Mr. Aguilar

3 can provide you notepads, should you so desire. But don't

4 allow your note taking, if you decide to take notes, to

5 distract you from listening to the testimony. Your notes are


6 an aid to your memory, if your memory should later be

7 different from your notes, you should rely on your memory. Do

8 not be unduly unduly influence bed at this notes of others, a

9 juror's notes are not entitled to any greater weigh than each

10 juror's recollection of the testimony. Until this trial is

11 over, don't discuss this case with anyone and do not permit

12 anyone to discuss this case in your presence. This includes

13 your spouse, children, relatives, friend, coworkers and people

14 with whom you commute to court each day. During your jury

15 service, you must not communicate any information about this

16 case by any means. By conversation, or with tools of

17 technology. For example, do not talk face to face, or use any

18 electronic device or media such as a telephone, a cell or

19 smart phone, camera, recording device, Blackberry, PDA,

20 computer, the Internet, any Internet service, any text or

21 instant messaging service, any Internet chat room, blog or

22 website, such as Facebook, myspace, Youtube or twitter, or any

23 other way to communicate to anyone, any information about this

24 case, until I accept your verdict or excuse you as a juror.

25 Let me expand on that just a little bit. One is, you know,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

69

1 you are here to evaluate the testimony and the evidence in

2 this case. Both from the witness stand and from whatever

3 exhibits I give you. That is all you are entitled to


4 consider. All the evidence comes from the four corners of

5 this room. If you start getting influenced by what other

6 people tell you outside the courtroom, it could call a

7 mistrial and all our work would be for nought. So none of us

8 wants that to happen. Secondarily, smart phones and Facebook,

9 it has caused a lot of problems for courts around the country.

10 Some jurors in other parts of the country have actually been

11 tweeting during trials, during jury deliberations, they have

12 been sending, oh, this company is really going to get hit hard

13 for millions of dollars. Some cases have actually influenced

14 stock market trading. So, you know, I carry three or four

15 devices, I am a real geek, but, you know, there is a time and

16 place for everything, and this is not the time or the place

17 for any of that. So, again, all the evidence comes from the

18 four corners of this courtroom, and so you need to hear all

19 the evidence from both sides, and then I will charge you on

20 what the law is, and then you all will deliberate and decide

21 this case and so you need to do that without being distracted

22 in any way. During our next break we will take a break for

23 lunch, and tomorrow, I don't think this case will go beyond

24 two days but thunderstorm he what we do is we take a morning

25 break for a quick ten minutes, a lunch break and then a quick

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

70

1 ten minute afternoon break, and then I will extend you guys

2 home. This applies to all these breaks and going home


3 tonight. Do not use the Internet, don't -- well you can use

4 the Internet, just don't use it about this case. And so this

5 is not the time to do any research on anything that you hear

6 about this case. This is not the time to hear or start Google

7 civil rights and see what pops up, tonight be Google, you

8 know, cop and arrest and traffic violation, you know, one

9 thing great about being a juror , there is no homework. Okay?

10 So no homework at all during breaks and then afterwards when I

11 send you all home. Don't discuss this case even with

12 yourselves, other jurors until the end of the case when you

13 retire to deliberate. It is unfair to discuss the case for

14 all the, before the before all the evidence is in because you

15 may become an advocate for one side or the other without

16 hearing both sides. The parties, the witnesses, the

17 attorneys, and persons associated with the case are not

18 allowed to communicate with you, and you may not speak with

19 anyone else in or around the courthouse other than your fellow

20 jurors or court personnel when you are around the building,

21 please continue to wear your juror button, that lets everybody

22 know you are a juror in this case, if there are any witnesses

23 around, they know not to approach you. I am not going to --

24 this building is a windowless building so I am not going to

25 keep you forced back in that little jury deliberation room

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

71


1 when we take breaks, but the risk of legislate you out,

2 though, is there is no secure place I can put you without

3 exposure to other witnesses.

4 A. So please always be cog any assistant of your

5 surroundings, don't talk about this case, number one, and 2,

6 if someone else approaches you, it is just best to say I am a

7 juror and I am sorry we can't talk. The reason for that, it

8 is always easy for me to say no, no, no, no, let me explain to

9 you why. (Letting not legislate) you may be having an

10 innocent discussion with one side or the other side and it

11 could be just about the weather has turned pleasant finally.

12 And so it is a completely innocent conversation but put

13 yourself in the minds of these parties over here. If they saw

14 cow with somebody else from the other side they are probably

15 wondering what is going on over there? What are they talking

16 about? So we want to even avoid those appearances from even

17 taking place. Everybody understand? Thank you. Don't make

18 any independent investigation of this case. You must rely

19 solely on what you see and hear in this courtroom. Do not try

20 to learn anything about this case from any other source. In

21 particular you may not use any electronic device or media,

22 such as telephones, cellphones, smart phones or computers to

23 research any issue touching on this case. Don't go online or

24 read any newspaper accounts of this trial or any other related

25 trials. Do not visit or view anyplace, discussed in this

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

72


1 case. Do not use any spent programs or other devices to

2 search for or to view any of the places discussed in this

3 testimony. In sum, you may not research any information about

4 this case, the law Hora the people involved including the

5 parties, the witnesses, the lawyers or the judge, until you

6 have been excused as jurors. There are some issues of law and

7 procedure that I may have to decide with the attorneys outside

8 of your presence. These issues are not part of what you must

9 decide and they are not properly discussed in your presence.

10 To avoid having to leave thement introduce and to save time, I

11 might discuss these issues with the attorneys here at the

12 bench out of your hearing. When I confer with the attorneys

13 at the bench, please do not listen to that we are discussing.

14 If the discussions require more time, which it shouldn't, that

15 was to the lawyers, I may have you leave the courtroom until

16 the lawyers and I resolve the issues. I will try to keep

17 these interruptions as few and as brief as possible. The

18 trial is going to begin now. The lawyers from each side will

19 make an opening statement. Opening sames are intended to

20 assist you in understanding the significance of the evidence

21 that will be presented. The opening statements are not

22 evidence. What the lawyers say is not evidence. The evidence

23 comes from the witness stand and whatever exhibits I introduce

24 at trial. After the opening statements, the plaintiff will

25 rent his case and the witness testimony and documentary or


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

73

1 other evidence. Next the defendant will have an opportunity

2 to present his case. The plaintiff will then be able to

3 present any rebuttal evidence. After all the evidence is

4 introduced, I will instruct you on the law that applies to

5 this case and then the lawyers will make their closing

6 arguments. Closing arguments are not evidence either. But

7 rather the attorneys's interpretation office what evidence has

8 shown or not shown and then finally you will go into the jury

9 ram to deliberate and reach a verdict. Keep an open mind

10 during this trial. During the entire trial. Don't decide the

11 case until you have heard all of the all of the evidence, the

12 closing arguments and my instructions, now it is time for

13 opening statements and with that I will recognize

14 Mr. Maldonado.

15 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor. And with

16 that I, and may it please the Court, good morning, jurors, and

17 thank you again for your service.

18 THE COURT: One second.

19 JUROR: I have a question for you.

20 JUROR: I don't know, I don't know if I should bring

21 it up or not.

22 THE COURT: Well, why don't you come up here.

23 JUROR: He looks familiar, I don't know if I know

24 her or not, I don't know if I know her or not, who is that


25 person, does anybody know? Is she a witness?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

74

1 MR. RALLS: That is Mr. Richter's wife.

2 THE COURT: Mr. Richter's wife.

3 JUROR: I don't know if I know her or not, but with

4 -- I don't know her by name.

5 THE COURT: Do you know where she works?

6 MR. RALLS: I do not, I can ask.

7 THE COURT: Go ahead and ask him.

8 JUROR: I just don't want to create a --

9 THE COURT: No. I appreciate that.

10 JUROR: I may have I may have seen her at the store

11 or something.

12 THE COURT: She does work at USAA, do you work in

13 the same area with her.

14 JUROR: No, I just recall seeing her somewhere.

15 THE COURT: Well, a face with 15,000 people. So you

16 don't socialize with her.

17 JUROR: No.

18 THE COURT: You don't work with her it is just

19 merely you recognizing her by face.

20 JUROR: (Witness nods head).

21 THE COURT: The fact she works at US AA you can set

22 that aside. Any objections, questions.




25 THE COURT: Thank you for bringing that up? (and

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

75

1 this is juror 15.


3 MR. MALDONADO: I think one of us for got to invoke

4 the rule.

5 THE COURT: I will invoke the rule.



8 THE COURT: Are there any witnesses in the --

9 spectator area.


11 THE COURT: The rule has been invoked. By a

12 gentleman if I ever point my finger, somebody walked in that I

13 don't know who -- whether they are a part of the case or not,

14 so I trust that you will check from time to time. Okay. With

15 that, back to opening statements. Mr. Maldonado.

16 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor. And again,

17 good morning, jurors. And thank you again for your service.

18 As we start today. As the judge informed you, this case is

19 about, it is a civil rights claim, a civil rights lawsuit

20 about a traffic stop. But it is more than that. It is about

21 a constitutional right to question officers about their


22 duties, about their obligations and about their

23 responsibilities, and whether you or I or anybody else has

24 that authority, that power, that right to do so. We expect

25 that the evidence will show that on September 7, 20none, Ryan

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

76

1 Rynearson was driving south on Losoya, he put on his signal,

2 that he was going to turn left on market street on his way

3 back to Laughlin Air Force Base, in Del Rio. Sunday evening.

4 We expect that the evidence will show that as he was turning

5 on market street, he noticed a police car behind him with

6 flashing lights. We expect that the evidence will show that

7 he was -- that he made a stop and that when he stopped, he

8 pulled out his driver's license and his proof of insurance and

9 he was ready for the officer. We will -- respect that you

10 will hear that Rick Rynearson was ready to hand them over to

11 officer Richter for that stop. We expect that you will hear

12 that when the officer approached the window that officer

13 Richter identified himself and that Mr. Rynearson asked the

14 officer, why kid you, why did you stop me? We expect that you

15 will hear and the evidence will show that Mr. Rynearson --

16 Mr. Richter, officer Richter told Rynearson that the officer

17 stopped Richter because of his Florida license plates and he

18 wanted to check if Rick had a valid driver's license. We

19 expect that the evidence will show that Richter asked the

20 officer to confirm that he had just stopped Mr. Rynearson


21 without justification. We expect that the evidence will show

22 that immediately after that, he was taken out of his vehicle,

23 he was handcuffed, he was put in a miss car, he was taken to

24 the jail and he sat there for six hours. We expect that the

25 evidence will show that Rick never cursed at officer Richter.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

77

1 We expect that the evidence will show that Rick never made a

2 threatening motion to the officer. We expect that the

3 evidence will show that Rick Rynearson was never disrespectful

4 to officer Richter. At the end of the day, the issue here is

5 why did officer Richter stop rynearson and why did officer

6 Richter arrest Mr. Rynearson? We expect that at the close of

7 the evidence, we ask that at the close of, of the evidence the

8 judge will instruct you on the law and we will come back and

9 ask you to find that Rick's constitutional rights were

10 violated, that his right not to be stopped, unless an officer

11 has justification was violated. We will ask you also to find

12 that his arrest where there was no probable cause the was

13 illegal. We will also ask you to answer the question.

14 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I don't mean to object, but

15 it is going beyond opening statement.

16 THE COURT: That is overruled.

17 MR. MALDONADO: We will also ask you at the close of

18 the evidence whether his rights to speak up as a citizen were


19 violated. We anticipate that this is the evidence that you

20 will hear and we ask that you listen closely and that at the

21 end of the day return a verdict in his favor. Thank you, Your

22 Honor.


24 THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Ralls.

25 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor. Good morning,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

78

1 ladies and gentlemen, and again thank you for your service

2 here today and as the Judge point out, I think it will be a

3 very brief trial. We obviously think the evidence is going to

4 show, is going to be a lot different than what you just heard

5 from plaintiff's counsel. Officer Richter is going to testify

6 that he was at the cutout in front of Fuddrucker's on Losoya

7 right before you get to Commerce Street, which is a very busy

8 intersection with pedestrian and vehicular traffic and that he

9 saw Mr. Rynearson pass in the right hand lane and then turn

10 into the left-hand lane without signaling a lane change. That

11 is important because it is it is important to make a lane --

12 to signal a lane change there because that is a busy

13 intersection with pedestrian and advocate dollar traffic. It

14 goes through Commerce, then goes on around to market street.

15 Having seen that he failed to made signal a lane change, offer

16 Richter followed Mr. Rynearson and when he got through the

17 busy parts of the intersection he turned on his overhead


18 lights to signal to Mr. Rynearson to pull over. Mr. Rynearson

19 did pull over. Officer Richter, the evidence will show, at

20 that point had not made a decision whether to simply give him

21 a verbal warning, a written warning, a ticket, or not that he,

22 not that it really factored into his decision at that point,

23 but or he could have at that point, because he had witnessed a

24 violation of the law, could just simply make an arrest, walk

25 up and make an arrest but he didn't do that. He approached

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

79

1 the vehicle. He tried to introduce himself. When he got

2 there, Mr. Rynearson was, did have his window down but he was

3 holding his license and his insurance over to the right, in

4 his right hand, and officer Richter asked him for his -- for

5 his license and insurance. At that point, Mr. Rynearson

6 started just in saying you are violating my constitutional

7 rights. Officer Richter again asked him for his license and

8 insurance. He again said you are just violating my

9 constitutional rights and failed to -- he refused basically to

10 five officer Richter his license and insurance. Which was a

11 very bizarre situation, but it was clear to officer Richter

12 that he was not going to comply and give him his license and

13 insurance. Officer Richter asked him again for his license

14 and insurance. He still refused to give it to him and officer

15 Richter told him if you don't give it to me you are going to


16 be arrested. At that point, he did start to give it to him,

17 officer Richter at that point exercised his discretion to go

18 ahead and arrest him for violation of the traffic law, which

19 he, I think the Judge will instruct you, he is entitled to do.

20 When he got officer -- when Mr. Rynearson got out of the car

21 he was handcuffed, he was placed into the backseat of the

22 patrol car and at that point, he asked officer Richter to

23 retrieve his wallet from his car, which officer Richter did,

24 and when offer Richter brought it to him he said what am I

25 looking for, you are looking for my concealed handgun permit

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

80

1 and it turned out that Mr. Rynearson had a loaded

2 nine-millimeter hand fun in his cargo shorts pocket at the

3 time. So that is -- I think the evidence is going to show,

4 that is bizarre that he did not tell officer Richterer,

5 tricker that at that he had a hand fun with him as he was

6 being taken out of the car as he was being handcuffed, as he

7 was being put in the patrol car. So the evidence is going to

8 show that Mr. Rynearson had a bad, for whatever reason, had a

9 seriously bad attitude about police officers from the moment

10 that he encountered officer Richter. Officer Richter then on

11 the way to the -- Mr. Rynearson, rather, on the way to the

12 jail, to the magistrate's office, actually, he was never

13 booked into jail, on the way to the magistrate's office,

14 officer -- I am sorry, Mr. Rynearson told officer Richter


15 words to the effect that he was military and had fought in

16 wars and killed people and that officer Richter better watch

17 out while violating constitutional rights. That is what

18 officer Richter was dealing with that day when he walked up to

19 the car. He could have simply, if Mr. Rynearson had simply

20 handed him his driver's license and his insurance as requested

21 and officer Richter could not identify the evidence will show

22 he could not identify him, Mr. Rynearson, from the driver's

23 license, because of the way that Mr. Rynearson was holding it

24 away from him. And he is entitled, number one, to have that

25 identification and to have the license and insurance. So it

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

81

1 was a very bizarre situation. Mr. Rynearson did spend we

2 think about five hours at the magistrate's office and then

3 signed some paperwork and was let go and that was pretty much

4 the end of the story for this. So we believe that officer

5 Richter at all times exercised good faith in dealing with

6 Mr. Rynearson. He gave him several opportunities to hand him

7 his license and his insurance. Mr. Rynearson instead just

8 said you are violating my constitutional rights after

9 repeated, him repeatedly saying that and officer Richter not

10 getting any cooperation and aware of the fact that he was

11 never going to get any cooperation decided to arrest him. And

12 we believe that it was a valid arrest. It was brought on by


13 the actions of Mr. Rynearson in failing to comply with, as a

14 major in the Air Force with a lawful order to provide the

15 license and insurance and we believe that if you listen to the

16 testimony that at the end, at the close of this evidence that

17 you will return a verdict in favor of officer Richter. Thank

18 you.


20 THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, so these are

21 opening statements, what both lawyers have said is not any

22 evidence. We are going to take a lunch break and when we

23 return from lunch, then you will start hearing the evidence in

24 the case. If you decide to have lunch together, do not

25 discuss this case. Don't discuss the opening remarks, because

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

82

1 that wasn't evidence. And you are not to discuss this case

2 until you hear all the evidence and then you can all start

3 deliberating. Please remember my lengthy instructions about

4 the Internet and smart phones. Don't do any outside research.

5 If you want to call your family members or your workplace and

6 just say I did get pick for a jury, just tell them it is a

7 short civil case, please don't give any description. It is

8 not so much I am worried about what you are going to say. I

9 am more worried about what they may tell you. So just give --

10 it is a simple short -- or a simple description it is a short

11 civil case. I should hopefully be back to work on Wednesday


12 or Thursday and keep it short and simple. I am going to

13 introduce you to the jury deliberation room. Mr. Aguilar will

14 give you an indication of how to get back into the building.

15 And where you might be able to grab a place for lunch. Let's

16 return right at 1:00 o'clock. All rise for the jury.

17 THE COURT: Do we need to take up anything.


19 MR. RALLS: I don't think so.

20 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, what time are we coming

21 back.

22 THE COURT: We are starting right at 1:00. Test

23 test.

24 (Lunch recess.)

25 (Lunch recess.) test test if you can test test

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

83

1 Fukushima test strokes. Practice strokes. If you can.

2 THE COURT: Please be seated. Good afternoon.

3 Hopefully everybody had a good lunch and with that, we will

4 begin hearing the evidence in this case. Mr. Maldonado, your

5 first witness.

6 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. We

7 call Richard Rynearson to the stand, Your Honor.

8 (Oath administered to the witness.)



10 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

11 DIRECT EXAMINATION

12 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

13 DIRECT EXAMINATION


15 Q. Mr. Rynearson, can you state your name for the record?

16 A. Sir, my name is Richard Lee Rynearson the third.

17 Q. And where do you work?

18 A. I am in the Air Force. I am an instructor pilot at

19 Pensacola, currently NES.

20 Q. Thank you and are you enlisted or are you an officer?

21 A. I am an officer.

22 Q. And what is your rank?

23 A. I am a major.

24 Q. And could you give us a sense of your employment history

25 or your service with the Air Force?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

84

1 A. Okay. Well, it started off with my military brat, my

2 father retired after 30 years in the military so I always

3 wanted to go and become a pilot one day. So I went to college

4 and did the ROTC program. And then I was commissioned upon

5 getting my degree. I went then to Del Rio, Texas as a student

6 pilot and for about a year I was a student until I not my

7 wings, got my wings. From there I then moved to Abilene,

8 Texas and spent about three years there flying C-130 aircraft


9 and then 9/11 happened. So two days after 9/11 I volunteered

10 to go to special operations and fly the A C-130 gunship attack

11 aircraft. So I moved there, I spent five years there. Did

12 eight deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan with special

13 operations. Following that, I went back to Laughlin Air Force

14 Base then this time as instructor pilot teaching and difficult

15 id that for three years.

16 Q. And that brings you to sort of the date of this incident,

17 right.

18 Q. So you were in Laughlin Air Force Base when the facts

19 relating to this case came up?

20 A. That is correct, sir.

21 Q. And so back in 2009, again, what were you doing in

22 Laughlin Air Force Base?

23 A. I was a T six instructor pilot, so we would take brand-new

24 officers who had just graduated from the Air Force academy or

25 some of the, some other college and we would take them in the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

85

1 T six and teach them the basics of flying, low level,

2 formation, aerobatics and instrument flight procedures.

3 Q. And today, how many years in the service have you

4 committed?

5 A. I have a little over 19 years.

6 Q. And when you were assigneds or when you were sent to


7 Laughlin Air Force Base in 2000, when you were there in 2009

8 did you request that assignment?

9 A. Yes, sir, it was my first choice.

10 Q. And then I am going to bring you back to the

11 September 2009, the incident in this case is September 7,

12 2009, correct?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 Q. And what were you doing in San Antonio? Or I can't are

15 with you September 7, 2009?

16 A. I was in San Antonio.

17 Q. And what were you doing here?

18 A. I was I had maintained an apartment in downtown San

19 Antonio, in addition to a really cheap apartment that I had in

20 Del Rio, so I was sleeping I would sleep in Del Rio in this

21 cheaper apartment but every weekend I spent in San Antonio.

22 Q. And how did you get back from travel between Del Rio and

23 San Antonio?

24 A. In my vehicle.

25 Q. And what kind of car did you have?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

86

1 A. It is a Mitsubishi eclipse.

2 Q. And what kind of license plates did your Mitsubishi have?

3 A. At that time, it had Florida tags.

4 Q. And why is that?

5 A. My previous assignment us at Herbert field in Florida and


6 my tags hadn't expired so I just continued to use those tags.

7 Q. So your license plates were current?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. So what happened on September 7, 2009?

10 A. Well,.

11 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I am going to object as to

12 the narrative, asking for a narrative response and ask it be

13 question and answer.


15 THE WITNESS: Okay. On that night, as I did pretty

16 much every Sunday of every weekend, I departed the Houston

17 street parking garage, which was attached to my building and I

18 made a left there on college street and proceeded through a

19 couple of intersections until I stopped at Losoya Street at a

20 stop sign. I signaled a right turn and turned into the right

21 most lane of Losoya, I then, knowing I had to make a left to

22 come to get to Market Street turned on my turn signal to the

23 left.

24 Q. Let me ask you something, what time of day was this?

25 A. This was about, right around 6:00 p.m.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

87

1 Q. And why were you leaving then? What why were you driving

2 then?

3 A. Well, I was trying maximize my time in San Antonio, but I


4 still have to get back to Del Rio in time to go to sleep so I

5 have enough crew rest to be legal to fly the next day.

6 Q. Okay. So I am sorry to interrupt you so you had made a

7 right on Losoya, you had gotten on the right-hand lane,

8 correct?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. And so then what happened?

11 A. So I knew I had to get into the left lane, so I used my

12 blinker and I signalled to the left and made a left change,

13 left lane change, and then kept proceeding. The I made it

14 past Commerce into where there is the turn, there is lake a

15 roundabout area like a sculpture, and it turns into Market,

16 and about halfway around in that turn I looked up and noticed

17 that there was a police car behind me with its lights on.

18 Q. And let me ask you something. You said that you put your

19 turn signal when you turned right from college on to Losoya,

20 correct?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. And you said that you put on your signal light to change

23 lanes from the right lane to the left lane on Losoya driving

24 south, correct?

25 A. Yes, sir.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

88

1 Q. I mean, why are you so certain that in fact you put on

2 your turn signal?


3 A. Well, I can remember it, and the -- one thing, I am very

4 procedurally driven. So if I can explain as an instructor

5 pilot and as an Air Force pa pilot, the skill set from the one

6 goes to the other, so for example, we fly 350, 400 miles per

7 hour, control pressures are very extensive so if you are not

8 looking at some -- your altitude every couple of seconds you

9 could be 100, 200 feet off, in addition to that, you have to

10 make sure your air speed is good if you are flying in

11 formation you have to make sure your wing man is in the

12 correction correct position you have navigation aids you need

13 to use, power settingsing ops checks all these things so when

14 we call head on a swivel, looking here, hub and spoke, look

15 over here to make sure this is good have a situational

16 awareness thing and procedural thing that transfers to driving

17 because it is a dynamic situation, you moving, so you are

18 thinking ahead in the jet, or when you are driving you are

19 thinking ahead what you are going to do, just like I know I am

20 going to be turning up there, turn signal, lane change.

21 Q. Let me ask you something?

22 THE COURT: One second, Mr. Rynearson you may want

23 to slow down just a tad.

24 Okay.

25 My court reporter is having trouble catching up with

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

89


1 you.

2 THE WITNESS: All right.


4 BY MR. MALDONADO:

5 Q. I am just curious to know, do all pilots like your

6 situation, are they also trainers?

7 A. No, sir.

8 Q. And before we continue, in terms of your service, have you

9 been recognized due to your service?

10 A. Yes, sir. I have several commendation medals, as with us

11 discussed previously.

12 Q. Sure. So you said you were -- you make -- you were making

13 a left on Market Street when you saw police car behind you

14 with their lights on, correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Had you seen that car before?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Was someone else with you?

19 A. No.

20 Q. So once you saw the signal lights, how do you know it was

21 for you -- about you -- that you were the one that needed to

22 stop?

23 A. There was -- there was no other vehicle between me and the

24 police officer, and then as we turned on to Market Street it

25 was very apparent, because the -- the police officer pulled up

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

90


1 right next to me.

2 Q. So I always know when I I have been stopped by a police

3 because I am usually speeding, did you know why you had been

4 stopped?

5 A. I did not know. I, at that point I assumed it was because

6 I had a broken taillight or someone one of those things that I

7 couldn't control but didn't know. I assume there was a, I

8 assumed there was a lawful reason for the stop other than my

9 driving.

10 Q. You didn't think you were speeding?

11 A. No, I wasn't speeding.

12 Q. You don't think you had failed to put on your signal?

13 A. No, I didn't fail to do that.

14 Q. So then you come to a stop. What happened next?

15 A. So, yeah.

16 Q. Let me stop. Where did you come to a stop?

17 A. I pulled into the Gonzalez convention center, so there is

18 a parking area there. I you would into that, and then the

19 police officer, officer Richter pulled in behind me.

20 Q. Okay. And then so officer Richter is behind you. You are

21 inside -- did you exit your Kata point?

22 A. No.

23 Q. What did you?

24 A. What did you do.

25 A. I turned off the car, I got my wallet out, took my


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

91

1 driver's license out of it, I reached up to my advisor and

2 grabbed my wad of insurance cards and registration, had those

3 in my hand, rolled down my window, as he was approaching the

4 car.

5 Q. So you knew the drill that your driver's license and the

6 officer would be asking for your driver's license and proof of

7 insurance?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And so there I guess at some point, officer Richter did

10 approach the window on your side of the car?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. And what happened next?

13 A. He approached the window and said, license and insurance.

14 Q. And did he say anything else after that?

15 A. No, he did not.

16 Q. What did you say?

17 A. I said, why did you pull me over? And he said, because

18 you have an out of stateliness plate and I just want to make

19 sure you have a driver's license.

20 Q. And what were you doing with your -- with your driver's

21 license and your proof of insurance while you are talking with

22 officer Richter?

23 A. Well, I have them here, and I really wasn't doing anything

24 once we began talking, because it was a conversation, but they


25 were right here. And just stayed right here.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

92

1 Q. So?

2 A. It was a very quick conversation. So it was very fast.

3 Probably within I mean, ten seconds, top.

4 Q. So you asked him after he asked you for the drivers and

5 your proof of insurance you asked him why did you stop me,

6 yes?

7 A. And.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And what did he say again?

10 A. Because you have an out of stateliness plate and I just

11 want to make sure you have a driver's license.

12 Q. And what did you say then?

13 A. I said, confirm you just pulled me over without cause.

14 Q. And word confirm is that what you said?

15 A. That's what I said, confirm.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. You didn't say you violated my constitutional rights?

18 A. No, I did not say that.

19 Q. And what did officer Richter say at that point?

20 A. He said get out of the vehicle.

21 Q. And what did you say then?

22 A. I said, confirm you are now ordering me out of my vehicle

23 without cause.


24 Q. And what did he say?

25 A. He said, yes, get out of the vehicle.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

93

1 Q. And at that point, what are you doing with your driver's

2 license and your proof of insurance?

3 A. They are still in my hand right here.

4 Q. And let me ask you something. Before you asked officer

5 Richter why did you stop me, that was his demeanor?

6 A. Before I asked him he was stern, I would say stern, very

7 stern and to the point.

8 Q. Okay. And I mean you are in the military I am sure that

9 did not that you are sort of used to that?

10 A. Yeah, that wasn't such a big deal.

11 Q. But once you asked him the question why did you stop me?

12 What was his demeanor or reaction?

13 A. His face got red, he -- he was yelling, he was irate after

14 that, I mean, I had just asked him or challenged him and

15 pointed out that he had done something wrong and he didn't --

16 he did not appreciate it.

17 Q. So from the moment that he asked you for -- from the

18 moment he appeared on your window and asked you for your

19 driver's license and proof of insurance, to the moment that

20 you were ordered out of the car, how long did that take?

21 A. Ten seconds tops.


22 Q. Are you sure he didn't ask you several times, give me your

23 driver's license and proof of insurance?

24 A. I am absolutely positive.

25 Q. Did he threaten you, I am going to arrest you if you

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

94

1 tonight give me your driver's license and proof of insurance?


3 Q. Did you ever say to him, I am hot giving you anything

4 until you answer my questions?

5 A. No, I never said that.

6 Q. Did you curse at him?

7 A. I did not.

8 Q. So did you exit the vehicle?

9 A. I did.

10 Q. And what happened next?

11 A. I opened up the door. As I was opening up the door he

12 kind of took a step back and kind of not into, looked kind of

13 like a football pose and put his right hand on what I assume

14 was his Taser, just kind of there, as I stepped out of the

15 vehicle, he came forward again, took the documents out of my

16 right hand and then told me to turn around and face my

17 vehicle.

18 Q. And did you do that?

19 A. I did.

20 Q. Did you resist turning?


21 A. No.

22 Q. Once you turned around, did he tell you put your hands

23 over your head or spread them or anything like that?

24 A. No.

25 Q. What happened next?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

95

1 A. He immediately grabbed my arms which are already at my

2 sides and threw handcuffs on them.

3 Q. Okay. And then did he say anything or did you say

4 anything?

5 A. I didn't say anything, but he did say, you do know that I

6 am a cop, right?

7 Q. And what did you say?

8 A. You do know that I am an American citizen.

9 Q. And what was his response?

10 A. Yeah, I am really impressed.

11 Q. And how long did he keep you by your car on the street or

12 on the convention way?

13 A. Not long after he had arrested me, probably it took ten

14 seconds, 15 seconds to walk me back to his car.

15 Q. And besides that conversation of you know I am a cop, I am

16 an -- you know I am an American citizen did you have any other

17 conversation while handcuffed by your car?

18 A. Not -- well, by the car as we are unwalking back, several


19 times at least two times he said, why are you being so

20 aggressive? And I said I am not. And which at the time I was

21 like, well who is he talking to? It is like what is this?

22 This seemed very strange, we are the only two people here.

23 Which kind of made me think that perhaps he had been recording

24 audio on his Taser, but those are the only two things he said,

25 why are you being aggression receive and I told him I am not.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

96

1 Q. And before he put you -- did he put you in the car vehicle

2 -- in the police vehicle?

3 A. He did, in the backseat.

4 Q. And before he put you in the police vehicle, did he pat

5 you down?

6 A. No.

7 Q. You were carrying a weapon, weren't you?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. Were you licensed?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Why were you carrying a weapon?

12 A. It is in my constitutional right and I believe that we can

13 strengthen our rights by exercising our rights and given my

14 profession, we are targeted here at home, like the Chattanooga

15 attacks demonstrate, so should I need to defend myself or my

16 family, I would like to exercise my constitutional rights.

17 Q. And was your -- you had a permit, correct?


18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. Was it valid?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. Was it unexpired?

22 A. It was unspider, yes.

23 Q. And he didn't pat you down?

24 A. That is correct, he did not.

25 Q. (Unexpired).

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

97

1 Q. So you are now inside the vehicle, what happened?

2 A. Okay. So he put me in the vehicle and then he went to my

3 vehicle. He spent a couple of minutes inside my vehicle. I

4 am not sure what he was doing there, and then he came back.

5 Q. And did he come back and stand outside the car or did he

6 --

7 A. No.

8 Q. -- come inside. He not into his driver's side car.

9 Q. And what happened?

10 A. I asked him, why are you arresting me? And he said, for

11 failing to saying natural a lane change on Losoya.

12 Q. So that's the first time you heard about the failing to

13 put on your turn signal?

14 A. That is correct, yes, sir.

15 Q. And what did you say?


16 A. I said you know what you are doing is wrong. And he said,

17 you already admitted to failing to signal or something along

18 those lines, which again led me to believe that he was

19 recording or something, because it was just very mysterious.

20 Q. He was state ago fact about what you had admitted?

21 A. Yes. Which obviously I didn't do that and we both know

22 that so --

23 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I am going to object it is

24 nonresponsive to --

25 THE COURT: That is sustained.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

98

1 BY MR. MALDONADO:

2 Q. So then what happened next?

3 A. After that, then he spent some time filling out some

4 paperwork, I couldn't see what it was. Up front. But then

5 about five minutes or so later, he says, he shows a citation

6 and he says, I am going to give cow one chance, you either

7 sign the citation or you can spend the night in jail, it is

8 your choice.

9 Q. And what did you say in response?

10 A. I said, I don't remember not using my signal but, so I

11 will sign your citation, but I remain concerned because when I

12 asked you way you pulled me over, you said it was because I

13 had an out of state tag and you wanted to see if I had a

14 driver's license.


15 Q. And what was his reaction to that?

16 A. He just said that's it you are going to jail and took away

17 the citation and I never saw it, never held it, never had a

18 chance to sign it.

19 Q. Did you immediately drive back to the magistrate's office

20 or the jail?

21 A. No. At that point, he called the tow truck and we waited

22 for the tow truck to arrive.

23 Q. And then what happened?

24 A. After he called the tow truck, I asked him, because I knew

25 at that point I was going to jail, I asked him, if he would go

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

99

1 into my car and retrieve my wallet? And did he agree to do

2 that.

3 A. He did.

4 Q. And did he bring you your wallet?

5 A. He did.

6 Q. And did you and officer Richter have a conversation about

7 the wallet?

8 A. Well, when he brought, he came back with my wallet he said

9 is there anything I am looking for in here specifically and he

10 said yes, my conceal carry permit.

11 Q. And what was his response to that?

12 A. He said are you carrying right now and I said yes I have a


13 loaded nine-millimeter in my pocket and he said why didn't you

14 give me the concealed carry permit when I first came up. I

15 said you arrested me too fast there was. Any time. And he

16 said well that is another thing I have got you on.

17 Q. And, 15, how long did it take between the exchange in the

18 car and when he asked you to exit the car?

19 A. In the very beginning?

20 Q. Yes.

21 A. Ten seconds tops.

22 Q. And at that point, did he remove the gun from you?

23 A. He did not.

24 Q. What happened next?

25 A. The tow truck arrived, took away the vehicle, and we

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

100

1 started to drive towards the magistrate's office, so it, we

2 took a right on Market Street, which I believe is one-way

3 street. Not long after we made that turn on to Market Street,

4 there was a vehicle coming at -- towards us driving the wrong

5 way on Market Street. Officer Richter, you know, made some

6 sort of a disparaging remark about the driver, but stopped the

7 lanes of traffic with the driver and then yelled at the driver

8 and the trough' did a 180 and went the correct way.

9 Q. He didn't arrest the driver?

10 A. He didn't arrest the driver.

11 Q. Did you and officer Richter have anymore conversations on


12 the way to the jail? It is actually magistrate office but

13 jail, magistrate?

14 A. It was pretty quiet, it was quiet, I was, after that I was

15 just in shock. Number one, I just had been arrested. Number

16 2, I just saw him whip out when someone is driving the wrong

17 way and it was a very strange night.

18 MR. RALLS: Nonresponsive, Your Honor.



21 Q. Can you tell us as you are driving to the magistrate

22 office, did you and officer Richter have another conversation?

23 A. Yes. As we got closer to the magistrate's office, I --

24 Q. Actually, I will withdraw that question. What were you

25 thinking on your way to the magistrate's office?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

101

1 A. What I was thinking was, I mean, I was in shock. I

2 couldn't believe that this had transpired. I was just on my

3 way from a happy weekend in San Antonio, driving home, having

4 done nothing wrong, and out of the blue I get stopped, lied to

5 and arrested and now I am going to jail. So it was just a

6 very shocking experience for me, so I reflected on that in the

7 vehicle.

8 Q. Did you then have a conversation with officer Richter?

9 A. As we got towards the magistrate I just said I want you to


10 know that I am in the military, I have been in combat, I have

11 killed people, I have shot been shot a at and I have seen far

12 better men than you die to protect the Constitution you just

13 violated.

14 Q. Did you mean to threaten him by saying that?

15 A. No.

16 Q. What did you -- what was your intention what was your

17 intention in saying that to him?

18 A. I wanted to shame him. I wanted him to know that even if

19 -- acting like that is something that can be done.

20 MR. RALLS: Object to relevance, Your Honor.


22 THE WITNESS: Even if that might be casual thing for

23 him, that, you know, violating my rights and taking my person

24 like that, and then lying about it, for whatever reason, he

25 decided to do that, that that was -- you know, that is not

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

102

1 right.

2 THE COURT: Okay now we need to go to question and

3 answer.

4 BY MR. MALDONADO:

5 Q. And did officer Richter respond to your statement?

6 A. He did. He said do you think you are the only person who

7 has been in the military or killed somebody?

8 Q. And did you say anything in response.?


9 A. I said you don't get it.

10 Q. What did you mean by that?

11 A. That what I attempted, maybe poorly, to tell him was that

12 the rights that he violates so casual he are defended by

13 people, you know, who sacrifice a great deal and I just wanted

14 him to know that.

15 Q. So you arrive at the magistrate office. What happens

16 next?

17 A. At that point, he got me out of the vehicle, and disarmed

18 me.

19 Q. Where were you carrying the weapon?

20 A. In my right cargo shorts pocket.

21 Q. Did you at any point resist while you were being taken out

22 of the police car?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Did you at any point curse to officer Richterer once you

25 arrived at the magistrate's office?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

103

1 A. No, sir.

2 Q. Did you make any threatening motion that would have given

3 reason to officer Richter to to believe that he should fear

4 for his person?

5 A. No, sir.

6 Q. So I imagine you were walked into the magistrate's office?


7 A. Yes.


9 A. He told me that after processing in the morning I would be

10 able to get my property back and then he led me into there and

11 then he left.

12 Q. And so once you are in there, what happens for people who

13 are arrested and taken there?

14 A. There was a lady by a window that had some Plexiglas or

15 some sort of glass on it and she processed me and some other

16 people. She put handcuffs back on us. She took our -- you

17 know, our belongings and I guess inventory did, and then took

18 us to a jail cell. So this may be five seconds walk away, you

19 can see it, it is line of sight where from where she was at

20 and she just opened up a jail cell and put me in there and

21 removed the handcuffs and then that was it.

22 Q. How many people were in the cell?

23 A. I remember six people, being in there, including one guy

24 who was vomiting like every hour.

25 Q. So approximately at what time were you pulled -- strike

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

104

1 that. Approximately at what time on September 7, 20mine was

2 your car stopped on Market Street?

3 A. Some time after like 6:00 p.m. is when he stopped me.

4 Q. And what, and at what time did you arrive at the jail,

5 magistrate's office?


6 A. That would have been probably closer to 7:00, maybe even a

7 little after 7:00 p.m., probably 7:15 p.m. I would guess but I

8 am not quite positive.

9 Q. And did there come a time that you were able to get out of

10 the jail?

11 A. Yes. At 10:30ish, the same lady who had processed us or

12 processed me into there came to the jail cell, put handcuffs

13 on me, and then led me back to her station and then brought

14 out a fodder and she told me that I had been arrested for

15 failing to sign the citation and I could bond out or I would

16 be transferred to the county jail so at that.

17 Q. What you were told or what you heard is you were arrested

18 for fail to sign the citation?

19 A. Yes. That's what she said.

20 Q. How many times were you offered the opportunity to sign

21 the citation?

22 A. Well, he gave me only that one, just like he said I will

23 give you one chance, but he never actually gave me that

24 chance.

25 Q. Well did you refuse to sign?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

105

1 A. No, I did not. I told him expressly that I would sign.

2 Q. And so then once the lady at the magistrate's office

3 explained to you the process, what did you do?


4 A. I told her that I would bond, I would like to bond out, I

5 think I signed something, and then she took me back to the

6 cell for another couple of hours. So --

7 Q. And did there come a time when you were finally able to

8 walk out of the jail?

9 A. Yes. I think shortly after midnight. Then they came and

10 got me again, allowed me to go outside, withdraw a couple of

11 hundred dollars from the ATM machine to pay my bond am then

12 they released me.

13 Q. Had you ever -- Thad you ever, prior to this incident, had

14 you ever been arrested and put in jail before?

15 A. Yes, one time.

16 Q. When was that?

17 A. That was in 19 a nine -- 1998 or 1999.

18 Q. And how long were you in jail?

19 A. Overnight.

20 Q. And so once -- you have paid the bond, you are talk

21 walking out of the jail, what did you do?

22 A. I ordered a cab, a cab took me to the impound lot, I paid

23 to have my car released to me and then from there, I couldn't

24 go really drive to work, because my -- I wouldn't be hell to

25 fly the next day because of the sleep and everything, so I

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

106

1 just went back to my apartment and tried to go to sleep for a

2 couple of hours until prop, the property room opened up so I


3 could go back and retrieve my property from the magistrate's

4 office.

5 Q. And is the property your gun or some other property.

6 Right. I had a backpack with like a computer in it, laptop.

7 And then my weapon.

8 Q. So you took a cab to the impound, what did that cost you?

9 A. I think it was $25, yes.

10 Q. And at the impound was it open at that hour?

11 A. It was.

12 Q. And how much did you pay to get your car out?

13 A. If I remember correctly, it was $130ish.

14 Q. Did you get up early that same day on the eighth and did

15 you retrieve your gun? And backpack?

16 A. I went back there. They gave me my backpack, but they

17 would not give me my bun back. They said my conceal carry

18 permit was not sufficient. They said that instead I needed to

19 drive across town to homicide and have them fill out some

20 paperwork and then I would have to provide that paperwork back

21 to them for them to release my gun back to me, so I did that.

22 I drove and attempted to do that, waited in line as homicide

23 but when when I was seen they told me it would take five to

24 seven.

25 MR. RALLS: I object as nonresponsive and hearsay.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

107



2 BY MR. MALDONADO:

3 Q. Did you get your gun that morning. No.

4 Q. Did you have -- did you ever go back and get your gun?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Why not?

7 A. Because I was told that by homicide people.

8 MR. RALLS: Again, Your Honor, objection to hearsay.



11 Q. Without telling us what other people told you why didn't

12 you get your gun?

13 A. Because my understanding was that it would take me at

14 least five to seven days before the homicide department would

15 get their own arrest report and then be able to fill out the

16 paperwork that would then allow the property people to give me

17 back my weapon. In addition to the delay, I believe they were

18 only open on the weekdays.

19 MR. RALLS: Object to nonresponsive, Your Honor.


21 THE WITNESS: They were only open on the weekdays

22 and I lived three hours away in Del Rio, for me to come back I

23 would have to take leave from my, you know, vacation time,

24 essentially, in order to go back to Laughlin, to then stand in

25 line, to then potentially have this same -- I was just over

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

108


1 it.

2 BY MR. MALDONADO:

3 Q. Okay. Remembering, you were here when Mr. Ralls did his

4 opening statement, correct, you were present here?

5 A. Where.

6 Q. In is really a bizarre situation, Mr. Rynearson. How do

7 you explain that you ended up getting arrested?

8 A. I agree that it is a bizarre situation. My explanation of

9 how I got arrested was that some police officer for some

10 reason chose to pull me over and then he arrested me when I

11 told him that what he had done was wrong. You can't pull me

12 over if I vice president broken a law, just to see if I have a

13 driver's license. That's unlawful. I understood that to be

14 the case.

15 MR. RALLS: I am going to object as to the witness

16 testifying as to what the law is, Your Honor.



19 Q. Mr. Rynearson, we are here today, why are we here today on

20 a lawsuit about a citation?

21 A. Right. And the reason we are here today is because --

22 MR. RALLS: Objection object to the relevance, Your

23 Honor.


25 THE WITNESS: Is because -- there are a couple of


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

109

1 layers to this, but number one, one of the most basic, I was

2 wronged, I was wronged by this cop and this is the system that

3 is set up for accountability. And I understand that a lot of

4 people have heard it several times why would you do this? I

5 mean, why would you spend all that time and effort and money

6 to seek this, because -- and the reason is because what he did

7 was really wrong, and it affected me, obviously.

8 Q. But, you know,.

9 BY MR. MALDONADO:

10 Q. But, you know, let's take that how it affected you you are

11 military so you are fairly familiar with handcuffs, right?

12 A. I had some survival training that, where we dealt with

13 handcuffs.

14 Q. Okay. So they have been on you before?

15 A. Correct.

16 Q. So you have had handcuffs before, how was this situation

17 any different?

18 A. This is far different. He -- you know, he pulls me over

19 out of the blue and basically he yanks me out of my car and

20 then puts handcuffs on me, then lies, detains me, and rocks,

21 you know, my personal life and my professional life. I mean,

22 this had a lot of ramifications, this was not just a oh just

23 go spend some time in the jail and then everything is

24 hunky-dory. You know, this goes back to my, to my commanders,


25 my reputation.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

110

1 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I am going to object as this

2 violates the basically, it is irrelevant, it goes beyond the

3 motions, pretrial motions, Your Honor.

4 THE COURT: Not at this point. That's overruled but

5 coming close, careful.

6 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor, I understand.

7 BY MR. MALDONADO:

8 Q. Did you have to report this?

9 A. I did.

10 Q. Were you required to report this?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Did this result in some sort of sanction against you?

13 A. I was reprimanded, there was a reprimand placed in my

14 record.

15 Q. Okay. And did it affect you in other ways?

16 A. I it did. Just to try to explain why this is important to

17 me, how it affected me. You know, I can explain how it

18 affected me. Maybe not perhaps exactly why. But, you know,

19 before this, I would travel in my country, that I have worked

20 and, you know, defended with this anticipation that the people

21 that I -- that I pay to protect me are doing so, you know, or

22 at least are not, you know, terrorizing me. After this

23 happened to me, it just affected my sense of security, driving


24 down the road. If you see a police officer, all of a sudden I

25 lose a breath, you know, like I feel vulnerable, like I can

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

111

1 just be victim needed at any time and I can't even control the

2 ramifications that is going to have in my life. And so, yeah,

3 it was -- it was a traumatic experience.

4 Q. I mean, some pokes may say, look, this is simply a traffic

5 ticket. Take the damned ticket and move on?

6 A. Right. Yeah.

7 Q. What do you say to that?

8 A. So beyond that, just the basic wrong, it is my opinion

9 check that, you know, our constitutional rights are very

10 valuable. You know, we all stand on the shoulder of giants,

11 so there are people who sacrificed, some of them in uniform

12 and some of them not in uniform, you know, freedom riders,

13 Martin Luther King, people who had cops with batons and dogs

14 and the water hoses, people stood up and risked themselves to

15 protect our rights, and I think it is important and I think it

16 is our obligation for all of us to when put in this position,

17 to also take a stand, even if it is inconvenient, I know we

18 have jobs, I know that, you know, we think, okay, you know, we

19 will just pay you and whatever, but when we do that, it only

20 gets worse and beyond that, you know, I have seen guys Diane

21 to protect our country, so -- and that is hard to explain to


22 someone who maybe only deals with that in a Broadway and

23 hasn't, you know, questioned, you know, what was that

24 sacrifice worth? And -- but I have, and it hurts to see that

25 betrayal of our values and for me, I have seen people do --

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

112

1 risk a lot more and give a lot more, so I can't, for the sake

2 of convenience pass up an easy opportunity to do the right

3 thing to defend the station.

4 MR. MALDONADO: No further questions, Your Honor.

5 THE COURT: Any cross?

6 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

7 CROSS EXAMINATION

8 BY MR. RALLS:

9 Q. (to defend this nation)

10 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

11 CROSS EXAMINATION

12 BY MR. RALLS:

13 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Rynearson.

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. Mr. Rynearson, I would like to sort of start, go back to

16 the beginning. How long were you stationed in Del Rio prior

17 to September 7, 2009?

18 A. I believe -- I believe that was about two years, roughly.

19 Q. Okay. So did you have an apartment in San Antonio for

20 that entire two years?


21 A. No, sir. Not the whole time.

22 Q. How long prior to the September 7, 20mine did you have an

23 apartment in San Antonio?

24 A. I would -- I think probably a year, maybe a year and a

25 half.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

113

1 Q. And would you come to San Antonio every weekend when you

2 had that apartment?

3 A. Yes, sir. I think -- I think maybe for three years I

4 might have spent four or five weekends total in Del Rio. And

5 the republicans were here in San Antonio.

6 Q. And during that year, were you driving the same car that

7 you were driving on September 7, 2009?

8 A. During -- yes, up to this event.

9 Q. Correct?

10 A. Was it the same car?

11 Q. Yes, sir.

12 Q. Okay. So for 50, 48, 50 weeks prior to this event you had

13 driven your Mitsubishi with the Florida license plates through

14 San Antonio, correct?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. Never been pulled over for having Florida license plates,

17 did you?

18 A. No, sir.


19 Q. You -- you are aware of the fact that the City of San

20 Antonio is a military town, correct?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. And has lots of people without a state license, out of

23 stateliness plates, correct?

24 A. Yes, sir.

25 Q. And it is also a convention town. You are aware of that,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

114

1 right?

2 A. Where.

3 Q. And has a lot of people without of stateliness plates,

4 correct?

5 A. I am not as familiar with the convention stuff but I would

6 agree that would make sense, yes, sir.

7 Q. And the same with regard to tourists, would you agree with

8 that?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. So there are lots of -- I mean, pretty clear that there

11 are a lot of people driving around downtown San Antonio

12 without a out of stateliness plates, rights?

13 A. Yes, sir. That makes sense.

14 Q. Okay. And you -- when you would come to San Antonio,

15 would you drive around San Antonio in your car with your out

16 of stateliness plate?

17 A. Certainly, sir, if I was going somewhere, I would.


18 Q. All right. So cow probably logged a lot of miles in San

19 Antonio with your out of stateliness plates without being

20 pulled over, correct?

21 A. Certainly some miles, yes, sir.

22 Q. Okay. Let me ask you this. You have had other traffic

23 tickets in the past, right?

24 A. I have, sir.

25 Q. For what?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

115

1 A. I believe all of them have been speeding, I can't remember

2 anything other than speeding.

3 Q. And you have had speeding tickets since you have been in

4 the Air Force?

5 A. Since I have been in the Air Force?

6 Q. Correct.

7 A. For -- yes. Yes, sir. I have.

8 Q. Okay.

9 A. Four or five, maybe.

10 Q. And I am sorry?

11 A. I am just estimating them.

12 Q. Okay. And the speeding tickets you have had while you

13 were in the Air Force that's while you were a pilot, right?

14 A. Yes, sir. Either a pilot or training to be a pilot.

15 Q. And so you weren't particularly integrating your pilot


16 training with your driving on those particular occasions,

17 correct?

18 A. On those occasions, sir, I was speeding. On purpose.

19 Q. Okay. All right. So let's go to -- let's go ahead go to

20 September 7, 2009. You say that you were driving down Losoya

21 street going south toward Commerce Street, correct?

22 A. Losoya going south on Commerce, yes, sir.

23 Q. And you had been through that intersection on a number of

24 occasions before September 7, true?

25 A. Yes, sir.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

116

1 Q. And you knew that there was a Fuddrucker's right there on

2 the left-hand side of the corner?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. And I think maybe a McDonald's right there on the

5 left-hand side of the corner?

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. A lot of pedestrian traffic through there, right?

8 A. Uh-huh.

9 Q. Yes?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. And a lot of vehicular traffic through there also,

12 correct?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 Q. At Commerce? And do you remember whether there is a


15 cutout in front of the Fuddrucker's on Losoya street heading

16 south?

17 A. I don't remember. I do know there are some cutouts, I

18 remember the one that is by the hotel, a little further back,

19 but I do know that -- I don't know if they are still there but

20 there were cutouts, yes, sir.

21 Q. So -- and Losoya street right there is a two-lane street,

22 right?

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 A. That's from what I understand, yes.

25 Q. And a relatively narrow two lane street, correct?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

117

1 A. I would agree with that.

2 Q. And probably had been through there on occasions when

3 people coming, tourists or whomever, people walking around

4 there may have stepped off the curb in front of you or close

5 to it or things like that?

6 A. Sure. Yes, sir.

7 Q. That happens, right?

8 A. Oh, absolutely.

9 Q. So it is important, you would agree with me, that you do

10 need to signal moving from the right-hand lane to the left

11 hand lane as, particularly as you are going through Commerce

12 Street, correct?


13 A. Yes, sir, I agree.

14 Q. Because if you don't, the people on the street may not

15 know what you what your intentions are, correct?

16 A. That makes sense, yes, sir.

17 Q. And they could step out in front of you and you could hit

18 them?

19 A. Absolutely.

20 Q. Okay. All right. And you would agree with me that if

21 somebody didn't signal going from right to left, the right

22 lane to the left lane on Losoya Street at that intersection,

23 then that -- they probably ought to get a ticket for failing

24 to signal a lane change, don't you think?

25 A. Yes, sir. That's the law.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

118

1 Q. No question about that, right?

2 A. No, sir.

3 Q. All right. So on September the 9th, seventh, I am sorry,

4 2009 it is about 6:15 in the evening, correct, when you are

5 going through that intersection.

6 Q. So you keep going through the intersection, well let me

7 back up, (September the seventh) there is no question but that

8 you did change lanes from the right-hand lane to the left hand

9 lane on Losoya Street before you got to Commerce Street, true?

10 A. Can you repeat that one more time?

11 Q. Sure. There is no question the but that you did change


12 lanes from the right-hand lane on Losoya Street to the left

13 hand lane on Losoya street before you get to Commerce?

14 A. Yes, sir, that is correct.

15 Q. Okay. No question about that. And then you went, is that

16 a -- controlled intersection, to have -- do you understand me?

17 A. Could you define controlled?

18 Q. Sure I can. Does it either have a stop sign or a

19 stoplight?

20 A. That one has a stoplight, I believe.

21 Q. And was the stoplight green or did you have to stop at the

22 intersection?

23 A. I didn't have to stop at that one, I don't believe. Nope.

24 Q. So, okay. So you drove through the intersection. Do you

25 know roughly what your speed was at that point?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

119

1 A. I don't recall, sir, but the same as the traffic that I

2 was with. I think it was probably 25, 30.

3 Q. Okay. You -- was there other traffic on Losoya at that

4 point? Do you recall?

5 A. There was some, yes, sir.

6 Q. And when cow went across Commerce Street, you were going

7 to make a left-hand turn on to Market Street?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And heft your left hand signal on at that point?


10 A. For the turn to Market?

11 Q. Correct?

12 A. Yes, sir, it was, even though there were green arrows, I

13 don't believe it was required but it is just a habit if I turn

14 I put my signal on.

15 Q. Okay. Do you know a lot about the transportation code?

16 A. I don't. That's why I say I am not sure if that is

17 required or not but I do remember that there was a green

18 arrow, turn arrow for the left turn.

19 Q. All right. So Mr. Rynearson, isn't it possible you turned

20 your left turn signal on after cow went through the

21 intersection of Commerce and Losoya to make your left hand

22 turn on to Market?

23 A. Are you saying and forgot to signal the lane change?

24 Q. Correct.

25 A. No, sir. That's not possible.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

120

1 Q. Okay. Where were you on Losoya Street at the point that

2 you signalled the lane change?

3 A. I was just past the hotel that was on the right. I

4 believe it is the Hyatt or -- yes, so I turned right, go past

5 the hotel and then turned my left signal on and made the left,

6 the change there by the Hyatt, I believe the it is Hyatt.

7 Q. How long after -- how far had you traveled in the

8 right-hand lane after you turned your turn signal on before


9 you moved into the left-hand lane?

10 A. It immediately went from right turn signal for the right

11 to the left-turn signal. It was going from right turn signal

12 to a left-turn signal. If I remember, it is like a short

13 distance. To the Hyatt, in fact, I think the Hyatt is on the

14 corner of Losoya.

15 Q. Okay. My question really is, after you got on to Losoya

16 Street and maybe I miss upped your testimony I am sorry if I

17 did, but after you got on to Losoya Street and made your lane

18 change, how long was it -- how far had you traveled between

19 the time you put your left-turn signal on and the time you

20 moved from the right lane to the left lane?

21 A. Probably the length of the Hyatt. I am not sure how long

22 that is, but the turn signal was on at the beginning of where

23 the Hyatt is and was just past the Hyatt that I turned,

24 actually moved into the left lane.

25 Q. So you don't know? You just don't know how long of a

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

121

1 distance that was?

2 A. Oh, I would have to estimate. The Hyatt is kind of long.

3 A. I don't -- I don't know the distance offhand.

4 Q. All right. Thank you, sir. So you -- to make sure I

5 understood your testimony, Your Honor, making your left turn

6 on to Market Street at the time that you saw the police car


7 behind you?

8 A. Yes, sir. I was halfway between, in the turn to Market by

9 the sculpture.

10 Q. And you recognized the police vehicle as having turned on

11 its lights to pull you over?

12 A. Yes, sir. This was no other vehicle behind me and the

13 police car so I thought it was probably me, but by the time I

14 was on Market it was obvious.

15 Q. And you knew that it was a San Antonio -- or you knew that

16 it was a marked police vehicle anyway, right?

17 A. It looked like a police car,.

18 Q. Any question in your mind at that point really that it was

19 a San Antonio police car?

20 A. No. I knew it was a police officer in San Antonio so,

21 yes, sir, no questions.

22 Q. All right. So then you pulled up and pulled into the

23 Henry B. Gonzalez convention center driveway.

24 Q. And officer Richter pulled up where relative to your

25 vehicle?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

122

1 A. Directly behind me.

2 Q. When you say directly behind you, was there any distance

3 between the vehicles?

4 A. There was some distance, yes.

5 Q. Hike a car length two, car lengths?


6 A. Maybe half of a car length.

7 Q. And at that point, you knew that you were going to need to

8 show the officer that had pulled you over, your driver's

9 license and your insurance, correct?

10 A. I anticipated he would ask for them so.

11 Q. And where did you say that you retrieved your drivers

12 license from?

13 A. I got the driver's license from my wallet.

14 Q. And do you keep -- where do you keep your wallet -- where

15 was your wallet at that time?

16 A. It was on my passenger seat.

17 Q. So when you got your driver's license -- well, let me back

18 up. You looked in your rear-view mirror at some point to see

19 whether or not there was an officer coming, correct?

20 Q. And you understood at that point that it was a San Antonio

21 police officer that was approaching your car, right?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. No question about that in your mind, right?

24 A. Well, you know, a police officer in San Antonio, yes, sir.

25 Q. Okay. And when officer Richter approached, got to your

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

123

1 car?

2 A. Uh-huh.

3 Q. First of all, how long did it take after the stop for


4 officer Richter to get to your car?

5 A. Fifteen seconds, maybe, not long.

6 Q. Long enough for you to retrieve your license and your

7 insurance?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And your concealed handgun permit was with your license in

10 your wallet, correct?

11 A. Yes, sir. It is in a different compartment but it is

12 there, yes, sir.

13 Q. And you certainly had time to get that while he was

14 approaching you also, correct?

15 A. I don't -- I mean, I suppose I could have. But it wasn't

16 a whole lot of time. It felt rushed. I just had been pulled

17 over, getting this information. But I suppose I could have.

18 I certainly didn't make a conscious decision not to get it.

19 Q. Okay. You didn't make a conscious decision to get it

20 pause you didn't give it to him when he came up to the car,

21 right?

22 A. I didn't, but I wasn't waiting for him to get to the car.

23 I mean, he -- he was at the car as I had Mimi information in

24 my hands.

25 Q. All right so you could have gotten your concealed handgun

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

124

1 permit, you didn't make a conscious decision not to get it,

2 but you could have gotten it. Yes, sir.


3 Q. And you knew at least prior to September 1st, 2009, you

4 knew that you were supposed to tender your concealed handgun

5 license with your license, right?

6 A. Right. The -- my understanding at the time was that --

7 well my understanding at that time was that the law had

8 changed seven days prior and we no longer had to give our

9 concealed carry permit to officers when pulled over so I

10 thought that that was the state of the law.

11 Q. Okay. But you were wrong about that, right?

12 A. Yes, sir. The law changed not to change the requirement

13 but instead the law changed just getting rid of the penalty if

14 you don't do it, so --

15 >> Yes. As a military man, wouldn't you think that

16 it would be important to advise the officer that is coming to

17 your car that you have -- that you are carrying a loaded

18 nine-millimeter pistol in your pocket?

19 A. Sure. I mean, if she going to arrest me or whatever, I

20 would assume that that might be something he would want to

21 know, depending on the nature, but again I didn't make a

22 conscious decision not to provide it to him. It is just he

23 arrested me too fast. I mean, I had that information there

24 and he ordered me out of the vehicle like ten seconds later,

25 so I mean, I had no problem with him knowing that I had a

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

125


1 concealed carry card. This all happened extremely quickly.

2 Q. All right. But not as you have told us so quickly that

3 you couldn't have gotten your concealed handgun license?

4 A. I am being -- I am being maybe a little bit gracious to

5 the point that yes, I could have gotten the concealed carry

6 rather than my driver's license I could have moved faster. Or

7 something along those lines but it certainly was in my opinion

8 this was not -- this was not me -- this was not me not

9 providing it. It was overcome by events.

10 Q. All right. You did not provide it?

11 A. It is true. I did not provide it at that time, yes, sir.

12 Q. When officer Richter got up to your car, you say that he

13 just said insurance and REJ when officer Richter got to your

14 car he just said license and insurance?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. He didn't introduce himself?

17 A. That is correct, he did knots, sir.

18 Q. And you -- and you already had your license and insurance

19 in your hand at that point?

20 A. Yes, sir.

21 Q. Okay. And when he said license and insurance, you knew

22 that he wanted you to give you his license and insurance?

23 Your license and insurance?

24 A. Yes, sir.

25 Q. Let me back that up I completely messed that up. You knew

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

126


1 that he wanted -- competent he wanted you to give him your

2 license and insurance at that point, correct?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. Okay. Why didn't you just give it to him at that time?

5 A. Because I asked him why he pulled me over and we were

6 having a conversation and it is not like I waited a long time

7 in this conversation. He had just asked me for them and in

8 that time I asked him why did you pull me over and he said

9 because you have an out of stateliness plate and I with a

10 tonight make sure you have a driver's license. We were

11 Converse tag point and I had them right here so it didn't seem

12 like it was a major requirement for me to hand them over at

13 lightning speed to him. They are right here and we are having

14 a conversation, so --

15 Q. So you did not give them to him at that point?

16 A. At that instant, I did not, no, sir.

17 Q. All right. And that's the only thing that he had asked

18 you to do at that point, correct?

19 A. That's true, sir.

20 Q. Okay. And you asked him actually told him or asked him

21 why he had pulled you over?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. And then after you say, as you have testified, that he

24 told you that he wanted to see if you had a valid driver's

25 license, then you withdrew your license and insurance at that


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

127

1 point, correct?

2 A. No, sir.

3 Q. You didn't complete giving him the license and insurance

4 at that point?

5 A. At that point, yes, sir. That's true.

6 Q. And you did that because you wanted to challenge the

7 validity of the stop that he had made?

8 A. No, sir. It was tonight channel the validity. That's not

9 -- that had nothing to do with the license and registration it

10 is just that the conversation became the focus, I mean, I am

11 multitasking in the short time of space. This is just seconds

12 and we are having a conversation and I am confused now because

13 he just told me that he has pulled me over without legal

14 justification.

15 Q. And so, but what would have prevented you, if anything,

16 from simply at the same time you were multitasking,

17 multitasking your license and insurance out to officer

18 Richter?

19 A. Sure. I could have done that. That's true.

20 Q. And probably wouldn't be here?

21 A. In that instant, however, I don't believe that that would

22 be much different than me giving it to him five seconds or ten

23 secondses later while we are having this conversation. I

24 gave, I gave to him when I and thed the vehicle ten seconds


25 later,s it was not a conscious decision to not give them to

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

128

1 him. That was not -- all I was doing was talking to him at

2 that moment and seconds later he ordered me out of the vehicle

3 and I stepped out of the vehicle and he not all my documents

4 in his hand.

5 Q. Officer Richter had asked you for your license and

6 insurance, you didn't tell him, look, you know, I want to talk

7 about this first, you didn't you didn't tell him why you were

8 not giving him your license and insurance, did you?

9 A. I think he upped why I wasn't, because we were having a

10 conversation and only seconds had elapsed.

11 Q. Well, that is not -- my question, is you did not tell him

12 that you were not going to give it to him at that point,

13 correct?

14 A. That is correct. I didn't say that.

15 A. That is true.

16 Q. You really do not know what was going through officer

17 Richter's mind at that point, correct?

18 A. That is definitely true.

19 Q. Okay. Did you -- you told officer Richter that he was

20 violating your constitutional rights, didn't he?

21 A. That's not true, that's incorrect, I never said that.

22 Q. And officer Richter told you on several occasions to give

23 him your license and insurance prior to the time that you gave


24 it to him, true?

25 A. That is incorrect, sir. That's false.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

129

1 Q. Why would -- strike that. So it was about ten seconds

2 from the time that officer Richter got to your car to the time

3 that you got out of your car?

4 A. No, sir. From him coming from his car to my car and me

5 getting out?

6 Q. Right.

7 A. No. It would have been ten seconds or so for him to walk

8 from his car to my car and then another ten, 15 seconds maybe

9 ten seconds probably closer before he had arrived at my

10 vehicle and ordered me out of the vehicle, and I got out of

11 the vehicle. It was probably -- from ordering me out of the

12 vehicle I would say closer to ten seconds, 15 seconds before

13 if I got out and I was actually outside the vehicle. It was

14 very fast.

15 Q. So let me just make sure I understand. It was ten to 15

16 seconds from the time he got to your window to the time that

17 you got out of your vehicle?

18 A. That is correct.

19 Q. And it is your testimony that -- that the officer -- that

20 you never said anything to officer Richter about violating

21 your constitutional rights?


22 A. That is correct, sir. I never said anything about my

23 constitutional rights.

24 Q. Okay. You are obviously from your testimony here today

25 very keen about making sure your constitutional rights are

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

130

1 kept intact, correct?

2 A. That is true, sir.

3 Q. Okay. And you felt like you had been pulled over for an

4 invalid reason?

5 A. After he informed me that he pulled me over just to see if

6 I had a driver's license, yes, sir.

7 Q. Okay. And you believed that was a violation of your

8 constitutional rights?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. And you never said that to him?

11 A. The only time I mentioned the Constitution was in the --

12 when we almost got near the magistrate's office and I let him

13 know about the importance and the people I saw defending the

14 Constitution that he had just trampled on, other than that, I

15 expressed the same ideas without ever mentioning the term

16 constitutional rights. I said you pulled me over without

17 cause.

18 Q. Okay. And that's all that that took for officer, in your

19 -- based on your testimony, all it took for officer Richter to

20 become completely irate was you saying you pulled me over


21 without cause?

22 A. Absolutely.

23 Q. Period?

24 A. Like a switch flipped.

25 Q. And at that point, -- had you ever run into officer

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

131

1 Richter in San Antonio before?

2 A. Not that I am aware of, no, sir.

3 Q. Do you have any idea what he was doing prior to the time

4 that he pulled you over?

5 A. From reading documents I do know. I mean, I believe I

6 have an idea, but at that time, I had no idea what he was

7 doing prior.

8 Q. Sure. All right. So have you -- after he became, as you

9 say, irate, did you ask him to calm down?

10 A. No, sir.

11 Q. Did he raise his voice at you?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. What did he say?

14 A. Well, when he told know get out of the vehicle, that was,

15 you know, get out of the vehicle, very irate, red faced,

16 stepped back, aggressive postures. And then why are you being

17 aggressive, don't you know I am a cop? From there on, it was.

18 Until we got -- it wasn't until we got close to the


19 magistrate's office that his demeanor had gone band back and

20 was not more mellow at the magistrate's office.

21 Q. And when you got out of the car, officer Richter asked you

22 to turn around and face the car so he could handcuff you?

23 A. He said turn around and face your vehicle, yes.

24 Q. And you did?

25 A. Yes, sir.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

132

1 Q. And he put the handcuffs on you?

2 A. Yes, sir.

3 Q. And how long did that take?

4 A. Putting the handcuffs on me?

5 Q. Well just from the time you got out of your car until the

6 point you were actually the handcuffed.

7 A. Three to five seconds.

8 Q. Then how long was it between the time that you left the

9 side of your car and got into the back of the patrol car?

10 A. Again, probably ten to 15 seconds.

11 Q. Ever did you ever during that period of time tell officer

12 Richter that you had a loaded handgun in your right front

13 cargo pants pocket?

14 A. That seemed, at that time, that seemed probably not a good

15 idea to inform him at that point of, so, no, sir, I did not.

16 Q. All right. When you did inform him of that, you say --

17 first of all, you say that he didn't get over being irate


18 until you got to the magistrate's office, roughly, right?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. So he was still out irate at the time that you did tell

21 him you had a loaded hand gun in your pocket, correct?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. What did he do?

24 A. Check.

25 A. He told me that, you know, that was one more thing he got

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

133

1 me on.

2 Q. What did you think he was going to do if you told him

3 between the time that you were -- or during the period of time

4 that you were going from your car to his car?

5 A. I didn't know at that point.

6 Q. Well, obviously he did not do anything, correct?

7 A. Anything.

8 A. As far as what?

9 Q. As far as were you worried he was going to do something to

10 harm you?

11 A. Yes. That was certainly a possibility.

12 Q. Okay. Obviously that never happened?

13 A. That did not happen outside of handcuffs and, you know,

14 that. It was not a beatdown story. However, I would, I was

15 certainly concerned.


16 Q. Offered, Richter, did officer Richter take the handgun

17 from you while you were at the patrol vehicle -- in the patrol

18 vehicle there at the Henry B. Gonzales convention center?

19 A. No, sir he did not.

20 Q. Are you sure about that?

21 A. I am positive.

22 Q. And you got in the car, how long were you there before you

23 left for the magistrate's office?

24 A. After he got me into the car until we actually pulled out,

25 it was probably 20 minutes, 25 minutes, maybe.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

134

1 Q. Mr. Rynearson, being in the military for almost 19 and a

2 half years now, I mean, you are supposed to follow orders,

3 correct?

4 A. Yes, sir. I am supposed to follow lawful orders, that is

5 correct.

6 Q. And you challenge unlawful orders; is that right?

7 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, may we approach on this.

8 THE COURT: No, that's all right. That is an

9 objection, that is sustained.

10 BY MR. RALLS:

11 Q. You challenged officer Richter's ability to pull you over,

12 correct?

13 Q. Or whether he had pulled you over validly, correct?

14 A. I asked him to confirm that he had just pulled me over


15 without cause and I believe that he certainly took that as a

16 challenge. And that was my intention to point out to him that

17 he -- you can't just pull me over to see if I have a driver's

18 license. So in that sense, yes, sir, in that sense, I believe

19 he felt challenged.

20 Q. You don't know what would have happened had you just

21 similar Friday handed him your driver's license and insurance,

22 correct?

23 A. I don't know. I don't know that anything would have

24 changed. You right, sir, I don't know.

25 Q. Zero you could have gotten a verbal warning?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

135

1 A. A verbal warning for what, sir?

2 Q. For failing to signal a lane change?

3 A. He had not mentioned failing to signal a lane change until

4 I challenged him, so I don't believe that that would have -- I

5 don't believe I would have gotten a verbal warning for

6 something I did not do had I given him my documents and not

7 challenged him. But you are right, sir, I don't know. I

8 don't know what he would have done.

9 Q. When you left -- you left the convention center and went

10 to the magistrate's court and that is when you had the

11 conversation about the fact that you had killed people and

12 seen other people die and your constitutional rights, correct?


13 A. A yes, sir. That's when I told him I had seen far better

14 men die to protect the document he had just trampled on, yes,

15 sir.

16 Q. And you were sitting in the backseat where relative to

17 officer Richter in the front seat?

18 A. I was left side and he was on the left side, driver's

19 side.

20 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, excuse me, may we approach

21 the bench?

22 THE COURT: Yes. Before you do that, though.

23 Ladies and gentlemen, let's go ahead and take our afternoon

24 break and we will bring you back in about ten minutes.

25 (Jury leaves courtroom.)

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

136

1 THE COURT: Please be seated. Yes.

2 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I just wanted to go into

3 given Mr. Rynearson's testimony that he had received a letter

4 of reprimand I wanted to go into the motion in limine ruling

5 regarding this letter of rip manned that he got back on

6 October 27, 2009. And ask him about other letters of

7 reprimand that he has got ten as well as any discipline for

8 failure to follow direct orders.

9 THE COURT: Your response.

10 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor. We had quite a bit

11 of an argument or discussion here on October 22nd, Your Honor,


12 as it concerns this letter, Your Honor, the specific ruling of

13 the Court was that we could not ask for damages relating to

14 any effects on his promotion, ability to move on through a

15 higher rank. That -- and we have complied with that Court's

16 ruling. I don't think we are precluded from saying that the

17 reporting this arrest and getting a letter of reprimand caused

18 him a stigma. And that it went into his personnel file.

19 THE COURT: The only thing that is concerning me

20 though as I reviewed the exhibits in this case, is leather

21 letter of reprimand, pardon me, the letter of reprimand is

22 dated October 27, '09, in that letter it indicates two

23 incidents for which he is being reprimanded. The incident

24 which is the subject of this case and then alleged

25 misrepresentations that he made to his superiors regarding the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

137

1 Air Force times and any articles that might be in there. So

2 he is reprimanded for two things. And so now you have

3 injected into this case that he ought to receive damages for

4 being subjected to a letter of reprimand, when the letter of

5 reprimand has two separate items in it.

6 MR. MALDONADO: I think -- I think I have injected

7 to the Court he had to report, in this trial, he had to report

8 this to the -- and it lettered in the letter of reprimand, I

9 am not sure bringing up a reprimand on an unrelated, doesn't


10 have to do with reporting a reporting an arrest or, you know,

11 disobeying an unlawful order or lawful order has nothing to do

12 with that, Your Honor.

13 THE COURT: You are missing -- you are mixing and

14 mixing things. He receives two letters of reprimands, he

15 receives October 7, '09 which is reprimanding him for this

16 incident and misrepresentations regarding an article in the

17 Air Force times. And then he receives a separate reprimand in

18 October of 2011. That is the refall to obey command. So I am

19 trying to keep the two very separate. So with regard to --

20 and so we are not going into the refusal to obey a command. I

21 am only concerned about whether I should let the defendant

22 bring up the October 2709 reprimand at all.

23 MR. MALDONADO: I think that -- I think that Mr.

24 Ralls certainly could ask have you ever been, prior to

25 October, September 7, 2009, have you been reprimanded for any

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

138

1 similar events, any similar infractions.

2 THE COURT: Well the answer to that is no.

3 MR. MALDONADO: Right.

4 THE COURT: So now we are going back to then,

5 Mr. Rynearson raised in the standard is an element, what I

6 consider to be seeking as an element of damages the fact that

7 he received a letter of reprimand. Is that your theory or

8 not?


9 MR. MALDONADO: That he is -- repeat that again,

10 Your Honor.

11 MR. MALDONADO: Maybe I can read it.

12 THE COURT: Well, that's fine too. Are you going to

13 argue a to the jury he ought to receive mental anguish damages

14 for having received the letter of reprimand in October of '09?

15 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, may I?

16 THE COURT: Well, I guess I need an answer to that

17 first, because if the answer is yes, well, then, I am going to

18 hear from you. If the answer is no, then I know where we are

19 headed.

20 MR. MALDONADO: I guess my concern is this, Your

21 Honor. Is that I don't -- I don't think I have a problem if

22 Mr. Rynearson answers questions about what else was he

23 reprimanded for on October 2009, if Mr. Ralls insists on

24 submitting this for the jury to review, I would have to talk

25 to my client, because I don't think it is fair for the jury to

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

139

1 see this. You know, the fact that he was stigmatized for

2 having to report the arrest stands on its own and he can claim

3 that he was damaged for that, independent of receiving a

4 reprimand for a debate that he had with public affairs.

5 THE COURT: So let's pa go back to my question are

6 you going to try to argue to the jury that he suffered mental


7 anguish damages as a result of being reprimanded in October of

8 '09?

9 MR. MALDONADO: At this point I would have to say

10 yes, Your Honor.

11 THE COURT: Well, then you make it an aspect of

12 inquiry. So Mr. Ralls.

13 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, it goes -- he has injected

14 this letter of reprimand that is misleading the jury at this

15 point he only received one letter of reprimand when he in fact

16 got two letters of reprimand at the same time and both, if

17 anything, had, if he was -- if his mental anguish was impacted

18 in some way or his career was impacted in some way, and that

19 has left out, the jury doesn't know one way or the other but

20 they should know he had a second letter of reprimand at the

21 same time he had the first letter of reprimand because it is

22 unfair otherwise.

23 MR. MALDONADO: Can we clarify I think we are

24 talking about one letter of reprimand.

25 THE COURT: Well.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

140

1 MR. MALDONADO: That includes two things.

2 THE COURT: Mr. Ralls is talking about two. This is

3 my ruling. Mr. Rynearson has injected the October 2709 letter

4 of reprimand into this proceeding, so I am going allow Mr.

5 Ralls to cross-examine him as to October 27, '09 reprimand,


6 and the contents of D 3. Mr. Rynearson has not opened the

7 door regarding the October 2011 letter of reprimand. So that

8 is not going to come in and he is not injecting or I am not

9 going to allow because it is speculation the injection that

10 his reprimand or reprimands caused him to be denied promotion

11 to lieutenant colonel so I am not going to submit that as an

12 element of damages, because that is speculative on his part.

13 So that is the ruling. I am splitting it between two letter

14 of reprimands. October 2011 does not get addressed by the

15 defendant. Mr. Ralls can go into the October 09.

16 MR. RALLS: And may I admit deposition Exhibit I am

17 sorry Defendant's Exhibit 3 as an exhibit, Your Honor?

18 THE COURT: Well, you are going to have to prove it

19 up, but you can question him from it and then if it has been

20 proven up then I will entertain any objections at that point.

21 MR. MALDONADO: Can I, sorry to beat this Horst,

22 Your Honor, I don't have my client here to confer on this.

23 This is the question regarding seeking -- would the Court --

24 if we asked for damages simply on the fact that he was

25 stigmatized by having to report the arrest and we don't

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

141

1 request damages for the letter of reprimand, and we are fine

2 -- I mean I need to consult with my client and we are fine

3 with an instruction from the Court saying they are not seeking


4 damages for the letter of reprimand in and any effects it may

5 have on his promotion, could we have in that way limit the

6 admission and questioning of this letter of reprimand?

7 THE COURT: If you are not going to seek damages as

8 a result of being reprimanded then this no longer becomes an

9 issue and I will later instruct the jury to disregard the fact

10 that he received any letter of reprimand. That is not an

11 element of damages in this case.

12 MR. MALDONADO: Can Mr. Rynearson come down and --

13 THE COURT: Yes. Let's take a five minute break and

14 you can confer.


16 (Brief recess.)

17 THE COURT: Thank you. Please be seated. What are

18 rewe doing.

19 MR. MALDONADO: After consulting with my client we

20 will not request damages for the letter of reprimand and a

21 would agree to limiting instruction that that, that we are not

22 requesting that and notwithstanding his testimony that he was

23 reprimanded.

24 MR. RALLS: I am sorry what was the last part about

25 rescinding? Did you say something about rescinding his

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

142

1 testimony.

2 MR. MALDONADO: Not withstanding the fact he


3 testified about the letter of reprimand.

4 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, regardless, it is still

5 before the jury. There is no way they can -- there is no way

6 we can get it out of the juror's mine that he has an adverse

7 personnel action in his military file as a result of this

8 incident and it is unfair to -- and misleading and it is

9 unfair to my client to not let the jury be made aware that he

10 had a similar adverse personnel action, not similar based in

11 in fact but he also had a letter of reprimand for another

12 reason at the same time.

13 THE COURT: Yes. Now you talking about the

14 2011 letter.

15 MR. RALLS: No, no. You were I am talking about the

16 2009 letter. Because he had two reprimands on that letter.

17 THE COURT: Yes, but one was for this incident, no

18 at similar incident. And then the other incident is the Air

19 Force times article regarding the Border Patrol, is that.

20 MR. RALLS: Right, that's what I meant not a similar

21 in a fact incident but he has two reprimands in the

22 October 27, 20mine letter.

23 THE COURT: That is going to be cured by a limiting

24 instruction so I want to keep this case just to this case. We

25 are not going to go into other incidents. So any objections

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

143


1 from the defense are overruled.

2 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, may I admit Defendant's

3 Exhibit 3 just for the record.

4 THE COURT: Well, for purposes for appellate

5 purposes but not for showing the jury, yes.

6 MR. RALLS: Yes, sir, I am sorry, exactly righteous

7 so that can be made a part of the record.

8 THE COURT: Anything else we need to take up before

9 the jury comes in.

10 MR. MALDONADO: Do I need to state on the record any

11 objections to the, to that exhibit, Your Honor?

12 THE COURT: No, your objections are carried over.

13 MR. MALDONADO: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor.

14 THE COURT: Anything else, Mr. Ralls?

15 MR. RALLS: Yes, Your Honor, no, nothing before the

16 jury comes in.

17 THE COURT: Bring them in.

18 (Jury enters courtroom.). (Exhibit 3 is admitted

19 for appellate purposes only) reporter's note).

20 THE COURT: Please be seated. Mr. Ralls, you can

21 continue.

22 BY MR. RALLS:

23 Q. Thank you, Your Honor.

24 BY MR. RALLS:

25 Q. Mr. Rynearson, let's go back to the point where you went

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

144


1 to the magistrate's office. So when you got to the

2 magistrate's office, you were booked into the -- into a

3 holding cell there, correct?

4 A. Yes, sir.

5 Q. And you stayed in that holding cell for how long?

6 A. Approximately six hours.

7 Q. Six hours total?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. You were taken out at one point for -- to get some bonding

10 money or something and put back in, right?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. Okay.

13 A. Actually, sir, after I got the bonding money from the ATM,

14 I didn't go back in, but initially when she had me, when she

15 told me that was an option and I said I will take that option,

16 she then placed me back in but --

17 Q. All right. Okay. So and during that six hours, how many

18 other people how many people were this the cell?

19 A. I believe six.

20 Q. Okay. And you know -- once you were taken to the

21 magistrate's office, you weren't taken to a different

22 building, were you?

23 A. No, sir.

24 Q. Okay. Are you familiar, not having been around San

25 Antonio, with the Bexar County adult detention center,


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

145

1 otherwise known as the jail?

2 A. No, sir.

3 Q. You weren't taken to the jail?

4 A. No, sir. I guess I was taken to the magistrate's office

5 and put in a cell.

6 Q. And then you were released after six hours and basically

7 went home at that point, right or went back to your apartment?

8 A. Yes, sir. I went back into my apartment until the

9 property section opened up so I could try to retrieve my

10 property.

11 Q. And were you able to retrieve all of your property with

12 the exception of your block, wasn't it a Glock?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 Q. With the exception of your Glock nine-millimeter were you

15 able to retrieve all the rest of cure property?

16 A. That is correct, yes, sir, I was.

17 Q. And you would have been able to retrieve your Glock had

18 you been a little more persistent about it, true?

19 A. Sir, if I had taken leave from work, and traveled to San

20 Antonio and stood in line and talked with the same people who

21 took my weapon and didn't refuse to give it back to me even

22 though I haven't been convicted of any crime failing alone

23 failing to signal a lane change and even though I have a

24 concealed carry permit.


25 MR. RALLS: Objection, nonresponsive.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

146


2 THE WITNESS: Okay, sir.

3 BY MR. RALLS:

4 Q. My question is simply, you would have -- if you had been

5 more persistent you could have gotten your Glock back,

6 correct?

7 A. Sir, that is possible. With much more effort on my part I

8 may have gotten my Glock back.

9 Q. All right. And the mental anguish that you suffered,

10 aside from the fact that you believed that your constitutional

11 rights were violated, while you were in the magistrate's

12 office was just observing, being in there with these other

13 individuals?

14 A. The traumatic experience isn't so much from being in the

15 jail. I mean, that was certainly unpleasant, someone was --

16 it was unpleasant. The real trauma comes from (triple) being

17 seized out of nowhere and having your liberty taken away, your

18 body, the control of your body taken away, someone puts

19 handcuffs on you, you have no idea what they are going to do

20 with you. They can do this, they could do that, you have

21 no-no, you have no control, that's a trauma.

22 Q. And you had been arrested once before and spent the night

23 in jail, correct?


24 A. That is correct, sir.

25 Q. What were you arrested for on that occasion?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

147

1 A. That one was in Dallas, Texas. I had just pot to my first

2 operational squadron, so I was a brand-new lieutenant,

3 brand-new wings, and I hadn't been in Texas, outside of pilot

4 training for more than two weeks, went to Dallas with some

5 people that were in a military officer group, they invited me,

6 we are at Ruby Tuesday in the bar of Ruby Tuesday and

7 drinking, a police officer comes over to my new friend,

8 another pilot in the squadron and tells him he better clean up

9 his language or he is going to get taken to jail and I say can

10 you really be taken to jail for your happening and he said I

11 was. Talking to you I am just asking a legal question and he

12 arrested me. He claimed it was for public intoxication. He

13 refused to give me a blood test, he refused to give me a

14 sobriety test. The charm was dismissed.

15 Q. So -- but you spent so that is another occasion where you

16 asked a run in with a police officer that you had nothing to

17 do with being arrested?

18 A. I am sorry, sir, nothing to do with -- in as far as you

19 are concerned, you did nothing wrong to be arrested on that

20 occasion either, correct.

21 A. As far as I was concerned and as far as the judge was


22 concerned I suppose when he dismissed it.

23 Q. Well, objection nonresponsive you really don't know why

24 the judge dismissed it, do you?

25 A. Because the police officer failed to show up.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

148

1 Q. So now, Mr. Rynearson, on that occasion, so you would have

2 had the same feelings about your constitutional rights being

3 vie made, wouldn't you?

4 A. Yes. I believe in that case, you know, it was a violation

5 of my Fourth Amendment rights unless he really thought I was

6 publicly intoxicated, but I mean, that's that's questionable,

7 maybe he thought I was. I would give him some leeway on that

8 one.

9 Q. Did you file a lawsuit against him?

10 A. No, sir. I deployed to Bosnia and I didn't file a lawsuit

11 on him.

12 Q. Okay.

13 Q. And how long were you in jail on that particular occasion?

14 A. Oh, I was almost -- it was almost 20 years ago, I think

15 maybe, I probably got in there early afternoon. Twelve hours,

16 probably, roughly.

17 Q. By the way, how long have you been a major?

18 A. I have been a major for probably eight years. Roughly.

19 Q. And I think that you testified earlier that officer

20 Richter yanked you out of your car. Are you talking about


21 actually physically reached in and yanked you?

22 A. No, sir. I was being figurative.

23 Q. Okay. Well, all right. So he told you to get out of your

24 car and wow not out. He showed up and quickly ordered me out

25 of my vehicle and put me in handcuffs.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

149

1 Q. Objection, nonresponsive, Your Honor?

2 THE COURT: That's sustained.

3 BY MR. RALLS:

4 Q. Mr. Rynearson, the question is really very simple, he

5 ordered you to get out of your car and you got out of your

6 car?

7 A. That is correct. I apologize.

8 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I will pass the witness at

9 this time.

10 THE COURT: Any redirect?

11 MR. MALDONADO: None, Your Honor.

12 THE COURT: You may step down, sir. Thank you.

13 THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.

14 THE COURT: .

15 THE COURT: Any other witnesses?

16 MR. MALDONADO: No-no Your Honor, we rest.

17 THE COURT: Plaintiffs rest.

18 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I guess I need to make a --


19 please.

20 THE COURT: Your Honor, I have to take up a legal

21 matter again, I am sorry to excuse you but I will bring you

22 back as soon as I can. Recess recess for jury. Change that.

23 (Jury leaves courtroom.)

24 THE COURT: Please seated Mr. Ralls.

25 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor, Your Honor, at

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

150

1 this time comes defendant Edwin Rynearson and files a motion

2 for judgment as a matter of law on the plaintiff's claims

3 against the defendant on the -- on the Fourth Amendment claim

4 there was -- we don't believe there is sufficient evidence to

5 support a violation of his Fourth Amendment, secondly with

6 regard to the First Amendment claim there is no evidence that

7 there was any kind of chilling effect on Mr. Rynearson as a

8 result of this incident. So he doesn't meet the requirements

9 of the Keenan case, even if the Court finds that there was not

10 probable cause for the Fourth Amendment arrest and finally,

11 Your Honor, we ask for judgment as a matter of law on any

12 allegation of -- any kind of punitive damages as a result of

13 the fact that there has been no evidence which would support

14 any punitive damages at this point.

15 THE COURT: Your response.

16 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor. On the illegal

17 stop, Your Honor, the evidence before the Court right now is


18 that officer Richter stopped Mr. Rynearson for an illegal

19 reason, a reason that is not sanctioned by the United States.

20 That is enough to go to the jury at this point, Your Honor.

21 On the false arrest, no probable cause, the evidence before

22 the Court right now is that there was no probable cause

23 because no violation had been committed. If Mr. Rynearson is

24 to be believed he had not violated any traffic violation, any

25 law that warranted his arrest and be put in jail. On the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

151

1 First Amendment retaliation case, Your Honor, the evidence is

2 that he was retaliated against for having spoken up. My

3 understanding of the law is that it is not a requirement that

4 he specifically show that his speech was chilled, but rather

5 that the actions of the defendant were intended to chill his

6 speech and for that reason -- for those reasons -- oh, and on

7 the punitive damages, Your Honor, the evidence before the

8 Court right now is that officer Richter, a peace officer of

9 the state of Texas, who can be presumed to know what the laws

10 are, intentionally, knowingly disregarded the federal rights

11 of Mr. Rynearson and violated the constitutional rights and

12 for those reasons, Your Honor, we ask that the Court deny the

13 motion, judgment for the defendant.

14 THE COURT: What is concerning me is the punitive

15 damage claims. I mean, don't you have a burden of showing


16 maliciousness or reckless indifference?

17 MR. MALDONADO: I am not sure about reckless

18 indifference, Your Honor, because that may be an Eighth

19 Amendment standard, but we do have to show that there was a

20 disregard of his federal rights, and for that reason, evidence

21 is being the Court that we have a peace officer who is assumed

22 to know what the laws are, and he intentionally disregards

23 them. He stated the reason he stopped, at least the evidence

24 right now before the Court is the reason he -- the reason the

25 officer stopped Mr. Rynearson check up above is for a reason

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

152

1 not sanctioned by the Supreme Court and is not lawful under

2 the Fourth Amendment. And an additional fact, if I can add,

3 Your Honor, is that the jury could believe -- if the jury

4 believes Mr. Rynearson, they could conclude that officer

5 Rynearson not only then violated Mr. Rynearson's rights but

6 then he lied about it by issuing him a citation. Rick.

7 THE COURT: Mr. Ralls, do you want to respond?

8 MR. RALLS: Yes, Your Honor. On the -- on the First

9 Amendment retaliation claim, retaliatory arrest claim, Your

10 Honor, the Keenan case, which is Keenan versus police go lis

11 ski. 290, fed third two, 52, it is a 2002 Fifth Circuit case

12 says that to establish a First Amendment retaliation claim

13 against an ordinary citizen, Keenan must show they were

14 engaged in constitutionally protected activity, with


15 defendant's, would defendant's action cause them so suffer an

16 injury from an person of ordinary firm tons continue to engage

17 in that activity and the defendant's adverse actions were

18 intended to. Protected conduct. And I don't believe there is

19 any evidence with regard to Mr. Rynearson's -- with regard to

20 a whether or not a person of ordinary firmness would have been

21 chilled from continuing to engage in the kind of activity that

22 Mr. Rynearson was engaging in. With regard to the punitive

23 damages claim, Your Honor, I think that the plaintiffs have to

24 show that Mr. Rynearson was maliciously, consciously and

25 maliciously disregarded the plaintiff's constitutional rights.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

153

1 It can't simply be that he consciously disregarded the

2 constitutional rights, it has to be intentional and malicious,

3 and I don't think there is any evidence of that, Your Honor.

4 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, I took the -- Mr. Ralls

5 spoke about this, the Keenan case.

6 THE COURT: I am not worried about that one. I will

7 hear your response on punitive damages.

8 MR. MALDONADO: On punitive damages.

9 MR. RALLS: I am sorry, but may I just addles, there

10 was no -- he never issued a citation that was -- that was put

11 in the record anywhere. I mean, even if -- I don't think

12 there is going to be -- the evidence will be disputed with


13 regard to the first of all whether a citation was issued and

14 there certainly was never one put on record anywhere, Your

15 Honor.

16 THE COURT: Your argument on punitive damages.

17 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor, again, the proposed

18 instructions that we submitted are drawn from the Fifth

19 Circuit pattern instructions. Now, I grant that those are

20 just pattern instructions, we have to check the law, but my

21 research of it is you have to show either the conduct was

22 malicious or in reckless disregard of the plaintiff's federal

23 rights and there is no requirement that by a conscious

24 disregard, an intentional disregard, in this instance, the

25 evidence has shown that Mr. Rynearson clearly expressed his

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

154

1 fright to question a police officer, clearly, clearly

2 expressed his right that he had been unlawfully stopped, which

3 that is protected, and as a result officer Richter took

4 adverse actions against -- against Mr. Rynearson and I think

5 we have presented enough evidence for the jury to conclude

6 whether there was a reckless disregard of Mr. Rynearson's

7 rights.

8 THE COURT: Yes. Sheer the ruling on the motion for

9 directed verdict. On the first two points, the First

10 Amendment claim and the Fourth Amendment claim, that shot

11 denied. With regard to the punitive damages, however, there


12 has to be a showing of malice, and there hasn't been the

13 requisite showing of malice that would entitle a reasonable

14 jury to find malicious conduct in this case. So it is granted

15 as to punitive damages. Anything else?

16 MR. MALDONADO: If we go back this evening, you were

17 and we do research would with and it? A brief would the Court

18 reconsider? Would the Court accept that?

19 THE COURT: I will accept it, I am always willing to

20 stand corrected, so you are welcome to try to see where I am

21 failing here. There will be homework tonight for both of you

22 anyway because I will give you the proposed jury charge in a

23 little while and you will need to take that home tonight and

24 see what I have done there.

25 THE COURT: Anything else, Mr. Ralls?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

155


2 THE COURT: We are ready to bring them in.

3

4 THE COURT: Please be seated. Mr. Ralls, your

5 witness.

6 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor. Your Honor, at

7 this time the defense would call Edwin Richter to the stand.

8 MR. MALDONADO: Test.

9 MR. RALLS: Test.


10 (Oath administered to the witness.)


12 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

13 CROSS EXAMINATION

14 BY MR. RALLS:

15 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Richter, you go by Rick?

16 A. Yes, sir, I do.

17 Q. Rick, can you tell us a little bit about yourself, where

18 you are born and raised?

19 A. Here in San Antonio, Knicks hospital, I spent some of my

20 younger years here and my father was military, so we moved

21 around a little bit after that, north Texas, outside of

22 Dallas, Fort Worth, where he was a helicopter pilot, training

23 for Vietnam. From there, to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where

24 he went to the war college and from there, to Fort Bragg,

25 North Carolina, where I did middle school and high school.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

156

1 Q. Where did you graduate from high school?

2 A. Westover high school in North Carolina.

3 Q. Did you have other family members that were in the

4 military?

5 A. Yes, sir, I did. My father, did 29 years in the U.S.

6 army, retired, and my brother did 20 years, and my self, I did

7 six years active duty.

8 Q. Okay. And your brother did 20 years in what?


9 A. Special forces. U.S. army.

10 Q. Okay. And you said that you did six years in the

11 military, what branch were you in?

12 A. I was in the U.S. army.

13 Q. What was your military occupation or specialty in the, or

14 your job in the army?

15 A. Military police officer a.

16 Q. And for the entire six years?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. Okay. And did you enlist for six years or is that more

19 than one enlistment?

20 A. I enlisted initially three years and then I reenlisted for

21 another 323.

22 MR. MALDONADO: You could have gotten out after

23 three.

24 A. Yes, sir, certainly.

25 Q. And so what years were you in the army?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

157

1 A. July of 1979 through April of 1985.

2 Q. And where were you stationed while you were in the army?

3 A. Two years in the Panama canal, who years at forth

4 Leavenworth, and a year over in turkey, about 60 miles from

5 Russia and five months at Fort Hood.

6 A. And the rest of that was schools here and there.


7 Q. All right, sir. Rick, when did you get out? Let's say

8 you got out of the military in 85, you said?

9 A. Yes, I did.

10 Q. And you got out where?

11 A. Fort Hood, Texas.

12 Q. Did you receive an honorable discharge?

13 A. Yes, sir. I did.

14 Q. Where did you go Fort Worth after you left the army?

15 A. I wanted to come to San Antonio PD to get in as a civilian

16 police officer but they had a hiring freeze back then in 1985

17 so I knew the Chief of Police up in Leavenworth Kansas where I

18 had been a police, military police officer, so he always told

19 me hey if you need a job come find me and I will hire you, so

20 I got out of the army Friday night and got hired on up there

21 Monday morning, so -- have with the Leavenworth Kansas police

22 department.

23 A. Yes, sir.

24 Q. What was your job with them?

25 A. I was patrol officer.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

158

1 Q. Okay. Did you have to go through any sort of academy for

2 -- to become a peace officer in Kansas?

3 A. Yes, sir. Went through the state of Kansas, all police

4 officers go through a state run police academy, so I went

5 through the state of Kansas police department.


6 Q. And how long were you on, let me back up did you have to

7 go through any sort of academy to become a military policeman?

8 A. Yes, sir, I went there Umile tripolice, went through basic

9 training and after that I went to graduate school, military

10 police fad, AIT.

11 Q. And how long were you in Leavenworth, with the Leavenworth

12 PD?

13 A. (Academy).

14 A. Just around three years.


16 A. I transferred to San Antonio police, rehired again, so I

17 applied down here and transferred down here.

18 Q. And were you accepted in the academy at San Antonio Police

19 Department?

20 A. I was, yeah, I worked that night, Friday night, 11 worth

21 police department, backed packed up to U-haul and started the

22 San Antonio Police Department Monday morning.

23 Q. And a when was that? Do you recall the dates that you

24 were in the police academy?

25 A. I believe it was August of 1987, I started the police

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

159

1 academy, I don't remember the exact date, I think August 13,

2 something like that.

3 Q. And how long was the police academy at that time?


4 A. Six months long.

5 Q. All right. Once wow pot out of the police academy, where

6 were you assigned?

7 A. Patrol, west substation on Culebra road.

8 Q. Okay. And how long were you assigned to patrol?

9 A. I worked out on the west substation for ten months and

10 then I transferred to the central patrol substation downtown

11 for two months.

12 Q. What did you do as a patrol officer?

13 A. You are dispatched by the police dispatchers for any

14 number of the calls, accidents, to disturbances, to alarms, to

15 fights, to murders, you handle everything.

16 Q. And you did that for about a year?

17 A. Yes, sir.

18 Q. All right. After you left patrol, where were you

19 transferred to?

20 A. I went into the traffic division.

21 Q. And what is the traffic division in SAPD?

22 A. The traffic division in SAPD maintains all the freeways

23 and major arteries throughout the entire City of San Antonio

24 for traffic violations of the Texas transportation code.

25 Q. All right.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

160

1 Q. And how long were you in the traffic -- is it the

2 division?


3 A. Traffic division,.

4 Q. How long were you in the traffic division?

5 A. I worked San Antonio traffic division for nine years.

6 Q. How many -- and when you worked, is that a 40 hour job

7 week or how does that work?

8 A. It is 40 hours a week, yes, sir.

9 Q. And when you are out on the road, during those 40 hours

10 are you making contact with civilians?

11 A. Substantial contacts, yes, all through the shift.

12 Q. And how many contacts would you say that you made a day

13 with civilians when you were a traffic officer?

14 A. I would say anywhere from 15 to if the. Fifteen to 50.

15 Q. And you did that for about nine years?

16 A. Yes, sir.

17 Q. So can you estimate for us the number of contacts you had?

18 A. It is in the hundreds of thousands.

19 Q. Okay.

20 A. I wouldn't even, wouldn't even know the number, sir.

21 Q. All right. When you left the traffic division, where did

22 you go?

23 A. After nine years on the traffic division I transferred

24 over to the bike patrol division downtown.

25 Q. And can you explain to the major a little bit about what

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

161


1 the bike patrol is?

2 A. Bike patrol is like your policeman on a mountain pike but

3 he is readily accessible, because we can go places where a car

4 can't go, so we take care of the entire downtown area as far

5 as any kind of crime that is observed, the almost 24 hours a

6 day, I think the bike patrol unit runs 20 hours a day so there

7 is a four hour lapse that the patrol cars are the only ones on

8 the street but other than that all the businesses downtown,

9 directly deal with the bike patrol units, freeze up the cars

10 to be more responsive to calls from the dispatcher, we try to

11 keep the traffic under control downtown, along with the

12 businesses and any crime that might happen on the River Walk

13 and all of that, is all handled by the bike patrol division.

14 Q. Okay. And so how many years did you -- you are retired

15 now, right?

16 A. Yes, sir, I retired February 14 of 2015.

17 Q. Okay. How many years were you a San Antonio police

18 officer?

19 A. Twenty-seven years.

20 Q. When you were working the bike patrol you said that you

21 were working downtown, right?

22 A. Yes, sir.

23 Q. And when you are working downtown on the bike -- or let me

24 back up. When you were in the traffic division, did you ever

25 have occasion to notice whether there were many vehicles on

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

162


1 San Antonio streets without a state without of stateliness

2 plates?

3 A. There are lots, we are a military U.S., a town, tourist

4 U.S.A. town, great number of vehicles without of stateliness

5 plates within the city.

6 Q. And is that true, did you also observe that within the

7 downtown area when you were on bike patrol?

8 A. Absolutely, yes, sir. Even more prevalent downtown

9 because of the high tourist concentration.

10 Q. High tourist

11 Q. Did you high tourist.

12 Q. Did you, let me ask you this first. Working downtown bike

13 patrol, and seeing cars without of stateliness plates, did you

14 pull them over to see if they had operators had driver's

15 licenses?

16 A. No, sir. It would be ridiculous to pull over a vehicle

17 with an out of state plate just because it is out of state. I

18 mean, like you said, in ill tritown, U.S. A and tourist town

19 U.S.A. there are too many vehicles without of state plates it

20 wouldn't make any sense.

21 Q. What experience would it be with regard to drivers that

22 you ran into not literally but ran into as a traffic police

23 officer with regard to the percentage that had driver's

24 licenses?

25 A. I would say 99.9 percent of people that we stopped that


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

163

1 are driving a car have driver's licenses. It is almost a

2 given if you are driving a car you have a license.

3 Q. Do you pull people over to see if they have a license?

4 A. No, sir. I do not.

5 Q. Does the San Antonio Police Department provide police cars

6 for members of the bike patrol?

7 A. Yes, sir. We have several vehicles within the bike patrol

8 unit that we use for different reasons throughout the year.

9 Q. And what reasons would those be?

10 A. Anything from super inclement weather, rain, super cold

11 one of the ice storms or to take a vehicle to go to the

12 hospital for a patient, prisoner, to the point of taking a car

13 to go eat lunch if you want to.

14 Q. Where are the cars kept?

15 A. They are kept in the parking garage of the bike patrol

16 unit.

17 Q. And you just check those out if you want to go eat lump or

18 something or what?

19 A. Yes, sir.

20 Q. Okay. On September the 7, 2009, were you in a patrol car?

21 A. I was in a patrol car, yes, sir.

22 Q. At 8:15 or 6:15 I am sorry, on that night?

23 A. 1815, yes, sir.

24 Q. And where were you at 6:15 on that -- on September the


25 sent, 20mine?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

164

1 A. I was parked in a vehicle cutout on the to hundred block

2 of Losoya Street next next to Fuddruckers.

3 Q. And what was the purpose for your being there?

4 A. Original will I planned to go inside Fuddruckers to eat

5 but when I got inside it was way too busy so I decided I would

6 leave and go somewhere else that didn't have a line since we

7 don't have very long or usually able to sit in line and wait

8 for lunch, you have to get something and, pretty fast because

9 because you don't know what is going to to happen.

10 Q. So what was your intention at the time that you left the

11 Fuddruckers with regards to whether you were going to find

12 something to eat or not?

13 A. I was going to just go to a different restaurant.

14 A. Until I saw a traffic violation and I figured I would stop

15 that traffic violation and make corrective action and head on

16 to lunch.

17 Q. Well, let's back up a little bit. So you come out of

18 Fuddruckers, get in your car and what what happens?

19 A. I see a vehicle as he passes me in the right lane,

20 Mitsubishi Eclipse, back Mitsubishi Eclipse and it changes

21 lanes without signaling from the right lane too the left lane

22 and continues through the intersection of Commerce Street, guy

23 after it to make corrective action, by the time I get up to


24 him, we are coming up to Market Street which is, it is a weird

25 intersection there are a lot of diagonal streets, pedestrian

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

165

1 cars in that intersection, trolley stops, so I activate my

2 emergency lights once we clear the second intersection there

3 at Market Street and pull him over.

4 Q. Okay. And why did you wait until you got there to pull

5 him over?

6 A. Because I don't want to activate the emergency lights in

7 the very beginning, there is no telling the person may

8 immediately freak out, stop in the intersection, be

9 unresponsive as far as what is going on, there are too many

10 enter successes, too many people, too many cars right there in

11 the intersection, I would much rather have a safer place to

12 clear the intersection, then turn on the lights and that way

13 when he pulls over, we are out of the traffic itself.

14 Q. When you were following the Mitsubishi, did you run it on

15 your computer?

16 A. I did, yes, sir.

17 Q. Okay. And can you explain first of all what the computer

18 is and how -- what it reflects?

19 A. The computer is basically a laptop, but it is connected to

20 software that we can type in a license plate and hit a button

21 and it will tell us a return what the make, model, year of the


22 vehicle is, who the owner is, and what whether the license

23 plates are current and now they didn't have it back now but

24 then it will even tell you if there is current insurance on

25 the car.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

166

1 Q. Did you find anything that was -- or was that car in

2 compliance while all the traffic regulations --

3 A. Everything was proper, it had proper registration, yes.

4 Q. Did you notice that he had Florida license plates --

5 A. It did have Florida license plates, yes, sir.

6 Q. And did you pull that car over pause it had nor license

7 plates?

8 A. Absolutely not. I pulled it over for failure to signal a

9 lane change a.

10 Q. And you observed that failure to signal a lane change?

11 A. Yes, sir. I sure did.

12 Q. After you pulled the car over, first of all, where did you

13 all park?

14 A. We ended up in the large driveway, right in front of the

15 convention center, I think it is called 100 convention way but

16 it is like an overly large driveway in front of the convention

17 center.

18 Q. At the time that you stopped your car, had you made a

19 decision with regard to what sort of, as you say corrective

20 action you were going to take?


21 A. No, sir. Not at that point.

22 Q. Okay. Backing up a little bit, why did you consider it

23 necessary to take corrective action?

24 A. Mainly because you need to signal lane changes, the it is

25 law, but the biggest reason downtown for signalling your

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

167

1 intention is because, in that particular intersection in

2 general is because it is such a high volume intersection with

3 pedestrians and vehicles, the streets are very narrow, and

4 without signalling your intention in a vehicle people are

5 always crowding on the curbs down there, stepping off the

6 curbs, you are liable to end up having a pedestrian VIN

7 incident or even a vehicular incident, so I needed to stop him

8 just at least to make some corrective action to let him know,

9 hey, you need to signal downtown at least.

10 Q. Okay. All right. So when you did pull him over and got

11 out of your car, what happened?

12 A. We stopped over there in front of the convention center, I

13 got out and walked up to his vehicle, his drivers window was

14 down probably two-thirds of the way already, and I could see

15 he had his, what appeared to be his driver's license and

16 insurance in his right hand, and I walk up and introduce

17 myself and almost simultaneously he is like, you are violating

18 my constitutional rights. Almost conduct me off to the fact I


19 can't even say who I am or SAPD. Right after that, I tell

20 him, I stopped you for failure to make a left lane change and

21 again it is just a constant barrage of you are violating my

22 constitutional rights. In and were you able to -- did you ask

23 him more than one time or not to give you his driver's license

24 and insurance?

25 A. I asked him several times to give the driver's license and

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

168

1 insurance and I could see it was in his right hand so it is

2 over the console so he is looking to me like this but he has

3 haze drivers licence and insurance like it is here but you

4 can't have it type of thing. So several times I of asking him

5 for it and then I told him I am going to arrest you if you

6 don't give me your driver's license and insurance.

7 Q. Do you know why he wasn't giving it to you?

8 A. I had no idea but I kept getting inundated with you are

9 violating my constitutional rights and I was just like, little

10 concerns on what was going on with the barrage of

11 constitutional right violation statements coming from him.

12 Q. Well, based on your experience and your training, was he

13 required to give you his license and insurance when you asked

14 for it?

15 A. He is required to give it to me, the state law even says

16 cow must present your driver's license and insurance when you

17 are stopped and a police officers requested requests it.


18 Q. Could you see, could you identify Mr. Rynearson by look

19 peering into his car to see his driver's license?

20 A. No, it is a shorter car, Mitsubishi eclipse is a shorter

21 car, so, and he is holding it over here over the center

22 console so I can see he has it but I can't make out clearly

23 whether it is valid or not.

24 Q. How many times total do you think you asked him for the

25 driver's license and insurance?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

169

1 A. I asked him several times. At least three times for his

2 driver's license and insurance. And probably three more times

3 that I am going to arrest you before finally I said you are

4 under arrest and he comes out and it is almost a

5 simultaneously gives it to me as he is on his way out the

6 door.

7 Q. So you had warned him that he was going to be arrested if

8 he didn't give you the driver's license and insurance?

9 A. After three types of saying I need your driver's license

10 and insurance and he is like you are violating my

11 constitutional rights and going this back and forth, and then

12 I told he I am just going to creates you if you don't give me

13 your driver's license and insurance and he is still refusing

14 two more times of that and then I just say you are under

15 arrest.


16 Q. Was that unusual as far as your experience in making

17 traffic stops?

18 A. The entire stop was unusual. And the numerous thousands

19 of stops I have done, hundreds of thousands, this one was

20 quite unusual in its entirety.

21 Q. Did you know -- did you -- did he offer any explanation as

22 to why he wasn't giving you his license and insurance?

23 A. He wasn't even asking me a statement, he wasn't saying why

24 are you violating my constitutional rights, he said you are

25 violating my constitutional rights, so it didn't, it wasn't

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

170

1 registering like I was just lake, I don't understand what is

2 going on in my head, because I explained to him who I was, I

3 explained to him that I stopped him for failure to signal a

4 left lane change and it just was a constant barrage of you are

5 violating my constitutional rights.

6 Q. So it wasn't being, was he being responsive so your

7 statements that he violated a traffic --

8 A. He was very uncooperative throughout the entire incident.

9 Q. Was there anything about his -- anything he said or his

10 demeanor that indicated to you that the that was going to

11 change?

12 A. At that point, even though it was very fast, the entire

13 incident lasted seconds, several seconds, it still was unusual

14 pause he whenever complied once time until the last time I


15 said that's it you are under arrest and he came out of the

16 car, but before that, he never once complied with any of my

17 commands in you heard Mr. Ryan son testified he thought it was

18 maybe somewhere between ten and 15 seconds, would you agree

19 with that estimation or (.

20 A. I would say it was probably a little longer than that,

21 maybe 30 seconds (rynearson).

22 Q. After he got out of the car, what happened? You know

23 what, let me back up. When you walked up to his car, that

24 were your options as far as what sort of corrective action you

25 could take?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

171

1 A. All the options ranged from a verbal, you know, you need

2 to use your turn signal, especially in this environment, there

3 are so had been people, to a written warning, which wouldn't

4 have cost any money or any fines whatsoever, to a regular

5 traffic citation, which would have cost money, depending on

6 the outcome of it or not. Or arrest. All of those are

7 options that are granted by the state of Texas.

8 A. As a police officer.

9 Q. All right. So do you as a cash did you as a police

10 officer have discretion as to which one of those option dogs

11 employ?

12 A. All the discretion for all of those options was my own.


13 Q. Can you arrest for a minor traffic violation such as that?

14 A. You can. Texas law says you can arrest for all traffic

15 violations except for speeding itself on face value.

16 Q. Did you believe at the time that you told Mr. Rynearson he

17 was under arrest that any of the other options would have been

18 useful?

19 A. I don't think, because of his highly uncooperative nature

20 at that point that any of the other options were reasonable

21 whatsoever.

22 Q. What was his demeanor like?

23 A. He wasn't angry. Just it didn't -- between the two of us,

24 I didn't understand where the barrage of your you are

25 violating my constitutional rights was coming from and he was

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

172

1 unresponsive and uncooperative with me as far as any of my

2 demands. So -- but it wasn't -- it didn't get ugly or

3 anything between the two of us.

4 Q. Did you become irate?

5 A. No, not at all.

6 Q. Well, did you -- when you walked up to his car, did you

7 introduce yourself?

8 A. Yes, sir.

9 Q. And you never not irate?

10 A. There is no reason to get irate, it was more of a

11 confusion if anything else. All the police -- the three


12 police academies I have been through, the military police, the

13 Kansas say split academy, the San Antonio police academy all

14 of them teach the same way you introduce yourself and explain

15 the violations, hi I am officer Richter -- San Antonio Police

16 Department, I, in there are small lane change but I couldn't

17 get most of this out before he was attacking with me you are

18 violating my constitutional rights so I don't know if he heard

19 some of it because he is just interjecting through my

20 conversation.

21 Q. So what did you -- when he got out of the car, what did

22 you do?

23 A. I put him in handcuffs.

24 Q. And why did you put him in handcuffs?

25 A. Because because at that point he was under arrest.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

173

1 Q. At the time that -- after you put him in handcuffs, what

2 did you do?

3 A. I walked him back to my car, to the patrol car, put him in

4 the back seat.

5 Q. And was there a point at which he asked you to retrieve

6 his wallet?

7 A. Yes, it was, he was already seat in the the back seat and

8 he asked me, hey, he told me he has got a computer in the car,

9 so I needed to go get that and he asked me if I could get his


10 wallet so I went back to his vehicle and picked up his wallet

11 on the front seat.

12 Q. Are you required to go do that sort of stuff?

13 A. No. It was kind of a courtesy. There is no reason not to

14 give him his wallet he will go over to the magistrate's

15 office? Were you mad, I am sorry.

16 A. He may need what is inside his wallet at the magistrate.

17 Q. Okay. Were you mad at Mr. Rynearson at that point?

18 A. There is no reason to be mad at him.

19 Q. Did you feel any malice toward Mr. Rynearson at that

20 point?

21 A. No, sir, no. None whatsoever.

22 Q. Did you feel any malice toward Mr. Rynearson at any point

23 that night?

24 A. No, sir, none at all.

25 Q. Once you got his -- what did you do with his computer in?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

174

1 A. I stuck it in the police property room. Once we got to

2 the magistrate's office in at his request.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And what happened to his car?

5 A. I secured the car, rolled up the windows, locked the doors

6 and had it impounded at the police impound.

7 Q. When you brought his wallet back what did you stay to him,

8 if anything?


9 A. I asked him specifically what was it he needed out of his

10 wallet because I seemed like hey can you get my wallet, can

11 you get my wallet I thought there may be something in there

12 that shouldn't be in there.

13 Q. So what did he -- asked him for what?

14 A. He said he had a concealed carry permit in there.

15 Q. And were you surprised at that?

16 A. I was surprised, because the law stated that you need to

17 hand that over with your driver's license when you hand your

18 driver's license to an officer when you are stopped.

19 Q. And obviously he did not do that?

20 A. He did not do that.

21 Q. Okay. Did you ask, what did you ask him then?

22 A. I asked him if he was carrying.

23 Q. And his response was?

24 A. And did he have a weapon and his response was yes, he did

25 is and were were you surprised at that.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

175

1 A. I certainly was.

2 Q. Was that -- have you had he other traffic stops where

3 people have failed to tell you that they were carrying a

4 loaded handgun on their person?

5 A. I personally have not ever had anyone not tell me they had

6 one. Even people that were -- had nothing else to do, that's


7 the first thing out, hey, officer I just need to let you hoe I

8 have a gun in the car, because I travel county to county or

9 whatever the reasoning is, but that's almost the very first

10 thing out of their mouth before they even say here is my lips,

11 it is like there is a gun here, just so you know, don't get

12 alarmed.

13 Q. What was your what would you your -- based on your -- or

14 based on your normal manner of doing things, what would you

15 have done had Mr. Try mere son told you he had a gun in his

16 cargo pants pocket while he was standing next to his car?

17 A. Well, then I would have secured the gun right there,

18 because I already had him handcuffed once he got out of the

19 car almost immediately.

20 Q. Let me back up a little bit. There was some conversation

21 about you saying that Mr. -- asking Mr. Rynearson why he was

22 being so aggressive, there was some testimony about that, do

23 you recall testimony?

24 A. Do you recall that?

25 A. I did, because I didn't understand what his constant.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

176

1 MR. BARRERA: Rajon was about, you know, almost

2 attacking me with why are you violating my constitutional

3 rights? And so I asked him multiple times throughout the

4 incident, why you being so verbally aggressive? And he said,

5 I am not. But it didn't make sense. None of it jelled.


6 Q. Were you recording any of that conversation?

7 A. No. We didn't -- we don't have body cameras at that point

8 in time, they might have them, I think they are just now going

9 to start getting some of those.

10 Q. Were you carrying a Taser?

11 A. I did have -- I believe I had a Taser, I can't remember

12 when I got it, but they don't have recording devices on them.

13 Q. All right. So if you -- if Mr. Rynearson thought you were

14 recording the conversation because you were pressing on your

15 Taser, that would be Dar?

16 A. No the face search a bright yellow pistol looking thing so

17 you don't get it confused with a real gun there but there is

18 no recording device on it, basically it is an electric gun is

19 what it is.

20 Q. And did the patrol car that you were in have recording

21 capability?

22 A. No, back then the patrol car, the at least the police bike

23 patrol has no recording capability whatsoever.

24 Q. So did you -- you didn't recording any of this ins at the

25 present time?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

177

1 A. No, sir.

2 Q. Did Mr. Rynearson ever ask you if you were recording it?

3 A. I don't believe so.


4 Q. Now, as far as the options that you could have employed as

5 with Mr. Rynearson, how do you make the decision which one to

6 use?

7 A. You mean which decision of what corrective action?

8 Q. Correct.

9 A. That's all on officer discretion so it all plays out

10 through -- from the beginning of the scenario to the end, but

11 all of those Class C violations are, individual offers

12 individuals make those individual decision organizationn't a

13 daily basis.

14 Q. And were you acting within the course and scope of your

15 employment at the time that you were -- as a peace officer at

16 the time that you were dealing with Mr. Rynearson?

17 A. Yes, sir, I was.

18 Q. And within your discretionary authority with regard to

19 what action you took?

20 A. Absolutely, yes, sir.

21 Q. After you got into the -- well, first of all, when you

22 found out that Mr. Rynearson had a loaded hand fun in his

23 cargo pants pocket, what did you do?

24 A. I secured the gun.

25 Q. Mr. Rynearson said you didn't secure it until you got it

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

178

1 to the magistrate's office?

2 A. That is now true, it was secured there at the scene, the


3 minute he told me, it would be ludicrous for me to say, oh,

4 let's go you have a gun in the back seat as a prisoner, keep

5 it and I will see you when we get down to the imagine's office

6 that is like suicide for me, leaving a pie in the back seat

7 that just says he has a gun in his pocket. There is to way I

8 would just say, keep that in your pocket, a and we will see

9 each other down there.

10 Q. You drove him to the magistrate?

11 A. I did, Your Honor,.

12 Q. And we heard some conversation or some testimony I'm sorry

13 about conversations that took place on the way to the

14 magistrate's office, can you tell us what your recollection of

15 that conversation was, please?

16 A. Well, while we are driving down there then this is the

17 first that I learned he was military too, because he is hike,

18 you know, I am military, and I have been to wars and I have

19 killed people and you better watch out violating people's

20 constitutional rights and I am like, I don't know where that

21 came from, but, okay. So I told him, well you are zero are

22 not the only guy who has been in the military nor the only guy

23 who has killed somebody so calm down, basically.

24 Q. Okay. Did you consider that a threat? A serious threat?

25 A. No, it was just him talking, he was angry, because he was

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

179


1 going to jail, to the magistrate's office, so I didn't take it

2 -- even though technically, by the law, it is a terrific

3 threat he just said I am this the military and killed people

4 and you party watch out, I didn't arrest him for that

5 terroristic threat violation, terroristic threat violation.

6 Q. What did you arrest him for. Only for the violation to

7 failure to signal left turn, I didn't failure to display

8 license on demand or arrest him for a failure to display your

9 concealed carry on demand, I didn't arrest him for the

10 terroristic threats for making the statement I arrested him

11 solely for the initial violation, which was failure to signal

12 left turn lane?

13 MR. RALLS: May I approach the witness, Your Honor?

14 THE COURT: Yes. Terroristic ] terroristic.

15 BY MR. RALLS:

16 Q. Let me hand you, Mr. Richter, the police report, which has

17 been marked as Exhibit, Plaintiff's Exhibit number 1 can you

18 look at that and tell us if that is the police report you

19 wrote as a result of this arrest?

20 A. That is a copy of the original police report that I wrote

21 that day of, that day of the arrest.

22 Q. And does it set forth basically what occurred that

23 afternoon or that evening?

24 A. It does. The narrative of the report is basically what we

25 went over here.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

180


1 Q. Okay. And can you tell us what the offense, the exact

2 offense event that Mr. Rynearson was arrested for, please?

3 A. The exact offense is new traffic, failure to signal.

4 Q. What does new traffic mean. That means it is not an old,

5 existing ticket he got before, this is a brand new violation,

6 not as in the ticket itself, but it is a new violation.

7 Q. And what was the address of the offense?

8 A. 200 block of Losoya treat.

9 Q. And is that right before you get to Commerce or not?

10 A. That is where the violation occurred, right before

11 Commerce, yes, sir.

12 Q. By the way, you heard Mr. Rynearson testify about taking a

13 right hand turn on to Losoya Street and then immediately

14 turning on his left hand signal?

15 A. Yes, sir.

16 Q. When he made -- do you remember what street he turned

17 right on to lo Soy I can't from?

18 A. That would have been college street.

19 Q. Okay. And how far is it from college street to Commerce

20 Street?

21 A. That is a full two blocks.

22 Q. So if he had turned on his right signal immediately, he

23 would have actually -- I am sorry, turned on his left signal

24 immediately, he would have gone through another intersection

25 before he got to Commerce?


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

181

1 A. Yes, sir. He would have upon through Crockett street.

2 Q. Mr. Okay. And are you certain Mr. Richter at the time

3 that he he went there 2 intersection of Commerce and Losoya he

4 did not have those -- or strike that. I am sorry. Are you

5 certain at the time that he -- you saw him change lanes from

6 the right lane to the left lane on lo soy I can't street

7 before Commerce Street that he did not have his left turn

8 signal on?

9 A. There is no doubt in my mine he did not signal that lane

10 change from right to left.

11 Q. And was that -- that was significant to you because of the

12 congestion at that intersection?

13 A. Significant because of the high pedestrian Volta

14 intersection, along with a high vehicle concentration, the

15 combination and the short distances between the two

16 intersections of Commerce and Losoya and Market, it is very

17 short span so it is the entire layout of that area is

18 extremely dangerous both for people and cars.

19 Q. Okay. Now, looking at Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1, does

20 that reflect the conversation, your recollection of the

21 conversation that was had wean you and Mr. Rynearson on the

22 way to the magistrate's office?

23 A. Yes. It is a very -- almost direct writing of that we

24 talked about right here.


25 Q. Okay. Can you read it to us, please?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

182

1 A. Yes, sir. I will. It size while on duty as zapped duty,

2 I was park to the cut out space in the 200 block of Losoya

3 street.

4 Q. I am sorry. I am sorry. I just mean the conversation

5 that you had on the way to the magistrate's office.

6 A. Zero.

7 A. Oh, or. To the magistrate's office. Okay. That

8 conversation that I actually wrote in the report it says while

9 being transported to the magistrate's office, the arrested

10 person, AP, which would be Mr. Rynearson told me he was

11 military and he had fought in wars and killed people, that I

12 better watch out while violating constitutional rights. Then

13 I wrote the A . Was booked for the traffic violation.

14 Q. And that is the person time that you knew he was even in

15 the military?

16 A. That's first time I knew he was military.

17 Q. When you got no the financial's office, what happened?

18 (AP).

19 Q. I processed him into the magistrate's office, processed

20 the report for the booking, and then took his personal

21 property over to the property room right next door, placed it

22 in there.

23 Q. Once you book him into the magistrate's office, do you


24 have any additional contact with him?

25 A. That is the end of the contact we had.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

183

1 Q. Okay. So how long a period of time were you and in the

2 Rynearson together that evening?

3 A. It is possible 45 minutes to an hour. I think that was

4 the most.

5 Q. And a at any time, did you can act -- did you feel

6 maliciously toward Mr. Rynearson?

7 A. No, no. It wasn't anything personal. I just didn't

8 understand where he was coming from with this constitutional

9 rights barrage to me, when it was obvious that this was a

10 traffic violation and a specifically bad part of an

11 intersection downtown to be doing something like that, and it

12 just -- I don't know where he was coming from, honestly.

13 Q. In the thousands or hundreds of thousands of contacts a

14 that you have had with civilians or citizens, during your time

15 on traffic, did you have people question the reason that they

16 were stopped?

17 A. Oh, sure, yeah, all the time. People want to know why

18 they are stopped, we tell them why they are stopped and

19 sometimes they still don't -- wait, it might have been another

20 car and you will explain to them but I didn't have any kind of

21 opportunity like that to have a conversation about the


22 incident itself as much because he was just uncooperative in

23 barraging me with you are violating my constitutional rights.

24 It was -- it was very one-sided that I was like, demanding for

25 his driver's license and insurance, and within seconds we are

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

184

1 going from this barrage to finally I am just like, okay, he is

2 uncooperative, we will just go straight to jail with this.

3 Q. Mr. Richter I think that's all the questions I have for

4 you right now, thank you, sir?

5 A. Yes, sir. Thank you.

6 THE COURT: Any cross?


8 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

9 CROSS EXAMINATION


11 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Richter?

12 A. Hi, sir.

13 Q. Good to see you again, sir?

14 A. Yes, sir. You too.

15 Q. You and I met before, correct?

16 A. We have, yes, sir.

17 Q. How many -- the last division that you worked for with the

18 San Antonio Police Department was the bike patrol, correct.

19 That is correct, yes, sir.

20 Q. And how many years were you with bike patrol?


21 A. I believe it was 14 years.

22 Q. Fourteen years. And I was paying attention to something

23 else so I apologize while you were testifying is it my

24 understanding that you recently retired?

25 A. I did retire, February of this year.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

185

1 Q. Congratulations, sir?

2 A. Thank you.

3 Q. (Period.

4 Q. And I didn't hear correctly did you retire as -- were you

5 the captain of the downtown --

6 A. No, no, I was patrol officer in the bike patrol division,

7 27 years on the police department.

8 Q. Okay. (Downtown bike patrol).

9 Q. And I think I heard you cell when you said, you can't,

10 correctly you said you can't simply arrest someone to check

11 their licenses, correct?

12 A. I can't arrest them to check their license?

13 Q. I'm sorry, let me go back. You can't stop a car simply so

14 see if the car has a license S that what you said?

15 A. You need some reasonable cause, probable cause, you just

16 can't say, eenie mean any mine any know I am checking you

17 today.

18 Q. The meeny, miny, moe you can't do that?


19 A. You can don't that.

20 Q. You also can't arrest you also can't stop a car simply

21 because they have, you know, Alex, Alex Alabama license mates

22 and you want to check whether they have a license?

23 A. Absolutely not.

24 Q. Even if you hate their football team?

25 A. I love Alabama but, regardless, you can't stop an out of

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

186

1 state vehicle because it has got out of state plates unless

2 the plates are ex-paired, but just because of the state

3 itself, that is not a violation.

4 Q. Right. And so would you agree with me that five jury

5 beliefs Mr. Rynearson, that you said that you stopped him

6 because of his Florida license plates to check his driver's

7 license that that would be illegal?

8 A. Can you rephrase the question, sir?

9 Q. Sure. If the jury beliefs Mr. Rynearson that you stopped

10 his car because of his Florida tags and to check whether he

11 had a driver's license, that that would be illegal?

12 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I am going to object on the

13 the basis that is a credibility question, first of all with

14 regard to the jury, secondly it calls for a legal conclusion.

15 THE COURT: That is love ruled. That is rover

16 ruled.

17 THE WITNESS: If they are the understanding that I


18 merely stopped him because he was driving a car that had

19 Florida plates?

20 MR. MALDONADO: I understand. My question is, if

21 the jury beliefs that you stopped Mr. Rynearson's car because

22 of the Florida license plates, that would have been ill,

23 correct.

24 A. That would have been wrong, yes.

25 Q. Well, not just wrong, illegal?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

187

1 A. Correct.

2 Q. Okay. Now, is it -- you understood that as a police

3 officer you have awesome powers, right?

4 A. I don't know what awesome, but you enforce the law.

5 Q. You can enforce law. I can't enforce the law, correct?

6 A. I can't anymore either.

7 Q. That is correct. And so the state of Texas gives police

8 officers like when you were a police officer the awesome power

9 to stop someone and say, I think you just violated the law,

10 correct?

11 A. They give you authority to do that, I don't know -- you

12 are --

13 Q. Authority, power?

14 A. Your opinion on whether it is awesome or not and mine is

15 just it is an authority to enforce the law, as it is written.


16 Q. I well I mean you are the only -- as police officers, you

17 are -- you are about the only individuals in the city that

18 have that coercive power to stop someone from walking if,

19 correct, because you believe a violation happened?

20 A. If you are violating the law, certainly, yes.

21 Q. If you believe a law was violated?

22 A. Not if you believe it, there has got to be some reasonable

23 or probable cause to -- for you to stop somebody,.

24 MR. MALDONADO: Right.

25 A. Not just on a whim.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

188

1 Q. Right. But you don't turn to your neighbor next door and

2 a pedestrian next door hey do you agree with me that a law was

3 violated? You make a decision and exercise your discretion?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. -- a law was violated I am stopping you, right?

6 A. That is correct, yes.

7 Q. And it is the law, correct, that you can arrest someone

8 for a Class C violation, correct?

9 A. It is state law that you can arrest for all Class Cs

10 except for speeding.

11 Q. And, you know, even simply jaywalking, you can take

12 someone to the magistrate's office for that, correct?

13 A. You could.

14 Q. And I don't suppose you did that all the time when you


15 were working, that you took ever to jail that -- where you saw

16 a violation?

17 A. Did I personally? No.

18 Q. No. You would be a pretty busy man if you were doing

19 that?

20 A. We would be way too busy.

21 Q. Right. I mean, this is why this case is so bizarre, as

22 Mr. Ralls put it that for a Class C violation, an individual

23 has been jailed for six hours, you agree that that is bizarre,

24 right?

25 A. I don't believe that it is bizarre that he was in jail for

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

189

1 six hours, I believe it is bizarre of his behavior towards me

2 during this whole incident.

3 Q. Well, we will get to the behavior, but maybe we should

4 clear up something for the your. He never cursed at you,

5 correct?

6 A. No, he didn't.

7 Q. He never made any threatening motions at you correct?

8 A. Not physical.

9 Q. Well, I can show you your report, Exhibit 1. Did you

10 state anywhere in there that you were -- that he made a

11 physical threat against you?

12 A. No, I said no physical.


13 Q. That he made a verbal threat against you?

14 A. Yes, I wrote in here he made a verbal threat.

15 Q. And you and I had a -- were at a deposition, right?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And I asked you that question, were you threatened by this

18 statement and do you recall what your answer was?

19 A. Over.

20 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I am going to -- page, line

21 and question.

22 MR. MALDONADO: I will see if he is going to deny

23 it, Your Honor.

24 THE COURT: No, he wants to follow page and line.

25 Ryan test test Rynearson test test Rynearson test test Losoya

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

190

1 test test the practice strokes.

2 MR. MALDONADO: I will continue, Your Honor.

3 BY MR. MALDONADO:

4 Q. Did you issue him a citation for threatening you?

5 A. No. No. It was availed threat, I didn't take it.

6 Q. Did you report it to your supervisor?

7 A. No, I didn't need to.

8 Q. I mean you agree with me that making a threat to a police

9 officer is far more serious than failing to signal a lane

10 change, right?

11 A. If it is not availed threat.


12 Q. Well, I mean, you were the recipient of this alleged

13 threat. And you have been out when you were a police officer

14 out in the streets would you agree with me that making a

15 threat to you is far more serious than failing to make a lane

16 change?

17 A. Not if the threat itself is not serious, that's what I am

18 saying, if he makes it availed let to me that I don't take it

19 to be serious then it is not anymore extreme than failure to

20 signal a lane change.

21 Q. Okay so you did not, when he told you something to the

22 effect that I have killed men, I have shot men and I have been

23 shot at, and a far better men, you know, have died for the

24 Constitution, a from what I understand from what you are

25 saying you didn't take that a as a personal threat? You

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

191

1 didn't take that as a personal threat?

2 A. Even though he said it to me he wasn't saying you and I we

3 are going to meet tomorrow when and I am taking you out, I did

4 not take it like that. It was a guy that was upset because he

5 has to go to the magistrate's office.

6 Q. I just want to be clear you didn't personally take that as

7 a threat?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Okay.


10 A. Not a serious threat.

11 Q. On September 7, 2009, Mr. Rynearson was not speeding,

12 right?

13 A. No, sir.

14 Q. And you didn't hear him blasting loud music, correct?

15 A. No, I did not.

16 Q. And you didn't see him weaving in and out of the traffic

17 lanes on Losoya, correct?

18 A. I did not.

19 Q. As if like, you know, you have seen probably intoxicated

20 people drive, he didn't seem to you to be intoxicated?

21 A. He was not intoxicated, no, sir.

22 Q. Anything unusual about that car when he was driving down

23 Losoya?

24 A. Nothing other than it failed to signal a lane change.

25 Q. I understand, and the other fact was that it had Florida

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

192

1 license plates, right?

2 A. That is not really unusual in San Antonio.

3 Q. So -- and when you pulled behind -- once you had initiated

4 a stop, which is you turned on your emergency lights and

5 Mr. Rynearson pulled on to convention way, and you pulled up

6 behind him, right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And once you ran his license plate numbers, you already


9 knew there were no outstanding warrants for him or for that

10 car?

11 A. It tells us a little bit. It can't be exact, but it tells

12 us some of that stuff.

13 Q. Did you have any reason to suspect that there was

14 something dangerous about Mr. Rynearson there?

15 A. No, not at all.

16 Q. Although you were bike patrol, you were in a car?

17 A. Correct.

18 Q. Why were you in a car again?

19 A. To go eat.

20 Q. Where was the car -- where did you get the car from?

21 A. The bike patrol parking garage.

22 Q. And where is that?

23 A. At that point in time, it was 240 East Houston.

24 A. It has since moved.

25 Q. And you had gone to get the cars to go eat at Fuddruckers?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

193

1 A. I had stopped at Fuddruckers to get something to eat and

2 they were too crowded so I left.

3 Q. Okay.

4 Q. Where was your bike?

5 A. Back at the office.

6 Q. How long had it gone without you eating.


7 Q. Was it your lunch hour or dinner time?

8 A. How long had I gone? A we get a 30-minute, where we can

9 clock out and eat dinner or lump or whatever you want to call

10 it, eat some food.

11 Q. And that was your 30 minutes?

12 A. Well, I hadn't clocked out yet. That's why I was trying

13 to find a place where I could eat without a line because it is

14 only 30 minutes.

15 Q. Once you finished running the checks in your cars, you

16 exited the police car and walked over to Mr. Rynearson's car,

17 correct?

18 A. Yes, sir.

19 Q. And (in your car) and there is a dispute, you say that,

20 you know, you identify yourself. Mr. Rynearson never heard

21 that, but you clearly heard him say, why did you stop me,

22 correct?

23 A. He didn't say why did you stop me. He said you are

24 violating my constitutional rights initially that was the

25 barrage coming at me.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

194

1 Q. Percentage).

2 Q. Practice stroke.

3 Q. If he had his driver's license and insurance documents on

4 his hand, correct?



6 Q. (and he had.

7 Q. And in your conversation with him, happened very fast,

8 correct?

9 A. The entire thing was very fast.

10 Q. Now, let me ask you again. When you approached the

11 vehicle, he asked you why did you stop me; isn't that true?

12 A. No stir. When I approached the vehicle, I stated who I

13 am, officer Rick San Antonio Police Department and immediately

14 he tells me, you violating my constitutional rights, at the

15 same time I am telling him I am stopping you for making an

16 illegal left lane change, and it is just going from there.

17 Q. So are you certain that Mr. Rynearson was not holding his

18 driver's license and his proof of insurance and that he asked

19 you why did you stop me? You never heard him say that?

20 A. No the very first thing out of his mouth was you are

21 violating my constitutional rights.

22 Q. Did he later -- let's say the second thing out of his

23 mouth did he tell you why did you stop me?

24 A. I am sure he probably did, and I explained to him that I

25 stopped him for failure to signal a left lane change but the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

195

1 barrage was you are violating my constitutional rights, not

2 really wanting to know why we are there, but just a constant

3 one-liner of you are violating my constitutional rights.


4 Q. Right. But, you know, assume for me for a second first

5 that if -- if he in fact asked you, the first question he

6 asked you why did you stop me?

7 A. That was no it is first question.

8 Q. Please assume for me for a second that fact, if he asked

9 you why did you stop me, and if you gave the reason that it

10 was because he had Florida license plates and you wanted to

11 check, cow -- you wanted to check his driver's license, I

12 think the next question from him would have been, that is not

13 -- that is not good cause to Menino, would you agree with me?

14 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I am going to object, calls

15 support speculation. It is compound and.

16 MR. MALDONADO: It is a theoretical question, Your

17 Honor.

18 THE COURT: But it is compound. You are going to a

19 going to need to break that up.



22 Q. Would you agree with me, can you accept the proposition ..

23 Menino ..

24 Q. -- can you accept in the beginning the proposition that he

25 could have asked -- the first question to you, presented to

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

196

1 you the first question, why did you stop me? Can you accept

2 that?


3 A. I can't accept it because that is not what happened, sir.

4 Q. I understand, but we immediate for the jury to see an

5 alternate version. Can you accept that that is a possibility

6 that he could have asked cash?

7 A. So you are making up a up a story and you want me to free

8 to it.

9 Q. No actually I am trying to figure out what your story is,

10 sir, so you have to answer my?

11 Question: Yes or no, can you accept that there is a

12 possibility that that could have happened.

13 A. I don't accept that.

14 Q. And so in a matter of seconds, he is asking you why did

15 you stop me, you say you asked him for his driver's license

16 and insurance, correct?

17 A. I did, yes.

18 Q. How many times?

19 A. Three times.

20 Q. And this all happens very quickly, right?

21 A. Very quickly.

22 Q. And.

23 Q. And all of a sudden you asked him to get out of the car

24 and he is under arrest, correct?

25 A. And I schools asked also asked him three times or stated

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

197


1 to him three times if who uh don't give it to me you will be

2 under arrest so --

3 Q. So did you ever say in your report that that exchange took

4 30 seconds?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Okay. And you and I had.

7 Q. No. And you and I had a meeting where you answered

8 questions in a deposition, correct?

9 A. Yes, sir. We did.

10 Q. And you -- and you agreeing today that it all happened in

11 a matter of seconds, correct?

12 A. It did all happen in several seconds, yes.

13 Q. So I just wanted to, you know, -- how long does it take to

14 ask four or five times give me your I am D, your driver's

15 license, and your proof of insurance and then he is telling

16 you, you know, why did you stop me? Confirm that you stopped

17 me for an illegal reason. You know, if it all happened -- can

18 you appreciate if it all happened in a matter of seconds that

19 that exchange probably was much shorter than what we are

20 hearing from you?

21 A. I believe everybody here, your client and myself, we were

22 there, we both agree it happened very fast and several

23 seconds. If you are trying to pinpoint an exact number of

24 seconds --

25 Q. He never told you I am not giving you my driver's license,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

198


1 correct?

2 A. No, he never said that.

3 Q. He never yanked them there your hand, did he?


5 Q. He never held them over here sort of lime like I did with

6 my little brother so see he see if he could reach kind of

7 taunting me?

8 A. He did have it on his right side of the body over the

9 console the furthest away from me.

10 Q. And he was having a conversation with you about it?


12 Q. And he was about to hand it to you?

13 A. Impossible he was.

14 Q. Well he had it in his hand and about to hand it to you?

15 A. I don't believe he was.

16 Q. (I don't believe he was not impossible).

17 Q. You didn't arrest Mr. Rynearson because he didn't -- he

18 didn't tell you about his concealed carry permit, correct?

19 A. No, I did not.

20 Q. That didn't go into any of your decision to arrest him,

21 correct?

22 A. Negative.

23 Q. (Misstroke up above) once Mr. Rynearson was out of the

24 vehicle, you had him turn around to face the vehicle and

25 handcuff him, correct?


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

199


2 Q. You didn't pat him down, correct?

3 A. No, I did not.

4 Q. You didn't check to see whether he was carrying knives or

5 a gun?

6 A. No, I did not.

7 Q. When you walked him over to the car, to the police car, he

8 didn't push against you, did he?

9 A. No, we didn't have any a kind of interaction like that.

10 Q. While in the car, in the police car, did you write out the

11 citation?

12 A. I did not write a citation.

13 Q. You heard testimony here that you offered, you gave

14 Mr. Rynearson one last chance if he signed the citation. You

15 made that offer to him, correct?

16 A. No, I did not. He stated that, I didn't state that.

17 Q. He didn't have the power to write his own citation,

18 correct?

19 A. No, sir.

20 Q. Mr. Rynearson never told you that he would disregard the

21 -- whatever citation or ticket you would have issued to him?

22 A. I never issued him a ticket because I was taking him to

23 the magistrate's office.

24 A. I didn't need a ticket.


25 Q. Mr. Rynearson was a person who told you check my wallet

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

200

1 for my concealed carry permit, correct?

2 A. He asked me to get his wallet, and he told me he had a

3 concealed carry license in the wallet.

4 Q. And did you find it there?

5 A. I sure did, yes.

6 Q. And did you at that point -- you confirmed whether he was

7 carrying, correct?

8 A. Yes, sir, I asked him.

9 Q. And you department remove didn't remove the weapon from

10 him at that point, did you, correct?

11 A. I did remove the weapon from him.

12 Q. Are you certain about that?

13 A. I am certain.

14 Q. Okay. So one of the pieces of evidence that we have of

15 what happened that day is that report that you prepared for

16 us. Can you look over it and confirm that you put in that

17 report that you removed the weapon from him?

18 A. I did not write that in the report.

19 Q. Are you sure? I mean I can give you some time to look at

20 it?

21 A. I have it right here.

22 Q. So just today, you are telling us, six years later, that

23 you did remove the weapon from Mr. Rynearson at the scene on


24 convention way and not like he says at the magistrate's

25 office?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

201

1 A. Correct.

2 Q. Did you report the concealed weapon to your supervisor?

3 A. No, sir. I don't need to do that.

4 Q. Did you report it anywhere?

5 A. I don't need to do that either.

6 Q. You didn't write him up for that either, for failing to

7 present to you his concealed carry, permit, correct?

8 A. I did not, I only booked him for the one violation of

9 failure to signal lane change.

10 Q. You didn't issue him a citation for failing to give you

11 his driver's license and his proof of insurance, correct?

12 A. I didn't book him for that either.

13 Q. And you didn't arrest him or issue him a citation for

14 making a threat to you, correct?

15 A. I didn't book him for that either.

16 Q. And only now are you saying that you -- only after he

17 challenged you for the reason why you stopped him did you say

18 it was because of this alleged failure to signal, correct?

19 A. That's wrong.

20 Q. Now, one last thing. I didn't understand of your

21 testimony earlier, did you say that Mr. Rynearson almost


22 attacked you?

23 A. No, sir. I didn't say that.

24 Q. Other than questioning your authority to stop him, was he

25 disrespectful towards you?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

202

1 A. He didn't really question my authority. He just kept

2 making that statement of you are violating my constitutional

3 rights. He wasn't questioning my authority. He just kept

4 making that statement over and over and over.

5 Q. Well, no, he did ask you too, why did you stop me?

6 A. And I told him, yes.

7 Q. Okay. So asking you why you stopped him, that is

8 questioning your authority, would you agree with me?

9 A. No, that is not questioning my authority, that is asking

10 why she being stopped, not questioning my authority as a

11 police officer.

12 Q. Well, why did you exercise your power or authority to stop

13 him? You appreciate that?

14 A. Yes. I answered his question, sure.

15 MR. MALDONADO: I have no further questions, Your

16 Honor.

17 THE COURT: Anything else by redirect?

18 MR. RALLS: No further questions, Your Honor. Thank

19 you.

20 THE COURT: You may step down, thank you, sir.


21 THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.

22 THE COURT: Any other witnesses.

23 MR. RALLS: No, Your Honor, defendant rests.

24 THE COURT: Defendant rests. Ladies and gentlemen,

25 you have now -- pardon me is there going to be any rebuttal?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

203


2 THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, you have now heard

3 all the evidence you are going to hear in this case. It is

4 going to take me a little while to work with the lawyers on

5 drafting the jury charge here for you all to consider. And we

6 still need to have closing arguments. It is already pushing

7 4:00 o'clock. So at this point I know you probably would like

8 to wrap this up, but it is going to be a late night if we

9 continue to do all of this and it will be a late break. So I

10 am going have you return tomorrow morning at 9:00. That way

11 you can start fresh. So at 9:00 o'clock tomorrow what you can

12 expect to hear is the closing arguments from the lawyers, and

13 my instructions on you on what the law is to apply and then

14 you will deliberate. Of course, how long you all want to

15 deliberate is entirely up to you. But I would anticipate for

16 planning purposes that you will probably finish by tomorrow.

17 Again, same instructions to you that I told you earlier. No

18 homework. Don't get on a computer tonight, don't get on your


19 smart phone tonight and start fang finding out what the law is

20 or what you think the law is, believe it or not everything on

21 the Internet is not right, so I will be pissing you all the

22 law that you need to know, and the lawyers havoid you all the

23 facts that you need to know, and so no homework. Your only

24 job is to go home safely tonight and return safely tomorrow

25 morning at 9:00 o'clock. All rise for the jury.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

204

1 COURTROOM SECURITY OFFICER: All rise for jury.

2 (Jury leaves courtroom.).

3 THE COURT: Please be seated. I am going to make a

4 few -- I have been working on the jury charge as we have been

5 at it here. I am going to make a few changes a here.

6 MR. RALLS: Your Honor,.

7 THE COURT: Yes.

8 MR. RALLS: I'm sorry but may I reurge my motion?

9 THE COURT: Oh, go ahead.

10 BY MR. RALLS:

11 Q. Actually can I just adopt my previous motion or do I need

12 to --

13 THE COURT: No. You don't need to restate it again.

14 MR. RALLS: Okay.

15 THE COURT: Any other points that you want to raise?

16 THE COURT: I will only hear arguments on new

17 points?


18 MR. RALLS: No, Your Honor, I don't have any new

19 points change punctuation.

20 THE COURT: Yes. So there are factual issues here

21 on both the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment

22 violations. And so to that extent that motion is denied. The

23 punitive damages. I was going to provide you an opportunity

24 to find new law, do you want to make any new arguments?

25 MR. MALDONADO: You were, I just -- I don't question

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

205

1 that the Court, but reading the proposed pattern jury

2 instruction that I submitted, I am sure it came mostly from

3 the Fifth Circuit and the standard is malicious or reckless

4 disregard and it explains what maliciousness is, and then it

5 explains what reckless disregard is, and if I understand the

6 Court's ruling is that we have to show Mallace, then malice I

7 would like the opportunity to brief that.

8 THE COURT: Yes. I have been pondering -- I have

9 been rereading too while we are up here. So I think the

10 standard is maliciousness or reckless disregard. So there is

11 no evidence of maliciousness, I still think I am correct about

12 that. Where is the evidence of reckless disregard?

13 MR. MALDONADO: Yes. The evidence is, again, Your

14 Honor, if the jury accepts Mr. Rynearson's version of the

15 facts and disbeliefs Mr. Richter, then we have a situation


16 where a police officer who knows what the law is, that, one,

17 they can't stop someone for out of stateliness plates, and to

18 check their driver's license, and then that the individual

19 asks are or questions what the officer did, and the officer

20 retaliates by arresting him then we have an officer who knows

21 what the law is, knows what the individuals federal rights

22 are, you know, to not be subject to an illegal stop,

23 automobile stop, not be subject to an illegal arrest, not be

24 subject to retaliation, for speech and be arrested without

25 probable cause, I believe that is the evidence sufficient to

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

206

1 submit the issue to the jury that punitive damages may be

2 warranted.


4 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I don't think there is any

5 evidence that -- of maliciousness or reckless disregard. I

6 mean.

7 THE COURT: Okay I agree with you on maliciousness.

8 I mean but the rec lis disregard I think Mr. Maldonado did

9 give a correct recitation so why doesn't it go to a jury?

10 MR. RALLS: There is just no flash -- Your Honor,

11 under that definition, it could go to the jury.

12 THE COURT: Yes. I believe so too. I am going to

13 reconsider my previous position. Now, I would be frankly

14 surprised if the jury does even award punitives, but it is an


15 issue that goes to the jury. And so we will keep that in.

16 Now, I am going to go back to chambers and finish revising

17 this jury charge. Print out copies for you all. And then

18 give you time to read and make objections. So we will is have

19 a jury charge conference tonight before you leave. So feel

20 free to take a break for amount ten or 15 minutes. But stick

21 around here, because I want to confer with you on the charge.

22 MR. MALDONADO: Well, I think we will have to do it

23 tomorrow, Your Honor, but I know the Court is working on the

24 charge, we may have proposed instructions, does the Court wish

25 for us to submit them this evening or bring them tomorrow

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

207

1 morning?

2 THE COURT: Well, I wanted to wrap up the charge

3 tonight, that way we go straight into closing arguments

4 tomorrow morning. Well straight into me instructing them on

5 the law and then recognizing you all for closing arguments.

6 So --

7 MR. MALDONADO: I can give you a preview of the two

8 issues that -- if the Court --

9 THE COURT: I mean, I think it would be much more

10 beneficial for me just to give you what I am proposing, you

11 all take a look at it, I will entertain comments and then

12 based upon your commentsly see whether I need to tweak it


13 further, and then once I get to a draft that I am comfortable

14 with of it being final then I will hear any objections. So

15 that is how I intend to proceed tonight unless that poses a

16 problem.

17 MR. MALDONADO: That's fine, Your Honor.

18 MR. RALLS: That's fine.

19 THE COURT: Why don't you take a 15-minute break and

20 I will be out.

21 (Brief recess.)

22 (Brief recess.) test test test test test test test

23 test (I believe it was juror Isaac that came up to the bench)

24 U.S.A. test test practice strokes.

25 THE COURT: Thank you. Please be seated. I guess

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

208

1 let's take this sections by sections first. Any objections or

2 comments to pages 1 through the first line of page 5? The

3 general stuff? Any additions, deletions, edits?

4 MR. MALDONADO: On page 4 -- on page, 4, Your Honor,

5 there were no experts so I am not sure an instruction on that

6 is needed.

7 THE COURT: Yes. You are right about that. Thank

8 you. So we are going to delete that. Anything else on pages

9 1 through top of 5?

10 MR. RALLS: Well, Your Honor, I don't know. I mean,

11 Mr. Richter is not a law enforcement officer now, so --


12 THE COURT: This is kind of a strange scenario so

13 even though he superintendent a current law enforcement

14 officer it is the same thing as applying, really I meanly

15 leave it up to you all do you quantity it in or out, Your

16 Honor.

17 MR. MALDONADO: I want it in.

18 MR. RALLS: I want it out.

19 THE COURT: It stays in. Anything else on pages

20 1 through the top of 5?


22 THE COURT: Okay. Then let's start off with the

23 unlawful seizure and arrest section. Any comments, edits,

24 deletions to that section?

25 MR. MALDONADO: No, Your Honor. 5 through --

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

209

1 THE COURT: 5 through the middle of 7.

2 MR. MALDONADO: 7. I don't have any objections

3 right now, Your Honor.

4 THE COURT: Anything from the defendant?

5 MR. RALLS: Well, Your Honor, I would like court to

6 include an instruction on -- with regard to the failure to

7 display license under 521024 of the Texas transportation code.

8 There is a definition in here as opposed to just 545104 A.

9 THE COURT: Yes, the reason I have done that,


10 though, was your client's testimony was that the sole reason

11 he was arrested was for the failure to signal a lane change.

12 MR. RALLS: I know but he could have been arrested

13 for the other --

14 THE COURT: But he could have been arrested for

15 that, yes, but that's not why he was arrested. I mean, it

16 came from your client's mouth.

17 THE COURT: Yes. To that extent, your objection is

18 noted but overruled.

19 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor.

20 THE COURT: Anything else on that section?

21 MR. RALLS: Which was just 5 -- down to qualified

22 immunity, Your Honor?

23 THE COURT: No. I am just dealing with unlawful

24 seizure and arrest so the next section would be First

25 Amendment retaliation. So anything more on unlawful seizure

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

210

1 and arrest?



4 THE COURT: Okay. Let's go Po go to the First

5 Amendment retaliation. Middle of 7 through middle of 8.

6 Anything on that one?

7 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, for the defendant, I still

8 would object that there is no evidence of any evidence, I am


9 sorry there is no evidence of any -- that Mr. Rynearson or any

10 reasonable person would have had their -- nobody would have --

11 the action of defendant Richter would not have a chilled

12 chilled a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to

13 engage in that activity. There is no evidence of that.

14 MR. MALDONADO: I think -- I am sorry.

15 MR. RALLS: So I just don't think there is --

16 MR. MALDONADO: The retaliatory act here is the

17 arrest itself. And I think most people would hold that that

18 act would be sufficient to chill a person of ordinary

19 firmness, Your Honor.

20 THE COURT: Yes. No. There is a fact issue on that

21 and there is very little but there is some evidence to support

22 the claim, so that stays in.

23 MR. MALDONADO: The only -- on 3, Your Honor, I feel

24 that -- I believe that the wording of substantially motivated

25 introduces a higher burden that is not required by case law.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

211

1 It is either a substantial or motivating factor.

2 THE COURT: I left the civil PJC book back in my

3 office. I believe -- let me go on Heine and get it, if I can.

4 (Revocation) revocation practice strokes.

5 THE COURT: While I am waiting to get a connection

6 here forget by a books, Mr. Ralls.


7 MR. RALLS: Well Your Honor, well the Keenan case I

8 cited earlier yes he is 295, third two, 92, the third element

9 under First Amendment retaliation is pretty much exactly what

10 you stated here, the defendant's adverse actions were

11 substantially motivated against the plaintiff's exercise of

12 constitutionally protected conduct. That's right out of the

13 case.

14 MR. MALDONADO: Could I would like to take the

15 evening to research the matter and submit authority.

16 THE COURT: You are welcome to do that, but I mean,

17 -- so we can show up at 8:30 and do one last tackle at that,

18 but we are having arguments at 9:00. I will tell you that.

19 MR. MALDONADO: I would say that not looking -- my

20 proposed ones, Your Honor, James versus Texas Collin County,

21 speech must be a substantial or motivating force.

22 MR. MALDONADO: Will we be provided Wifi in the new

23 courthouse, Your Honor?

24 THE COURT: Oh, -- tweak --

25 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor,.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

212

1 THE COURT: Yes.

2 #04: May I look on my phone for case law?

3 THE COURT: Yes.

4 #04: Thank you. (Change speaker ID.

5 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, may I just correct the


6 citation on Keenan I think I cited it earlier as incorrectly

7 it should be Keenan versus Tejeda. It is 295, two-third,

8 252,.

9 MR. MALDONADO: 290. 290. (F.3d? Not two-thirds.

10 It is late.)

11 THE COURT: I am looking without realizing it I left

12 it exactly almost verbatim, the language from Keenan versus

13 Tejeda, (I left it so the language of substantially motivated

14 is in the Fifth Circuit case law. So that is noted and

15 overruled. Anything else? On the First Amendment retaliation

16 part?


18 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, only on the third

19 element, Your Honor.

20 THE COURT: Yes. And I have noted that and

21 overruled that. So let's turn to the qualified immunity

22 language now. Any objections, edits, deletions to that

23 section?

24 MR. MALDONADO: Is the Court going to -- initially,

25 Your Honor, I just want to note for the record the Fifth

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

213

1 Circuit has obviously ruled on this, but we would note for the

2 record that we don't believe that qualified immunity is a

3 question for the jury. The circumstances are split on that.


4 We would ask the Court not to submit a question either in the

5 instructions or the verdict form and we want a ruling on that,

6 Your Honor.

7 THE COURT: Yes. I tend to agree with you, but

8 that's not Fifth Circuit law. I also question the submission

9 of a qualified immunity claim. I wasn't bound by the Fifth

10 Circuit law I would not do it but I am bound by that law so

11 that is noted and overruled. If I was not).

12 MR. MALDONADO: And my second point, Your Honor, is

13 that is whether the Court in its instruction is going to say

14 that it was clearly -- what was clearly established in 2009

15 concerning the Fourth Amendment rights. This is the court

16 going to instruct him on that? It is whether -- the

17 instruction will say it was clearly established -- oh, it

18 does, Your Honor, I am sorry, I apologize.

19 THE COURT: I thought I did have that language.

20 MR. MALDONADO: Yes.

21 MR. RALLS: I don't have any objection to it, Your

22 Honor.

23 THE COURT: Anything else from the plaintiff?

24 MR. MALDONADO: Not at this time, Your Honor.

25 THE COURT: Okay. Then we are on pages 9, 10

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

214

1 through 12, all the damage sections. Any objections,

2 comments, edits from the plaintiff?


3 MR. MALDONADO: On the punitive -- Welton punitive

4 damages, Your Honor, the factors that should guide the fixing

5 of the amount, we object to that because it seems to limit the

6 jury's discretion to consider the circumstances under which

7 punitive damages should be imposed. It is not only in cases

8 where there has been deceit, coverup, insult, intended or

9 reckless injury, and so I am afraid what the jury will say is,

10 they are going to go through each factor and say, well, we

11 really continue think it is here and then, don't think it is

12 here and not consider other factors. We don't know what they

13 saw in the facts that they would find to be a reckless

14 difficult regard of Mr. Rynearson's federal rights and would

15 entitle him to punitive damages.

16 THE COURT: Mr. Ralls?

17 THE COURT: We are on paragraph -- on page 12.

18 MR. RALLS: Right.

19 THE COURT: I mean I see a couple of options here.

20 This isn't the usual kind of case so this is odd. I guess we

21 could change it to say the reprehencability of defendant's

22 conduct and then period. Or I guess the other thing is, this

23 language isn't limiting. It says the reprehencability of

24 defendant Richter's conduct, including but not limited to.

25 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I am happy with taking both

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

215


1 of those paragraphs out. I don't -- and I think it might be a

2 comment on the weight of the evidence or -- that it may

3 suggest to the jury that defendant Richter's conduct was

4 reprehensible or deceitful or --

5 THE COURT: Well, that is a third avenue. So we

6 would delete the if you decide to award punitive damages, all

7 that language one and two?

8 MR. RALLS: That is correct, Your Honor.

9 MR. MALDONADO: I have no objection to that, Your

10 Honor.

11 THE COURT: Now the only thing that may potentially

12 cause that to be an issue later down the road, I don't think

13 we are going to get there, but if the jury did award punitive

14 damages, and it is not in proportion to what the Supreme Court

15 has said there has got to be some ratio.

16 BY #04:

17 Q. Guess we will have to figure that out later. That's the

18 only down side to taking out the language.

19 MR. RALLS: Well I am not averse to leaving number

20 2 in, given that, Your Honor, it is just number one I am

21 really concerned with.

22 MR. MALDONADO: I believe something similar to

23 number -- we submitted something similar to number 2, Your

24 Honor. So I don't think I can object at this point, although

25 I could reconsider but I think for the same concern that the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

216


1 Court has expressed I think there has to be language about

2 proportionality.

3 THE COURT: So we -- so we delete paragraph 1, then

4 and just leave 2? Is that.

5 MR. RALLS: The that's okay with me, Your Honor.


7 THE COURT: Okay. We will do that.

8 THE COURT: And then lastly any objections,

9 comments, edits to pages 13 and 14.

10 MR. MALDONADO: I think the law is split, Your

11 Honor, on whether nominal damages must or may be awarded where

12 no compensable damages are awarded. I was reading yesterday

13 some old cases from the seventies and eighties in the Fifth

14 Circuit where the Court seemed to assume that nominal damages

15 pled to naturally when there was no compensable -- when there

16 were no compensation for a fourth -- for a constitutional

17 violation. Some circuits include language that they say it is

18 must. For example, the Third Circuit, and I think that's what

19 we relied on in in doing this research.


21 MR. RALLS: Nominal.

22 A. Your Honor, I am sorry. I would rather it not be in

23 there. I don't have a food legal argument for that.

24 THE COURT: Well, I have got at least -- I mean in

25 my mind I have at least to tender a may. The question is, is


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

217

1 it must? I think that is the issue here. And so if they

2 don't find actual or compensatory damages, must they award

3 nominal damages? And that is the legal question.

4 MR. MALDONADO: I think the cases I have seen, Your

5 Honor, is that it is odd, where it is sort of reversed here it

6 is usually plaintiffs who don't want this instruction, because

7 it is an out for the jury, not to award compensatory damages.

8 But it is clear from the cases that if a party, like if a

9 plaintiff requests a nominal damages instruction and the jury

10 finds -- they tans first question yes, there was a

11 constitutional violation, I would is a say 100 percent of the

12 cases, the court cases have held that it was reversible error

13 not to have submitted the instruction to the jury.

14 THE COURT: Well I intend to submit an instruction,

15 but again my question is, is it may or must?

16 MR. MALDONADO: And if that is the case I think we

17 would insist it would be must, Your Honor.

18 THE COURT: So what circuit law do you have for

19 that?

20 MR. MALDONADO: And that I turn to Mr. Gonzalez.

21 #04: Judge, we.

22 Q. Have we have just the Kerry opinion itself, the language

23 in there, both what it says and logically what it implies, the

24 language in Carrie talks about because of the right to


25 procedural due process is quote unquote absolute and because

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

218

1 of its importance to organized society that due process be

2 observed the defendants or the plaintiffs in that case were

3 entitled quote unquote entitled to recover nominal damages,

4 Judge. And it wouldn't seem to -- it doesn't make logical

5 sense that if the purpose of these nominal damages is to give

6 some value to these rights there is a violation, even if it is

7 a technical violation to hold that the jury at that point can

8 still say, well, yes there is a violation but there is no whom

9 natural damages it doesn't seem to comport with what the Kerry

10 lack, the importance to organized society that these rights be

11 scrupulously observed in what Carrie said, Judge?

12 THE COURT: CAREY versus pie thus, 435 U.S. 247. It

13 is Carey) (based upon) based upon) the practice strokes.

14 THE COURT: I am looking at Archie versus Christian

15 a Fifth Circuit case out of 1987. Far versus Cain, FARRAR,

16 1985 case, and all those cases, the Fifth Circuit seems to

17 imply, or it didn't imply it actually states that a plaintiff

18 is entitled to an award of nominal damages for the violation

19 of civil rights even where there is no injury. So it seems to

20 man it seems to mandate an award so I will change that

21 language to must. Before we move on to damages we have

22 something else, Your Honor.

23 THE COURT: Go ahead.


24 MR. MALDONADO: Than damages. So we have a proposed

25 instruction, Your Honor, on presumed damages. And in

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

219

1 instances of false arrest, some courts have held that in those

2 cases damages may be presumed and the jury can be asked to

3 give an amount, and so they are not called nominal damages,

4 because the amount that are awarded in these jurisdictions is

5 more than a dollar. And we could -- you know, I guess the

6 Court could rule on it while I present -- I make the request,

7 or I could -- we could go ahead and submit one to the Court.

8 We have, for example, the case of Kerr nine, KERMAN, versus

9 city of New York, 374 F.3d, 93. And they discussion this

10 issue, Your Honor, at pages 124 through 31. We are aware that

11 Sixth Circuit also has ruled on that, Your Honor, (aware).

12 A. Albeit it in the PLRA context, prison litigation reform

13 but considering that the standards for recovery are so much

14 more demanding under that statute, it would seem that the

15 logic follows that in less demanding litigation like this

16 sort, 1983, that we could also request -- well the Sixth

17 Circuit, they held that they are saying there were presumed

18 damages and an instruction should be given to the jury for

19 example, false arrest claims. (for, for example, I am looking

20 at McClellan, MCCULLOCA versus Glasgow, say, 1980 case out of

21 the Fifth Circuit. And 1983 case, it is talking about an


22 award of some damages may be appropriate based upon jury

23 findings, then it goes on to question substantial amounts

24 cannot be awarded. But then here is the language I am

25 interested in. Any -- 1983 prohibits any but nominal damages

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

220

1 for presumed but unproven injury. I mean, so there, I mean,

2 the case seems to stand for the proposition you can get

3 compensatory damages but if you don't get compensatory damages

4 then you can get nominal damages but there is no presumed

5 damages.

6 MR. MALDONADO: Yes. Your Honor, --

7 THE COURT: Do you have anything contrary to that?

8 MR. MALDONADO: So this Second Circuit case is

9 obviously not from this jurisdiction. But in the Supreme

10 Court case, Memphis, I forget, school district or something,

11 versus extra tour are a or extra tour are a, I don't have the

12 pronunciation correct, that was 1985, 1987 Supreme Court case,

13 which included language about presumed damages where they

14 said, where they repeated what court said and then they said,

15 there may be instances of violations where it is -- you know,

16 it can't be quantified what happened. And the example that

17 they gave there was I think the procedural due process

18 violation, subsequently circuits like the seventh -- like the

19 second and the Sixth Circuit have said, look, in false arrest

20 claims, the person may go to jail for several hours, but there


21 may not be loss of wages. There may not be substantial

22 emotional harm there, but there is no doubt that the person

23 was -- was deprived of loss of liberty so those instances

24 where there is a loss of liberty without a corollary evidence

25 or finding of damages by the jury that damages may be

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

221

1 presumed. I know is not the law in this circuit, Your Honor.

2 THE COURT: Right but isn't that the purpose of

3 nominal damages to satisfy those cases?

4 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, I concede that that is

5 what it appears, but some courts have suggested otherwise and

6 for that reason we are -- we would request that the Court

7 consider a presumed damages instruction.

8 THE COURT: Yes. I mean, my limited research at

9 this point doesn't seem to establish the Fifth Circuit allows

10 for that. Zero to the contrary, I am seeing a lot of language

11 in cases saying that in 1983 constitutional violation nominal

12 damages are presumed to flow, so it seems to suggest that you

13 either get compensatory damages or the jury doesn't award

14 compensatory you get nominal damages and so that objection is

15 noted but -- and that instruction that is requested and noted

16 but will not be included. Anything else --

17 MR. RALLS: Well, Your Honor, yes, I am sorry to

18 back you up, but on compensatory damages, I guess, is where we


19 were going to have a limiting instruction regarding --

20 THE COURT: Yes. I think I have done that in the

21 verdict form, have I not?

22 MR. RALLS: Maybe I missed that.

23 THE COURT: So in question number 13, I say what sum

24 of money, if paid now in cash -- and actually it should say

25 what sum of money, if any, we need to change that, would

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

222

1 fairly and reasonably compensate plaintiff Rynearson for his

2 mental anguish and compensatory damages. So you are right, I

3 did not limit it further as we discussed. For his mental

4 anguish and compensatory damages what I am struggling with is

5 the language there I am thinking about mental anguish,

6 compensatory damages suffered from his seizure or arrest and

7 then put the date of the incident? Or do you have a better

8 suggestion?

9 MR. RALLS: There are several questions that one --

10 have to do with seizure, stop and one is arrest so I am not

11 sure that wouldn't be -- that wouldn't be duplicative, but the

12 only thing that I was thinking is --

13 THE COURT: Or suffered on the date of the incident?

14 MR. RALLS: I was thinking something like do not

15 consider any amount or any -- in considering mental anguish

16 and compensatory damages do not consider any amount for

17 adverse personnel actions or letter of recommendation,


18 something like that, more specific, but that is probably

19 actually I lake your language more and more the I think about

20 it.

21 THE COURT: Suffered on the date of the incident?

22 MR. RALLS: Yes, sir.

23 THE COURT: What what do the plaintiffs say?

24 MR. MALDONADO: I am fine with that, Your Honor.

25 MR. MALDONADO: Are we moving to the verdict form,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

223

1 Your Honor?

2 THE COURT: One second here.

3 MR. RALLS: Can we put only on the date of the

4 incident?

5 THE COURT: And that is what I am trying to get on.

6 I mean when did he report the injury? Or report the incident?

7 MR. MALDONADO: I think it was reported the next

8 day. September 8th, Your Honor.

9 MR. MALDONADO: Another suggestion, Your Honor.

10 THE COURT: Yes.

11 MR. MALDONADO: In the instructions itself and not

12 on the verdict form the Court could say sort of like Mr. Ralls

13 was saying I am instructing you that for purposes of

14 compensatory damages you should not consider awarding any

15 compensatory damages if you believe that Mr. Rynearson was


16 reprimanded at his place of employment.

17 THE COURT: Well, that is another way of doing it,

18 rather than tampering or editing the verdict form, on page 10,

19 middle of the page, after the first full paragraph under

20 compensatory damages, inserting language there, saying, no

21 compensatory damages should be awarded for any adverse

22 personnel actions that may have been suffered?

23 MR. MALDONADO: I am fine with that language, Your

24 Honor.

25 THE COURT: Yes. We are going to limit it that way

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

224

1 we are going to include language that says no compensatory

2 damages should be awarded for any adverse personnel actions

3 that may have been suffered by plaintiff Rynearson. So that

4 goes in the middle of page 10.

5 THE COURT: Any objections to that, Mr. Ralls?

6 MR. RALLS: Well, I guess his testimony really had

7 to do with the mental anguish he suffered as a result of

8 having to report it, so --

9 THE COURT: And that's why -- that gets to come in,

10 but then nothing else comes in for the jury's consideration.

11 So he gets to say, well I suffered mental anguish because I

12 had to report it but the jury can't consider anything that

13 might have happened as a result of that.

14 MR. RALLS: Well, but the problem with that is, that


15 I mean, how do you distinguish between the mental anguish that

16 he suffered -- okay, as a result of having to report it.

17 Okay. All right. Your Honor,.

18 THE COURT: Okay. Anything else on the

19 instructions?

20 MR. MALDONADO: No, nothing else, Your Honor.



23 THE COURT: Okay. Let's turn to the verdict form.

24 Let's take these in segments. Any objections, edits,

25 deletions to questions 1 through 4?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

225

1 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, with regard to question

2 number 2, the qualified immunity question, I think it should

3 be worded that -- I think that this puts the burden of proof,

4 shifts the burden of proof to the defendant the way this is

5 worded. And that it should be worded as it is in the charge

6 basically that no reasonable, do you find from a preponderance

7 of the evidence that no reasonable officer could have believed

8 that his stop of plaintiff Rynearson was valid or whatever?

9 THE COURT: Do you want to respond to that,

10 Mr. Maldonado?

11 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, I think that is a

12 confusing question. The jury has been instructed (on the


13 definition of qualified immunity. We have got to presume that

14 they know the definition when they are answering this

15 question, and they will be referencing the Court's

16 instructions, I mean that is the same for compensatory damages

17 or for any of the other terms of art that are included in the

18 verdict form. I do not see the argument that it shifts the

19 burden. It is fairly neutral, so I would -- I would object or

20 oppose Mr. Ralls's suggestion.

21 THE COURT: I don't see where it shifts the burden

22 either. That is noted but overruled. Anything on, --

23 anything else on 1 through 4? Into.


25 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, just to be more artful on

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

226

1 the record, what I would prefer on number 2 would be do you

2 find from a preponderance of the evidence that no reasonable

3 officer possessing knowledge of clearly established law and

4 the information known by the defendant Edwin Richter at that

5 time could have believe that he had probable cause to arrest

6 Richard Rynearson?

7 THE COURT: (Could have believed).

8 THE COURT: I would like to stay as neutral as I can

9 on the language to the jury. What I am thinking of doing,

10 though, and just because this is so law Laden, on question

11 number 1 I said considering all of the instructions in the


12 jury charge we went do you find, I am going include that same

13 language, considering all the instructions in the jury charge,

14 do you find? I think that will cure any issues. So to the

15 extent you want anything else that is noted but will not be

16 inserted and overruled.

17 THE COURT: Anything else on 1 through 4?

18 MR. RALLS: Well, are you going to consider that

19 preparatory language on -- I mean, insert that language in all

20 of these, then?

21 THE COURT: Well, no. I was going to do it just on

22 1 and 2 and do it on 5 and 6, so everything on the legal part

23 I am going refer them back to the jury charge. But for

24 example, 3 and 4 -- well,.

25 THE COURT: Now I am just -- you know what? We are

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

227

1 just going to do this globally. I am going to take out that

2 language in 1, I am going to insert it in the very beginning,

3 preparatory. So it will read considering all the instructions

4 in the jury charge, we the jury answer the questions submitted

5 by the court as follows. And so that will avoid a repetition

6 every time. Anything else on 1 through 4?



9 THE COURT: Number 5 through 8. So knife we are


10 going to take out considering all the instructions language

11 and start with do you find. Anything else from the plaintiff?



14 MR. RALLS: The same thing, just the same objection

15 on number six, the qualified immunity.

16 THE COURT: That is noted and overruled.

17 THE COURT: Moving to 9 through 12, we are going to

18 do the same thing on 9. So it will start with do you find.

19 Any other objections, edits, deletions, 9 through 12?

20 MR. MALDONADO: No, Your Honor. And I just wanted

21 to clarify something. I objected to the qualified immunity

22 instruction. I just want to note for the record I would also

23 object to the submission in the verdict form of the qualified

24 immunity question.

25 THE COURT: That is noted and overruled.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

228

1 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I would also on question

2 number ten, I would ask for -- I would object to that and ask

3 for the instruction that I read previously.

4 THE COURT: And that is noted and overruled.

5 Anything else on 9 through 12?





9 THE COURT: Let's move to the damages, 13 through

10 15. So I just caught my mistake on 13 I say what sum of

11 money, if any, if paid now in cash and the same thing needs to

12 be done on 15 -- well, 15 has got it, never mind. So it is

13 just 13. And so 13 now going to read what sum of money, if

14 any, paid now in cash, would fairly and reasonably compensate

15 plaintiff Rynearson for his mental anguish, compensatory

16 damages suffered only on September 7, 2009?

17 THE COURT: Any other objections, edits, deletions

18 to 13, 14 or 15?

19 MR. MALDONADO: So after the last any suffered -- is

20 that what the Court said?

21 THE COURT: Yes if any is misplace sod what sum of

22 money, if any, if paid now in cash, would fairly and

23 reasonably compensate plaintiff Rynearson for his mental

24 anguish and compensatory damages suffered only on

25 September 7 -- oh, no, no, no, we have already cleaned that

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

229

1 language up.

2 BY THE COURT:

3 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, I thought we had.

4 THE COURT: You are right. So that language won't

5 be in there. So it is going to be plaintiff Rynearson for his

6 mental anguish and compensatory damages question mark.


7 MR. RALLS: If any, Your Honor, at least --

8 THE COURT: Well, I got -- I have already included

9 the if any up front.

10 THE COURT: So now with that said, any -- anything

11 else on 13, 14 or 15?

12 MR. MALDONADO: Can I just ask, Your Honor, we have

13 three claims I presume that we could recover on each claim and

14 the Court is -- is essentially guiding the jury to just award

15 for all three claims at once. I don't have the law on me. I

16 can't say that it should be different, but I tend to research

17 it, my sense is it is not fair.

18 THE COURT: What is not fair? That he gets to have

19 the jury give him damages for each of the -- I mean he only

20 suffered one damage. He suffered whatever mental anguish and

21 compensatory damages the jury finds that he suffered because

22 of the activities. I mean, so --

23 MR. MALDONADO: Well --

24 THE COURT: Do you want the jury to award him for

25 each incident, for arrest and then later for the jail?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

230

1 MR. MALDONADO: For the stop, for the arrest, and

2 then separately for the fact that his right to speak up, you

3 know, a -- he was retaliated again for against for that.

4 THE COURT: The difficulty I am having with all of

5 that based upon how he testified, how did Hebraic -- he didn't


6 break that down.

7 MR. MALDONADO: Well, I would argue, Your Honor,

8 that he did testify about the indignity of being stopped and

9 his right being violated when he knows that what the officer

10 said was not cause for stopping him. And then he did testify

11 about the arrest itself and being sent to jail for six hours.

12 Now, I think that -- that distinction I think is clear between

13 the stop and the arrest. I would grant the Court that it is a

14 much more difficult argument to make between the arrest and

15 the First Amendment, because they are sort of -- they are sort

16 of hard to separate but at a minimum I would ask that we be

17 allowed to submit to the jury a separate requests for damages

18 for the stop and the arrest.

19 THE COURT: Do you want to respond?

20 MR. RALLS: Yes, Your Honor. I agree with the

21 Court's initial analysis and that is that there is only -- he

22 only suffered, he is only entitled to be made whole once and

23 this way that is what you are doing with this verdict form.

24 THE COURT: He is entitled to be made whole once and

25 I mean, if it could have been broken down in the evidence

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

231

1 that, you know, he suffered distinct periods of mental

2 anguish, if these were like separate dates these occurred I

3 could see all that but this all of this activity happened


4 basically in a span of what 20 seconds and then the six hours

5 is and so I don't know how the jury would be able to start

6 awarding damages for each independent claim. The other

7 problem I have is, frankly, and only because the defendant

8 didn't raise this, is -- and we will see what jury does with

9 mental anguish an compensatory damages but I was struggling

10 with has he met -- has the plaintiff met the legal standard

11 for mental anguish? And that's another part that, you know --

12 that is going to be difficult for this on appeal, but if it

13 gets that far. The objections are noted and overruled. We

14 are only going to have one global set of questions. Anything

15 else on 13, 14 or 15?

16 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, can I raise it now that --

17 THE COURT: It is too late now? We will take all of

18 this up post jury now but it is too late now. Anything else?


20 THE COURT: Let me get you a clean set of documents.

21 How much time do you want for jury argument?

22 MR. MALDONADO: I was intending on walking the jury

23 through the verdict form, Your Honor, so in that sense, I

24 think it will be longer than my opening, so I would ask for 30

25 minutes. I don't really believe it will take me 30 minutes,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

232

1 Your Honor. But I don't want to shortchange myself.

2 MR. RALLS: I am okay with 30 minutes, Your Honor.


3 THE COURT: Yes. Thirty minutes each side. What I

4 will do is I will first instruct the jury, what I do is I

5 provide them an individual copy, and so then you will be able

6 to both argue as the Court said on page 6 or whatever you want

7 to point to they will have copies in front of them tomorrow

8 morning. So we will start at 9:00. Jury will be given copies

9 of the instructions. I will instruct them on the law and then

10 recognize you all for arguments. Thirty minutes on each side.

11 The only exhibit was 1, right?

12 MR. RALLS: That is correct, Your Honor, well, 3,

13 that is not going to the jury.

14 THE COURT: Right. So only 1 is going to the jury.

15 Anything else we need to take up tonight?


17 MR. RALLS: Mr.



20 THE COURT: Okay. Why don't you all stand by and my

21 law clerk will five you all clean copies before you leave.

22 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor,.

23 THE COURT: Yes.

24 MR. MALDONADO: I got this from Ms. Greenup. And if

25 I am interpreting it correctly I don't even think the police

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

233


1 report went in. It was by agreement nobody -- we didn't

2 oppose it.

3 THE COURT: I mean no one formally moved for its

4 admission. That is a good point.

5 THE COURT: Do you both agree to move for the

6 admission or does it stay out?

7 MR. RALLS: Your Honor, I thought that this morning

8 whatever we --

9 THE COURT: You know,.

10 MR. RALLS: I thought it was admitted, basically.

11 THE COURT: I am not sure I made a formal ruling.

12 (Reporter reads back testimony.)

13 THE COURT: So 1 admitted.

14 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Stand by for the

15 final version.

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT


1

1 November 10, 2015. Day 2 of jury trial, Rynearson versus

2 Richter.

3 THE COURT: Thank you. Please be seated. You

4 should have been provided a new copies of the jury

5 instructions and verdict form this morning. On page 7, we

6 changed question 14, since we stated yesterday that nominal

7 damages appear to be required under Fifth Circuit law, we

8 deleted the words if any in that paragraph. And then I want

9 to point out to you another change we did on the jury

10 instructions. On page 12, when we were talking about the

11 punitive damages, you will recall that there was a

12 paragraph 1 and a paragraph 2 and we deleted one of the

13 paragraphs, but we have also short tend the second paragraph

14 because the remainder of the sentence dealt with issues that

15 weren't involved in this case. And so with that, are there

16 any final objections to the jury charge or the verdict form

17 from the plaintiff?

18 MR. MALDONADO: Other than the objections that we

19 went over yesterday, no, Your Honor. I think I gave to

20 Mary-Kate my page 7, I was having a conversation with your

21 clerk, Your Honor. I am fine with the verdict form, but I

22 think there may be some confusion. If the jury answers yes to

23 the question of qualified immunity, that is, that Mr., officer

24 Richter is qualified to the qualified immunity defense, I


25 don't think the jury is -- I don't think there is an

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

2

1 instruction there that they don't answer any of the questions

2 13 through 15. Page 6 says, go to the next page. And as they

3 go to the next page, if they answered yes to question number

4 -- to 3, 7 or Len that has to do with legal causation then

5 they go to 13, but the jury is not told, even in the other

6 ones, even in the preceding pages, don't even answer number

7 14.

8 THE COURT: Let's stop and take a look at that. So

9 on page 2 of the verdict form, question 2, if they answer yes

10 to qualified immunity, they do not answer questions 3 and

11 4 and they go to the next set of questions.

12 MR. MALDONADO: That's right.

13 THE COURT: That begins on 5, so then on question

14 six, if they answer yes to qualified immunity, they don't

15 answer 7 and 8 and they go to 9. If on ten if they answer yes

16 to qualified immunity they don't answer 11 and 12. (immunity)

17 and -- so then on top of page 7 it says if you answered

18 question numbers, 3, 7 or 11 yes, then answer question 13.

19 They will only answer 3, 7 and 11 if they answered no to

20 qualified immunity. So where is the confusion?


22 THE COURT: I mean I know as the dance, but where is

23 it wrong?


24 MR. MALDONADO: Right. So they get to page 6, Your

25 Honor, and if they have answered yes to the question of

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

3

1 qualified immunity, they should stop there, correct?

2 THE COURT: Well, no, because they could have --

3 they could have answered yes that he got -- he has qualified

4 immunity of the arrest but could have said no, he doesn't have

5 qualified immunity to your other two claims.

6 MR. MALDONADO: That's right -- that's --

7 THE COURT: I mean, it is unlikely they will do

8 that, it is either going to be all or nothing, I would think,

9 but I mean that is remote possibility, isn't it?

10 MR. MALDONADO: I think that -- that is correct,

11 Your Honor. I guess you are right, because they are offered

12 three opportunities to answer the qualified immunity maybe

13 they do 1 and 3 but I don't think it is going to happen, I

14 think it is all or none, the Court is correct. So if they say

15 no to all of them, I don't -- I mean, my sense is that on

16 page 6 it doesn't -- it doesn't instruct them don't go any

17 further if you have answered yes to 2 -- whatever the

18 qualified immunity questions are, 2, 6 and 8 or --

19 THE COURT: Yes. That's why I started at the top of

20 page 7 with if you answered question numbers 3, 7 or 11 yes,

21 so they will only answer those questions if they found there


22 was no qualified immunity.

23 MR. MALDONADO: Well, they will only answer question

24 number 13.

25 THE COURT: Well, they will starting with number 13

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

4

1 but if they for some reason don't want to give compensatory

2 damages then they have to answer 14. Right?


4 THE COURT: So -- and.

5 MR. MALDONADO: Except they don't answer the nominal

6 damages question even with -- if qualified immunity has been

7 found.

8 THE COURT: Let me stop here, because maybe I am

9 missing it. Mr. Ralls, do you think -- is this correct or do

10 you think I have erred?

11 MR. RALLS: Well, Your Honor, I wouldn't think that

12 they would -- that they would answer those questions if they

13 find qualified immunity.

14 THE COURT: Right. And so again, though, I keep

15 ongoing back to the very first sentence on page 7, doesn't

16 that cure it?

17 THE COURT: I mean otherwise I guess I can say if

18 you answered questions numbers, 3, 7 or 11 yes then answer

19 question number 13 if you have answered question numbers 3,

20 7 or 11 no, do not answer any other remaining questions? I


21 guess that is another way I could clear it up.

22 MR. MALDONADO: The alternative is if the jury comes

23 back and they answer yes on the qualified immunity and then

24 they award nominal damages the Court would entertain briefing

25 from the parties.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

5

1 THE COURT: Yes, I can clean it up as a matter of

2 law.

3 MR. MALDONADO: That's right.

4 THE COURT: But I guess I am still stuck, with

5 haven't I cured it by the first line?

6 MR. RALLS: Well, by the first line on page 7?

7 THE COURT: Yes.

8 MR. RALLS: I mean that is 3, 7 or 11, so.

9 THE COURT: And they will only answer 3, 7 or 11 yes

10 if they have answered no to qualified immunity on 2, 6, and

11 10.

12 MR. RALLS: True.

13 THE COURT: Do you see what I am doing?

14 MR. MALDONADO: I know, Your Honor, but the

15 instruction is that they must award if they find a violation.

16 And so they answer yes to the violation and they answered yes

17 to the qualified immunity.

18 THE COURT: Oh, no. Now I see where you are headed.


19 Mr. Maldonado, even if there was a violation, but he had

20 qualified immunity, you don't get nominal damages, do you.

21 MR. MALDONADO: That's right, Your Honor, you don't.

22 THE COURT: Okay. Then we are saying the same

23 thing. (Maldonado) and my only concern is that I don't know

24 whether the jury will get it from this, but, you know, it is

25 not -- I mean, it is only for the purpose of clarifying it for

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

6

1 the jury.

2 THE COURT: Okay. I think I have not it right. It

3 is a dance they have to go through, but I think I have worded

4 it all correctly and if for some reason there is an error, we

5 will deal with the error if it arises if it does.

6 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor. Anything

7 else by way of objections to the jury instructions or verdict

8 form.



11 MR. RALLS: No Your Honor but I would request the

12 plaintiff be required to open fully as to liability and

13 damages.

14 THE COURT: Yes. He will be required to open fully.

15 Mr. Maldonado, I am giving you guys 30 minutes each, do you

16 want to reserve some time for rebuttal.

17 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor, seven minutes.


18 THE COURT: 7? So 23 and 7. Okay. And I will give

19 you both a final two minutes warning. Anything else we need

20 to take up before the jury comes in?

21 MR. MALDONADO: Just to confirm, Your Honor, they

22 will have the verdict form?

23 THE COURT: Yes, they will have both the jury

24 instructions and the verdict form. Anything else? Are they

25 all here yet?

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

7

1 COURTROOM SECURITY OFFICER: One was missing. Let

2 me find out.

3 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, do we move the.

4 THE COURT: Cow can twist it and --

5 COURTROOM SECURITY OFFICER: They are filling out

6 their men use they are all here.

7 THE COURT: Why don't we take a quick break, the

8 wiring is very delicate why don't Karl to get you and slightly

9 angle it toward the jury. And I will come out when the jury

10 is ready.

11 (Brief recess.)

12 THE COURT: Please be seated. Good morning, ladies

13 and gentlemen.


15 THE COURT: You should have in front of you two


16 documents, one called jury instructions and one called the

17 verdict form. Do you not? January isn't Jan is not feeling

18 well, she has a cold, she completely slipped. Call Jan.

19 THE COURT: Well most of the time it runs like a

20 well oiled machine. Jan thank you.

21 THE COURT: You should now have two documents, one

22 called jury instructions and one called verdict form. I

23 provide you a written copy because it is my duty now to read

24 this charge to you. And so rather than read to you 14 pages I

25 find it much more easy on the juries if they can read along

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

8

1 rather than just me reading this to you.

2 MEMBERS OF THE JURY:

3 Now that you have heard all of the evidence, it is

4 my duty and responsibility to instruct you on the law you are

5 to apply in this case. The law contained in these

6 instructions is the only law you may follow. It is your duty

7 to follow what I instruct you the law is, regardless of any

8 opinion that you might have as to what the law ought to be.

9 If I have given you the impression during the trial

10 that I favor either party, you must disregard that impression.

11 If I have given you the impression during the trial that I

12 have an opinion about the facts of this case, you must

13 disregard that impression. You are the sole judges of the

14 facts of this case. Other than my instructions to you on the


15 law, you should disregard anything I may have said or done

16 during the trial in arriving at your verdict.Page 1.

17 You should consider all of the instructions about

18 the law as a whole and regard each instruction in light of the

19 others, without isolating a particular statement or paragraph.

20 The testimony of the witnesses and other exhibits

21 introduced by the parties constitute the evidence. The

22 statements of counsel are not evidence; they are only

23 arguments. It is important for you to distinguish between the

24 arguments of counsel and the evidence on which those arguments

25 rest. What the lawyers say or do is not evidence. You may,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

9

1 however, consider their arguments in light of the evidence

2 that has been admitted and determine whether the evidence

3 admitted in this trial supports the arguments. You must

4 determine the facts from all the testimony that you have heard

5 and the other evidence submitted. You are the judges of the

6 facts, but in finding those facts, you must apply the law as I

7 instruct you.Page 2.

8 You are required by law to decide the case in a

9 fair, impartial, and unbiased manner, based entirely on the

10 law and on the evidence presented to you in the courtroom.

11 You may not be influenced by passion, prejudice, or sympathy

12 you might have for the plaintiff or the defendant in arriving


13 at your verdict.

14 Plaintiff Richard Rynearson has the burden of

15 proving his case by a preponderance of the evidence. To

16 establish by a preponderance of the evidence means to prove

17 something is more likely so than not so. If you find that

18 Plaintiff Rynearson has failed to prove any element of his

19 claim by a preponderance of the evidence, then he may not

20 recover on that claim.Page 2.

21 The fact that a person brought a lawsuit and is in

22 court seeking damages creates no inference that the person is

23 entitled to a judgment. Anyone may make a claim and file a

24 lawsuit. The act of making a claim in a lawsuit, by itself,

25 does not in any way tend to establish that claim and is not

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

10

1 evidence.Page 3.

2 The evidence you are to consider consists of the

3 testimony of the witnesses, the documents and other exhibits

4 admitted into evidence, and any fair inferences and reasonable

5 conclusions you can draw from the facts and circumstances that

6 have been proven.

7 Generally speaking, there are two types of evidence.

8 One is direct evidence, such as testimony of an eyewitness.

9 The other is indirect or circumstantial evidence.

10 Circumstantial evidence is evidence that proves a fact from

11 which you can logically conclude another fact exists. As a


12 general rule, the law makes no distinction between direct and

13 circumstantial evidence, but simply requires that you find the

14 facts from a preponderance of all the evidence, both direct

15 and circumstantial.

16 Page 3.

17 You alone are to determine the questions of

18 credibility or truthfulness of the witnesses. In weighing the

19 testimony of the witnesses, you may consider the witness's

20 manner and demeanor on the witness stand, any feelings or

21 interest in the case, or any prejudice or bias about the case,

22 that he or she may have, and the consistency or inconsistency

23 of his or her testimony considered in the light of the

24 circumstances. Has the witness been contradicted by other

25 credible evidence? Has he or she made statements at other

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

11

1 times and places contrary to those made here on the witness

2 stand? You must give the testimony of each witness the

3 credibility that you think it deserves.

4 Page 4.

5

6 Even though a witness may be a party to the action

7 and therefore interested in its outcome, the testimony may be

8 accepted if it is not contradicted by direct evidence or by

9 any inference that may be drawn from the evidence, if you


10 believe the testimony.

11 You are not to decide this case by counting the

12 number of witnesses who have testified on the opposing sides.

13 Witness testimony is weighed; witnesses are not counted. The

14 test is not the relative number of witnesses, but the relative

15 convincing force of the evidence. The testimony of a single

16 will will

17 witness is sufficient to prove any fact, even if a

18 greater will

19 number of witnesses testified to the contrary, if

20 after considering all of the other evidence, you believe that

21 witness.page 4.

22 You are required to evaluate the testimony of a

23 law-enforcement officer as you would the testimony of any

24 other witness. No special weight may be given to his or her

25 testimony because he or she is a law enforcement

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

12

1 officer.Page 5.

2 In determining the weight to give to the testimony

3 of a witness, consider whether there was evidence that at some

4 other time the witness said or did something, or failed to say

5 or do something, that was different from the testimony given

6 at the trial.

7 A simple mistake by a witness does not

8 necessarily mean that the witness did not tell the truth as he


9 or she remembers it. People may forget some things or

10 remember other things inaccurately. If a witness made a

11 misstatement, consider whether that misstatement was an

12 intentional falsehood or simply an innocent mistake. The

13 significance of that may depend on whether it has to do with

14 an important fact or with only an unimportant detail.Page 5.

15 At times during trial, I sustained objections to

16 questions asked without permitting the witness to answer. You

17 may not draw any inferences from an unanswered question.

18 Such items as I excluded from your consideration were excluded

19 because they were not legally admissible as evidence. You

20 must decide this case solely upon the admissible evidence

21 before you.Page 5.

22 First, Plaintiff Rynearson claims that Defendant

23 Richter violated his constitutional right to be free from

24 unreasonable arrest or seizure. To recover damages for these

25 alleged constitutional violations, Plaintiff Rynearson must

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

13

1 prove by a preponderance of the evidence that:

2 1. Defendant Richter committed an act that violated

3 the constitutional rights Plaintiff Rynearson claims were

4 violated, and

5 2. Defendant Richter's acts were the cause of

6 Plaintiff Rynearson's damages.


7 Plaintiff Rynearson claims that the way Defendant

8 Richter stopped and arrested him on September 7, 2009,

9 violated his constitutional rights. To establish these

10 claims, Plaintiff Rynearson must show that the stop and arrest

11 were unreasonable.

12 In the case of a traffic stop, a police officer must

13 have reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion exists when

14 the traffic stop was justified at its inception and the

15 seizure was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances

16 that justified the stop in the first place. Additionally,

17 reasonable suspicion exists when the police officer can point

18 to specific and articulable facts that, when taken together

19 with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant

20 the seizure. You should look at the totality of the

21 circumstances to see whether Defendant Richter has a

22 "particularized and objective basis" for suspecting Plaintiff

23 Rynearson of legal wrongdoing. To help you make this

24 determination, I will instruct you on the elements of the

25 crime for which Plaintiff Rynearson was stopped. page 7.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

14

1 Defendant Richter argues that Plaintiff Rynearson

2 was stopped for violating Texas Transportation Code §

3 545.104(a), which provides: "an operator shall use the signal

4 authorized by [Texas law] to indicate an intention to turn,

5 change lanes, or start from a parked position."


6 If you find that Plaintiff Rynearson has proved by

7 a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant Richter lacked

8 reasonable suspicion to make the traffic stop on September 7,

9 2009, then Defendant Richter violated Plaintiff Rynearson's

10 constitutional right to be free from unreasonable "seizure"

11 and you must then consider whether Defendant Richter is

12 entitled to qualified immunity, which is a bar to liability

13 that I will explain later. If Plaintiff Rynearson failed to

14 make this showing, then the traffic stop was constitutional,

15 and your verdict will be for Defendant Richter on the

16 unreasonable stop claim.(Page 7)) page 7)

17 Additionally, a warrantless arrest such as the one

18 involved in this case is considered unreasonable under the

19 Fourth Amendment when, at the moment of the arrest, there is

20 no probable cause for the defendant to reasonably believe that

21 a crime has been or is being committed. Probable cause does

22 not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but only a

23 showing of a fair probability of criminal activity. It must

24 be more than bare suspicion, but need not reach the 50%

25 mark.(page 8)

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

15

1 The reasonableness of an arrest must be judged based

2 on what a reasonable officer would do under the circumstances,

3 and does not consider Defendant Richter's state of mind. The


4 question is whether a reasonable officer would believe that a

5 crime was, or was being, committed based on the facts

6 available to that officer at the time of the arrest.

7 To help you determine whether Defendant Richter had

8 probable cause to arrest Plaintiff Rynearson, I will now

9 instruct you on the elements of the crime for which he was

10 arrested.)page 8)

11 Defendant Richter argues that Plaintiff Rynearson

12 was arrested for failing to signal a lane change in violation

13 of Texas Transportation Code § 545.104(a). Under §

14 545.104(a), "an operator shall use the signal authorized by

15 [Texas law] to indicate an intention to turn, change lanes, or

16 start from a parked position." Texas law provides that a

17 police officer may arrest someone for violating § 545.104(a).

18 If you find that Plaintiff Rynearson has proved by a

19 preponderance of the evidence that Defendant Richter lacked

20 probable cause to make the arrest on September 7, 2009, then

21 Defendant Richter violated Plaintiff Rynearson's

22 constitutional right to be free from unreasonable arrest and

23 you must then consider whether Defendant Richter is entitled

24 to qualified immunity, which again is a bar to liability that

25 I will explain later. If Plaintiff Rynearson failed to make

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

16

1 this showing, then the arrest was constitutional, and your

2 verdict will be for Defendant Richter on the


3 unreasonable-arrest claim.

4 (page 9)

5 Next, Plaintiff Rynearson claims

6 Defendant Richter violated Plaintiff Rynearson's First

7 Amendment right to be free from a retaliatory arrest. To

8 support his claim for retaliatory arrest, Plaintiff Rynearson

9 must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that:

10 1. He was engaged in constitutionally protected

11 activity;

12 2. The actions of Defendant Richter caused Plaintiff

13 Rynearson to suffer an injury that would chill a person of

14 ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that activity;

15 and

16 3. Defendant Richter's adverse actions were

17 substantially motivated against Plaintiff Rynearson's exercise

18 of constitutionally protected conduct.

19 If you find that Defendant Richter had probable

20 cause to arrest Plaintiff Rynearson, then you may not find for

21 Plaintiff Rynearson on this claim. If a person's conduct gives

22 a police officer probable cause to believe he or she is guilty

23 of a crime, that individual cannot make a claim for

24 retaliatory arrest. Probable cause exists when the totality

25 of the facts and circumstances within a police officer's

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

17


1 knowledge at the moment of arrest are sufficient for a

2 reasonable person to conclude that the suspect had committed

3 or was committing an offense. Probable cause does not require

4 proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but only a showing of a fair

5 probability of criminal activity. It must be more than bare

6 suspicion, but need not reach the 50% mark.

7 (page 10)

8 If you find that Plaintiff Rynearson has proved the

9 second two elements by a preponderance of the evidence, then

10 Defendant Richter violated Plaintiff Rynearson's

11 constitutional right to be free from retaliatory arrest and

12 you must then consider whether Defendant Richter is entitled

13 to qualified immunity, which again is a bar to liability that

14 I will explain in a moment. If Plaintiff Rynearson failed to

15 make this showing, then the arrest was constitutional, and

16 your verdict will be for Defendant Richter on the First

17 Amendment retaliatory-arrest claim. Additionally, if you find

18 probable cause existed for Defendant Richter to arrest

19 Plaintiff Rynearson, any argument that Plaintiff Rynearson's

20 speech as opposed to his criminal conduct was the motivation

21 for his arrest must fail, and so your verdict must be for

22 Defendant Richter on this claim.

23 As to each claim for which Plaintiff

24 Rynearson has proved each essential element, you must consider

25 whether Defendant Richter is entitled to what the law calls

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

18


1 "qualified immunity." Qualified immunity bars a defendant's

2 liability even if he violated a plaintiff's constitutional

3 rights. Qualified immunity exists to give government

4 officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken

5 judgments about open legal questions. Qualified immunity

6 provides protection from liability for all but the plainly

7 incompetent government officials who knowingly violate the

8 law. It is Plaintiff Rynearson's burden to prove by a

9 preponderance of the evidence that qualified immunity does not

10 apply in this case.

11 Qualified immunity applies if a reasonable officer

12 could have believed that the stop and arrest were lawful in

13 light of clearly established law and the information Defendant

14 Richter possessed. But Defendant Richter is not entitled to

15 qualified immunity if, at the time of the stop and arrest, a

16 reasonable officer with the same information could not have

17 believed that his actions were lawful. Law enforcement

18 officers are presumed to know the clearly established

19 constitutional rights of individuals they encounter.)page 11)

20 In this case, the clearly established law at the

21 time was that individuals have a right to be free from arrests

22 not supported by probable cause, and that it is a violation of

23 the Texas Transportation Code to fail to signal a lane change

24 or to fail to display your driver's license upon demand of a

25 police officer.


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

19

1 If, after considering the scope of discretion

2 and responsibility generally given to police officers in

3 performing their duties and after considering all of the

4 circumstances of this case as they would have reasonably

5 appeared to Defendant Richter at the time of the stop and

6 arrest, you find that Plaintiff Rynearson failed to prove that

7 no reasonable officer could have believed that the stop and

8 arrest was lawful, then Defendant Richter is entitled to

9 qualified immunity, and your verdict must be for Defendant

10 Richter on those claims. But if you find that Defendant

11 Richter violated Plaintiff Rynearson's constitutional rights

12 and that Defendant Richter is not entitled to qualified

13 immunity as to that claim, then your verdict must be for

14 Plaintiff Rynearson on that claim.

15 If Plaintiff Rynearson has proved a claim against

16 Defendant Richter by a preponderance of the evidence, you must

17 determine the damages to which Plaintiff Rynearson is

18 entitled. You should not interpret the fact that I am giving

19 instructions about Plaintiff Rynearson's damages as an

20 indication in any way that I believe that Plaintiff Rynearson

21 should, or should not, win this case. It is your task first

22 to decide whether Defendant Richter is liable. I am

23 instructing you on damages only so that you will have guidance

24 in the event you decide that Defendant Richter is liable and


25 that Plaintiff Rynearson is entitled to recover money from

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

20

1 Defendant Richter.

2 If you find that Defendant Richter is liable to

3 Plaintiff Rynearson, then you must determine an amount that is

4 fair compensation for all of Plaintiff Rynearson's damages.

5 These damages are called compensatory damages. The purpose of

6 compensatory damages is to make Plaintiff Rynearson whole-that

7 is, to compensate Plaintiff Rynearson for the damage that he

8 has suffered. Compensatory damages are not limited to

9 expenses that Plaintiff Rynearson may have incurred because of

10 his injury. If Plaintiff Rynearson wins, he is entitled to

11 compensatory damages for any physical injury, pain and

12 suffering, and mental anguish that he has suffered because of

13 Defendant Richter's wrongful conduct. No compensatory damages

14 should be awarded for any adverse personnel action that may

15 have been suffered by Plaintiff Rynearson.

16 (page 13)

17 You may award compensatory damages only for injuries

18 that Plaintiff Rynearson proves were proximately caused by

19 Defendant Richter's allegedly wrongful conduct. The damages

20 that you award must be fair compensation for all of Plaintiff

21 Rynearson's damages, no more and no less. You should not award

22 compensatory damages for speculative injuries, but only for

23 those injuries that Plaintiff Rynearson has actually suffered


24 or that Plaintiff Rynearson is reasonably likely to suffer in

25 the future.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

21

1 If you decide to award compensatory damages, you

2 should be guided by dispassionate common sense. Computing

3 damages may be difficult, but you must not let that difficulty

4 lead you to engage in arbitrary guesswork. On the other hand,

5 the law does not require that Plaintiff Rynearson prove the

6 amount of his losses with mathematical precision, but only

7 with as much definitiveness and accuracy as the circumstances

8 permit.

9 You must use sound discretion in fixing an award of

10 damages, drawing reasonable inferences where you find them

11 appropriate from the facts and circumstances in evidence.

12 You should consider the following elements of

13 damage, to the extent you find them proved by a preponderance

14 of the evidence:

15 1. Physical pain and mental anguish in the past.

16 2. Costs associated with posting bail and retrieving

17 his vehicle from the car impound lot.

18 To recover compensatory damages for mental and

19 emotional distress, Plaintiff Rynearson must prove that he has

20 suffered a specific discernable injury with credible evidence.

21 Hurt feelings, anger and frustration are part of life and are


22 not the types of harm that could support a mental-anguish

23 award. Evidence of mental anguish need not be corroborated by

24 doctors, psychologists, or other witnesses, but Plaintiff

25 Rynearson must support his claims with competent evidence of

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

22

1 the nature, extent, and duration of the harm. Damages for

2 mental or emotional distress must be based on the evidence at

3 trial. They may not be based on speculation or sympathy.

4 If you find that Defendant Richter is liable for

5 Plaintiff Rynearson's injuries, you must award Plaintiff

6 Rynearson the compensatory damages that he has proved. You

7 may, in addition, award punitive damages if you find that

8 Defendant Richter acted maliciously or with reckless

9 indifference to the rights of others.

10

11 An act is done maliciously if done or prompted or

12 accompanied by ill will, or spite, or grudge toward the

13 injured person individually, or toward some class or group of

14 which she is a member. One acts with reckless indifference to

15 the rights of others when one's conduct, under the

16 circumstances, manifests a complete lack of concern for the

17 rights or safety of another. Plaintiff Rynearson has the

18 burden of proving that punitive damages should be awarded by a

19 preponderance of the evidence.

20 The purpose of punitive damages is to punish and


21 deter, not to compensate. Punitive damages serve to punish a

22 defendant for malicious or reckless conduct and, by doing so,

23 to deter others from engaging in similar conduct in the

24 future. You are not required to award punitive damages. If

25 you do decide to award punitive damages, you must use sound

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

23

1 reason in setting the amount. Your award of punitive damages

2 must not reflect bias, prejudice, or sympathy toward any

3 party. It should be presumed that Plaintiff Rynearson has

4 been made whole by compensatory damages, so punitive damages

5 should be awarded only if Defendant Richter's misconduct is so

6 reprehensible as to warrant the imposition of further

7 sanctions to achieve punishment or deterrence.

8 If you decide to award punitive damages, the

9 following factors should guide you in fixing the proper

10 amount:

11 The ratio between the punitive damages you are

12 considering awarding and the amount of harm that was suffered

13 by Plaintiff Rynearson.

14 Nominal damages are an inconsequential or trifling

15 sum awarded to a plaintiff when a technical violation of his

16 rights has occurred but the plaintiff has suffered no actual

17 loss or injury. If you find from a preponderance of the

18 evidence that Plaintiff Rynearson sustained a technical


19 violation of his Fourth or First Amendment rights but that

20 Plaintiff Rynearson suffered no actual loss as a result of

21 this violation, then you must award Plaintiff Rynearson

22 nominal damages.

23 It is now your duty to deliberate and to consult

24 with one another in an effort to reach a verdict. Each of you

25

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

24

1 It is now your duty to deliberate and to consult

2 with one another in an effort to reach a verdict. Each of you

3 must decide the case for yourself, but only after an impartial

4 consideration of the evidence with your fellow jurors. During

5 your deliberations, do not hesitate to reexamine your own

6 opinions and change your mind if you are convinced that you

7 were wrong. But do not give up on your honest beliefs because

8 the other jurors think differently, or just to finish the

9 case.

10 Remember at all times, you are the judges of the

11 facts. You have been allowed to take notes during this trial.

12 Any notes that you took during this trial are only aids to

13 memory. If your memory differs from your notes, you should

14 rely on your memory and not on the notes. The notes are not

15 evidence. If you did not take notes, rely on your independent

16 recollection of the evidence and do not be unduly influenced

17 by the notes of other jurors. Notes are not entitled to


18 greater weight than the recollection or impression of each

19 juror about the testimony.

20 When you go into the jury room to deliberate, you

21 may take with you a copy of this charge, the exhibits that I

22 have admitted into evidence, and your notes. You must select

23 a jury foreperson to guide you in your deliberations and to

24 speak for you here in the courtroom. Your verdict must be

25 unanimous. A verdict form has been prepared for your

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

25

1 convenience. After you have reached a unanimous verdict, your

2 jury foreperson must fill out the answers to the written

3 questions on the verdict form and sign and date it. After you

4 have concluded your service and I have discharged the jury,

5 you are not required to talk with anyone about the case.

6 If you need to communicate with me during your

7 deliberations, the jury foreperson should write the inquiry

8 and give it to the court security officer. After consulting

9 with the attorneys, I will respond either in writing or by

10 meeting with you in the courtroom. Keep in mind, however,

11 that you must never disclose to anyone, not even to me, your

12 numerical division on any question.

13 You may now proceed to the jury room to begin your

14 deliberations.(now, at this time, ladies and gentlemen, I am

15 going to recognize the attorneys for their closing statements)


16 delete last paragraph) again what the lawyers say is not

17 evidence but you should nevertheless pay close attention to it

18 because it is their job to point out what they believe

19 deserves emphasis during your deliberations in the jury

20 deliberation room. And with that, Mr. Maldonado.

21 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you. Your Honor. Good

22 morning, ladies and gentlemen. Of the jury.


24 MR. MALDONADO: Richard Rynearson and I want to

25 thank you again for your service and your willingness to serve

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

26

1 on this jury, your patience and your willingness to serve on

2 this jury. Your service is invaluable, and a necessary

3 element to our democracy. I don't mean to sound too stuffy or

4 formal about this. But you sit here as the zero conscience of

5 the community. We are asking you to apply your enlightened

6 conscience to protect and defend the Constitution for

7 Mr. Rynearson, who has put himself on the line. This case is

8 more than simply about a traffic stop. It is about your right

9 to question those who have been given great power. With great

10 power comes great responsibility. Not all public servants are

11 prudent in their exercise of the power. And therefore when a

12 member of our community brings forward to you a complaint of

13 abuse or misuse of power, it is incumbent that a

14 representative group of the community like yourself apply


15 their collective wisdom to correct that abuse. That is your

16 role today. For you to decide whether Richard Rynearson or

17 officer Edwin Richter is telling the truth, you must apply

18 your common sense. You heard from Mr. Rynearson about his

19 driving on September 7, 2009. And he explained to you why it

20 would have been unlikely for him, an Air Force pilot, not to

21 signal for a lane change. He was not speeding. He was not

22 weaving in and out of the lanes. His driving was in

23 compliance with traffic laws. Does it seem unusual to you for

24 someone who does not believe to have done any wrongdoing to

25 ask the officer, "officer can you tell me why you stopped me?"

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

27

1 officer Richter would have you believe that is bizarre.

2 Frankly, the bizarre aspect about this case is that 15 or 20

3 seconds after that question was posed Mr. Rynearson was forced

4 out of his vehicle, handcuffed, walked to the police car,

5 driven to a police station and sat there for six hours. That

6 is the bizarre aspect of this. Let me emphasize something

7 about this case again. When you go back to the jury room and

8 deliberate, think about what 15, 20, 30 seconds means.

9 Remember there is no dispute that this happened very quickly.

10 That is what Mr. Rynearson said. Fifteen seconds at most.

11 That is what officer Richter said to you too. It happened

12 very quickly. Then consider which version of the facts is


13 true in light of that agreed fact. It happened very quickly.

14 Is it one where Mr. Rynearson poses two questions to officer

15 Richter who confirms and then orders him out (to) or do you

16 believe in those 15 seconds officer Richter repeated several

17 times, give me your driver's license and proof of insurance.

18 It wasn't just once or twice or even three times. Officer

19 Richter testified to you, several times. Think about it.

20 What is more likely to happen? These are the facts we

21 presented to you. Officer Richter approaches the vehicle and

22 the window where Mr. Rynearson is sitting in his car. Officer

23 Richter, can you provide your driver's license and proof of

24 insurance? Mr. Rhine, can you tell me why you pulled me over?

25 A. Offer Richter, I saw that you had Florida license mates

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

28

1 and wanted to check and see if you had a driver's license.

2 Mr. Rynearson. Confirm that you are -- that you stopped me

3 without cause. Officer Richter. Get out of the vehicle.

4 Mr. Rynearson. Confirm that you are ordering me out of the

5 vehicle without cause. Officer Richter. I am confirming

6 that. Get out of the vehicle. Fifteen seconds. That is it.

7 That's what it took. That is what happened here. That is how

8 Mr. Rynearson ended up handcuffed in the back of a police car,

9 driven to the magistrate office to sit in a holding cell for

10 six hours. Don't get distracted by the issue of whether

11 Mr. Rynearson refused to tender his driver's license and proof


12 of insurance. Remember, this happened very quickly. Officer.

13 Can you confirm, can you tell me why you stopped me, Officer,

14 can you confirm for me that you stopped me without cause?

15 Mr. Richter, officer Richter didn't stand -- didn't sit --

16 didn't go to the witness stand and said say to you,

17 Mr. Rynearson pulled the documents away from me. He held them

18 away from me. He never showed them to me. Do you think it is

19 consistent for a person to withhold documents or not give them

20 to him if he has them prepared when the officer approaches the

21 car? In fact, the issue of the driver's license and proof of

22 insurance is so inconsequential and really not believable that

23 officer Richter didn't even give it as an arrest as the reason

24 to arrest Mr. Rynearson. You heard it from him. That's not

25 why I arrested him. You will go back and you will read his

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

29

1 officer's report. That's not the reason why he arrested him.

2 It really is not an issue here. Officer Richter admitted that

3 Mr. Rynearson never said I am not giving you the documents.

4 And he admitted that Mr. Rynearson was holding the documents.

5 What was said, how far apart the documents were held, there is

6 a different story on that. But it doesn't matter. Fifteen

7 seconds. It took 15 seconds for me to hold these documents

8 and then end up handcuffed. Fifteen seconds. Go back to the

9 jury room and time it. And then the most bizarre thing of all


10 happened. Officer Richter exercised the awesome power that we

11 as citizens have given him. He exercised his powers as police

12 officers and ordered Mr. Rynearson to exit the car and

13 handcuffed him. You and I don't have that power. Only peace

14 officers, only law enforcement officers. That's why this is

15 so bizarre. Where do we go from officer, tell me why I was

16 stopped to being handcuffed? One additional fact undermine,

17 undermines officer Richter's story. Is it consistent with

18 someone who is uncooperative or difficult not to have cursed

19 at the officer, not to have been disrespectful? You heard it

20 from officer Richter. Mr. Rynearson never, was never

21 disrespectful, never cursed at him. I asked him, when you

22 were walking him to the police car, handcuffed, did he resist?

23 Did he say anything to you? Did he make a motion that would

24 have threatened you? Is that consistent with someone who is

25 uncooperative or difficult? Questioning an officer is not and

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

30

1 can never be a bizarre thing, particularly when it concerns

2 the work of public servants. Every one of us has the right

3 and obligation to make inquiries to a public servant whether

4 the, whether the public's business is done in compliance with

5 the law. It is our right and our obligation. Don't be

6 distracted about the weapon. A lot of testimony about an

7 armed -- the fact that Mr. Rynearson was armed and he was

8 carrying a nine-millimeter Glock. Don't be distracted about


9 it. That is not why he was arrested. You heard it from

10 officer Richter. Don't be distracted by the weapon. He

11 wasn't breaking the law for carrying the weapon. He wasn't

12 cited for it. There is nothing unusual about him carrying a

13 weapon. It is the law. It is legal here in Texas. He is

14 military, for God's sakes, we expect him to have weapons. And

15 what about the fact that Mr. Rynearson never told officer

16 Richter about the weapon? Fifteen, 20 seconds. How much time

17 do you have to say that? Fifteen, 20 seconds. Officer, why

18 did you stop me?" And from there, he ended up handcuffed.

19 the sake is -- the same is true for alleged threat by

20 Mr. Rynearson on the way to the magistrate office. Remember

21 what Mr. Rynearson testified that he said to officer Richter.

22 I am in the military. I have been shot at and killed people.

23 I have seen far better men die to protect the constitution

24 that you just violated. Yes, that is what Mr. Rynearson said.

25 You heard from him. Did he say it to threaten him? He says

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

31

1 he didn't. I asked officer Richter, were you threatened? He

2 wasn't threatened. He didn't take it as a threat. Look at

3 the police report. There is no such threat for that. The

4 statement simply reflected Mr. Rynearson's disbelief,

5 disillusionment, disappointment with officer Richter's

6 conduct. That is that officer Richter so casually, so


7 recklessly violated Mr. Rynearson's rights for simply saying

8 why did you stop me? The judge has instructed you on the law.

9 You will be asked to decide whether Mr. Rynearson's civil

10 rights were violated, in flee different ways. Was the stop

11 illegal? Was he arrested with no probable cause? Was he

12 arrested because he asserted his first amendment right of

13 questioning a public servant? If I can direct your attention

14 to the verdict form that you were provided. The first set of

15 questions are about the traffic stop, and it asks you whether

16 you find by a preponderance of the evidence that the stop was

17 lawful. If you believe Mr. Rynearson, that the reason for

18 stop was because he had license -- his license plates were

19 from out of state, if you believe Mr. Rynearson that that is

20 what officer Richter said to him at the window, then you must

21 answer yes. It is against the law to stop a car simply

22 because it has out-of-state license plates.

23 MR. RALLS: I am going to object to that, Your

24 Honor, it is not in the charge, as the legal conclusion.

25 THE COURT: That is sustained. Rephrase your

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

32

1 argument.

2 MR. MALDONADO: If you find that he didn't have

3 reasonable suspicion to stop the car, you must answer yes.

4 The second question, page number 2, asks you whether officer

5 Richter is entitled to qualified immunity. I won't go over


6 the instructions that the Court has given you. Let me just

7 say, that no reasonable officer in this case knowing that he

8 cannot stop a car simply because it has out-of-state license

9 plates could have believed that such action was lawful. You

10 must answer no to this question, question number 3 asks you

11 whether officer Richter's conduct caused harm to

12 Mr. Rynearson. We submit to you that you have to answer yes

13 to this question, the stopping of the car, the deprivation of

14 that liberty in and of itself is the violation, however small.

15 You don't have, officer Richter doesn't have the right to stop

16 someone without legal justification. Moving on to question

17 number 4. If you find that officer Richter acted maliciously

18 or with reckless disregard to Mr. Rynearson's rights then you

19 must answer yes. And I submit to you that your answer on this

20 question is yes. As a police officer, officer Richter is

21 presumed to know the law. As it concerns the law with traffic

22 stops. He stated on the stand that he cannot legally stop a

23 car simply because it has out of state tags. And knowing

24 that, he stopped Mr. Rynearson on September 7, 2009. He

25 recklessly disregarded Mr. Rynearson's rights. Moving on to

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

33

1 page 3, you will be asked about the claim for a wrongful

2 arrest. An arrest without probable cause. Question 5 asks

3 you to consider whether officer Richter violated


4 Mr. Rynearson's constitutional right to be free from arrest

5 without probable cause. We ask that you answer this question

6 yes. If you find that officer Richter wrongfully arrested

7 Mr. Rynearson because of the out of state license plates and

8 not because of the license to signal then you have to answer

9 yes. This is because officer Richter has no legal cause, no

10 probable cause to rales Mr. Rynearson. You must also answer

11 no to question number six. This concerns qualified immunity

12 on the question of arrest. No reasonable officer knowing that

13 the stop was made because of the Florida license plates could

14 conclude that officer original's Richter's actions were lawful

15 in arresting Mr. Rynearson. You must also answer yes to the

16 question number 7. This question asks you whether defendant

17 Richter's act caused harm to Mr. Rynearson. Let's think about

18 that arrest. The handcuffing, the riding in the back of a

19 car, limited mobility, the loss of your -- loss of liberty.

20 Six hours in a holding cell. The indignity and the stigma of

21 having been arrested in public. Having to report the arrest

22 to your superiors in the Air Force. These were caused by the

23 false arrest committed by officer Richter. Question number

24 8 asks you to consider punitive damages and award -- and we

25 submit that you should answer yes and a ward them to

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

34

1 Mr. Rynearson. The judge has instructed you on the

2 circumstances and conditions under which you must award


3 punitive damages. Remember, go back to the instruction. They

4 serve to punish the defendant for malicious or reckless

5 conduct and to dether the others from engaging in similar

6 conduct in the future. Remember that we as citizens have

7 entrusted police officers with the awesome power to enforce

8 laws and to do it through coercive means if necessary. We

9 trust that such powers will be used wisely and prudently.

10 Officer Richter did not act wisely or prudently here. He knew

11 that he did not have probable cause to arrest Mr. Rynearson,

12 and notwithstanding knowing that, officer Richter handcuffed

13 Mr. Rynearson, put him in the back of a police car, denied him

14 his liberty and sent him to jail for six hours. That is not a

15 prudent or wise exercise of the power officer Richter has been

16 instructed. It is a reckless disregard of Mr. Rynearson's

17 federal civil rights. You must also answer yes to question

18 number 9. (Entrusted) that is moving on to the of retaliatory

19 arrest, the First Amendment, page 5. If you believe that

20 there was no legal cause for the stop and arrest, and that the

21 arrest was motivated because Mr. Rynearson asked, "Officer,

22 why did you stop me, that he had the audacity to ask that

23 question that Mr. Rynearson's First Amendment rights were

24 violated. You must answer yes to that question. You must

25 answer no to question number ten. No reasonable officer could

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

35


1 believe that it was lawful to arrest a person simply for

2 asking a question. And when there is no probable cause to

3 arrest them. You must answer yes to question number 11, the

4 arrest, the jail, the handcuffing, the indignity, the

5 humiliation, those were caused by officer Richter. He was the

6 legal cause of those wrongs. We ask that you also answer yes

7 to question number 12. Remember that punitive damages are

8 meant to punish and deter. Go back to the instruction when

9 you are in the -- when you are deliberating in the jury room.

10 We submit to you that officer Richter's retaliatory arrest

11 shows a reckless disregard for Mr. Rynearson's free speech

12 rights. You will then be asked to award damages to

13 Mr. Rynearson. We are on page 7. You are asking need

14 questions there. Question number 13 asks you, what amount of

15 money, if any, reasonably compensates Mr. Rynearson for his

16 mental anguish and compensatory damages? The damages we seek

17 here are not easily provable. That doesn't mean they don't

18 exist. You heard from Mr. Rynearson what it meant for him to

19 have his rights violated. You heard from him what it means

20 for him to own these rights, having served in Afghanistan and

21 Iraq. You heard from him how this shattered his view of the

22 Constitution and what it means to put your life to protect it

23 and then to come back home and have someone so casually and

24 recklessly violate it. You heard Mr. Rynearson testify to the

25 indignities and stigma of having to be arrested and report

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

36


1 such arrest to the Air Force. A major. And we also have the

2 issue that Mr. Rynearson spent six hours in jail on a Sunday

3 evening. Only you in your collective wisdom can decide what

4 is a fair and just amount. There is no dispute that at a

5 minimum what you have here is six hours in jail as injury.

6 Putting aside the indignity, the humiliation, the

7 embarrassment, the trauma, putting aside that, six hours in

8 jail.

9 THE COURT: You have exhausted 23 minutes and you

10 still need to fully open on the remaining questions.

11 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor. Most folks are at

12 home having dinner with the family on a Sunday evening.

13 Nowadays a that is about the only time parents have to spend

14 with their kids. This happened on a Sunday in September, for

15 some, September Sundays means enjoying a beer and watching

16 supervised night football. For others, it is a time to lie

17 down just for a few minutes to nap. For most of us, it is a

18 time to decompress, prepare for week, go to bed early for the

19 start of the week. Only you in your enlightened conscience

20 can put a value to this injury. We submit to you that a fair

21 -- that fair compensation for these injuries are between 1,000

22 and $3,000. You have the right to give more or less. For

23 Mr. Rynearson, this is not about the money. It is about the

24 wrongs that officer Richter caused him, his loss of liberty.

25 Because Mr. Rynearson suffered an injury that is compensable,


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

37

1 and if you determine to compensate him for that injury, you

2 don't have to bother with question number 14. If you do

3 choose to answer question number 14, we leave it to your

4 collective wisdom to decide what is a fair amount. Question

5 number 15 asks you to provide an amount for punitive damages.

6 Remember that punitive damages are meant to punish and deter.

7 This case might appear small, but other police officers are

8 watching. The community is watching. They wait to hear from

9 you whether there are any consequences for illegally stopping

10 a citizen or arresting him without probable cause on a mere

11 traffic violation. As jury members, you sit here representing

12 the community in deciding whether officer Richter violated the

13 Constitution. You express the conscience of the community and

14 what we stand for in your verdict. We submit to you that this

15 is a case where you must send a message to officer Richter and

16 all the other officers who have been entrusted with enforcing

17 the law. We ask that you award a punitive damages in the

18 range of 2000 to 10,000. It is not about the money. It is

19 about the message that you send to those who we have entrusted

20 with the power to arrest us. Ladies and gentlemen of the

21 jury, I thank you for your service and request that you return

22 a verdict in favor of Mr. Rynearson.

23 THE COURT: Thank you, Counsel. You have five

24 minutes remaining. Mr. Ralls.


25 MR. RALLS: Thank you, Your Honor. Good morning,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

38

1 ladies and gentlemen. Again, on behalf of my client, Edwin

2 Richter and myself, I would like to thank you for helping us

3 with this case and helping us resolve these disputed fact

4 issues. I want to start by asking you to recall the oath that

5 you took at the beginning of this case when you were seated as

6 jurors, and that oath is to follow the law as the judge has

7 instructed you, what that law is. You may not like as we

8 discussed in voir dire you may not like the fact that a person

9 can be arrested for a simple traffic violation, but sure

10 enough that's what the law is, and that is what happened in

11 this case. I also want to point out to you that what the

12 lawyers say, again, is not evidence in this case, so anything

13 Mr. Maldonado has just told you or anything that I am about to

14 tell you is not evidence. We are just trying to tell you what

15 we believe the evidence has shown in this case. And also I

16 want to tell you that the plaintiff has this burden of proof

17 in this case, not only does the inform have the burden of

18 proof on the three claims that the plaintiff has made that is

19 wrongful stop, arrest, or seizure, and retaliatory arrest, but

20 he also has the burden of proof to prove that no reasonable

21 officer could have believed the actions of -- could have

22 believed that he should take the actions that officer Richter

23 took in this case. And I want to point out at the very outset


24 that there is no evidence with regard to what other reasonable

25 officers could or would have done in this case. So let's look

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

39

1 at the first element of the claim in this case, and that is

2 the wrongful arrest. Again, you can -- what we say is not

3 evidence, but you can take your common sense into the jury

4 room with you, and in determining the credibility of these

5 witnesses and what I would like to point out to you is that

6 you can consider that officer Richter's reason for arrest of

7 Mr. Rynearson was, in fact, the failure to signal a lane

8 change on Losoya street. Consider the fact that the -- even

9 though the plaintiff would ask you to believe that the reason

10 that Mr. Rynearson was pulled over was because Mr. Rynearson

11 had out of state license plates and officer Richter wanted to

12 see if he had a driver's license, that simply does not hold

13 water in this case. Officer Richter has been -- has been in

14 the police as a military policeman, as a Leavenworth Kansas

15 policeman, as a San Antonio policeman for a total of 36 years.

16 San Antonio is full of cars, because of the tourism trade, the

17 military presence, the convention trade, full of cars that

18 have out of state license plates. First of all, officers

19 don't want to make tourists mad. Second of all, there is no

20 reason to pull over -- to pick out one car that has out of

21 state license plates just on the off chance that it might not


22 have a driver's license and as officer Richter testified, of

23 all the hundreds of thousands of stops that he has made,

24 virtually all of them have driver's licenses. So why, ask

25 yourselves, why in the world, first of all, would he stop a

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

40

1 car that -- just because it has out of state license plates

2 and secondly why in the world would he think that that car,

3 driver, might not have a driver's license? That just doesn't

4 make sense. He pulled him over because he failed to signal a

5 lane change. Another point on that is that, Mr. Rynearson

6 testified that as soon as he made the right turn on to Losoya

7 street, he put on his left hand blinker and continued with his

8 left hand blinker. Officer Richter who was on the downtown

9 bike patrol for over 15 years and rode those streets all the

10 times, familiar with those streets, testified that he had to

11 -- that Mr. Rynearson had to go through a another intersection

12 before he even got to the intersection of Losoya and commerce.

13 So if he turned on his left hand blinker immediately after he

14 turned on to Losoya street, he would have gone through a

15 second -- he would like you to believe he would have gone

16 through a second intersection all the while with his left-hand

17 blinker on. That just doesn't make sense. And as far as the

18 -- as far as what happened at the car, consider this. This is

19 not Mr. Rynearson's first arrest for an alleged civil rights

20 violation or a first arrest. He was arrested as you recall


21 when he was a lieutenant, he was arrested because he

22 challenged the authority of a police officer that was talking

23 to his friend at a bar. And so he got arrested for that.

24 Consider the fact that when he went up -- when we were talking

25 about the gun, even though the gun is not one of the factors

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

41

1 in the arrest itself, the gun, what that proves to me, what

2 that shows is his attitude toward questioning civil rights or

3 his attitude towards his ability to question others regarding

4 civil rights, his over board attitude. As soon as I started

5 asking him about that, he got very upset about how he was

6 entitled to do that. He -- you know, that was his

7 constitutional right. That is the same thing I submit to you

8 that happened when officer Richter got up to his car that day.

9 For whatever reason, he believed that his constitutional

10 rights have been violated. And officer Richter when he asked

11 him for his license plate -- I mean his license I am sorry and

12 insurance, he responded instead of giving it to him, and he

13 admitted that he did not give it to him after he had

14 responded. After he had requested it. He -- Mr. Rynearson

15 admitted that to you from the jury stand yesterday, that he

16 did not provide it to officer Richter when he requested that.

17 That is perfectly consistent with that kind of attitude that

18 Mr. Rynearson has, that he would say something like you are


19 violating my constitutional rights. That is the -- that is is

20 that is the vernacular he uses. Officer Richter went up to

21 the car and he said you are -- show me your license and your

22 insurance. He said, responded with you are violating my

23 constitutional rights. Officer Richter, license and insurance

24 please, you are violating my constitutional rights. Officer

25 Richter, if you don't show me your license and insurance you

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

42

1 are going to be arrested. You are violating my constitutional

2 right it is. And sure enough, after that he still didn't show

3 it to him except as he was, after he had been told that he was

4 arrested as he was stepping out of the car. Officer Richter

5 also had the right regardless of whether Mr. Rynearson showed

6 him the driver's license and insurance to make an arrest for

7 the traffic signal violation. The Judge has instructed you as

8 to what the law in Texas is and that is one of the things that

9 a police officer can make an arrest for. Officer Richter

10 after having this exchange at the car exercised his discretion

11 to make an arrest as opposed to doing something else which he

12 told you that when he went up to the car in the first place he

13 had the option of simply giving him a verbal warning, which

14 probably would have happened or a ticket, which probably would

15 have happened, but because of the obvious response and the

16 obvious fact that Mr. Rynearson was not going to comply with

17 officer Richter's commands he arrested Mr. Rynearson. Officer


18 Richter's a actions under those circumstances were reasonable.

19 It appeared to him that there was not going to be any

20 cooperation on the part of Mr. Rynearson and is not required,

21 and you haven't heard any evidence that he is required to

22 stand there and argue with Mr. Rynearson for 30 minutes about

23 whether he is going to comply with his orders or not. And

24 Mr. Rynearson, being a major in the United States Air Force,

25 you would think that he would immediately comply with an

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

43

1 officer's orders, hand him the license and insurance and then

2 question whether it was a valid stop or not. Again, going

3 back to the -- going back to the reason for the stop, the

4 failure to signal the lane change, you can consider officer

5 Richter's statement with regard to whether Mr. Rynearson

6 actually signaled the lane change or not, because officer

7 Richter stated that he wanted to take corrective action with

8 regard to Mr. Rynearson. He wanted to point out to him,

9 because that is such a congested intersection that people are

10 there, pedestrians are there all the time, there is a

11 McDonald's right there on the street, people can even -- even

12 Mr. Rynearson admitted people can step out into the street and

13 if you don't signal they could be hit.

14 Other traffic could be involved in an accident if

15 you don't signal. So that's the reason that he pulled him


16 over, was to take corrective action, to point out to him that

17 he had failed to signal his lane change from the right hand

18 lane to the left.

19 I would like to go through the charge with you

20 itself and point out a few things. To you, and that is, and

21 in particular with regard to the starting on page 6, what

22 officer Richter's -- what the standard was for officer Richter

23 to determine whether or not he could make an arrest in this

24 particular instance.

25 And that is whether or not he had probable cause.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

44

1 And as the point -- as the Court pointed out to you in this

2 charge, probable cause does not require proof beyond a

3 reasonable doubt.

4 It only requires a showing of a fair probability of

5 criminal activity. It must be more than bare suspicion but it

6 doesn't even have to reach the 50 percent mark. There is no

7 question, first of all, that that in this instance, officer

8 Richter believed that he had probable cause to make an arrest

9 of Mr. Rynearson for his failing to signal a lane change and

10 secondly for failing to provide his license.

11 And with regard to that, the whole license, whether

12 he provided, arrested him for failing to provide his license,

13 whether he arrested him for a lane change, whether he arrested

14 for terroristic threats for the comments on the way down or


15 for not tendering his concealed handgun license, officer

16 Richter told you the reason he didn't do that, because they

17 don't stack charges.

18 They don't add charges one on the other in San

19 Antonio. That is why all of those do not appear on

20 Plaintiff's Exhibit number 1. He just arrested him for the

21 failure to lane change. And to the next paragraph on page

22 number 6, talks about qualified immunity, actually talks about

23 the reasonableness of the arrest and says the reasonableness

24 of arrest must be judged based on what a reasonable officer

25 would do on the circumstances, and doesn't consider defendant

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

45

1 Richter's state of mind. The question is whether a reasonable

2 officer would believe that a crime was or was being committed

3 (sic) based on the facts available to that officer at the time

4 of the arrest. There is no question but that the elements for

5 an arrest were there for officer Richter at that time. I

6 would like to direct your attention to the verdict form. On

7 question number 1, asks you do you find from a preponderance

8 of the evidence of the on September 7, 2009 defendant Richter

9 violated plaintiff rear gleans.

10 Q. To be free from a seizure, the traffic stop without

11 reasonable suspicion. (Clear up.) Again, again, your answer

12 to that should be no. For the reasons that I have told you.


13 It is a credibility question, but the credibility all stacks

14 up on the side of officer Richter. He didn't -- he wasn't

15 there to make an arrest. He was there to have lunch, but he

16 saw a violation that needed corrective action in a

17 particularly congested intersection and so he took action to

18 do that. He had probable cause to make that arrest. So the

19 answer to question number 1 should be no. If you answer

20 question number 1 no, then you don't need to go to question 2,

21 3 or 4, you just simply go to question 5, and that question

22 asks, do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that on

23 September 7 defendant Richter violated plaintiff Rynearson's

24 Fourth Amendment right to be free from arrest without probable

25 cause? Again, the answer is no. If a police officer sees a

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

46

1 violation take place, like an illegal lane change, he can make

2 an arrest, and that's what officer Richter did in this

3 instance. The judge has instructed you that that is what the

4 law is and that that is what can happen in this instance.

5 Officer Richter simply exercised his discretion to effect the

6 arrest. Now, looking at the, again, turning to the qualified

7 immunity aspect on page 8 and 9, if you look at the first full

8 paragraph on page 9, the Court says, "In this case the clearly

9 established law at the time was that individuals have a right

10 to be free from arrest not supported by probable cause and,

11 and that is -- that it is a violation of the Texas


12 transportation code to fail to signal a lane change or to fail

13 to display your driver's license upon demand of an officer.

14 Again, he had probable cause to make the stop for the illegal

15 lane change, again, Mr. Rynearson admitted on the stand the

16 second part of this, that he failed to display his driver's

17 license upon demand of a police officer. He said that he kept

18 it over to his right-hand side and didn't give it to him

19 because he wanted to investigate whether the arrest was legal

20 or not. That is not the law. He can ask him that, and we are

21 not -- we have no objection to that. Everybody has the right

22 to ask a police officer what he has been pulled over for, but

23 if the police officer asks for your insurance and your

24 driver's license, you have got to give it to him and that's

25 what officer -- Mr. Rynearson failed to do in this case, after

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

47

1 repeated requests. And there is no, again, this -- the burden

2 is on the plaintiff to prove that no reasonable police officer

3 would have done what officer Richter did, and there is no

4 evidence of what any other officer would have done. And

5 officer Richter's testimony was that he felt hike his actions

6 were reasonable. With regard to -- so question number 5, you

7 should answer no, question number 6, even if you were to

8 believe that the -- that the arrest was violative of

9 Mr. Rynearson's constitutional rights, question number 6,


10 asking do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that

11 defendant Richter is entitled to qualified immunity in his

12 arrest, and that answer should be yes, he is entitled to

13 qualify immunity, even if you answer the other one no -- or

14 yes, rather. Turning quickly to the alleged First Amendment

15 violation, retaliatory arrest, that is a little bit confusing

16 in the charge, but what it says is that if Mr. -- if officer

17 Richter had probable cause to arrest Mr. Rynearson for

18 anything, for any of the two charges above, then he could not

19 have violated his constitutional rights under the retaliatory

20 arrest portion. So the Judge points that out to you on

21 page 7 of the charge where he states after the three elements

22 that gave person's conduct gives a police officer probable

23 cause to believe he or she is guilty of a crime, that

24 individual cannot make a claim for retaliatory arrest. So if

25 officer Richter had probable cause to make the arrest in the

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

48

1 first place, retaliatory arrest, you have to answer no to.

2 Additionally, even if you don't agree, the plaintiff also has

3 not proved, in my opinion, the second element of the First

4 Amendment tall, retaliation claim and that is that the

5 defendants, the actions of defendant Richter caused plaintiff

6 Rynearson to suffer injury that would chill a person of

7 ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that activity.

8 There is no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Rynearson has been


9 chilled in any manner of continuing to question -- to exercise

10 the same kind of activity that he was engaging in at the time

11 --

12 MR. MALDONADO: Objection, Your Honor, that is not

13 the law.

14 THE COURT: The jury will read the jury charge and

15 follow those instructions.

16 MR. RALLS: There is no evidence of that. Turning

17 to -- so your answer to question number 9 on the First

18 Amendment violation, retaliatory arrest question, question

19 number 9 should be no. There was no violation, First

20 Amendment violation because officer Richter had probable cause

21 to stop and arrest Mr. Rynearson. Turning to the damages,

22 what sum of money now if paid in cash would fairly and

23 reasonably compensate plaintiff Rynearson for his mental

24 anguish and compensatory damages? The judge has told you in

25 the charge what constitutes mental anguish, and in this case,

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

49

1 the judge has told you on page 11 that to recover compensatory

2 damages for mental and emotional distress, you have to show

3 more than hurt feelings, anger and us from investigation,

4 those are just simply a part of life and not the types of harm

5 that can support a mental anguish claim. In this particular

6 case, that is what happened. He got mad. He was -- he had


7 hurt feelings. He was angry. He was frustrated, and that's

8 what he told you, that he was frustrated, but that is not the

9 kind of mental anguish that we are talking about that will

10 support an award for mental anguish in this case. So it is my

11 position that in question number 13 you should answer that

12 question zero. Not only because of that, but because the

13 actions, it was not the actions of officer Richter that caused

14 Mr. Rynearson any damages. It was the actions of

15 Mr. Rynearson that put him in jail that afternoon, that made

16 him sit in jail for six hours and made him have to call his

17 officer and tell his superior officer and tell him what had

18 happened. So the answer to that question is no. The

19 plaintiff has not proved that the result, that proximate cause

20 of his damages were the actions of Mr. Richter, of officer

21 Richter. Question number 14 is whether, if you find that

22 there was a technical violation. There was no technical

23 violation here. There was a violation. There was an arrest

24 that was supported by probable cause and there was no

25 technical violation of Mr. Rynearson's constitutional rights.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

50

1 So that should be zero. Lastly, what sum of money should be

2 paid to Rynearson son by offer Richter in punitive damages?

3 Officer Richter was doing exactly what he was -- what his job

4 was.

5 He saw a violation. His job was to enforce the


6 traffic laws in the City of San Antonio and to keep downtown

7 San Antonio safe for everyone. He saw a traffic violation in

8 a particularly congested intersection. He did exactly what he

9 should have done, which is pull that individual over to make

10 -- to make that person aware of what had occurred, what he had

11 done and how dangerous that intersection was and why you

12 should signal when you make a turn.

13 He did exactly what his job required him to do. You

14 cannot punish officer Richter for his actions in this case.

15 He was certainly not malicious. You heard him testify from

16 the witness stand.

17 He was not malicious toward Mr. Rynearson in this

18 case. Nor was he recklessly in disregard of Mr. Rynearson's

19 constitutional rights. He exercised his discretion as a

20 police officer to effect an arrest of Mr. Rynearson because

21 Mr. Rynearson had broken the law in two ways. One, the

22 traffic violation and, 2, the failure to tender his license

23 and insurance. What I would like -- first of all, I want to

24 make -- say something about objections. Of I told you at the

25 outset of this case that I may have -- may make some

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

51

1 objections during the course of the trial. I may have done --

2 I may have done something else during the course of the trial

3 that irritated you all or -- or that you didn't like. If in


4 fact, I did, please hold that against me and not my client.

5 Secondly, the plaintiff's lawyer will have a chance to get up

6 here and talk again and when he does, I won't get another

7 chance, because he, the plaintiff has the burden of proof but

8 I would like for you to go back into the jury room and think

9 about what I may have said in response to what the plaintiff's

10 argument is in the next go round. So ladies and gentlemen,

11 thank you very much for your time here. Thank you for helping

12 us to resolve this question, these questions. We sincerely

13 appreciate your performing your civic duty in coming down

14 here. I am glad it was a short trial for you. Thank you

15 again.

16 THE COURT: Thank you, Counsel. And Mr. Maldonado,

17 you have five minutes.

18 MR. MALDONADO: Thank you, Your Honor. Ladies and

19 gentlemen of the jury, a few points. Humans are creatures of

20 habit. Mr. Rynearson testified about the fact that he is a

21 pilot in the Air Force, and how what he does has trained him

22 to be procedural in his work, the procedural aspects of his

23 work, checking gauges, checking altitude, checking the other

24 plane's or individuals working with him, turning switch, knobs

25 here and there. He takes that into his daily life. Humans

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

52

1 are creatures of habit. I suggest to you whether you believe

2 that, in your own lives, in the lives of other people, whether


3 he would have, as he stated to you, put on that signal that

4 day. This was a very quick interaction. Fifteen seconds, 20

5 tops. Officer, why did you stop me? Why did you stop me?

6 Officer confirmed that you stopped me without cause. Exit the

7 vehicle. Officer confirmed, confirm that you are telling me

8 to exit the car without cause. Exit the vehicle and then in

9 handcuffs. Defense counsel has pointed out in the

10 instructions that a reasonable officers would have concluded

11 that he failed to display -- Mr. Rynearson failed to display

12 his driver's license and proof of insurance. Remember the

13 testimony. He had them on his hands. Officer Richter could

14 see them, they were having a conversation. Mr. Rynearson was

15 asking a very simple question to officer Richter. Why did you

16 stop me? When you return to the jury room to deliberate, use

17 your common sense. How quickly could this have happened, this

18 interaction? This was not a 30-minute discuss of give me your

19 documents, you violated my constitutional rights. That's not

20 what happened. Fifteen seconds. And Mr. Rynearson ended up

21 handcuffed, in the back of a police car and six hours of his

22 time in the jail. We ask for you to return a verdict in favor

23 of Mr. Rynearson and award him compensatory damages and what

24 we requested and assess punitive damages in the amounts that

25 we requested. Thank you, jurors. Thank you, Your Honor.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

53


1 THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, it is time for you

2 all to deliberate. I know you have not had much time to meet

3 each other, but you first need to select someone to serve as

4 the foreperson. Try to select someone who will give everybody

5 the opportunity to speak if they so desire. And then

6 otherwise we await your verdict. While you are in that jury

7 deliberation room, no outside influences. No one using

8 cellphones or smart phones to conduct any independent

9 research. All your questions about what the law comes from

10 the instructions I gave you. And then all the facts came from

11 the evidence presented in this case. Otherwise we await your

12 verdict. All rise for the jury. 1026.

13 THE COURT: I don't anticipate this will be lengthy

14 deliberations, maybe I will be wrong about that but if you all

15 will stay in the area. If you are going to leave the area, if

16 you would provide Becky your cellphone numbers so we can

17 contact you.

18 MR. MALDONADO: Your Honor, what is Court's rules

19 about talking to the jury after the verdict?

20 THE COURT: Just because I know the two of you I

21 will let you go back. Normally I after the verdict go in and

22 thank them. I will bring the two of you along but not your

23 clients.

24 MR. MALDONADO: I understand, Your Honor.

25 (recess at 10:27 a.m. Test test test test test test

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

54


1 test test test test test test test test test test test test

2 test test test test Waiting in courtroom for verdict at

3 1:32 p.m. test test 1:35 p.m.

4 THE COURT: Please be seated. Ladies and gentlemen

5 miss understanding you have reached a verdict; is that

6 correct?

7 JUROR: Yes.

8 THE COURT: Who serves as the foreperson? Could you

9 pass the verdict form? Thank you. The verdict is in proper

10 form. And signed and dated.

11 Ladies and gentlemen, I am going read your verdict,

12 please listen carefully because at the end of my reading, one

13 or more of the lawyers may want to question you individually

14 as to whether or not this is your verdict.

15 As to question number 1, do you find by pa

16 preponderance of the evidence that on September 7, 2009

17 defendant Richter violated plaintiff Rynearson's Fourth

18 Amendment right to be free from a seizure?

19 Traffic stop without reasonable suspicion? The

20 answer was no. Accordingly the jury did not answer questions

21 2, 3 and 4. Question 5. Do you find from a preponderance of

22 the evidence that on September 7, 2009 defendant Richter

23 violated plaintiff Rynearson's Fourth Amendment right to be

24 free from arrest without probable cause?

25 The answer was no. Accordingly question 6, 7, and


ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

55

1 8 were not answered. Question 9. Do you find from a

2 preponderance of the evidence that on September 7, 2009

3 defendant Richter violated plaintiff Rynearson's First

4 Amendment right to be free from retaliatory arrest as a result

5 of his free speech, the answer was no.

6 Accordingly, questions ten, 11 and 12 were not

7 answered. And as a result of that verdict, questions 13, 14

8 and 15 were zero. Does anyone want the jury polled?

9 MR. MALDONADO: Yes, Your Honor. At that.

10 THE COURT: As.

11 COURTROOM DEPUTY: As I call our your names, please

12 answer yes or no to the question. The question to each of you

13 will is this. This is your verdict? Mr. Barnes.

14 A. Yes.

15 Ms. Moody?

16 A. Yes.

17 Ms. Boatwright?

18 A. Yes Mr. Cunningham.

19 A. Yes Ms. Anderson.

20 A. Yes Mr. Isaac.

21 A. Yes.

22 A. Mr. West?

23 A. Yes.

24 THE COURT: The verdict is in proper form and it


25 stands. Ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of my colleagues and

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

56

1 I, I would like to thank you for your jury service here in

2 federal court in San Antonio. At this time I am going to

3 excuse you back to the jury deliberation room and I will go

4 back there and thank you individually for your service. All

5 rise for the jury, please.

6 THE COURT: Please seethe. The please be seated.

7 In accordance with the jury's verdict we will today or

8 attorney enter a judgment reflecting that plaintiff take

9 nothing. Do you still wish to speak with the jurors?


11 THE COURT: Okay.

12 THE COURT: Why don't you and Mr. Ralls accompany

13 me. You go through that door right there. And we will see

14 what they have to say.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23


24

25

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

Rynearson v. Richter Trial

Documents

Transcript of Rynearson v. Richter Trial