City sued in death of man in IMPD custody

  • Comments
  • Print

An Indianapolis family is suing the city of Indianapolis and six of its police officers, claiming the officers used “unreasonable, excessive, and deadly” force against their son as he was handcuffed, lying on the ground and repeatedly telling them, “I can’t breathe.”

The wrongful death lawsuit, filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, is seeking an unspecified amount of compensatory damages from the city and both compensatory and punitive damages from the six Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officers involved in the incident.

According to the complaint, Herman Whitfield, a 39-year-old African American man described as “a gentle person,” was having a mental health episode but was not acting violently or threatening the police officers. However, one of the officers tased him, then the other officers handcuffed his hands behind his back and left him lying on his stomach while they applied pressure to his back for three to four minutes.

Whitfield said, “I can’t breathe,” at least three times before he lost consciousness and died.

In The Estate of Herman Whitfield, III v. the City of Indianapolis, et al., 1:22-cv-01246, Whitfield’s family asserts the use of excessive force by the defendants violated Whitfield’s Fourth Amendment rights. Also, the complaint calls the officers’ actions “reckless and done with callous indifference” and contends the city’s police policies and practices were responsible for the officers’ actions that resulted in Whitfield’s death.

The family is being represented by Indianapolis attorneys Israel Nunez Cruz of the Cruz Law Firm and Richard A. Waples of Waples & Hanger.

“Mr. Whitfield did not present a danger to the officers, and there was no need to taser him,” a news release announcing the lawsuit issued by the family’s attorneys stated. “Moreover, the officers violated their own training in keeping Mr. Whitfield handcuffed face down after he was restrained, and not moving or breathing, which led to his death. … Mr. Whitfield, who was in his family home, needed professional mental health care, not the use of excessive deadly force.”

The city of Indianapolis declined to comment on the pending litigation.

On March 25, Whitfield’s parents, Gladys and Herman Whitfield Jr., called for an ambulance to help their son who was having a “mental health crisis.” Six IMPD officers arrived: Steven Sanchez, Adam Ahmad, Matthew Virt, Dominique Clark, Jordan Bull and Nicholas Mathew.

The Whitfields told the officers everyone in the home was fine and they questioned where the ambulance was.

The officers then entered the home and spoke with Whitfield, according to the complaint. He was not responding cogently to their questions, but he eventually got up and began walking from his bedroom to the front door of the house.

As he turned from the kitchen into the dining room, Whitfield was tased at least twice by Sanchez. Whitfield collapsed to the floor, yelling, “fire, fire.”

“Mr. Whitfield had done nothing justifying Officer Sanchez shooting him with a taser in his own home,” the complaint states. “He had not threatened the officer verbally or physically, and because of his mental health crisis, was simply not responding to their demands to get dressed and leave.”

Whitfield was on the floor when four or five officers got on top of him, handcuffed him and left him lying on his stomach. According to the complaint, Whitfield repeatedly told officers, “I can’t breathe,” but the officers continued to put pressure on his back for “three to four minutes before medics arrived.”

When the ambulance arrived, the emergency medical technicians instructed the officers to get Whitfield off his stomach. At that point, Whitfield was unresponsive.

The EMTs performed CPR but Whitfield never regained consciousness.

As part of the complaint, the plaintiffs detail police procedures and the “widespread agreement in the policing community” about the risk of asphyxia when an individual is restrained in a prone position. Many police departments across the country instruct their officers to move individuals into a position that “facilitates breathing” as soon as they are handcuffed, according to the complaint.

“Despite the widespread knowledge about positional asphyxiation, three to four of the officers continued to apply pressure to Mr. Whitfield’s back after he was handcuffed and not moving and while he was prone on the floor,” the complaint states. “Rather than quickly sitting Mr. Whitfield up, the offices left him lying on his stomach.”

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

8 thoughts on “City sued in death of man in IMPD custody

    1. What unique issue are you referring to? There are at least 100 Countries whose citizens would think US law enforcement is a trip to Disneyland.
      What IS unique in the US is an adoring Press acting as a public relations firm for the Plaintiff, as long as the correct boxes are checked.
      There are a hundred unasked questions. Why are there no toxicology reports from an incident in April (the attorney is already laying groundwork for unfavorable results there). Does the person have a criminal history? Any previous runs to this address? Since he is a “gentle person” why didn’t the family just drive him to the ER? If the family called for an ambulance, how did 8 cops get dispatched? Software glitch?
      When the actual facts come out, it will be that cops were dispatched at 3:30am to an extremely dangerous situation with a large adult male out of control. And the “journalists” and the liberals they pander to to sell advertising, will be nowhere to be found.

    2. And there are likely 100 countries where no one would be killed by the police for a similar incident.

      Terms noted such as “adoring press” and “public relations for the plaintiff” reflects an attempt to distort facts and minimize the impact of a human being who died due to police action.

      Yes, further information is indeed needed. What does bodycam video from the officers display.

      Why didn’t the family just drive him? Perhaps they do not or cannot drive. Believe it or not, driving is not a requirement. Again, an attempt to smear the victims.

      Again, prejudicial statements: “large adult male out of control” for which the respondent has zero justification for station nor any personal knowledge of the situation.

      So finally the comment about ‘liberals’ is made. Perhaps the family is staunch conservative, god-fearing, anti-abortion, and ardent supporters of the Second Amendment.

      This shameful set of assumptions based on suppositions and perhaps unconscious bias reflects upon a mindset that led the the death and destruction on 6 January 2021 at the Capitol. Distortion, misrepresentation, and assumptions run amok and without any substantive proof or justification.

    3. Derek C.
      Just as you accuse conservatives of making false assumptions,
      The anti police leftist do the exact same thing. Never giving the police the benefit
      of the doubt. Always assuming that the police are guilty.

      Everyone needs to wait for the facts to come out.

    4. Derek, lol. Distort the facts? Your 1st sentence is a slanderous non-fact(killed by police). The height and weight given for the individual quality as large. Maybe he hasn’t chosen his gender yet, but for fun, let’s stipulate male. The “facts” of the report state at 3:30am the guy was naked , bleeding and in a state the the family felt the need to call the police and when deescalation didn’t work, the police were compelled to use their tasers. Maybe that is normal at your house, but I call that out of control.

      Did you pull a muscle in your back somehow tying this to Jan 6th? Odd you didn’t draw any analogies to the 2020 riots…

      I’m repulsed by the lawsuit painting what was a very intense and dangerous situation as unicorns and rainbows until the means cops showed up.

      Let’s see what the actual facts are and how it gets covered in the media if it gets covered at all.

    5. Funny how Chuck W first thinks he’s Perry Mason by listening a litany of unanswered questions – perhaps unanswered only to the public – but then draws a conclusion that it was not the police’s fault.

  1. Thank you Derek C. for your salient response – hopefully Chuck will consider taking some Unconscious Bias Training and learn to think/speak a little slower in the future. And I agree, where is the bodycam footage?