Family of Iowa domestic homicide victim loses lawsuit to police

A federal court has ruled that a small-town police department cannot be held liable for allegedly inadequately responding to a woman’s complaints about persistent threats and harassment from her estranged husband, who killed her.

Angela Prichard, 55, was shot and killed by her husband Christopher in October 2022 and was later convicted and sentenced to life in prison. In the weeks before his death, Christopher Prichard had made numerous threats against himself and his business, damaged his belongings, and repeatedly violated the temporary restraining order he had obtained against him.

after his death family sues city of Bellevue and the police force claimed that the officers’ closeness to her husband contributed to their failure to take action in response to reports about her.

On October 21, the court dismissed the case, finding that the officers’ “inaction” posed no danger to Prichard and that the Iowa law requiring officers to arrest those who violate restraining orders did not give victims the right to sue if they failed to comply. to do this.

Attorney Dave O’Brien, who represented the plaintiffs, said in an email that the family disagreed with the decision and asked Chief Justice CJ Williams to reconsider his decision. He said they are also asking the Iowa Supreme Court to weigh in on the proper interpretation of state statutes.

City attorneys have cited ongoing litigation, declining to comment on the case, including whether the city has disciplined any officers or updated training or policies since Angela Prichard’s death.

It was claimed that the police did not pay attention to warning signs

According to the lawsuit, it was not difficult to conclude that Christopher Prichard posed a threat to his wife. He had been accused of domestic violence against her six months before his death, and she had found tracking devices and hidden cameras in his car and home.

In the two months before her death, the man texted her, threatening her that “this was going to get really ugly” and that he would “ruin her business,” filed false reports about her to the police, and vandalized her home, leaving guns visibly strewn about, along with paint and dog feces.

In September 2022, a court issued a restraining order, specifically stating that if Christopher Prichard violated its terms by approaching his wife, he “must be arrested immediately.” This is in addition to an Iowa law that requires that if an officer has reason to believe someone is violating a protection order, “a peace officer must take that person into custody.”

But Prichard filed dozens of reports that her husband was violating the order, but that had little effect, the lawsuit says. Police arrested him only once, held him in jail for one night, and did not arrest him after subsequent reports, although he failed to appear in court and was sentenced to a further five days in jail for the violation.

The complaint accused police of favoritism towards Christopher Prichard, stating that Prichard performed free or discounted electrical work for some of them. He claimed police endangered Angela Prichard by signaling to him that he could act with impunity.

Do officers have a duty to protect?

The court rejected this claim. While government officials may be held responsible for the so-called “state-created danger,” the allegations merely show that Bellevue police failed to adequately respond to the danger posed by Prichard’s husband, Williams.

“The court here absolutely disapproves of the officers’ alleged actions, or rather their inaction,” Williams wrote. “However, this does not mean that the defendants’ conduct rises to the level of (violating Prichard’s rights).”

The judge found that officers may have violated Iowa law by not arresting Christopher Prichard for each violation, but that law did not give victims the right to sue them for not doing so.

In their latest filing, the plaintiffs asked the court to send that question to the Iowa Supreme Court for interpretation. They also ask the court to reconsider the matter in light of evidence that the state intends to sue if the officers fail to arrest the harassers and that the officers involved lied about accepting low-cost services from the couple’s businesses. .

Could more energetic enforcement have saved Angela Prichard?

In a footnote, Williams notes that police could have more aggressively investigated and pursued Christopher Prichard’s reported violations of the protective order, but that doesn’t mean it would guarantee his wife’s safety.

“Plaintiffs argue that if officers had arrested Christopher more frequently, it might have prevented Angela’s murder,” the judge wrote. “Arguably, it can equally be surmised that what made Christopher angry enough to kill Angela was that the cops arrested Christopher for violating the no-contact order. His failure to attend the hearing and surrender for jail time likely resulted in him being charged with violating the no-contact order.” “He was angry at being held responsible.”

Even if he were arrested immediately after skipping trial, the maximum time he would spend in jail would be six days, Williams wrote.

“If he wanted to kill Angela, he only had to wait six days,” he wrote. “This demonstrates the terrible situation faced by victims of domestic violence, as no contact order, even if enforced, carries with it the weight of punishment that is a deterrent to a violent person.”

William Morris runs the courts of the Des Moines Register. He can be contacted [email protected] or 715-573-8166.

It was claimed that the police did not pay attention to warning signs

Do officers have a duty to protect?

Could more energetic enforcement have saved Angela Prichard?

Related Posts