Inmate’s civil rights lawsuit dismissed | News, Sports, Jobs

A federal district judge dismissed an inmate civil rights lawsuit accusing authorities of child endangerment over a search of her infant child during a Blair County Jail visit.

Prisoner Jason Paul Neil, 42, claimed authorities abused their authority by carrying out what he called a “sting operation” during a contact visit between Neil and his girlfriend and their children in February 2022.

In a civil rights petition filed in federal District Court in Johnstown in 2023, prison officials argued that Hollidaysburg police officers, Kids First and Blair County Children and Youth Services agreed to a search of the boy when Neil’s girlfriend and her baby arrived. To the prison for a visit.

By monitoring Neil’s phone conversations with his girlfriend, prison officials concluded that the couple was responsible for bringing some suboxone into the facility during scheduled child visits.

Visits for the children were arranged through the jail by Kids First and the county’s child welfare agency.

When his girlfriend and her child came to visit on February 22, 2022, the child was taken to a lobby and “surrounded by four strangers” where he was stripped of his clothes.

Neil stated in his lawsuit that the child was “crying and whining” during the examination.

The drugs were found and Neil and his girlfriend were charged with numerous drug-related offences.

Neil was eventually sentenced to two to four years in prison by Timothy M. Sullivan, now the senior judge.

He is currently incarcerated at Pine Grove State Correctional Institution on drug and other charges.

His girlfriend’s accusations against Blair are still ongoing.

In his petition, Neil claimed that authorities endangered the baby’s welfare and that the search violated the United States Constitution.

A year ago, U.S. Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto, presiding in Johnstown, had recommended dismissing Neil’s petition.

Pesto stated that Neil’s civil rights claim was “the classic definition of arrogance”, stating that it was like “killing one’s parents and asking for sympathy as an orphan”.

He thought Neil’s claims on his behalf were invalidated by his conviction for drug offences.

In his reasoning, Pesto argued that Neil should be declared not guilty because the authorities violated the law by preventing a crime (smuggling) from occurring in the first place.

Pesto recommended that the case be dismissed.

Neil objected to that motion, but earlier this month District Judge Stephanie L. Haines agreed with Pesto and dismissed the complaint.

In sum, Haines stated that Neil claimed that “these officers conducted an outrageous and blind sting operation in anticipation of drugging an underage child.”

According to Haines, Neil called the ban a “sting operation” that knowingly endangered the mother and her young child.

In his opinion, “Judge Pesto correctly ruled that (Neil’s) ability to bring a constitutional lawsuit in federal court was eliminated by this conviction in state court.”

He concluded that Neil had failed to prove any of his constitutional claims.

He explained that the authorities could not be sued because they did not prevent a crime from occurring.

“It can be assumed that the search and seizure operation to obtain a criminal conviction was carried out lawfully,” Haines said.