Clark County Nevada
October 22, 2020
DATELINE—Las Vegas, Nev. (Oct. 21, 2020): Sources close to the investigation today confirmed that the President of Veterans In Politics, Int’l., Steve Sanson, has filed suit against Las Vegas Metro Police.
CIVIL RIGHTS LAWSUIT
The newsflash apparently official, Steve Sanson has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit—against Las Vegas Metro Police Dept. and an employee, Officer Raul Pinal—for an incident that took place back in 2019—just a few short blocks from family court—located at 600 N. Pecos Rd.—the Gates of Hell!
SANSON FILES in FEDERAL COURT
Sanson’s lawsuit alleges two causes of action; the first claim arises under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 alleging violation of Sanson’s substantive Fourth Amendment rights to live free of unreasonable search and seizure; the second is a Monell claim, alleging that the municipal agency fails to properly train Metro Officers on the ins ‘n outs of the Constitution—which governs police conduct while undertaking traffic stops, vehicular searches, and firearms confiscations.
Sanson’s lawsuit alleges a violation of the Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
SANSON vs. LVMPD!
According to official court documents, on March 22, 2019, at 11:30 a.m., SANSON left the Clark County Family Courthouse—when he was pulled over almost immediately! Stop right there. Could it be that Metro Police were “stalking” Sanson? Hmm…
MOTIVE to HARASS?
According to Sanson, Metro Police had foreknowledge of Sanson’s physical presence at family court—situated at Pecos & Bonanza. It’s worth noting that the Metro Officer pulled-over Sanson approx. one-quarter mile from the family law courthouse. Coincidence?
THE FACTUAL CLAIMS
SANSON contends that LVMPD acted without PROBABLE CAUSE—thereby violating his constitutional rights—under the Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments—in all the following ways—
- by Illegally searching the glove compartment of SANSON’s vehicle;
- by Illegally searching the center console of SANSON’s vehicle;
- by Illegally searching the remaining interior of SANSON’s vehicle, opening all four doors, moving clothing, and using a flashlight to search the vehicle;
- by illegally searching the trunk of SANSON’s vehicle;
- by illegally detaining SANSON for a period of time longer than necessary to issue a traffic citation;
- by illegally seizing SANSON’s firearms, which he legally stored and legally possessed.
THE MONELL CLAIM
Sanson’s lawsuit also alleges that LVMPD knowingly, and with deliberate indifference to the Constitution, maintains policies and procedures that fail to properly prepare officers for traffic stops—such as the one with Sanson on March 22, 2019.
FAILURE to ADEQUATELY TRAIN
Sanson alleges that LVMPD fails to adequately train officers on Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment requirements for traffic stops as well as constitutional limitations on search and seizure.
The LVMPD Officer failed to clear Sanson’s weapon, you can clearly see in the video that the magazine was still in the weapon and the officer chambered a round after Sanson warned him not to.
ARIZONA vs. GANT
Sanson’s lawsuit makes a compelling argument, i.e., LVMPD does have a training handbook, which is over 600 pages long, and yet, the handbook never mentions the landmark case of Arizona v. Gant, [556 U.S. 332 (2009)].
Arizona v. Gant, [556 U.S. 332 (2009)], is a U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that, in order to justify a warrantless vehicular search after an arrest, the Fourth Amendment requires police officers to demonstrate: (i) a threat to their safety posed by the arrestee, or, (ii) a need to preserve evidence from tampering at the hands of the arrestee.
Here, the fact that the LVMPD handbook is silent as to Arizona vs. Gant tends to suggest that LVMPD fails to properly train its police officers on up-to-date Fourth Amendment policies and procedures.
DAMAGES & FEES
Sanson seeks the excessive sum of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) to compensate for damages sustained by Metro’s unlawful searches and seizures. Sanson also seeks to recover attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses.
Sanson is represented by local civil rights attorney, Adam Breeden, (Breeden & Assoc. PLLC). Mr. Breeden is a well-respected trial lawyer with an eye for detail; he has a reputation as an earnest and forthright advocate in the tradition of Johnny Cochran.
We tried to interview Mr. Sanson, and he politely referred us to his lawyer, Mr. Breeden. But Mr. Sanson did volunteer a brief statement: “First of all, I am in the very capable hands of Mr. Adam Breeden; second, our lawsuit speaks for itself; third, our claims do have merit, and fourth, I am confident the court will validate those claims.”
Sanson added: “I wish to say thank you to all the well-wishers for their continued support.”
Stay tuned for all the excitement! We are your official headquarters for news ‘n information on the important public interest lawsuit, Sanson vs. LVMPD!
LVMPD Body Camera Videos
Click onto each video to have a complete understanding of all violations:
Veterans In Politics International President Constitutional Rights Violated by LVMPD Officer part 1
Veterans In Politics International President Constitutional Rights Violated by LVMPD Officer part 2
Veterans In Politics International President Constitutional Rights Violated by LVMPD Officer part 3
Veterans In Politics International President Constitutional Rights Violated by LVMPD Officer part 4
Veterans In Politics International President Constitutional Rights Violated by LVMPD Officer part 5
Veterans In Politics International President Constitutional Rights Violated by LVMPD Officer part 6
VETERANS in POLITICS, INT’L – “Where Change Happens!”