Stating that Sheriff’s Department defendants in Zane Seipler’s wrongful termination case have not provided “legitimate discovery responses” and have “twice violated this Court’s protective order,” Seipler attorney Blake Horwitz asked Federal Magistrate P. Michael Mahoney in Rockford that,
“This improper conduct before this Federal Court…cease.”
The pleading points out that defendants in deposition have denied that racial profiling has occurred in the McHenry County Sheriff’s Department, but now “defendants are investigating fifty-one deputies for racial profiling and have admitted that they failed to tender data covering 5,000 traffic stops covering a two year period.”
A footnote says that the internal probe began January 14, 2011.
The motion points out that Horwitz has spent over 150 hours looking at ”faulty” data provided by the Sheriff’s Department over a year ago, but now defendants refuse to reproduce defendants for depositions on the newly-released data.
“Perhaps defendants though they could get away with non-disclosure of the vital information; however this scheme unfolded when plaintiff requested the source data from which the racial profiling date was originally ascertained,” Horwitz continues.
“The new data reveals 5,000 arrests never before tendered—clearly indicating that the initial disclosures were a sham.”
A footnote says that Horwitz is not blaming opposing attorney James Sotos, “but believes counsel’s client in fact has intended this result.”
For not releasing all the data in a timely fashion, Horwitz seeks to have the Sheriff’s Department “pay reasonable expenses.”
Two instances of violating the Court’s protective order are listed:
- “the release of police records concerning the plaintiff”
- “the deposition of Deputy Millman was released to a local McHenry County newspaper, the Northwest Herald.”
The description of the more recent alleged violation follows:
“In the article, the newspaper editor went into extreme detail as to the allegations of Deputy Milliman, ultimately ridiculing him and comparing him to a character on Sesame Street who generates delusional accusations.”
The motion “requests that his Court enter an Order for a Rule to Show Cause requesting why defendants should not be held in contempt for their repeat failure to comply with this Court’s Protective Order…(and) order sanctions against defendants…”