In the lawsuit, the woman claims jailer Antonio Azua forcibly raped her, gave her chlamydia and when she wrote to Sheriff Mitchell Shaw to tell him what happened to her, he did not bother to read the complaints.
In the response, which was filed today in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Shaw's attorney, Patricia Keck, of the Springfield firm of Keck and Phillips, questioned the entire premise of the lawsuit.
Plaintiff failed to mitigate her damages in that Plaintiff failed to report the alleged activities of co-defendant Azua to Sheriff Shaw or any employee or officer of Barton County and because she voluntarily participated in the alleged incidents.
The response also claims Shaw and Azua are protected by the doctrine of official immunity, claims the lawsuit is "frivolous" and asks that the plaintiff pay attorney fees and costs.
The woman's lawsuit alleged deplorable conditions for female prisoners, lax oversight and poor training of jailers by Shaw and claims the sheriff refused to provide documents and records to the woman's attorney, Bill Fleischaker, Joplin, even though all of the documents are open records under the Missouri Sunshine Law.
Though Fleischaker filed the action, the woman's lead attorney is Jeremy Beaver, McAlester, Oklahoma.
Shaw, who was first elected sheriff in 2008, was defeated John Simpson in the Republican primary earlier this month.
Azua's trial on a felony rape charge stemming from his alleged actions with the former prisoner, is scheduled to begin February 1, 2021 in Barton County Circuit Court.
3 comments:
A captive person who is asked to have sex by an individual with that kind of power over them cannot consent. If she had said "no," what would the consequences have been? Sex under duress or threat of retaliation for refusal is still rape. This is still not an argument.
Sorry, bro.
Let's ask Todd Akin?
>>>The response also claims Shaw and Azua are protected by the doctrine of official immunity,<<<
B*tch Please?!
Post a Comment