Guthrie Woman Files Lawsuit Claiming she was Wrongfully Arrested

EDMOND

A Guthrie woman claims she was wrongfully arrested on a traffic stop and taken to the Logan County jail where she was subjected to an improper strip search, court papers show.

Anna Lynn Self, of Guthrie, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma that names the Logan County sheriff and the City of Guthrie as defendants. The suit was filed in January.

On March 23, 2008, Guthrie Police Officer Wes Henry was patrolling when he noticed a green 1999 four-door hardtop Volkswagen with the rear driver’s side brake light out, according to a Guthrie Police Department report.

Henry stopped the car at Noble and Seventh Street. Police ran a warrant check, which showed that Self was wanted on a Logan County warrant.

At about 11:47 p.m., Henry arrested Self for the outstanding warrant and a sergeant transported Self to the jail, where she was booked.

That was the end of the police report narrative.

Allegations

Self claims she was forced to remove all of her clothing and expose her private parts for viewing by “agents” of Logan County, a practice and procedure she states was utilized by the county jail, according to court papers.

The sheriff had authority as the final decision-maker for the jail to institute and condone such practices, that have occurred in a “systematic pattern,” making him liable, the lawsuit states.

Furthermore, the sheriff failed to adequately train, supervise and discipline including those who “acting under color of law and based upon past policy and custom, deprived Plaintiff of her Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights, inflicting severe mental and physical anguish, humiliation and degradation, all to her detriment,” the lawsuit claims.

The conduct of personnel involved in the plaintiff’s detention and strip search was “intentional, malicious, willful, wanton and in reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, and grossly negligent, in that this conduct shocks the conscience and is fundamentally offensive to a civilized society,” the lawsuit states.

Self seeks $250,000 for past and future physical and mental pain and suffering, past and future loss of enjoyment of life, and past and future loss of earnings, according to court papers. She also seeks compensation for costs, interest and attorney’s fees, and such other relief as deemed proper.

David Kirk, Guthrie’s attorney in the lawsuit, said he cannot comment on specifics because the case involves pending litigation. Kirk said he has represented the city in several similar cases in the past and the city usually wins. He said he expects Guthrie to prevail in this matter.

Chris Collins, an attorney for former Logan County Sheriff Randy Richardson, listed as a defendant in the original complaint, declined comment because the case involves pending litigation.

In February, an uncontested motion to substitute party was filed on behalf of Richardson, who left office before the lawsuit was filed.

Court Responses

In court proceedings, Guthrie admits the plaintiff was arrested on a traffic complaint and taken to the county jail, but stated that it lacks sufficient information to either admit or deny any allegation regarding what happened to the plaintiff after she was taken to the jail.

Guthrie denies there was a “false arrest, and that the plaintiff was “subjected to a strip search.” The city denies the allegations stemming from the alleged strip search, and denies that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief she is seeking.

Also in court proceedings, the sheriff denies the allegations listed in the lawsuit.

The plaintiff failed to state a claim against the sheriff in his official capacity for any applicable constitutional violation or remedies, and failed to state a claim under the Fourth, Fifth or 14th amendments, the sheriff’s response states.

The sheriff denied allegations of a “pattern of persistent practices known to and approved by the sheriff, in his official capacity, that would be unconstitutional,” according to court papers.

The sheriff “cannot be held liable for any constitutional violations resulting from the acts of its agents, servants or employees under the doctrine of respondeat superior or vicarious liability.”

The sheriff also states there was probable cause for the plaintiff’s arrest, and that any search was based on a legitimate penal and/or safety and security purpose. Furthermore, the sheriff is exempt from liability under state tort claims law, the sheriff states.