ILNews

State trooper sues after incident with city officer

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana State Police detective involved in a physical confrontation with an Indianapolis Metropolitan Police deputy chief in August 2010 in the deputy chief’s office has filed a lawsuit claiming false arrest and assault and battery.

Master Trooper Detective Wayne Billings went to IMPD Deputy Chief William Benjamin’s office in downtown Indianapolis while Billings was in the City-County Building for an appointment. He told the City-County Building employee that he was law enforcement, which allowed him to have access to Benjamin’s office.

Billings had received threatening phone calls and voicemails regarding his relationship with a woman and he believed Benjamin was the person making those calls. He hid a recorder on himself.

According to the suit, Benjamin first did not know who Billings was, but later became upset when Billings mentioned the woman. Billings claimed he told the officer he must have the wrong person and tried to leave, but was prevented by Benjamin. Billings claimed Benjamin forcibly grabbed Billings as he tried to leave and later shoved him against a wall. Benjamin called for other officers to help him.

Billings claims he constantly identified himself as a state trooper. The other IMPD officers took his gun and his official ISP identification and Billings was held handcuffed in an interview room. He was later released but police took the recorder. According to the suit, Benjamin became enraged when discovering the recorder on Billings and accused Billings of “setting him up.”

Billings was placed on administrative duty by ISP after the incident. He was suspended for two days for using his police authority in a personal matter.

Now, Billings is suing, claiming his constitutional rights were violated, he was falsely arrested and imprisoned, and he was assaulted. He is also suing for recovery under Indiana Code 34-24-3-1 due to criminal confinement and abuse of process. The suit, Wayne E. Billings v. Deputy Chief William Benjamin, in his official and individual capacities, No. 1:11-CV-748, was filed June 3 and includes IMPD Chief of Police Paul R. Ciesielski and Major Christopher Boomershine, as well as other IMPD officers and personnel, as defendants. The case is before Judge Tanya Walton Pratt in the Indianapolis Division of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT