A man who spent nearly 18 years in prison for crimes from which he was later exonerated is now suing the City of Hammond
and various police officers involved in his arrest.
James Hill was convicted of rape, unlawful deviate conduct and robbery in connection with an attack against a gas station
clerk in 1980. The clerk, L.J., couldn’t at first identify her attackers, but after she was hypnotized by police, identified
Hill as one of the two men. Biological evidence found on L.J. and evidence at the scene did not connect Hill to the attack.
Hill claims that the police officers involved in the investigation covered up important information, including that L.J.
had been hypnotized and there were doubts about the reliability of statements from a witness that Hill owned a blue denim
bag identical to the one used during the attack.
It wasn’t until 2001 that DNA testing on the physical evidence showed that Hill wasn’t the source of semen found
on L.J. and her clothing. At that time, Hill had already been released from prison, but filed an amended petition for post-conviction
relief in 2005. The post-conviction court vacated his convictions in October 2009.
Hill’s suit says his arrest, prosecution, convictions, and imprisonment were because of unconstitutional and unlawful
efforts by the police officers named in his suit, who tried to use any means to gain a conviction. The defendants, Frank Dupey,
Richard Tumildalsky, Raymond Myszak, and Michael Solan, deliberately didn’t reveal exculpatory information about the
hypnosis of L.J., didn’t investigate any other potential suspects, and fabricated evidence from witnesses which was
presented at trial. He claims the City of Hammond is also liable as it’s responsible for the policies, practices, and
customs of the Hammond Police Department.
Hill filed the suit last week in the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, James Hill v. City of Hammond, et
al., No. 2:10-CV-393. It includes three counts – denial of a fair trial, supervisory liability, and a Monell
claim against the city. Hill is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, interest, and any other proper relief.














I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.