The Yonkers Police Department was served with a federal lawsuit arguing its officers violated the civil rights of community advocate Hector Santiago during a violent encounter at City Hall last November.
City Hall chaos
On November 22nd, 2022, Hector Santiago attended a crowded Yonkers City Council meeting on the extension of term limits. As he and the rest of the attendees chanted against each other, and even with a councilmember, Santiago was physically escorted from the chamber. During his chaotic removal, YPD Detective Russel Kilgore responded to Santiago’s dismissive arm shrug with a closed-fist punch to Santiago’s face. A handful of officers then tackled Santiago to the floor of Yonkers City Hall.
You may watch an abbreviated clip of the incident below.
In remarks to News12, YPD commissioner Christopher Sapienza put the blame solely on this founder of the pro-police initiative, ‘Stop and Shake.’ Comparing Santiago to other meeting attendees, Sapienza said, “he’s the one who took it to the level to get arrested.”
Santiago’s immediate arrest produced charges that were later amended or dropped. Ultimately, he faced only a single violation of “Disorderly Conduct.” Judge John P. Collins Jr. acquitted Santiago of that violation on July 25th, after over 20 court appearances on this matter.
Since the incident, Santiago and his civil rights attorney, Leo Glickman, made overt actions signaling their intent for restitution. First, in January, Glickman filed a notice of claim with the City of Yonkers. Then a letter was sent requesting the prosecution of Det. Kilgore for assault. And now on September 14th, a complaint appeared on file with the U.S. District Court Southern District of New York enumerating a litany of civil rights violations perpetrated by the Yonkers Police.
Suing the City
The defendants listed in the complaint include Det. Kilgore foremost, followed by other officers from the YPD Intelligence Division present that night, as well as the City of Yonkers. These same parties that participated in the local criminal prosecution of Santiago, now face judgement in federal court on seven different allegations. These allegations range from assault and battery to the violation of Santiago’s fourth amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure.
In detail, the 11-page complaint lays out the specifics of each violation. At the heart of the complaint, and greater controversy, is Det. Kilgore’s punch. Described as “excessive and unnecessary force” by attorney Leo Glickman, it is delineated into the separate acts of assault and battery. Per his representation, two assaults occurred. First, Santiago’s forceful removal from the City Council chamber, and then the punch. The battery was also then the punch, as it resulted in real physical harm.
Beyond that literal punch, the lawsuit presents other officers as culpable for their participation. This culpability manifested when officers, “despite having the opportunity to do so, failed to intervene in the obviously unlawful and unconstitutional acts.”
As argued at Santiago’s trial, his arrest only came after he suffered an assault. And the inference is that Santiago’s arrest was merely a means to justify said assault. So, with “no reasonable expectation of successfully prosecuting [Santiago],” his punishment amounts to false arrest and malicious prosecution.
The complaint reaches even further back into the timeline of the incident, before the hallway incident. It cites the singular selection of Santiago for removal as demonstrating his deprivation of rights and violation of his equal protection under the law. This is supported by the fact that no other similarly-vocal participant of that council meeting suffered any arrested or prosecution.
Prayer for relief
The lawsuit does not present any specific amounts of compensation for the conduct it describes. Instead, it calls for a jury trial. If the jury finds the defendants liable, then it would also determine the damages.
Earlier this year, Santiago participated in a 50-h hearing with Corporation Counsel for the City of Yonkers. Essentially, this is a deposition in response to the notice of claim. Considering this process, it is likely that the City may wish to settle this matter out of court to avoid a jury trial altogether.
To date, the YPD maintains the support of its officers’ actions in this incident after an internal investigation it conducted last year.
