City: police not responsible in Dorr case
The city of Watertown is asking a judge to rule that its police department was not responsible for one of its off-duty officers trying to kill another man in 2004.
The city, which faces a state Supreme Court lawsuit by the shooting victim, Ryan T. Dorr, has filed a motion for summary judgment, essentially arguing that there is no need for a trial in the matter as there are no issues of fact to be decided.
Attorneys for Mr. Dorr counter that there are numerous issues that a jury could debate, including its key contention that the city was negligent in its training and supervision of former officer Michael K. VanWaldick, who shot Mr. Dorr three times on Dec. 8, 2004.
In court documents opposing the city's motion, attorney Daniel R. Ryan contends that the police department had a "mountain of evidence that Mr. VanWaldick was violent and unstable," yet took no action against him.
Mr. Ryan maintains that the department was aware that Mr. VanWaldick made several threats against his former girlfriend, the former Jessica S. Quinta, who is now married to Mr. Dorr, but never fully investigated the allegations. A state Commission of Investigation report issued in July 2006 was highly critical of the department's handling of Mr. VanWaldick's conduct leading up to the shooting.
The city contends that the suit should be decided in its favor because the department was not the proximate cause of Mr. Dorr's injuries, as Mr. VanWaldick was off-duty and not acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the shooting.
Mr. Ryan claims that argument "misses its mark." He contends that there are "numerous connections" between the shooting and Mr. VanWaldick's job and the department's "failure to act on prior knowledge of Mr. VanWaldick's violent propensities." He claims only a jury can decide whether any connections exist.
Mr. Ryan also claims Mr. VanWaldick may have used police resources to help him carry out the act, but that, too, would be for a jury to decide. He states that Mr. Dorr's address was not publicly available in 2004, making it possible that Mr. VanWaldick learned it through a police computer database after Mr. Dorr had provided a statement to police regarding Mr. VanWaldick's behavior toward Mrs. Dorr.
Mr. VanWaldick climbed a ladder to enter Mr. Dorr's second-floor LeRay Street apartment and shot him once inside. He then kidnapped Mrs. Dorr from the apartment and took her to a residence in the town of Adams. He also stole a vehicle on the day of the shooting.
Mr. Dorr's attorney claims that Mr. VanWaldick never denied that he used his department-issued service weapon and ammunition from the department to shoot Mr. Dorr, although Mr. VanWaldick has not admitted that, either, which would be another issue to be decided at trial.
The city also claims the case should be decided in its favor because it is protected by the doctrine of governmental immunity. Mr. Ryan claims that the department's "inaction" in regard to Mr. VanWaldick cannot be an argument for immunity.
He maintains that the department violated its own policies, procedures and standards in its response to Mr. VanWaldick's violent propensities. He states that the department "sloughed off" the issue and any investigation into the matter was "entirely haphazard and half-hearted." He claims Mr. VanWaldick was "clearly afforded preferential treatment" because he was a police officer.
Mr. Ryan claims a jury should consider whether the department knew or should have known that Mr. VanWaldick was potentially dangerous and whether it owed Mr. Dorr any duty to keep him from being harmed.
A trial, if a judge denies the department's motion, has been scheduled to begin Nov. 1.
Mr. VanWaldick is serving a 15-year prison sentence at Clinton Correctional Facility, Dannemora, after pleading guilty in Jefferson County Court to attempted murder, kidnapping and grand larceny.
According to Mr. Dorr's attorneys, the case has languished in part because of Mr. VanWaldick's reluctance to answer key questions during a June 2009 deposition taken at the prison. Judge Hugh A. Gilbert ordered Mr. VanWaldick to sit for a second deposition, which he did in May. However, a transcript of those proceedings shows little more information was obtained, as Mr. VanWaldick repeatedly said he could not recall events of six years ago.
