Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 1 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Miami Division Case No.: 11-23765-civ-JAL DAWN MORRIS WILLIS, Plaintiff, v. SHERIFF PAUL MAY in his official capacity as Sheriff of Okeechobee County, TOMMIE JOE BROCK, & JOHN DOES 1-10 Defendants. _______________________________________/ AMENDED COMPLAINT1 Plaintiff, Dawn Morris Willis, hereby sues Defendants, Sheriff Paul May, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Okeechobee County (the OSO) for federal civil rights violations and Tommie Joe Brock and John Does 1-10 for federal civil rights violations and sexual battery, and conspiracy. Introduction 1. This case is about a nightmare. Over an eight month period between November

2008 and July 2009, Ms. Willis was used as a sex slave by T.J. Brock, then a Detective and Sergeant with the Okeechobee County Sheriffs Office. For the first half of the relevant period, Sheriffs Deputy Brock forced Ms. Willis to have sexual intercourse with him and to perform oral sex on him in exchange for Sheriffs Deputy Brock not violating Ms. Willis probation. During the second half of the relevant time period, Ms. Willis was detained in the Okeechobee

This Amended Complaint is being filed to omit/dismiss the County as a distinct defendant, and to rename Defendant Okeechobee County Sheriffs Office as Sheriff Paul May in his official capacity as Sheriff of Okeechobee County. All claims made against Sheriff May are filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983.

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 2 of 12

County Jail. Sheriffs Deputy Brock, who was not assigned to the jail, would have Ms. Willis removed and transferred to his office. On numerous occasions outside of the jail, he raped Ms. Willis while she was shackled with handcuffs and leg irons. Sheriffs Deputy Brocks rape of Ms. Willis would not have been possible but for the assistance of other deputies. 2. The Okeechobee County Sheriffs Office knew about Deputy Brocks

misconduct. He was a veteran deputy and was long suspected of having sex with juvenile and adult offenders in prison and providing alcohol and drugs to detainees. In fact, Deputy Brock, while on road patrol, detained Ms. Willis years earlier and offered to not arrest her for driving under the influence if she would only have sex with him. In his words, sex with him was better than jail. The OSO knew for decades that it had a problem officer, but did nothing. There were numerous complaints about him and the OSO conducted internal affairs investigations into his misconduct. 3. Ms. Willis informed prison officials about being raped by Deputy Brock but they

did nothing. Finally, Ms. Willis, through a family connection, contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation on or about June 12, 2009. The FBI interviewed Ms. Willis concerning the sexual assaults by Sheriffs Deputy Brock and then notified the OSO. Deputy Brocks last rape of Ms. Willis occurred on July 2 or 3, 2009, after the FBI interviewed Ms. Willis. The next day, the FBI again interviewed Ms. Willis. Ms. Willis obtained DNA evidence the proved, beyond

peradventure, that Deputy Brock had sexual relations with her. 4. At all times throughout this nightmare, Deputy Brock was acting in his capacity

as an Okeechobee County Sheriffs Deputy. At all times throughout and before this nightmare, the OSO knew about Deputy Brocks behavior. It is responsible for the violations of Ms. Willis civil rights.

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 3 of 12

Parties, Jurisdiction & Venue 5. Florida. 6. Defendant, Sheriff Paul May in his official capacity as Sheriff of Okeechobee Plaintiff, Dawn Morris Willis, is a female resident of Miami-Dade County,

County (the OSO), is the sheriff of Okeechobee County and is the responsible party. All claims asserted against the OSO are asserted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. 7. Defendant, Sheriffs Deputy T.J. Brock, is a resident of Okeechobee County,

Florida. At all material times, he was acting in his official capacity as a Deputy Sheriff. He wore a badge and was armed with his official service pistol. He was an employee of the OSO. All claims asserted against Deputy Brock are asserted pursuant 42 U.S.C. 1983, except for a state law claim of sexual battery. Deputy Brock was, at all times, an active-duty detective sergeant. As a detective sergeant, he had unrestricted access to the county jail and any inmate housed in the jail. He was not, however, assigned to the county jail. He was terminated from the Sheriffs Department on or about July 8, 2009. He served as a deputy sheriff for approximately 23 years, most recently as the OSOs homicide detective. 8. Defendants, John Does 1-10, are other deputies and employees of the OSO who

conspired with Deputy Sheriff Brock to rape and sexually batter Ms. Willis. 9. 1983. 10. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims against all This Court has federal question jurisdiction because it arises under 42 U.S.C.

Defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a). 11. Venue is proper because all facts occurred within the Southern District of Florida.

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 4 of 12

Facts Common to All Counts 12. Several years ago, when Ms. Willis was approximately 21 years old, she was

pulled over by Deputy Brock, purportedly, on suspicion of driving under the influence. Instead of arresting her, Deputy Brock took her to his home and, while she was under the influence of alcohol, told him that she could avoid going to jail if she had sex with him. She complied with his demands to avoid being taken to jail. The sex was coercive and not consensual, and accordingly, was rape. 13. In November or December of 2008, Ms. Willis, while detained at the Okeechobee

jail, met with Deputy Brock. He explained to her that he could help her with her pending case if she would have sex with him and serve as a confidential informant for various investigations. The sex was coercive and not consensual, and accordingly, was rape. The rape occurred in Jack Hills office. Deputy Brock called it her Christmas present. 14. Ms. Willis was released on January 6 2009. Deputy Brock drove Ms. Willis

home to her mothers house. 15. Between January 6, 2009 and April 2009, Deputy Brock raped Ms. Willis at least

ten to fifteen times. Sometimes it was intercourse, other times she performed oral sex. During this period, Deputy Brock was using Ms. Willis as a confidential informant on various official sheriffs department investigations. By providing Deputy Brock with sex, and serving as a confidential informant, Deputy Brock promised to keep Ms. Willis out of jail and/or agreed to help her reduce her charges to avoid begin charged as a habitual offender. 16. Deputy Brock also promised to help secure favorable treatment for Ms. Willis

husband, then in jail.

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 5 of 12

17. couch. 18.

In February 2009, Ms. Willis had sex twice with Deputy Brock on his office

On April 22, 2009, Ms. Willis arrested and booked in County jail. Shortly after

that date, Ms. Willis had sex with Deputy Brock in his office. 19. On June 2, 2009, Ms. Willis was removed from County jail by a detention deputy.

The detention deputy escorted Ms. Willis to Deputy Brocks office, where, while wearing handcuffs and leg shackles, she was vaginally raped by and forced to perform oral sex on Deputy Brock. 20. On June 12, 2009, Ms. Willis accusations against Deputy Brock were reported to

the FBI. FBI Special Agent Jeffrey Serna interviewed Willis. Ms. Willis provided panties to SA Serna that she believed contained DNA evidence from Deputy Brock based on a rape that occurred on or about June 2, 2009. Ms. Willis reported the incident to the FBI to prevent further sexual abuse. 21. On July 2, 2009, after 5pm, Ms. Willis was taken from jail to the detective bureau

where she performed oral sex on him in his office. At the time, Ms. Willis father was ill and in a nursing home. Deputy Brock told Ms. Willis that she could use the phone to call her sick father if she performed oral sex on him. Deputy Brock ejaculated inside Ms. Willis mouth and ordered her to swallow his semen. She refused, and instead she spewed his semen onto a napkin taken from his office. She hid the semen stained napkin on her person prior to Deputy Brock escorting her back to jail. Ms. Willis was crying, and other sheriffs deputies and staff witnessed her crying while she was escorted back to jail by Deputy Brock. 22. On July 3, 2009, SA Serna again met with Ms. Willis at the jail. She reported to

him the events that happened the day prior, and she provided to SA Serna the semen stained

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 6 of 12

napkin. SA Serna turned over the panties and napkin to FBI Special Agent Pollard. They were processed by the Florida Department of Law Enforcements Fort Myers Crime Lab. FDLE analysis confirmed that both the panties and the napkin contained Deputy Brocks semen. 23. The FBI then reported this incident to the Sheriffs Department. On Friday, July Deputy Brock was immediately

3, 2009, Detective Faulkner interviewed Deputy Brock.

suspended with pay. Detective Faulkners investigation concluded that Ms. Willis testimony was credible and true. Phone records confirmed that a call was placed from Deputy Brocks office to Ms. Willis fathers nursing home on the date and at the time alleged by Ms. Willis. 24. In October 2009, Deputy Brock was arrested and charged with (i) felony sexual

battery by a law enforcement officer and (ii) felony sexual misconduct between a detention facility employee and an inmate. 25. Video surveillance confirms that Ms. Willis was transferred to Deputy Brocks

office from jail. 26. In late 1992, Deputy Brock was investigated for allegedly providing juveniles

with alcohol and drugs in exchange for sex. Upon information and belief, throughout his 23 years with the Sheriffs Department, Deputy Brocks misconduct was widely known. Other deputies knew that Deputy Brock was having inappropriate relationships with women and female inmates. Ms. Willis specifically complained to a jail official about Deputy Brock, but nothing was done about her complaints. Deputies saw Ms. Willis crying when leaving Deputy Brocks office. Deputies saw other women cry when leaving Deputy Brocks office. 27. 28. Upon information and belief, Deputy Brocks rape of Ms. Willis was not isolated. Deputy Brocks actions could not have occurred without the assistance of other

deputies and employees of the OSO. Other employees transported Ms. Willis to Deputy Brock,

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 7 of 12

assisted him with checking her in and out of the jail, and, perhaps most disturbingly, provided security to allow Deputy Brock to engage in his misconduct without interruption. These coconspirators are identified as John Does 1-10. 29. Deputy Brock was charged with sexual battery by a law enforcement officer and

sexual misconduct between detention facility employee and inmate. He pleaded guilty but was sentenced to probation only and was not incarcerated. For reasons that remain unknown, he was not charged with rape, battery or witness tampering despite proof beyond any doubt. 30. Litigation hold letters were served on the County, the OSO and the State

Attorneys Office on August 1, 2011. Count I Eighth/Fourteenth Amendment Violation Against the OSO (Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983) 31. 32. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-30. The Fourteenth Amendments due process clause and the Eighth Amendments

ban on cruel and unusual punishment clause prohibit a person acting under color of state law from raping and battering an inmate and a pretrial detainee. 33. To the extent Ms. Willis was an inmate serving a sentence following a conviction

or guilty plea, her claims are brought pursuant to the Eighth Amendment. To the extent Ms. Willis was a pretrial detainee, her claims are brought pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment. The substantive analysis is identical. 34. Deputy Brock violated Ms. Willis Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights

when he raped and battered her. Other deputies and employees assisted Deputy Brock and knew or should have known about Deputy Brocks history of misconduct.

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 8 of 12

35.

The OSO condoned Deputy Brocks actions and allowed the rapes to happen.

The OSO turned a blind eye to a problem deputy. They cannot now hide their heads in the sand and claim ignorance. 36. Ms. Willis was harmed as a result of Deputy Brocks violations of Ms. Willis

constitutional rights. Ms. Willis was harmed as a result of the OSOs negligent security at the Okeechobee County Jail. Count II First Amendment Retaliation Against the OSO (Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983) 37. 38. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-30. Plaintiff had a First Amendment right to file a grievance with the jail and to press

criminal charges against Brock. 39. Plaintiff exercised her First Amendment rights when she filed a grievance with

the jail concerning the rape and abuse and when she initiated criminal charges against Brock. 40. Plaintiff was retaliated against by the OSO because she exercised her First

Amendment rights. 41. Plaintiff, in violation of established standards of conduct for jails, was not

transferred out of the facility that allowed the rapes to occur. 42. Plaintiff was placed in a specific holding cell at the entrance to the jail where she

was effectively on display for anyone entering the jail. 43. 44. hygiene. 45. Upon information and belief, the OSO was displeased that Ms. Willis came Among the Plaintiff was also told that she could face charges punishable by life in prison. Plaintiff was denied medical care and was denied access to a shower and daily

forward with her meritorious allegations about Deputy Brock and the OSO. 8

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 9 of 12

problems raised by Ms. Willis allegations is the possibility that numerous criminal proceedings involving Deputy Brock would have to be reopened and would entitle prisoners to habeas petitions. 46. Ms. Willis was harmed as a result of the OSOs retaliation for her exercising her

First Amendment rights. Count III Eighth/Fourteenth Amendment Violation Against Deputy Brock (Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983) 47. 48. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-30. The Fourteenth Amendments due process clause and the Eighth Amendments

ban on cruel and unusual punishment clause prohibit a person acting under color of state law from raping and battering an inmate and a pretrial detainee. 49. To the extent Ms. Willis was an inmate serving a sentence following a conviction

or guilty plea, her claims are brought pursuant to the Eighth Amendment. To the extent Ms. Willis was a pretrial detainee, her claims are brought pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment. The substantive analysis is identical. 50. Deputy Brock violated Ms. Willis Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights

when he raped and battered her. 51. 52. At all times, Deputy Brock was acting under color of law. Ms. Willis was harmed as a result of Deputy Brocks violations of Ms. Willis

constitutional rights. Count IV Sexual Battery Against Deputy Brock 53. 54. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-30. Deputy Brock battered Ms. Willis when he raped her.

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 10 of 12

55.

Ms. Willis did not consent to being raped. As a matter of law, Ms. Willis could

not have consented to being raped by Deputy Brock because of his position as a Deputy Sheriff. 56. Ms. Willis was harmed when Deputy Brock raped her. Count V False Imprisonment Against Deputy Brock 57. 58. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-30. Deputy Brock falsely imprisoned Ms. Willis when he removed or had her

removed from jail and took her to a private OSO office to rape and batter her. 59. Deputy Brock enlisted the assistance of other deputies and employees to keep her

falsely imprisoned. 60. Ms. Willis was harmed when Deputy Brock falsely imprisoned her.

Count VI Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Against Deputy Brock 61. 62. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-30. Deputy Brock intentionally caused Ms. Willis severe emotional distress by falsely

imprisoning her and by raping her. 63. Ms. Willis was harmed as a result of Deputy Brocks intentional infliction of

emotional distress. Count VII Conspiracy Against John Does 1-10 64. 65. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-30. John Does 1-10 are other OSO employees and deputies who assisted Deputy

Brock by knowingly allowing him to rape her, by assisting the rape by transporting Ms. Willis to Deputy Brock, by securing Ms. Willis in the OSO office to allow Deputy Brock to rape her and by otherwise turning a blind eye to Deputy Brocks misconduct.

10

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 11 of 12

66.

Under Florida law, a conspiracy existed between Deputy Brock and John Does 1-

10. Plaintiff will amend this complaint accordingly to add the other deputies and employees during discovery. 67. Ms. Willis was harmed as a result of the conspiracy. Prayer for Relief Plaintiff seeks judgment against the OSO for compensatory damages in excess of $1,000,000, attorneys fees and litigation costs, and judgment against Tommie Joe Brock for compensatory damages in excess of $1,000,000, punitive damages in the maximum amount permitted by law, attorneys fees and litigation costs. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Matthew Sarelson Matthew Seth Sarelson, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 888281 Max M. Nelson, Esq. Fla Bar No. 84532 SARELSON LAW FIRM, P.A. 1200 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1440 Miami, Florida 33131 305-379-0305 800-421-9954 (fax) David John Glatthorn, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 307416 DAVID J. GLATTHORN, P.A. 506 Datura Street West Palm Beach, Florida 33402 561-659-1999 561-659-9075 (fax) glatt@msn.com

11

Case 1:11-cv-23765-JAL Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2011 Page 12 of 12

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on December 1, 2011, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the forgoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties identified on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. ___/s/ Matthew Sarelson Matthew Sarelson, Esq. Service List Case No.: 11-23765-civ-LENARD Matthew Seth Sarelson, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 888281 Max M. Nelson, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 84532 SARELSON LAW FIRM, P.A. 1200 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1440 Miami, Florida 33131 305-379-0305 800-421-9954 (fax) msarelson@sarelson.com mnelson@sarelson.com Counsel for Plaintiff David John Glatthorn, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 307416 DAVID J. GLATTHORN, P.A. 506 Datura Street West Palm Beach, Florida 33402 561-659-1999 561-659-9075 (fax) glatt@msn.com Counsel for Plaintiff John A. Makholm, Esq. MAKHOLM LAW GROUP Once Capital Center 696 First Avenue North, Suite 205 St. Petersburg, Florida 33701 727-823-5100 727-823-5114 (fax) makholm@verizon.net Counsel for Okeechobee County Garrett S. Elsinger, Esq. PURDY, JOLLY, GUIFFREDA BARRANCO, P.A. 2455 E. Sunrise Blvd., Suite 1216 Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33304 954-462-3200 954-462-3861 (fax) garrett@purdylaw.com Counsel for Sheriff May Robert J. Watson, Esq. ROBERT J. WATSON, P.A. 3601 S.E. Ocean Blvd, Suite 4 Stuart, Florida 34996 772-288-1880 rjwpa@yahoo.com Counsel for Brock

&

12