Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No.

CHRISTOPHER COLBRUNO

Plaintiff,

v.

ELIAS DIGGINS, in his official and individual capacity,

WILLIAM KESSLER, in his official and individual capacity,
SAMANTHA KIELAR, in her official and individual capacity,
TINA KLOSIEWSKI, in her official and individual capacity,
RYAN SEWITSKY, in his official and individual capacity,
THOMAS TINDALL, in his official and individual capacity,
PAUL ORTEGA, in his official and individual capacity,
STEPHEN PETIT, in his official and individual capacity,
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, a municipality,

Defendants
____________________________________________________________________________

COMPLAINT
____________________________________________________________________________

Plaintiff CHRISTOPHER COLBRUNO, by and through his attorney, David A. Lane of

KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP, and Anna Geigle of THE GEIGLE LAW FIRM respectfully

alleges for his Complaint as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. This case seeks to vindicate the basic human dignity every person has, even if that

person is a severly mentally ill prisoner incarcerated in the Denver City jail.

2. Christopher COLBRUNO needed medical attention and was taken to the hospital

by the Defendants all of whom refused to be bothered to put some clothing on him despite its

ready availability, choosing instead to take a completely naked prisoner (a human being) and
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 11

parade him unclothed through the entirety of the Denver Health Hospital in violation of his basic

right to bodily integrity.

JURISDICTION & VENUE

3. This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, including

Article III, Section 1 of the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. 1983. Jurisdiction is

conferred on this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1343 and 2201. Jurisdiction

supporting Plaintiffs claims for attorney fees is conferred by 42 U.S.C. 1988.

3. Venue is proper in the District of Colorado pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). All

of the events alleged herein occurred within the state of Colorado, and all of the parties are

residents of the state. At all pertinent times mentioned herein, each Defendant was employed

by the City and County of Denver, State of Colorado, and was acting under color of state law.

PARTIES

1. The Plaintiff is an individual who resides in the Colorado Department of Corrections.

2. The Defendant, Elias DIGGINS, was an Interim Sheriff of the Denver Sheriffs

Department. The Sheriff has his administrative offices at the Downtown Detention Center

located at 490 West Colfax Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80204. At all times relevant to the

subject matter of this litigation, Defendant DIGGINS was a citizen of the United States and a

resident of Colorado and was acting under color of state law in his capacity as Interim Sheriff for

the Denver Sheriffs Department.

3. The Defendant, William KESSLER, is a Deputy Sheriff in the Denver Sheriffs

Department. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, Defendant KESSLER

was a citizen of the United States and a resident of Colorado and was acting under color of state

law in his capacity as Deputy Sheriff for the Denver Sheriffs Department.
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 11

4. The Defendant, Samantha KIELAR, is a Deputy Sheriff in the Denver Sheriffs

Department. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, Defendant KIELAR was

a citizen of the United States and a resident of Colorado and was acting under color of state law

in her capacity as Deputy Sheriff for the Denver Sheriffs Department.

5. The Defendant, Tina KLOSIEWSKI, is a Deputy Sheriff in the Denver Sheriffs

Department. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, Defendant

KLOSIEWSKI was a citizen of the United States and a resident of Colorado and was acting

under color of state law in her capacity as Deputy Sheriff for the Denver Sheriffs Department.

6. The Defendant, Ryan SEWITSKY, is a Deputy Sheriff in the Denver Sheriffs

Department. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, Defendant SEWITSKY

was a citizen of the United States and a resident of Colorado and was acting under color of state

law in his capacity as Deputy Sheriff for the Denver Sheriffs Department.

7. The Defendant, Thomas TINDALL, is a Deputy Sheriff in the Denver Sheriffs

Department. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, Defendant TINDALL

was a citizen of the United States and a resident of Colorado and was acting under color of state

law in his capacity as Deputy Sheriff for the Denver Sheriffs Department.

8. The Defendant, Paul ORTEGA, is a Captain in the Denver Sheriffs Department. At

all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, Defendant ORTEGA was a citizen of the

United States and a resident of Colorado and was acting under color of state law in his capacity

as Captain in the Denver Sheriffs Department.

9. The Defendant, Stephen PETIT, is a Sergeant in the Denver Sheriffs Department. At

all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, Defendant PETIT was a citizen of the

United States and a resident of Colorado and was acting under color of state law in his capacity
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 11

as Sergeant in the Denver Sheriffs Department.

10. Defendant CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER is a municipal entity for purposes of

1983.

11. At all times, all Defendants were acting within the scope of their duties and

employment, under color and authority of state law, and in their official capacities as law

enforcement officers.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

12. On May 4, 2015, COLBRUNO was in the custody of the Denver Sheriffs

Department, confined in a cell on the third floor of the Van Cise-Simonet Detention Center.

Because of his severe mental illness, COLBRUNO dismantled an emergency call box and button

located inside of his cell, and reportedly ate portions of the circuit board and some screws.

Denver Sheriffs supervising COLBRUNO became aware that he had consumed pieces of metal

at approximately 2200 hours.

13. Shortly thereafter Denver Sheriffs contacted the on-call physician at Denver Health

Medical Center (DHMC) for guidance. Denver Sheriffs were instructed to transport

COLBRUNO to the DHMC for x-rays and treatment within one hour of the call. Two Deputy

Sheriffs and one Sergeant were tasked with transporting COLBRUNO to DHMC.

14. At approximately 0020 hours on May 5, 2015, COLBRUNO, while restrained,

wearing orange mittens, and clothed only in a smock, was removed from his cell and placed into

a scout van by Defendants KIELAR, SWEITSKY, and PETIT.

15. During transport to the hospital, COLBRUNO defecated and urinated on himself, and

soiled the smock he was wearing. Upon arrival at the hospital, Defendants KIELAR,

SWEITSKY, and PETIT were met by three additional Deputy Sheriffs: Defendants KESSLER,
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 11

KLOSIEWSKI, and TINDALL. COLBRUNOS clothing was completely removed, leaving only

the mittens. Defendants made no effort to obtain another smock or any other item that would

have allowed COLBRUNO to enter the hospital in a dignified manner. Instead, PETIT, as the

ranking officer, made the decision to remove COLBRUNO, naked, from the van. COLBRUNO

was then paraded by these six Defendants through the ambulance bay, outside entryway, atrium,

and hallway of the hospital, while attempting to cover his genitals with the mittens. This was

done in plain view of all hospital employees, patients and any visitors who happened to be

standing around.

16. PETIT later contacted his supervisor, Captain Philip Swift, to report that

COLBRUNO had defecated and urinated on himself during the transport. PETIT failed to

mention the humiliation COLBRUNO endured at the hands of the six Defendants described in

15 above. In fact, the six Defendants, KESSLER, KIELAR, KLOSIEWSKI, PETIT,

SWEITSKY, and TINDALL, all wrote statements about their involvement with COLBRUNOs

transportation and entry into the hospital, and not one made mention that he was forced to enter

and walk through the hospital in the nude.

17. When COLBRUNO arrived at his hospital room, Defendants chained him to the bed

with a belly chain and leg irons. There COLBRUNO remained completely naked.

18. DHMC staff witnessed this inhumane and degrading treatment of COLBRUNO and

immediately reported it to the Risk Manager, Ann Marie Stuart (Stuart). Stuart went on to

report the incident to Carmen Kassalty (Kassalty), who manages the medical staff that work

inside the Denver Sheriffs facility. Accordingly, Kassalty e-mailed ORTEGA and DIGGINS

with a request that the incident be reviewed. Specifically, Kassalty stated that Denver Health

would like the DSD to review the fact the patient was completely naked when brought to the
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 11

[Emergency Department].

19. All complaints to the Denver Sheriffs Department Internal Affairs Bureau initially

go to ORTEGA, who then assigns the case to an investigator. ORTEGA was to classify the case

as Informal, Formal, or Grievance. Occasionally, ORTEGA would consult with DIGGINS about

how to classify a case. Senior Investigator Armando Saldate (Saldate) was tasked with

inputting all new cases into a database known as IAPro, and was to provide a packet of available

information to the assigned investigator.

20. ORTEGA assigned the investigation of this incident to Internal Affairs Bureau

Senior Investigator Brent Miller (Miller) on May 5, 2015. Internal Affairs Bureau Senior

Investigator Christopher Bakas (Bakas) was assigned to assist Miller in following up on the

complaint and obtaining the surveillance video. The same day, Bakas traveled to DHMC and

obtained three surveillance videos that clearly depict KESSLER, KIELAR, KLOSIEWSKI,

SWEITSKY, TINDALL, and PETIT casually escorting a naked COLBRUNO through the

ambulance bay, outside entryway, atrium, and hallway of the hospital.

21. Bakas reported to ORTEGA that the incident reported by Kassalty had in fact

occurred, and was verified by surveillance video obtained from the hospital. ORTEGA gave no

further direction to Bakas at the time of this report.

22. During a meeting that occurred later the same week, ORTEGA told Bakas that

further investigation of this incident would be assigned to Miller alone, as Miller was

investigating two other unrelated matters involving COLBRUNO.

23. Several days later, ORTEGA had a private meeting with Miller during which

ORTEGA told Miller that the three matters involving COLBRUNO would be maintained as

separate matters instead of being combined into one investigation, as was ordinarily the custom
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 11

when multiple cases involve the same complainant.

24. On May 8, 2015, ORTEGA had a telephone conversation with Soldate in which

ORTEGA directed Soldate not to upload any information into IAPro on COLBRUNOs case.

ORTEGA explained that they would follow this procedure because DIGGINS was going to make

the case go away after making some telephone calls.

25. On May 11, 2015, Miller again met with ORTEGA to discuss the investigation of the

three matters involving COLBRUNO. During the meeting, ORTEGA questioned Miller about

whether he had uploaded the surveillance videos to IAPro yet. When Miller reported that he had

not yet uploaded the videos, ORTEGA ordered Miller not to upload the videos because they are

making it go away; its not going to be a case. ORTEGA explained that they was the Interim

Sheriff, DIGGINS. ORTEGA then ordered Miller to get rid of the video.

26. Also on May 11, 2015, Miller reported ORTEGAs order to Bakas not to upload the

video, and repeated that ORTEGA stated that the case was no longer a case and that the

incident would be taken care of.

27. On May 12, 2015, Miller had a conversation with Soldate, in which Miller reported

that he had challenged ORTEGAs decision to close the investigation of COLBRUNOs case

during their meeting on May 11, 2015. Miller further related that ORTEGA told Miller that

DIGGINS was making the case go away and that ORTEGA ordered Miller to destroy the

videos.

28. Also on May 12, 2015, Miller was told by ORTEGA that his employment was

terminated effective May 14, 2015. ORTEGA told Miller that he was being terminated because

he inserted subjective opinions into his reports.

29. On May 14, 2015, Miller provided Saldate three (3) discs containing the surveillance
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 11

video obtained of the May 5, 2015, hospital incident. At the same time, Miller told Soldate that

his employment was being terminated, and that it was Millers belief that his termination was in

connection with his challenge of ORTEGAs order to destroy the videos and conduct no further

investigation into the hospital incident.

30. On May 15, 2015, ORTEGA was to begin a vacation. Prior to leaving the office,

Defendant ORTEGA told Soldate that everything that was going to be investigated as a case,

uploaded into IAPro, and assigned to an investigator during ORTEGAs absence, had already

been given to Soldate by ORTEGA. At the time of this conversation, nothing had been provided

to Soldate on COLBRUNOs case by Defendant ORTEGA. This conversation confirmed the

report Miller made to Soldate on May 14, 2015: that ORTEGA wanted no further investigation

into COLBRUNOs case involving the incident at DHMC.

31. The actions of the Defendants caused COLBRUNO to suffer great emotional distress.

32. The actions of the Defendants were done knowingly, intelligently, willfully and

wantonly, with the understanding that these actions were outrageous and would cause severe

emotional distress to COLBRUNO.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

( 1983 Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Violations Unlawful Seizure
all Defendants)

33. COLBRUNO incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint for purposes of this

claim.

34. The actions of all Defendants as described herein, while acting under color of state

law, intentionally deprived COLBRUNO of the securities, rights, privileges, liberties, and

immunities secured by the Constitution of the United States of America, including his right to

freedom from unlawful seizures as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 11

the United States of America and 42 U.S.C. 1983, to not be paraded in a public place naked by

the Defendants.

35. The actions of the Defendants in exposing Plaintiffs naked body for all to see is an

unreasonable seizure under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States

Constitution.

36. All defendants intentionally, knowingly, and recklessly subjected COLBRUNO to an

illegal, demeaning, and invasive seizure without any reasonable justification.

37. Defendants conduct proximately caused damages, and economic losses to

COLBRUNO.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

( 1983 Violation Violation of the Right of Bodily Integrity

all Defendants)

38. COLBRUNO incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint for purposes of this

claim.

39. Defendants knew that COLBRUNO had soiled his smock to the point that it would

not be reasonable to have him wear it inside of the hospital. Instead of locating another smock or

other item to allow COLBRUNO to walk in public without being exposed in the nude, they chose

to intentionally humiliate him.

40. The actions of Defendant as described herein, while acting under color of state law,

intentionally deprived COLBRUNO of the securities, rights, privileges, liberties, and immunities

secured by the Constitution of the United States of America, including his right to freedom from

unlawful and unreasonable searches as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution

of the United States of America and 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that the Defendant conducted an

intrusive and illegal equivalent of a strip search in direct violation of state law, CRS 16-3-405,
Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 11

which states in relevant part:

(2) As used in this section, strip search means having an arrested person remove or

arrange some or all of his or her clothing so as to permit a visual inspection of the genitals,

buttocks, anus, or female breasts of such person.

41. The actions of the Defendants caused humiliation, embarrassment, and emotional

distress to COLBRUNO and violated his right to bodily integrity and privacy.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in his favor

and against the Defendants, and grant:

(a) Appropriate declaratory and other injunctive and/or equitable relief;

(b) Compensatory and consequential damages, including damages for emotional

distress, loss of reputation, humiliation, loss of enjoyment of life, and other pain and

suffering on all claims allowed by law in an amount to be determined at trial;

(c) All economic losses on all claims allowed by law;

(d) Punitive damages on all claims allowed by law and in an amount to be

determined at trial;

(e) Attorneys fees and the costs associated with this action, including those associated

with having to defend against the false criminal charge as well as expert witness fees, on all

claims allowed by law;

(f) Pre- and post-judgment interest at the lawful rate.

(g) Any further relief that this court deems just and proper, and any other relief as

allowed by law.

PLAINTIFF REQUESTS A TRIAL TO A JURY ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE.

Dated this 1st day of May, 2017.

Case 1:17-cv-01072-GPG Document 1 Filed 05/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 11

KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP

s/ David A. Lane
David A. Lane
1543 Champa Street, Suite 400
Denver, Colorado 80202
Ph: 303-571-1000
Fax: 303-571-1001
dlane@kln-law.com

THE GEIGLE LAW FIRM

s/ Anna Geigle
Anna Geigle
4100 E. Mississippi Ave.
16th Floor
Denver, CO 80246
Ph: 303-731-2585
Fax: 720-600-4641
anna@pgalegal.net
Attorneys for Plaintiff