A federal jury on Friday rejected claims from a Woodlands man and his now ex-wife that four Harris County Precinct 4 constables had violated their civil rights by unlawfully entering their home.
The 12-person jury also rejected claims from Jacob Gorsky that Deputy Jesus Guajardo and Corporal Benjamin Riveaux had unlawfully arrested him and used excessive force during the arrest; that Riveaux had used excessive force while questioning Gorsky’s then-wife, Olesya Gorsky; and that Deputy Patrice Small had unlawfully searched the Gorskys’ home for their son.
The verdict, reached after less than two hours of deliberations, concludes a nearly eight-year legal battle. The Gorksys displayed little emotion as U.S. District Court Judge Lee Rosenthal read the verdict. The couple’s attorney, Randall Kallinen, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In deciding that Guajardo, Riveaux, Small, and now-former Deputy Glenn Berry had not violated the Gorskys’ civil rights and were therefore entitled to qualified immunity, the jury determined that the pair were not entitled to receive up to $500,000 in damages for the physical pain and mental anguish they claimed to have suffered at the hands of the officers.
Earlier this week, Jacob Gorsky testified that the Feb. 21, 2016 encounter led to him developing heart disease, cancer, and the dissolution of his marriage. “The beautiful marriage started to fall apart,” he said in a thick Ukrainian accent. But the jury found the officers were not ultimately responsible for those problems, including what Gorsky argued was the exacerbation of his now-former wife’s existing mental health issues.
The jury was also not persuaded by Gorsky’s assertion that he had been arrested without probable cause and had been subjected to excessive force while being handcuffed. Guajardo testified that he had detained Gorsky for the amount of time it took to consult with a prosecutor about a possible charge of criminal mischief because Gorsky had refused to fetch his wife, who was being investigated for allegedly egging her neighbor’s car.
As far as entering the Gorskys’ home, the jury found that the deputies had received valid consent from Olesya Gorsky, who was heard on an audio recording saying, “Yeah, yeah,” when the officers asked if they could come inside. Valid consent does not have to be verbal, according to jury instructions.
In addition, Olesya Gorsky had accused the officers of bruising her arms, legs, and buttocks when she was grabbed, handcuffed, and pushed into a chair. But the jury appeared to side with the defense’s argument that if Olesya Gorsky had indeed sustained any bruises from her interactions with law enforcement, it was more likely than not that they were the result of the medications she had been taking for anxiety and depression.
In the end, the jury found the evidence presented and arguments given by Suzanne Bradley and Gregory Burnett of the Harris County Attorney’s Office more persuasive than that of Kallinen and his co-counsel, Alexander Johnson.
In her closing argument, Bradley said the case was not one of alleged officer misconduct, but law enforcement being blamed for an ongoing feud between neighbors that had escalated to such an extent that the Gorskys were being investigated for causing property damage to their neighbor’s car.
Irena Levy, a friend and neighbor of the Gorskys, testified that it was her who, unbeknownst to the Gorskys, took two eggs from their refrigerator and smashed them on the front windshield of the neighbor’s 2014 Toyota 4Runner. Levy was upset because the neighbor had called Precinct 4 earlier that night to complain about a birthday party at the Gorskys she had attended.
Law enforcement had gone to the Gorsky’s house after the neighbor identified Olesya Gorsky, not Levy, as the one on a security camera doing the egging.
“Instead of solving their problems with the (neighbors), they decided to sue the deputies,” Bradley said, adding the deputies had been ensnared in “something that is petty, appalling and nonsense.”
Republish our articles for free, online or in print.
