Judge dismisses free-speech suit against Stamford police
STAMFORD — A federal judge last week threw out a suit by a Stamford man claiming his free-speech rights were violated when he was arrested for holding up a sign saying “Cops Ahead” just down the street from where city police were conducting a distracteddriving detail in 2018.
Judge Alfred Covello’s decision to close the case Wednesday provided a win for the city’s police department as well as the arresting sergeant, Richard Gasparino.
“I’m obviously very happy with the outcome of the case and I publicly want to thank Assistant Corporation Counsel Barbara Coughlan and Attorney Elliot Spector for all their hard work,” Gasparino said. “The two of them believed in the case from the very start and never doubted my actions. I took a lot of criticism for this arrest publicly and professionally, but like the legal team I never second guessed my decision on that day.”
Spector said, “The judge rightly found that if a police officer is performing an act to protect the public, people don't have a right to interfere with the performance of those duties. We all know and Judge Covello recognized that there is a serious safety issue with distracted drivers and many people are being killed or seriously injured and the government provides grants for distracted driving operations to deter people from committing those motor vehicle violations. And the way you deter people is to fine them.”
Spector said Gasparino used great discretion and restraint by giving Michael Friend the opportunity to stop holding up the sign and warned that he would be
arrested if he returned.
“We were confident that our police acted appropriately and did not engage in unconstitutional conduct,” said City Corporation Counsel Kathryn Emmett. “We're gratified that the court agreed.”
ACLU Legal Director Dan Barrett, who brought the case on behalf of Friend, said the two were disappointed in the ruling.
“We remain of the opinion that everyone has the right to protest the police,” Barrett said. “And so as it happens, we are studying our options and considering what to do next.”
The incident happened on April 12, 2018, when Friend was spotted on Hope Street near Cushing Street holding up the “Cops Ahead” sign, two blocks from where police were ticketing distracted drivers. Gasparino took the sign and warned Friend he would be arrested if he did not move.
Friend walked away, went to his car and found another piece of paper to make another “Police Ahead” sign and stood next to the Food Bag on Hope Street, this time three blocks from where the operation was running and held up the sign.
About 30 minutes later, Gasparino took the second sign away, along with two cellphones and charged him with interfering with police.
Later that year, Friend and the Connecticut ACLU filed suit against Gasparino and the police department claiming Friend’s free speech rights had been violated. Almost a year later they expanded the suit by claiming the city engaged in unconstitutional bail-setting practices.
While Friend and Barrett argued that he cannot legally be punished for his dissemination of public information on a matter of public concern, Covello found it was of little public concern.
Friend also argued that the police department’s interest was only of generating ticket writing opportunities, but Covello said the officers that day were doing more than just writing tickets. “The police operation sought to stop and cite violators in order to deter not only current behavior, but also future distracted driving and, therefore, save lives,” the judge said in his decision.
The judge also found that the only way the operation could effectively continue was without Friend’s interference.
Covello also found that Gasparino had found probable cause to arrest Friend and therefore could not be found to have maliciously prosecuted him.
“Specifically Friend was preventing the police from conducting effective enforcement of distracted driving violations by warning drivers of the presence of police officers in their vicinity,” Covello wrote.
The judge also found that Friend’s case did not bring with it sufficient evidence to prove any constitutional violations when it came to setting Friend’s bail of $25,000 in the case.
“There is simply insufficient evidence that in setting bail at $25,000 and holding Friend for several hours that the city of Stamford violated Friend’s constitutional rights,” he said in the decision.