Marc Stephens submits Amended Reply Brief in $76M lawsuit against City of Englewood and Englewood Police Department

Marc Stephens submits Amended Reply Brief in $76M lawsuit against City of Englewood and Englewood Police Department

On Friday, January 20, 2017, in the case titled Marc Stephens vs City of Englewood, et al, Appellant Marc Stephens submited his Amended Reply Brief in the $76M lawsuit against City of Englewood, Englewood Police Department, Detectives Marc McDonald, Desmond Singh, Claudia Cubillos, Santiago Incle, Jr., Nathaniel Kinlaw, Deputy Chief Thomas Loschiavo, Chief Lawrence Suffern, Nina C. Remson Attorney At Law, LLC, and Comet Law Offices, LLC.

On November 4, 2016, Marc Stephens submitted a consolidated reply brief for the City of Englewood and all officers, which totaled 26 pages, and a second brief for Nina C. Remson Attorney At Law, LLC, which was 12 pages. Comet Law Offices, LLC never responded to the complaint.

On December 28, 2016, Circuit Judges Chagares, Vanaskie And Krause from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied Marc Stephens’ Motion to exceed the page and word limits, and requesting the court to relax the laws regarding the filing of his briefs.

On January 5, 2017, Marc Stephens wasted no time, and submitted a motion for reconsideration en banc, motion for stay, and a motion to expedite the decision. Marc submitted the motion to protect his legal argument just in case the 3rd circuit erroneously awarded the case to the defendants.

On January 13, 2017, as Marc anticipated, the 3rd Circuit denied his motion for reconsideration en banc. The panel ordered Stephens to submit a 'consolidated' 15 page reply brief, within 14 days, for all defendants, and the brief could not exceed 7,000 words.

A week later, Marc submitted his amended reply brief which ‘completely destroyed’ the defense of all defendants.

The City of Englewood and Officers raised Four main defenses, which included:

City of Englewood defense #1: “Reported time of the 7 Eleven incident, i.e. 10:00 pm versus 10:12 pm. Even assuming arguendo, the defendant, Kinlaw, did see Tyrone Stephens in front of the McDonalds at approximately 10:00 pm, the victims indicated that the assault took place at approximately 10:12 pm”.

Marc replies, “McDonald testified the victims stated they were attacked on October 31, 2012 in the parking lot of 7 eleven at 10pm, and that Tyrone stated he was at McDonlads, ECF Doc. 72-3, page 25-26, 28.

Prosecutor: First of all what was the time that the victims said the attack occurred?

McDonald: On or about 10pm.

Prosecutor: And what day did they say the attack occurred?

McDonald: October 31, Halloween.

Prosecutor: Where did Tyrone say that he was at that time?

McDonald: He stated he was initially at McDonald’s.

Marc then put forth evidence proving 'before' the criminal investigation started, all Englewood investigating officers knew Tyrone was at McDonald’s at 10pm.

Marc replies, “Defendants Marc McDonald and Desmond Singh confirmed that Tyrone was in front of McDonald’s at 10pm and defendant Nathaniel Kinlaw confirmed that he saw Tyrone in front of McDonalds at 10pm, ECF Doc. 72-2, page 91. ECF Doc. 77-6 page 55-56.

McDonald: “Kinlaw said that he saw you…that was at 10 oclock he said that”.

At this point, the City of Englewood already lost the case. If the victims stated they were attacked at “7-eleven at 10pm”, and officers stated that they saw Tyrone in front of “McDonald’s at 10pm”, which is almost a mile away, it is impossible for Tyrone to be at both places at the same time.

City of Englewood defense #2: “Accordingly, there is no way to prove that the time of both the sighting of the Appellant at McDonald’s, and the occurrence of the 7 Eleven incident, were at the same, exact time”.

Marc replies, “FALSE. Naiquan Thomas stated at 10:00pm he was present at 7-eleven during the incident, ECF Doc. 72-3, page 8, #5-10. Naiquan Thomas stated to defendant Cubillos, after he walked out of 7-eleven the fight was already started, and he walked up to Derrick Gatti and after about “2 minutes” they both left, ECF Doc. 72-3, page 12, #1-4. Naiquan stated to Defendant Singh, Incle Jr, and Cubillos the names of the individuals who were fighting, and stated that Tyrone was not at 7-eleven, ECF Doc. 72-3, page 11.

“Victim Jeisson Duque stated after the attack an old lady said she called the cops, and the victims waited 10 minutes for the police, but police never arrived so they left, ECF Doc. 72-2, page 11, #12-21. 10:00pm (time of attack) + 2 mins (Thomas &Gatti left) + 10 minutes (Duque waited for police) = 10:12pm. This confirms the time of 10:12pm of the third 911 phone call in which officer W. Regitz arrived at 7 eleven at 10:15pm, ECF Doc. 72-2, page 2”.

City of Englewood defense #3: “During the initial interviews, witness, Cortes, confirmed that she identified attackers from the photo book, which per the Investigation Report, were Justin Evans, Tyrone Stephens and Derrick Gaddy”.

Marc replies, “This statement is false. McDonald testified after speaking with the victims and witness Natalia Cortes on November 2, 2012, the Englewood Investigators “All we really knew was at that particular point was—was Derric Gatti”, and they received a tip the following week on Monday, November 7, regarding Kirk and Justin, ECF Document 72-3, page 19, paragraph #2, and ECF Document 72-3, page 113, paragraph 14-25”.

City of Englewood defense #4: “During this hearing, and while under oath, Evans did not state that he identified Tyrone because the police coerced him or pressured him to do so”.

Marc replies, “McDonald testified that Justin Evans was coerced to implicate himself and Tyrone, ECF Doc. 72-3, page 32-36, #24-32”.

Comet: Did he say, “it’s me because the officers are pushing me…”

McDonald: correct.

The City of Englewood simply has no defense. Marc also put forth evidence that Detective McDonald testified that witness Natalia Cortes ‘did not identify anyone’, and the suspects in the photo ID book were ‘all adults’. At the time of the incident, Tyrone Stephens was a ‘minor’. All of the police reports, and testimony, states Natalia identified Tyrone as the suspect.

Marc Stephens was very thorough with obtaining audio, transcripts, and victims and witnesses sworn statements. Marc was able to obtain a copy of the video surveillance from 7-eleven. The Englewood Police Department deleted the incident. As soon as the video hits 9:59pm, it cuts off.

The Englewood Police Department knew Tyrone was not in the video.  In addition, Marc Stephens has detective McDonald's 'testimony' stating that he received a copy of the 7-eleven video, and the incident at 10pm is captured.

It is impossible for Marc Stephens to lose the case on the merits. Only corruption can beat this case.

Marc submitted a motion to expedite the court’s decision. Marc is also waiting on the 3rd circuit to decide on his Motion to remove Judge William J. Martini from the case for intentionally overlooking the evidence on file in District Court.

Marc and Tyrone Stephens are seeking $76 million in damages.

Marc Stephens Amended Brief - A Must Read!

Click on Marc Stephens' Video Evidence Below.

Video of the Day


Wayne's Interior Design