The 75-year-old protester who Buffalo police knocked down to the ground is filing a major lawsuit against the city, officers, and mayor.
Martin Gugino was brutally shoved to the floor during a protest that took place in Buffalo, New York late last year. The elderly citizen suffered a fracture to his skull and was unable to walk after the incident too. Now, he is fighting for his rights by filing a lawsuit against the city, the major, and also the officers involved in the incident.
Gugino believes Buffalo’s Mayor Byron Brown is equally responsible for the act as are the officers Aaron Torgalski, John Losi, and Robert McCabe.point 243 |
Other than that, he has named Joseph Gramaglia who is the Deputy Police Commissioner, and Byron Lockwood who is another police commissioner of the area.point 128 | All of these names were present in the court documents that were filed on Monday.point 195 | 1
The incident took place on June 4th at a protest that was held against the subject of racism as well as police brutality. News outlets mentioned how Gugino’s lawyers claimed that the victim’s counts include the unlawful use of force as well as the violation of his rights towards freedom of movement.
The news comes as a grand jury collectively decided earlier this month to dismiss the charges on officers Torgalski as well as McCabe for pushing down the 75-year-old protester. With that said, both officers are currently under suspension as the results of an internal investigation are still pending.
Right after the grand jury’s decision was unveiled, Gugino mentioned to CNN how he was definitely taken aback and a little surprised. He didn’t expect the jurors to give the officers a free hand by refusing to indict them for any charges after the jaw-dropping incident.
The 75-year-old referred to the act with the following bold terms, “There’s no reason for officers to break that up, short of them thinking that there is some kind of lawless action about to occur, clear and present danger to somebody over something.point 330 |
” He also mentioned how it wasn’t a curfew but an actual intent towards suppressing dissent.point 89 | 1