view
COMPLAINT at COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PHILADELPHIA COUNTY Case ID: 230803256
- Plaintiff, Michael Naessens, is an adult citizen and resident of the State of Nevada, residing as captioned.
- Defendant, Lawrence Richardson, Jr., was at all material times a law enforcement officer for the City of Philadelphia Police Department acting within the course and scope of their employment and pursuant to the policies, practices, and/or customs of the City of Philadelphia Police Department.
- Defendants, John/Jane Doe 1 – 10, are believed to be adult residents of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania whose identities remain unknown to Plaintiff despite the exercise of reasonable diligence.
- Plaintiff formerly owned and operated a bar and restaurant in Philadelphia.
- He employed Jon Batista as a sous chef for three weeks in July of 2015.
- Plaintiff fired Jon Batista for, inter alia, acting in a harassing and threatening manner towards other employees and misrepresenting his professional qualifications.
- After firing Mr. Batista, Plaintiff challenged Mr. Batista’s application for unemployment benefits, which was ultimately denied at least in part due to Plaintiff’s challenge.
- Jon Batista, after Plaintiff fired him, began a campaign of harassment against Plaintiff, sending dozens of threatening, libelous, and harassing emails, text messages, and internet postings.
- On October 20, 2017, Plaintiff testified to these threats and harassment, as well as evidence of dealing illegal drugs, at a probation detainer hearing for Jon Batista, and Mr. Batista’s motion to lift his probation detainer was denied on the basis of Plaintiff’s testimony, causing him to remain incarcerated.
- Then, on or about June 5, 2018, two judges of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas and ten (10) other individuals were sent threatening and/or harassing cards in the mail, purporting to be from Jon Batista.
- The postcards were sent on May 28, 2018, between 6:11 p.m. EDT and 6:31 p.m. EDT, using Postable.com.
- On those dates, Jon Batista was serving sentences imposed by the two judges, and the ten (10) other individuals have been described as “neighbors” of Mr. Batista by the defendant.
- Mr. Batista was arrested for the threatening cards and questioned by Defendant, who evidently took Mr. Batista at his word that he was not involved.
- On or about June 7, 2018, a representative from Postable.com informed Defendant that the requests were made “using Chrome 66 browser on a Windows 10 operating system.”
- On or about June 11, 2018, a representative from Postable.com informed Defendant that the requests came from IP addresses 170.170.57.206 and 170.170.59.138.
- Also on or about June 11, 2018, a representative from Yahoo informed Defendant that the email address jonthebatista@yahoo.com was created in 2015 and was associated with the IP address 170.170.59.139.
- Then, on or about July 13, 2018, a representative of FedEx informed Defendant that IP addresses 170.170.59.138 and 170.170.59.139 are used by FedEx but do not correspond to any specific location or computer.
- This representative also informed Defendant that IP address 170.170.57.206 was not used by FedEx.
- This representative further indicated that, based on the IP addresses, dates, and times, the Postable.com requests were potentially made from the internet connections of two FedEx Office locations, one in Dearborn, Michigan, and one in Riverside, California.
- On or about July 24, 2018, Defendant received documents from FedEx, including but not limited to transaction details and surveillance video from the Dearborn and Riverside locations.
- Defendant then focused his investigation on one individual at the Dearborn FedEx, a white male who used a copier inside the Dearborn FedEx while on the phone on May 28, 2018, approximately between the times of 6:05 p.m. EDT and 6:28 p.m. EDT.
- This man does not look like Plaintiff.
- Defendant presented the surveillance video to Jon Batista, who identified this man that does not resemble Plaintiff as Plaintiff.
- On or about October 30, 2018, Defendant sought and was granted a warrant for Plaintiff’s arrest for criminal charges related to the threatening mail.
- As a result of that warrant, on or about January 21, 2019, law enforcement officers came into Plaintiff’s home and arrested him using unnecessarily aggressive and violent tactics, causing him injury.
- Plaintiff was then held in custody in Las Vegas until, on or about January 31, 2019, the Philadelphia Police Department requested his extradition to Philadelphia.
- During that time, Plaintiff was denied his prescribed medications and CPAP machine, resulting in numerous health issues, including but not limited to Plaintiff’s systolic blood pressure spiking to over 200.
- Also during that time, Plaintiff was mailed various items of homosexual erotica in an apparent effort to make him a target for violence at the hands of other inmates.
- When Plaintiff finally had his preliminary arraignment in Philadelphia on February 21, 2019, his bail was set at $350,000.00 with a 10% non-refundable deposit required for release, which Plaintiff posted on or about February 23, 2019.
- When released on bail, Plaintiff was released at night after the prison’s property room was closed. As such, Plaintiff was forced to find his way to a friend in Center City Philadelphia without his identification, money, cell phone, or other property (a practice no longer followed by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons) in order to finally call his sister for assistance.
- The prosecution of Plaintiff ended in his favor in September of 2021.
- As a direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiff was obliged to pay various litigation costs, including but not limited to approximately $25,000.00 in attorney’s fees and approximately $10,000.00 retaining expert witnesses.
- As a further direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiff suffered serious personal injuries and/or aggravations thereto, including but not limited to post- traumatic stress disorder.
- As a further direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiff has suffered agonizing aches and severe physical pains, disability, anguish and humiliation, and will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time into the future, to his great detriment and loss.
- As a further direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiff has been obliged to incur various expenses for medical treatment and may be obliged to continue to incur additional such expenses for an indefinite time into the future, to his great detriment and loss.
- As a further direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiff has suffered or may suffer a loss of earnings and earnings capacity past, present, and/or future.
COUNT I MALICIOUS PROSECUTION MICHAEL NAESSENS v. ALL DEFENDANTS
- All preceding paragraphs of this Complaint are fully incorporated herein by reference.
- Defendants initiated criminal proceedings against Plaintiff without probable cause by fabricating police reports; misstating, misrepresenting, and omitting material facts in Defendant Richardson Jr.’s affidavit of probable cause; and/or otherwise making false statements.
- Such false/misrepresented statements include, but are not limited to: a. Stating in his affidavit of probable cause that, “A Federal Express security manager was able to trace the former IP address of 170.170.57.206. The search revealed that IP address belongs to Federal Express,” when he was actually told, “Please note, IP address 170.170.57.206 is not registered to FedEx Office” (emphasis added). b. Stating in his affidavit of probable cause that, “The male could easily use that cellular phone to transmit the threat while employing the Federal Express Wi-Fi signal connected to the target IP address,” when he was told by Postable.com that the request was made from a device running Windows 10. c. Describing the male in the Dearborn FedEx location as “closely resembl[ing]” Plaintiff’s Pennsylvania driver’s license photograph when he did not.
- Defendants initiated criminal proceedings against Plaintiff for a purpose other than to bring an accused person to justice.
- The above-described actions were so malicious and intentional and displayed such a reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s rights and well-being that the imposition of punitive damages is warranted. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Michael Naessens, demands compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant, Detective Lawrence Richardson, Jr., and John/Jane Doe 1 – 10 in an amount in excess of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), to fairly and adequately compensate Plaintiff and punish and deter such conduct on the part of Defendants and others similarly situated, in addition to interest, costs, attorney’s fees, delay damages, and all other appropriate relief.
COUNT II INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS MICHAEL NAESSENS v. ALL DEFENDANTS
- All preceding paragraphs of this Complaint are fully incorporated herein by reference.
- The above-described malicious, intentional, and reckless acts of Defendants were outrageous, atrocious, completely intolerable in a civilized society, shock the conscience, and went beyond all possible bounds of decency.
- The above-described malicious, intentional, and reckless acts of Defendants caused and continue to cause Plaintiff severe emotional distress, anxiety, and fear.
- The above-described actions were so malicious and intentional and displayed such a reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s rights and well-being that the imposition of punitive damages is warranted. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Michael Naessens demands compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant Lawrence Richardson, Jr., and John/Jane Doe 1 – 10 in an amount in excess of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), to fairly and adequately compensate Plaintiff and punish and deter such conduct on the part of Defendant and others similarly situated, in addition to interest, costs, attorney’s fees, delay damages, and all other appropriate relief.