Gray was in jail awaiting trial for robbery. The defendants allegedly interrogated Gray about the robbery and in addition, unexpectedly questioned Gray about an unrelated murder. Gray alleges that the cops became violent with him after he refused to implicate himself in the murder investigation. Gray claims the cops slapped him across the face, verbally abused and threatened him, kneed him in the back, and stomped on his foot.

Gray testified to these events at trial in district court but he contradicted himself during cross examination on several points. Furthermore, none of his witnesses were able to verify that Gray had any physical signs of abuse after the interrogation.

The detectives did not put on any evidence before moving for a directed verdict under Rule 50a of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A court may grant a directed verdict during a jury trial where a party has put on evidence but demonstrated no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find in his favor. A district court shall withdraw the case from the jury when any verdict in favor of the nonmoving party necessarily will be premised upon speculation and conjecture.

Thus, the issue on appeal is whether the district court properly awarded the defendants a directed verdict.

Questions:

If you were sitting on the appellate court and were faced with these facts, would you rule that the directed verdict was improper in light of the fact that the issue before he court is one of utmost importance, involving the alleged violation of a citizen's constitutional rights by an officer of the state?

Would you feel that an issue of this nature must be allowed to go to the jury regardless of whether the plaintiff's testimony is self-serving and uncorroborated by other testimony but where it is not undermined by other credible evidence that the plaintiff committed perjury?

OR . . .

Do you think Gray presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case?

Answer

See Gray v. Spillman and Cartner, 993 F.2d 1537, 1993 WL 165039 (4th Cir. (N.C.)) to see how the Appellate court ruled.

Even if a jury were to disbelieve all contradictory elements of Gray's testimony, it still would be left with the testimony that Spillman slapped Gray with either his right or left hand and slammed him against a wall, that Bishop stomped on his foot, and that Riggs kneed Gray in the back, all in an attempt to procure a confession. Should a jury believe these allegations, then the jury must believe that Gray “was beaten for an absolutely impermissible reason: to coerce an incriminating statement.” Gray I, 925 F.2d at 93. A showing of the conduct alleged by Gray is sufficient to establish “the unjustified striking, beating, or infliction of bodily harm,” thereby creating a triable jury issue. King, 636 F.2d at 72.  Lack of injury does not disqualify the claim under the statute.

Trial Court grant of Directed Verdict under Rule 50(a) is reversed.  Case remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Marcus Reynolds
Wake Forest Univ. School of Law