ROANOKE TIMES

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: WEDNESDAY, January 19, 1994                   TAG: 9401190052
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: C1   EDITION: STATE 
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium


COURT WON'T REINSTATE LAWSUIT

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a civil rights lawsuit filed against Lexington and its police chief over a policeman's fatal shooting of his wife, but a related state court case still is pending.

Attorneys for the dead woman's brother had said the city and the chief should be forced to pay $10.7 million because police officials had ignored evidence that her husband might be dangerous, but the Supreme Court rejected that argument.

Arguments in a wrongful death lawsuit that seeks $4 million are to be heard Feb. 14 in Rockbridge County Circuit Court.

Lisa Knick of Lexington was shot to death Sept. 29, 1990, during an argument with her husband, Jerry Knick, at their home. He was on duty and wearing his uniform and police revolver at the time.

Jerry Knick was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Lisa Knick's brother, Clinton Edward Vincent Jr., filed a civil rights lawsuit on behalf of his sister's estate and her two children, who are now living with him and his wife in Northern Virginia.

A federal judge in Lynchburg had ruled that the city of Lexington and Police Chief Bruce Beard were not responsible because Jerry Knick was not acting in his official capacity.

"This was a garden-variety domestic dispute which had a tragic ending - the fact that Knick was a police officer was incidental," said Judge Jackson Kiser. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his ruling.

In the appeal acted on Tuesday, Vincent's lawyers said police officials "emboldened and encouraged Knick" by ignoring evidence that he had been violent, threatened suicide and misused his police revolver.

A city can be held liable for an employee's violation of someone's rights if the city did not train the employee properly, the appeal said.

Without comment, the Supreme Court refused to reinstate the case.

The ruling "makes a lot of sense," said Fain Rutherford, a Roanoke attorney representing Beard. "This man went into a jealous rage, and no employer can be expected to prevent that sort of behavior when it erupts."

Frank Slayton of South Boston, one of Vincent's attorneys, said the ruling was disappointing. But he said the state case is stronger because the burden of proof is lower than in the federal court.

"Under state law in Virginia, we have to prove gross negligence; we think that will be easier," Slayton said.


Memo: shorter version ran in the Metro edition.

by CNB