An Illinois appellate court upheld a record $3 million jury award after finding sufficient evidence that two Chicago police officers cared more about going home for the day than protecting a domestic violence victim who was killed by her alleged abuser a short time later.
In a strongly worded opinion released late last week, 1st District appellate justices ruled the CPD officers did not use “all reasonable means to prevent … abuse, neglect or exploitation” when responding to a domestic violence call at Vanessa Taylor’s West Side apartment on June 28, 2015.
Records show that when police arrived at the home, they saw Taylor’s boyfriend, James Thomas, holding a Samurai sword and appearing to make Molotov cocktails. Officers took the man, who had been hearing voices and trying to start grease fires in the apartment, to a hospital, where they strapped him to a bed and then left him there.
Thomas was treated with an antipsychotic drug and released early the next morning, according to court documents. He returned to Taylor’s apartment and on June 30 — about 25 hours after the initial 911 call for help — and allegedly strangled the 49-year-old mother of five with a cable cord.
We “find that the officers’ failure to fulfill their duties under the (state’s Domestic Violence) Act was a substantial factor in bringing about Vanessa’s death,” the opinion states.
A Cook County jury took less than two hours in 2022 to find the city liable for Taylor’s death and awarded her estate $3 million, which is believed to be a record civil judgment under the Illinois Domestic Violence Act. The appellate court upheld their decision, finding the cops who responded to her home showed “utter indifference to or conscious disregard for” her safety.
In a 39-page ruling, Justice Sanjay Tailor listed several steps the officers should have taken under Illinois law to help ensure Taylor’s well-being, including informing her about orders of protection, referring her to a social service agency and taking her to a nearby domestic shelter. He also faulted the officers for not ensuring the medical staff understood the dangerous behavior Thomas exhibited, which could have factored into the doctor’s decision to civilly commit him.
Records indicate Taylor had a black eye, but officers treated the situation as a mental health call and did not arrest Thomas. The court listed several charges Thomas could have faced in connection with the incident, particularly after he allegedly cut the gas line in Taylor’s building and tussled with officers who eventually used a Taser to get him under control.
“(The) officers were not necessarily required to arrest Thomas, nor were they permitted to simply walk away shortly after taking Thomas to the hospital,” Tailor wrote.
In perhaps the most damning passage, the justices found sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude at least two responding officers were more focused on ending their shifts than helping Taylor. One officer testified her shift ended while she was at the hospital, while another said he was at the end of his shift and about to start his weekend.
“The undisputed facts about what actions the officers took and did not take, coupled with the evidence adduced at trial … provided sufficient evidence for the jury to infer that the officers were more interested in going home than in complying with their obligations under the (state’s Domestic Violence) Act to take reasonable measures to protect Vanessa,” the opinion states.
Civil rights attorney Richard Dvorak, who represented Taylor’s family in the lawsuit, told the Tribune that the appellate ruling sends an unequivocal message about police officers’ obligations to domestic violence victims. Whenever a law enforcement has reason to believe that a person has been abused, neglected, or exploited by a family or household member, the law requires them to: make an arrest if appropriate, discuss orders of protection, refer the victim to a social service agency and offer to take the victim to a shelter, among other things.
“I’m really hoping that not only the city of Chicago, but every jurisdiction in Illinois, starts training their officers that these are not mere suggestions in the statute. They’re mandatory and there’s a reason for that,” Dvorak said. “And if you don’t comply, death could very well occur.”
The city of Chicago has not decided whether it will appeal the decision, according to a Law Department spokesperson. She also declined to comment on whether the Police Department would institute any changes in light of the appellate opinion.
“The Department of Law is reviewing the court’s decision and is assessing next steps,” spokesperson Kristen Cabanban said in statement.
Thomas was found mentally fit to stand trial for Taylor’s murder in 2022. He remains in Cook County Jail awaiting trial.
Taylor’s case drew intense interest from domestic violence advocacy groups, more than a dozen of which submitted legal briefs in support of the original Cook County jury verdict. The ruling marked the second time in less than a week that the 1st District Appellate Court outlined police officers’ obligations when responding to domestic violence calls and reiterated the steps that must be taken to safeguard a victim’s well-being.
In an opinion released Dec. 29, justices ruled that a man’s family could sue the village of Maywood after police responded to a 2017 domestic violence call in which Lee Anthony Davis’ son had gone on an “aggressive and violent” rampage. The son, Gale Jackson, was taken to the hospital and discharged later that night.
He returned to his father’s home and tried to strangle his brother, according to court records. When Davis tried to intervene, Jackson allegedly pushed him down the stairs and caused a fatal injury.
Jackson currently is in Cook County Jail, awaiting trial for his father’s murder.
Cook County Circuit Judge Cheryl Ingram had dismissed the Davis family’s lawsuit, saying that officers had taken Jackson to a hospital equipped to handle “someone who may be dangerous” and that showed “the officers acted in good faith in rendering emergency assistance.”
The appellate court disagreed and reinstated the case, stating the law required the officers to explain how to obtain an order of protection, offer to take the family to a safe place and summarize other assistance that was available. The family also was not asked if they wanted to press charges against Jackson, which could have stopped him from returning immediately home after being released from the hospital.
“Arresting Gale, instead of merely leaving him in the hands of hospital personnel without knowing the outcome of his medical evaluation, would have prevented the predictably tragic events that occurred when Gale was able to return to the residence under his own devices, without sufficient time for his anger to have cooled,” the opinion states. “Furthermore, arresting someone and obtaining medical care for them are not mutually exclusive choices.”
Dvorak — who also represented Davis’ family in a successful appeal — says the back-to-back appellate decisions make clear that officers cannot hand off their responsibilities when it comes to domestic violence calls.
“In both cases, they dropped the men off at the hospital so it wasn’t their problem anymore, and they hoped for the best,” Dvorak said. “But in these kind of volatile domestic violence situations, hoping for the best is not acceptable.”
