former hpu professor files lawsuit

7/26/2019 Former HPU professor files lawsuit

1/17

MYLES .BREWER

4364

E

- m a i l : mules e

, b r e i n e r l a w . n e t

D

a v i e s P a c i f i c

C e n t e r

8

41 Bishop

S t r e e t , S u i t e 2115

n o l u l u ,

Hawaii

96813

T

e l e p h o n e : 808)

26-3426

F

a c s i m i l e : 808)

521-7680

A t

orney o r P l a i n t i f f

G

ORDON

.

KNOWLES

vTTE

r

N , , W i t

~

ILEU

2

1 6

J ~ , ~

-

~

3 :

~

3

I

N IC

IlZCUIT

COURT

OF

THE IlZST C I R C U I T

GORDON . KNOWLES

~ ~ ~ ,

CIV IL

NO.

Pl a i n t i f f ,

~ ~

HERYL

SUNIA,

individually and as

an

agent

o

f

he

Honolulu

Police

Department;

DIANA

N

II. ES-HANSEN individually; CITY AND

COUNTY

OF

HONOLULU,

a

municipal

c

orporation;

the

HONOLULUPOLICE

D

EPARTMENT,

a department

within

he

City

& County

of

Honolulu;

a

ndDOES 1-20.

COMPLAINTFOR

DAMAGES;

DEMANDFOR

JURY

TRIAL;

SUNIMONS IN

A CIVII,

ACTION

Defendants .

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

P

laintiff,

GORDON

J.

KNOWLES,

( Plaintiff')

by

and

through

his

attorney

hereby

a

l leges

an

d

avers as follows:

o

hereby

certi fy

that

this

is

full

true,

and

c

orrect

copy

o f

th

I

o

le

in

this

off ice.

C

lerk,

Circuit

Cour t

First

Circuit


2/17

PARTIES

Pl a i n t i f f ,

GORDON

. KNOWLES, s

and

was t a l l

times

e l e v a n t h e r e i n a

r

e s i d e n t of

he

S t a t e

of

awaii and

a

i t i z e n

of

h e

United

S t a t e s

of

America

United S t a t e s ) .

2. DefendantSHERYL iJNIA Defendant

Sunia )

s

and

was

t

a l l times e l e v a n t

h

e r e i n a

e s i d e n t

of

h e S t a t e

of

awaii

and

a

i t i z e n of h e

United

S t a t e s .

Defendant

Sunia s

b

eing sued

n d i v i d u a l l y , an

d

as

an agent of h e Honolulu

P o l i c e

Department.

3

. Defendant

DIANA

II~ES-HANSEN

Defendant i l e s

-Hansen )

s and

was

t

a

times

e l e v a n t h e r e i n a e s i d e n t of

h e S t a t e

of awaii an

d

a

i t i z e n

of

h e

United

S t a t e s .

D

efendant i l e s

-Hansen s

being sued

n d i v i d u a l l y .

4. Defendant CITY COUNTY

OF

HONOLULU

Defendant C i t y )

s

a

m

u n i c i p a l

c o r p o r a t i o n o p e r a t i n g

w i t h i n

t h e S t a t e of awaii.

5. Defendant HONOLULU OLICE

DEPARTMENT Defendant

HPD )

s a

d

epartment w i t h i n

t h e C i t y &County f

onolulu,

u r r e n t c o r p o r a t e

s t a t u s

unknown.

6.

Defendants John or

Jane

Doe

- 2 5 ,

a r e DOE NTITIES

1-25

D oe

De f e n d a n t s )

a r e

f i c t i t i o u s

na mes

e p r e s e n t i n g

Defendants whose r u e names, d e n t i t i e s , a n d / o r

c

a p a c i t i e s

a r e

a s

y e t

unknown

o

P l a i n t i f f

and

h i s

Counsel,

e s p i t e

t h e i r

i n q u i r y and du e

d

i l i g e n c e ,

who

r e

o r

were

in som e manner

e s p o n s i b l e

f o r

or engaged n

the

c t i v i t i e s

a l l e g e d

h

e r e i n

so

as

o be

i a b l e

f o r

i n j u r i e s

s u f f e r e d by

l a i n t i f f .

7.

P l a i n t i f f s

w i l l seek e a v e t o amend

h i s

Complaint, f t e r d i s c o v e r y has

co m m enced, nd

more p e c i f i c a l l y i d e n t i f y

an

y Doe efendants whose

r u e

i d e n t i t i e s , c a p a c i t i e s

and c t i o n s

b eco me known

o

P l a i n t i f f through

d i s c o v e r y .

C

OMPLAINT

ORDAMAGES

- 2 , -

Knowles

.

Sunia


3/17

SUBJECT

M TTER

URISDICTION

8.

P l a i n t i f f

hereby

r e

- a l l e g e s

and i n c o r p o r a t e s b y

e f e r e n c e

a s

i f u l l y s e t

f o r t h

h e r e i n a l l of

h e

a l l e g a t i o n s

c o n t a i n e d

i n

paragraphs 1-7 above.

9.

Upon

n f o r m a t i o n and

b e l i e f

Defendants'

c t s

a n d / o r o m i s s i o n s

which

a r e

more

f

l l y

a l l e g e d h e r e i n

were performed

and / o r

o m i t t e d

under

h e c o l o r

of t a t u t e s

o r d i n a n c e s

c

ustoms,

e g u l a t i o n s

procedures

o r

usages

of

h e S t a t e of awaii.

1 0.

Defendants'

c t s

a n d / o r

omissions

s u b j e c t e d P l a i n t i f f o r caused

P l a i n t i f f

o b e

s

u b j e c t e d

t o

t h e

d e p r i v a t i o n

of

i g h t s

p r i v i l e g e s

a n d / o r

immunities

s e c u r e d b y

h e

C o n s t i t u t i o n

of h e S t a t e of Hawaii,

h e Hawaii Revised S t a t u t e s

and

C i t y County

epartmental

Procedures

a

nd

P r a c t i c e s .

PERSONAL

JURISDICTION

1 1 . P l a i n t i f f hereby

r e - a l l e g e s an

d

n c o r p o r a t e s

b y

e f e r e n c e

as f u l l y

s e t

f o r t h

h

e r e i n a l l

of

h e


c o n t a i n e d i n

paragraphs 1 - 1 0

above.

1 2.

As

l l e g e d

more

u l l y bel ow, Defendant S u n i a

Defendant N i l e s -Hansen,

D

e f e n d a n t HPD, e r t a i n Doe efendants

employed b y Defendant HPD,

nd

Defendant

CITY

o l l e c t i v e l y

Defendants )

c t s

o r omissions

o c c u r r e d

w i t h i n

t h e

C i t y

County

f

Honolulu,

St a t e of

Hawaii.

1

3 . Upon

n f o r m a t i o n

and

b e l i e f Defendants

Sunia and N i l e s

-Hansen

and c e r t a i n

Doe

D

e f e n d a n t s

a c t e d as a g e n t s of

efendant HPD, y s p e c i f i c a l l y

using

p o l i c e powers and

a c c e s s i n g

c

o n f i d e n t i a l

p o l i c e

d a t a

bases

o r

t h e

purpose

of n j u r i n g

h a r a s s i n g i n v e s t i g a t i n g

o r g a t h e r i n g

nformation on l a i n t i f f .

CONIPLAiNTFORDt1MAGES

-3-

Knowles

v .

Sunia


4/17

1 4 .

Defendant

HPD s

r e s p o n s i b l e f or

the a c t s

and/or

omissions

o f t s

employees

an

d

a

g e n t s

e n t r u s t e d

with

p o l i c e

powers,

p e c i f i c a l l y i n c l u d i n g but not

i m i t e d t o a l l

a c t i v e

employees

and

any

persons a c c e s s i n g HPD

ecords

and f i l e s through

HPD r o t o c o l s

an

d

otherwise

not

a

v a i l a b l e t o the

p u b l i c .

1

5. Defendant City

s

r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e a c t s

and

omissions o f t s employees

an

d

d

epartments,

p e c i f i c a l l y i n c l u d i n g the

Honolulu

P o l i c e Department.

1 6. Defendant

City

an

d DefendantHPD r e

r e s p o n s i b l e and/or l i a b l e

f o r

the

a c t s

an d / o r omissions

o f t s

i n d i v i d u a l p o l i c e

o f f i c e r s

who

v e r r e a c t e d

based o n

th e

m

s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s

o f

efendants

Sunia

and

N i l e s

-Hansen.

Doe

efendant

o l i c e

o f f i c e r s

who

ac t e d u p o n the

f a l s e

and

l l e g a l claims o f

Defendants

Sonia and Niles

-Hansen

b y

n i t i a t i n g the

ar r e s t imprisonment and

subsequent

search seizure

a g a i n s t P l a i n t i f f a r e l i a b l e as

agents

o f

efendant

HPD.

1 7 . Upon

nformation

and b e l i e f

Defendant

Sonia w a s an

agent

o f

efendantHPD t

a

l l

times r e l e v a n t t o t h i s

Complaint,

and t h a t

she a c t e d

with a c t u a l p o l i c e powers

a c c e s s i n g

HPD

d a t a

bases

not v a i l a b l e t o the

p u b l i c .

1

8.

A l t e r n a t i v e l y

Defendant Sonia

w a s

an agent

o f

efendantHPD t a l l times

re l e v a n t t o t h i s

Complaint,

and t h a t

she a c t e d with

d e f a c t o

p o l i c e powers,

ausing

t h e

a r r e s t and

f

a l s e

imprisonment o f

l a i n t i f f

and

the

s e i z u r e o f i s p r o p e r t y .

FNTTF

1

9.

P l a i n t i f f

hereby

r e - a l l e g e s and i n c o r p o r a t e s

By

e f e r e n c e as f u l l y s e t

f o r t h

h

e r e i n

a l l o f

he

a l l e g a t i o n s contained

i n

paragraphs 1-18 above.

20. All a c t i o n s

complained

o f ook

p l a c e i n the City County

f Honolulu, and

a l l

C

OMPLAINT

OR

DAMAGES

-4-

Knowles

.

Sonia


5/17

Defendants

e s i d e

i n t h e

C i t y

&County

f

onolulu. All p o t e n t i a l

w i t n e s s e s

a r e

s i m i l a r l y

l o c a t e d

i

n

h e

C i t y &County

f

onolulu.

F

ACTUAL

ALLEGATIONS

21 . P l a i n t i f f

hereby e

- a l l e g e s

and

i n c o r p o r a t e s b y e f e r e n c e ,

as

i f

u l l y

s e t

f o r t h

h

e r e i n ,

a l l

of h e a l l e g a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d in paragraphs 1-20

above.

22.

P l a i n t i f f

s

a

Member

f

h e United S t a t e s

Army

eserves,

and holds t h e

rank

of

L e u t e n a n t

C o l o n e l .

Throughout

i s m i l i t a r y c a r e e r , L i e u t e n a n t

Colonel Knowles

has worked as

a

n n t i

- t e r r o r i s m

o f f i c e r with t h e 322d

C i v i l

A f f a i r s Brigade a t Fort

S h a f t e r ,

a

i l i t a r y

p o l i c e

o

f f i c e r ,

wa s

deployed

t o

I r a q ,

and

p a r t i c i p a t e d

i n

numerous

peacekeeping

missions

n

Korea,

Japan, h a i l a n d , Thailand a n

d

Indonesia with

d i s t i n c t i o n

an

d

honor.

2

.

In

October of 998, l a i n t i f f wa s

i r e d

as an

A s s i s t a n t P r o f e s s o r

a t Hawaii

a c i f i c

n i v e r s i t y( HPU )

nd

has

been on

s t a f f

h e r e as a o c i o l o g y p r o f e s s o r f o r

f i

f teen 15) e a r s .

2

4.

P l a i n t i f f

s

a

u b l i s h e d a u t h o r

in h i s f ie l d of o c i o l o g y a n

d

c r i m i n a l u s t i c e in

both

c

i v i l i a n and

m i l i t a r y

p u b l i c a t i o n s .

2 .

Upon

n f o r m a t i o n and b e l i e f ,

Defendant

h e r y l

Sonia

Defendant Sonia ) wa s

a lso

a r o f e s s o r of

riminal J u s t i c e a t the Hawaii

a c i f i c

U n i v e r s i t y( HPU) uring

t h e r e l e v a n t

t

im e s

l l e g e d i n t h i s

Complaint.

2

6.

Upon n f o r m a t i o n

and b e l i e f ,

Defendant

Sonia wa s a Honolulu

o l i c e

O f f i c e r

e t e c t i v e o r

s o m e

y e a r s

p r i o r

t o b e comin g a r o f e s s o r .

2

7.

Upon

n f o r m a t i o n and b e l i e f ,

Defendant

Sonia wa s

i t h e r

t e r m i n a t e d , e l i e v e d

of

he r

d u t i e s , or

e s i g n e d

f r

om h e

Honolulu

o l i c e Department o r reasons

stemming

rom

charges

of a b r i c a t i n g evidence a n

d

misconduct

e l a t i n g

t o

a

2 0 0 3 homicide

i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

C

OMPLAINTFOR

DAMAGES

-5-

Knowles v .

Sonia


6/17

28.

P r i o r

t o

t h e

e v e n t s

t h a t l e a d

up

t o

P l a i n t i f f ' s

a r r e s t , i n c a r c e r a t i o n ,

an

d

t h e e v e n t s

t

h a t g i v e r i

s e

t o

t h i s Complaint,

Defendant

Sunia an

d

l a i n t i f f worked i n t h e same

departments

a t

w a i i

P a c i f i c U n i v e r s i t y .

2

9.

P r i o r

t o

2015,

efendant

Sunia was a

r o f e s s o r a t

t h e

Hawaii

a c i f i c U n i v e r s i t y

a

nd

a o l l e a g u e

o f

l a i n t i f f ' s

who

was

n

l i n e

f o r t h e

sam e ob advancements

a s

P l a i n t i f f .

30 . At

s o m e time i n t h e

l a t e p a r t

o f

014,

efendant Sonia

e x p r e s s e d

i n a

co n v e r s a t i o n w i t h P l a i n t i f F t h a t

she thought

h e

a d m i n i s t r a t i o n

a t HPU as

c o n s i d e r i n g l e t t i n g

he r g o

because

she d i d

not have a

PhD

e g r e e ( D o c t o r a t e

o f

h i l o s o p h y ) .

3

1 . I n o r about October

2014,

a r l o s

J u a r e z ,

a n o t h e r

employee

o f

awaii

a c i f i c

U

n i v e r s i t y

( HPU ),

o n f r o n t e d

P l a i n t i f f s t a t i n g

t h a t he

had i n f o r m a t i o n

t h a t

P l a i n t i f f

was l s o

w

o r k i n g

a t

t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f

awaii,

Manoa.

32.

P l a i n t i f f

b e l i e v e d

t h a t

such o u t s i d e work

might e o p a r d i z e h i s

employment

t a t u s

w

i t h HPU.

33.

P l a i n t i f f became

concerned t h a t he

was

under s u r v e i l l a n c e b y

HPU

d m i n i s t r a t i o n

o

f f i c i a l s ,

and

mad e

a

o l i c e r e p o r t a l l e g i n g s t a l k i n g ' /

b y

a i d

o f f i c i a l s .

34.

I n

o r about

October 2014, l a i n t i f f had

a

o n v e r s a t i o n

w i t h

David

Lanoue, D e a n

o

f PU

Lanoue ). At h a t t i m e ,

D e a n

Lanoue informed P l a i n t i f f

t h a t he

i n

f a c t

d i d

have

s

o m e o n e o o k i n g i n t o

P l a i n t i f f ' s

o u t s i d e

e mpl oy ment

c t i v i t i e s .

3

5. In o r

about

D e c e m b e r 2014,

HPU

rovost Matthew Liao

- T r o t h ( Liao

-Troth )

an

d

Vice r e s i d e n t

Diana

N i l e s

-Hansen

N i l e s-Hansen )

m e t

with

P l a i n t i f f an

d

c o n f r o n t e d

hi m

/

l a i n t i f f u s e s

a

e d e r a l

Department

o f

u s t i c e

d e f i n i t i o n

o f

t a l l c i n g ,

which

i n c l u d e s

o b t a i n i n g

pe r s o n a l

i n f o r m a t i o n

about

h e v i c t i m b y

c c e s s i n g

p u b l i c

r e c o r d s ,

u s i n g

intemet

e a r c h e s ,

e t c .

This d e f u u t i o n

was

not

p p l i e d by

t h e

Ha w a u

i s t r i c t Court

under

s t a t e law

o r a

TRO.

see

4

n f r a ) .

OMPLAINT

FORDAMAGES

6

Knowles

.

Sonia


7/17

about

i s

o u t s i d e

employment

c t i v i t i e s .

At h a t

m e e t i n g ,

l a i n t i f f o b j e c t e d t o

t h e s t a l k i n g

i n t o

d

e t a i l s of

i s

p e r s o n a l l i f e

and

e r m i n a t e d t h e m e e t i n g .

3

6 .

Upon

n f o r m a t i o n

and

b e l i e f , t was

around

t h i s

time

Defendant Sunia

o f f e r e d

t o

i

n v e s t i g a t e ,

s u r v e i l , and o l l e c t i n f o r m a t i o n o n l a i n t i f f

soft-campus

c t i v i t y b y

c c e s s i n g

c

o n f i d e n t i a l p o l i c e

d a t a b a s e s .

3

7.

Some ime a t t h e end o f

2014

o

J a n u a r y o f

015, efendant

Sunia

began t o

r

e p r e s e n t h e r s e l f s

P l a i n t i f f s

u p e r v i s o r .

3

8 .

Upon

n f o r m a t i o n

and

b e l i e f ,

Defendants

Sunia

and

N i l e s

-Hansen g r e e d

t o

o b t a i n

P l a i n t i f f

s

p r i v a t e i n f o r m a t i o n

i n

o r d e r

t o

manufacture and a r r e s t of l a i n t i f f an

d

s e a r c h o f

h

i s home.

3

9. I n

o r

about

F e b r u a r y

o f 015,

l a i n t i f f e c e i v e d w r i t t e n n o t i f i c a t i o n

f r

om

HPU

ad m i n i s t r a t i o n

t h a t

he wou ld

be p l a c e d

o n unpaid

a d m i n i s t r a t i v e

l e a v e ,

pending

t h e i r

in v e s t i g a t i o n .

4

0.

I n

F e b r u a r y ,

2015

l a i n t i f f

i l e d and

Equal

Employment

O p p o r t u n i t y Commission

EEOC )

omplaint ll e g i n g r e t a l i a t i o n .

P l a i n t i f f s

s e p a r a t e l y

p u r s u i n g l l Hawaii

a c i f i c

n i v e r s i t y employment s s u e s

s e p a r a t e l y ,

and

t h o s e

j o b / r e t a l i a t i o n

i s s u e s

a r e

not

complained

of

in

h i s

a c t i o n .

4

1 . On

arch

23,

2015, l a i n t i f f

i

l e d

i n d i v i d u a l l y

f o r

a Temporary R e s t r a i n i n g

Order

a

g a i n s t

HPU rovost Matthew

Liao

- T r o t h and Vice

r e s i d e n t

Dian a

N i l e s

-Hansen

and

D a v id

Lan

oue,

( HPU

d m i n i s t r a t o r s )

o

s t o p t h e

p e r c e i v e d

i n v a s i o n

i n t o

h i s

p r i v a c y .

That e t i t i o n

wa s e v e n t u a l l y d i s m i s s e d f o r

i n s u f f i c i e n t p l e a d i n g .

(See o o t n o t e

1 , supra)

4

2.

On

arch

27,

2015

l a i n t i f f

i l e d

f o r

Workers Compensation

b e n e f i t s

based

C

OMPLAINT

FORDAMAGES

-7- Knowles

.

Sunia


8/17

upon h o s t i l e work

environment

r e a t e d by

HPU d m i n i s t r a t o r s .

P l a i n t i f f s

s e p a r a t e l y

r

e p r e s e n t e d

i n

t h a t m a t t e r , and those i s s u e s a r e not

complained of n

t h i s

a c t i o n .

43. In or about June of 015,

l a i n t i f f

r e c e i v e s w r i t t e n

n o t i c e t h a t h e has

been

t

erminated romHPU.

FIRST

CAUSE

OFACTION:

v i l

Conspiracy

44. P l a i n t i f f hereby

e

- a l l e g e s

and n c o r p o r a t e

by

e f e r e n c e , as

f

u l l y s e t

f o r t h

h e r e i n ,

a ll

of

h e


contained

i n

paragraphs

1-45

above.

45 .

At

s o m e time

between

January

and September

of

015,

efendant Sunia h ad

accessed

Honolulu

o l i c e

Department

records

o determine

h a t

P l a i n t i f f owned

a

lawful

i r e a r m .

4

6.

Defendant Sonia Defendant

iles

-Hansen conspired

t o

have l a i n t i f f a r r e s t e d

based

s o l e l y on the information d i s c l o s e d by Defendant HPD.

47. On

eptember

1 ,

2015, efendants Sonia

an

d Niles

-Hansen and

h e i r

agents

or

c

o - c o n s p i r a t o r s

c o n t a c t e d t h e

Honolulu

o l i c e

Department,and r e p o r t e d

t h a t PlaintifFwas

in

h e

Fo r t

S t r e e t Mall r e a , had

a

gun, and wa s planning an a c t i v e

shooter 2

/

event t the

HPU

c

ampus.

48 .

On

eptember

1 ,

2015, efendant Honolulu

Police Department

Defendant

PD )

c t e d on Defendant's Sunia's a l l e g a t i o n s of n a c t i v e shooter

event

t

the

HPU

ampus.

4

9.

Upon

nformation and

b e l i e f ,

P l a i n t i f f a l l e g e s

t h a t

DefendantHPD

esponded

with

s

uch

o r c e

and

p r e j u d i c e

because

Defendant

Sonia

had

c a l l e d

i n

an

a c t i v e

shooter

i t u a t i o n

wi t h i n t h e p r o t o c o l s

of

HPD.

z

/

Active

h o o t e r i s

a term

of

r t

i n p o l i c e v e r n a c u l ar ,

which

c a u s e s w e l l

- t r a i n e d

p o l i c e

o f f i c e r s

t o

respond

w

i t h a

i g h e r

d e g r e e

of

w a r e n e s s , a n t i c i p a t i o n and

e x p e c t a t i o n t o u t i l i z e

deadly

o r c e .

C

OMPLAINTFORDAMAGES -g- Knowles

.

Sonia


9/17

50.

At h a t

t i m e , l a i n t i f f was

a l s e l y a r r e s t e d

and

i n c a r c e r a t e d

based

s o l e l y

on

the

a

l l e g a t i o n s

of

efendant

Sonia

and Defen dant

i l e s

-Hansen.

5

1 . Th e

r i m in a l m a t t e r t h a t

followed h a t

a r r e s t was

S t a t e

v s .

Knowles,

1DCW-15-

0004531.

That

a s e

was

i s m i s s e d

w i t h

p r e j u d i c e

on

February

2,

016, ecause

t h e

unknown

omplaining

w i t n e s s r e f u s e d

t o

show.

SECOND

CAUSE

OFACTION:

v i l

ConspiracX

5

2. P l a i n t i f f hereby e

- a l l e g e s

an

d i n c o r p o r a t e s b y e f e r e n c e ,

a s

i f

u l l y s e t f o r t h

h e r e i n ,

l l of h e


c o n t a i n e d i n p a r a g r a p h s

1 - 5 1 above.

53 . In

a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e i r p l a n t o

have l a i n t i f f a l s e l y

i m p r i s o n e d ,

a r r e s t e d an d

p

r o f e s s i o n a l l y

maligned, e r m a n e n t l y

unemployable,

Defendant

Sonia a d v i s e d

an d c o n s p i r e d

t h Defendant

i l e s

-Hansen o

g e t

Defendant

HPD

o s e a r c h P l a i n t i f f ' s apartment

an d

p o t e n t i a l l y engage l a i n t i f f

i n

a

o n f l i c t .

54 .

Defe ndants Sonia an

d N i l e s-Hansen c o n s p i r e d t o

manufacture a

e t i t i o n

f o r a

T

emporary

R e s t r a i n i n g

Order( TRO')

n

d o r c h e s t r a t e

t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s where l a i n t i f f ' s

r

e s i d e n c e

would

b e

s e a r c h e d

and P l a i n t i f f p o s s i b l y s h o t .

55 . D e f e n d a n t s ,

each

ofthem,

knew

h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n p e r t a i n i n g

t o

t h e l a w f u l

p

o s s e s s i o n of

a handgun, ombined with a demand h a t Defendant

HPD

e r v e

a

TRO ould

c

r e a t e

a i t u a t i o n where

Defendant

HPD

ould o r c e t h e

s e i z u r e

of

h e handgun,

and p o t e n t i a l l y

i

n c i t e

a

o n f l i c t

w i t h

P l a i n t i f f

wh e n

h e y s e a r c h e d

h i s

h o m e .

F o r t u n a t e l y ,

l a i n t i f f

d i d not take

th e b a i t .

5

6 .

Defe ndants Sonia

and

N i l e s-Hansen

c o n s p i r e d

t o f i l e a TRO o l e l y i n o r d e r

to

OMPLAINT

FOR DAMAGES 9

Knowles

v .

Sonia


10/17

have HPD e a r c h

P l a i n t i f f s

home an

d

engage Defendant n ano t h e r

c o n f l i c t .

This

p l a n

wa s

b

a s e d on

Defendant S u n i a s

knowledge

of

HPD r o t o c o l s , an

d h e


Defendant

HPD

u

n l a w f u l l y d i s c l o s e d t o h e r .

5

7 .

This p l a n

was o i n s u r e

t h a t P l a i n t i f f

c o u l d

not

only

never

e t u r n

t o work a t

HPU

h

e

c o u l d never work

anywhere.

58 . S u b s e q u e n t l y ,

Defendant HPD

as

a d m i t t e d

t h a t Defendant Sunia had a c c e s s e d

t

h e i r

d a t a

base

an

d

o b t a i n e d i n f o r m a t i o n about l a i n t i f f s gun e g i s t r a t i o n and p e r m i t .

T

HIRD CAUSE

OF

ACTION

F

a l s e

Imprisonment

5

9 .

P l a i n t i f f

hereby e

- a l l e g e s

and

n c o r p o r a t e s by

e f e r e n c e ,

a s

i f

u 1 1 y

s e t f o r t h

h

e r e i n ,

l l

of h e


c o n t a i n e d

i n

p a r a g r a p h s

1-58

above.

6

0 .

Upon n f o r m a t i o n

an

d

b e l i e f , Defendants

Sunia

an

d

N i l e s

-Hansen

o r c h e s t r a t e d

t h i s HPD/Swat

e s p o n s e s of

eptember 1 and September 2 015

with

h e

s p e c i f i c

i n t e n t

t o

cause

P

a i n t i f f s

a r r e s t , imprisonment an

d

trauma.

6

1 . Defendant HPD

new

o r should have

known h a t

t h e

u n a u t h o r i z e d d i s c l o s u r e

of

t

he

i r e a r m


was o

be

used o r a TRO

u s t i f i e d

a r r e s t ,

s e a r c h

and s e i z u r e .

62 .

DefendantHPD

as

a

t a n d i n g

p r a c t i c e

of i s c l o s i n g f i r e a r m i n f o r m a t i o n

t o

an

u f a c t u r e

TRO

e a r c h e s .

63 .

That

h i s a r r e s t and a l s e

imprisonment

was n j u s t i f i e d an

d

caused l a i n t i f f

damages o

be

proven a t r i a l .

FOURTHCAUSEOF

ACTION:

D

efamation

Slander

OMPLAINT

FORDAMAGES

-1

- Knowles

v. Sunia


11/17

64.

P l a i n t i f f hereby e- a l l e g e s

and


b y

e f e r e n c e , as f u l l y

s e t f o r t h

h

e r e i n ,

a l l of

h e

a l

l e g a t i o n s

c o n t a i n e d i n

p a r a g r a p h s

1-64 above.

6

5 . At some

time

p r i o r t o September

2,

016, efendants S u n i a , N i l e s

-Hansen,

and

e f e n d a n t HPD

o n s p i r e d

t o

f i l e f o r a

emporary

e s t r a i n i n g

Order,

n

o r d e r t o manufacture

a

b

a s i s

t o

s e a r c h

P l a i n t i f f s h o m e w i t h o u t

a w a r r a n t . See, i l e s

-Hansen v .

Knowles,

Case

No.

1

SS-1-000904

H I 1 ~

C i r . ,

2015).

This

raud

wa s b a s e d s o l e l y on

h e


Defendant

HPD

e l e a s e d

t o

Defendants Sunia

and N i l e s

-Hansen.

6

6.

On

eptember 2, 0 1 5

and with

s p e c i f i c

m a l i c i o u s

i n t e n t

t o

i n j u r e P l a i n t i f f ,

e f e n d a n t s

Sunia

and

N i l e s

-Hansen

i l e d

an

a p p l i c a t i o n

f o r

a

e s t r a i n i n g

o r d e r

i n

an

e f f o r t

t o

manu f a c t u r e a r e t e n s e f o r Defendant

HPD

o s e a r c h P l a i n t i f f s

home.

6

7 .

Defendants

Sunia

and

N i l e s

-Hansen

p l e a d

under

o a t h t h a t t h e y were n imminent

d

an

g e r i n

o r d e r

t o

g e t

t h e

TRO.

6

8 .

On

eptember 2, 015, DefendantHPD ollowed t s p r o t o c o l s f o r s e r v i n g a

TRO

u

pon someone who o s s e s s e s a

i r e a r m ,

and a l

so s e a r c h e d

P l a i n t i f f s h o m e o s e i z e t h e f i r e a r m .

69 . On

o v e m b e r

27,

0 15 ,

h a t a c t i o n w as

e t t l e d b y

h e p a r t i e s

w i t h o u t

any

c o u r t

or d e r r e s t r a i n i n g anyone.

FIFTH

CAUSE

OFACTION

efamation

Liable

7


e

- a l l e g e s

an

d

n c o r p o r a t e

b y e f e r e n c e , as

f


h e r e i n ,

a

l l

of

h e


c o n t a i n e d

i n p a r a g r a p h s 1-69 above.

7

1 .

Defendants,

each

of hem,

n t e n t i o n a l l y

d i s s e m i n a t e d

p r i v a t e

f a c t s v e r ba l l y , in

w

r i t i n g ,

c o u r t

f i l i n g s ,

and

on

h e

I n t e r n e t , whic h

d i r e c t l y

harmed

l a i n t i f f s p e c i f i c a l l y t h e

OMPLAINT

FOR

DAMAGES

1

Knowles

v.

Sonia


12/17

l a w f u l p o s s e s s i o n of

a i r e a r m .

7

2.

D e f e n d a n t s , each of hem,


d i s s e m i n a t e d t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n and

knew

o

r

s h o u l d

have

known

h a t

t h i s

would cause

l a i n t i f f s a r r e s t , impri sonment and

t h e

s e a r c h

and

s

e i z u r e of i s h o m e

something

a TRO p p l i c a t i o n would not do w i t h o u t

t h e

p r i v a t e

i

n f o r m a t i o n .

7

3 .

D e f e n d a n t s , each

of

hem s e p a r a t e l y ,

a c t e d

w i t h m a l i c e a f o r e t h o u g h t

i n t e n t i o n a l l y

seeking o harm h e P l a i n t i f f

by

i s s e m i n a t i n g

P l a i n t i f f

s

r i v a t e


about

h e

p

o s s e s s i o n of

i r e a r m .

7

4.

P l a i n t i f f

was

n j u r e d

by

h e

Defendants

c t i o n s

i n

an

amount

o be proven

a t

t r i a l

SIXTHCAUSEOFACTION

I

n t e n t i o n a l I n f l i c t i o n of

motional

i s t r e s s

7

5. P l a i n t i f f

hereby

e

- a l l e g e s

an

d n c o r p o r a t e s by e f e r e n c e ,

a s i f


h

e r e i n ,

all of

h e

a l l e g a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d

i n

p a r a g r a p h s

1-74

above.

7

6.

D e f e n d a n t s , each of hem,


a c t e d

knowingly

and w i t h malice

c a u s i n g

t

he l a i n t i f f e v e r e

emotional

i s t r e s s .

77 .

D e f e n d a n t s , each

of

hem,

knew

r s h o u l d have

known h a t c a u s i n g

t h e

a r r e s t

an d

imprisonment of l a i n t i f f would c a u s e

P l a i n t i f f g r e a t harm.

7

8 . P l a i n t i f f was

n j u r e d

by

h e

Defendants

c t i o n s

i n

an

amount

o

be

proven a t t r

i a l

S

EVENTHCAUSE OF

ACTION

In t e n t i o n a l I n t e r f e r e n c e with

r o s p e c t i v e

Economic Advantage

7

9.

P l a i n t i f f

hereby e

- a l l e g e s

and


by

e f e r e n c e ,

as

i f

u 1 1 y s e t

f o r t h

he r e i n ,

l l of h e

a l l e g a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d

i n

p a r a g r a p h s

1 - 7 8 a b o v e .

8

0 .

D e f e n d a n t s ,

each of hem

e p a r a t e l y ,

were knew

o r

should have

known

h a t

t h e i r

COMPLAINTFORDAMAGES IZ

Knowles v.

Sonia


13/17

dissemination o f l a i n t i f f s p r i v a t e

information

t o

e f f e c t u a t e

a

TRO r r e s t ,

search s e i z u r e

would

n o t

only

i n t e r f e r e

wi t h

P l a i n t i f f l s

HPU

o r k

c o n t r a c t , o t h e r c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e

t e a c h i n g

o

p p o r t u n i t i e s ,

a n d h i s c u r r e n t b e n e f i t s

a n d

p o t e n t i a l f o r

a d v a n c e m e n t

wi t h t h e m i l i t a r y .

81 . P l a i n t i f f

w a s

n j u r e d

by

h e Defendants'

c t i o n s

i n a n

a m o u n t

o be proven a t

t r i a l .

EIGHTHCAUSE

OF

ACTION

v i l Rights

Violations

8


r e - a l l e g e s

a n d

i n c o r p o r a t e s

by

e f e r e n c e ,

a s

i f


h e r e i n ,

a l l

o f

h e a l l e g a t i o n s contained i n paragraphs

1-81

above.

8

3.

D ef e n d a n t

HPD a s h a d

a

p a t t e r n a n d

p r a c t i c e

o f

e l e a s i n g

p r i v a t e information

a

bout gun

permits

t o n o n - H P D

personnel

o r HPD ersonnel

unauthorized

t o r e c e i v e t h a t

i

nformation

in

o r d e r

t o

manufacture

TRO

ased

search

seizures without

a

w a r r a n t .

8

4.

Upon

nformation a n d b e l i e f ,

t h e r e

a r e

many

t h e r persons who hould simply

h

a ve

been served a TRO, ut D ef e n d a n tHPD as developed a

process

o r

manufacturing

TRO

ba s e d

s e a r c h e s , a n d

t h i s

has been

going

o n o r

y e a r s .

8

5.

Upon nformation a n d b e l i e f ,

Defendant

City h a d

a c t u a l

a n d

c o n s t r u c t i v e

k

n o w l e d g e

about Defendan t HPD s r a c t i c e

o f

f f e c t u a t i n g w a r r a n t l e s s

search

seizures

by

m p r o p e r l y

d i s c l o s i n g

f i r e a r m s r e g i s t r a t i o n information, a n d did

n o t h i n g .

I

~TINTH

CAUSEOFACTION

G

e n e r a l

Negligence

85.

P l a i n t i f f

hereby

r e

- a l l e g e s

a n d

i n c o r p o r a t e s

by

e f e r e n c e ,

as

i f


h e r e i n , a l l

o f

h e a l l e g a t i o n s

contained

i n paragraphs 1-90 above.

8

6.

D ef e n d a n t HPD

a d

a duty

n o t o d i s c l o s e

P l a i n t i f f s

P r i v a t e

information, a n d

C

OMPLAINT'FOR

DAMAGES

-13

Knowles v .

Sunia


14/17

knew

efendant

Sunia and

o t h e r HPD mployees had a p r a c t i c e

of

manufacturing warrant

l e s s

s

earches

seizures based on

the

HPD

TRO rocedure.

EREFORE

l a i n t i f f prays

f o r

damages, n c l u d i n g

consequential damages, n

a

mounts

to be proven a t t ri a l :

F

or s p e c i a l

damages, ncluding c o n s e q u e n t i a l

damages, n amounts o be proven

a t

tr i a l ;

2.

For

g e n e r a l

damages according t o proof

hereof

t

t r i a l ;

For

p u n i t i v e damages

a g a i n s t Defendants n t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l

c a p a c i t i e s ; an

d

4

.

For

such

u r t h e r

and

a d d i t i o n a l

r e l i e f

the

Court

deems

u s t

and

a p p r o p r i a t e .

ATED:

2016

MYLES S

BREWER

Attorney for

the

Plaintiff

GORDON

J

KNOWLES

COMPLAINT

FOR DAMAGES

14

Knowles

v

Sunia


15/17

IN

THE

IRCUIT COURT

OFTHE

IRST

CIRCUIT

GORDON

.

KNOWLES

STATEOFHAWAII

1~-~

C

NIL,NO.

~ 6

P a i n t i f f

vs .

DEMANDFOR

JURY

RTAT

S

HERYL IJNIA, n d i v i d u a l l y and as an g e n t

o

f h e

Honolulu

o l i c e

Department;

DIANA

NILES-HANSEN

n d i v i d u a l l y ;

CITY

AND

C

OUNTYOF HONOLULU u n i c i p a l

c

o r p o r a t i o n ;

t h e

HONOLULU

POLICE

D

EPARTMENT

department

i t h i n t h e

C i t y

County

of onolulu;

a

nd

DOES

- 2 0 ,

D

e f e n d a n t s .

DEMAND

OR

JURYTRIAL

P

a i n t i f f

GORDON

. KNOWLES

h e r e i n

P l a i n t i f f ' ) ,

by and

though i s u n d e r s i g n e d

a

t t

o r n e y s , hereby

de m and a r i a l by u r y f o r a ll

i s s u e s

so r i a b l e

h e r e i n .

DATED:

onolulu,

I une 3,

016

MYLES

.

BREWER

A

t t

orney

o r t h e P l a i n t i f f

G

ORDON

.

KNOWLES

C

OMPLAII~IT FOR

DAMAGES -15-

Knowles

.

Sunia


16/17

1N

THE

CIRCUITCOURTOFTHE IRST

CIRCUIT

S

TATE OF

HAWAII

GORDON . KNOWLES

A l

/

, "

~ ,

< ~

C

l

1Lr 1VQ~

`

.

~

~

P

l a i n t i f f ,

v

s . SUMMONS NA IVIL

ACTION

SHERYLSUNIA

n d i v i d u a l l y

and

as an

agent

of he

Honolulu o l i c e

Department; DIANA

N

ILES-F-IANSEN, n d i v i d u a l l y ; CITYAND

COUNTY

OF HONOLULU

municipal

co r p o r a t i o n ;

t h e

HONOLULU

POLICE

D

EPARTMENT department

within the

City

County of onolulu;

a

nd

DOES

-20,

De f e n d a n t s .

SUMMONS

TO: SHERYLSUNIA

D

IANA

NILES

-HANSEN

HONOLULU OLICEDEPARTMENT

C

ITY

COUNTY

OF

HONOLULU.

Y

OUAREHEREBYSUMMONED

nd

e q u i r e d

t o

s e r v e upon

l a i n t i f f s a t t o r n e y s ,

w h o s e

a

ddresses

r e

s t a t e d

above, n ans w er o

the

Complaint h i c h

s

a t t a c h e d . This c t i o n

m u s t

e aken

w

i t h i n

twenty

2 0)

ays f t e r

s e r v i c e

of h i s summons pon you, x c l u s i v e of h e day of

e r v i c e .

I

f ou

a i l

t o

m a k e your answer

within

the

twenty

day ime

i m i t ,

jud gm en t

by

e f a u l t

w i l l

b

e

taken

g a i n s t you o r

the

e l i e f demanded n the

Complaint.

T

h i s stumnons s h a l l

not

be

p e r s o n a l l y d e l i v e r e d b e t w e en 10:00 p.m. an

d

6:00 a.m.

on

p

remises

not

open o

t h e

general

p u b l i c ,

unless a

judge of

h e

above- e n t i t l e d

Court permits,

n

w

r i t i n g on

h i s

s um mon s,

ersonal

e l i v e r y

during th ose

h o u r s .

COMPLAINTFOR

DAMAGES

-16-

Knowles

.

Sunia


17/17

A

a i l u r e

t o

obey h i s summons may

e s u l t n an n t r y of e f a u l t

an

d e f a u l t

judgment

g a i n s t

t

he

disobeying person or p a r t y

D

ATED: onolulu Hawaii

~ ' ~ ~ ~ -

X 0 1 5

P.

NAfCAMQTO

~~ ~

C

LERKOFTHE

AB

COURT

OMPLAINT

FORDAMAGES

17

Knowles

v

Sunia

former hpu professor files lawsuit

Documents