Sie sind auf Seite 1von 12

Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 1 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Civil Action No. 17-12191

RYAN N. SCEVIOUR,

Plaintiff,

v.

COLONEL RICHARD M. MCKEON,


MAJOR SUSAN ANDERSON,
AND A NUMBER OF JOHN DOES
AND/ OR JANE DOES,

Defendants.

DEFENDANT, MAJOR SUSAN ANDERSON’S, ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST


AMENDED COMPLAINT

The Defendant, Major Susan Anderson, answers the Plaintiff’s Complaint as follows:

Introduction

The Defendant neither admits nor denies the Plaintiff’s first unnumbered paragraph as
same is a statement of introduction. To the extent that factual allegations are asserted against her,
the Defendant denies same.

Jurisdiction

The Defendant neither admits nor denies the Plaintiff’s first unnumbered paragraph as
same is a statement of jurisdiction. To the extent that factual allegations are asserted against he,
the Defendant denies same.

1. The Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 1.

2. The Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 2.

3. The Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 3.

Parties

4. The Defendant admits that Ryan N. Sceviour (“Trooper Sceviour”) was at all relevant
times hereto, employed by the Massachusetts State Police as a Massachusetts State Police
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 2 of 12

Trooper.

5. The Defendant admits that Colonel Richard D. McKeon ("Colonel McKeon"), was,
at all times relevant hereto, the Superintendent of the Massachusetts State Police.
The remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Plaintiffs’ Complaint contain legal
conclusions to which no response is required.

6. The Defendant admits that she was, at all times relevant hereto, employed as a Major by
the Massachusetts State Police.

7. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of


the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Facts

8. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of


the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

9. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of


the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

10. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

11. The Defendant admits the allegations contained in this paragraph of the Plaintiff’s
Complaint.

12. The Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations
contained in Paragraph 12. Answering further, Defendant states that the term
“extraordinary” is subjective and not cited to any Department Rule or training materials.

13. The Defendant admits portions of the allegations contained in Paragraph 13. However,
the Plaintiff quotes only a portion of Massachusetts Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule
14. Rule 14 also includes the following language; “The prosecution shall disclose to the
defense, and permit the defense to discover, inspect and copy, each of the following items
and information at or prior to the pretrial conference, provided it is relevant to the
case…”

14. The Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations
contained in Paragraph 14.

15. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint regarding the time of assignment.

16. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 3 of 12

17. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

18. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

19. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

20. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

21. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

22. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

23. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

24. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

25. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

26. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

27. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

28. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

29. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

30. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

31. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 4 of 12

32. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

33. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

34. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

35. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

36. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

37. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

38. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

39. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

40. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

41. The Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 41. Answering further,
upon receipt of the Plaintiff’s initial report on October 17, Ms. Bibaud’s Defense
Attorney, Kara Colby, immediately filed a handwritten motion requesting the Worcester
District Court to impound Trooper Sceviour’s initial report due to “prejudicial pretrial
publicity.” Attorney Colby’s motion to impound was allowed by the Court that same day.
A copy of the Motion to Impound was subsequently provided to Defendant Anderson
who in turn provided a copy to the Plaintiff during their meeting on October 19, 2017.

42. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

43. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

44. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

45. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 5 of 12

46. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

47. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

48. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

49. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

50. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

51. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

52. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

53. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

54. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

55. The Defendant admits the allegations stated in Paragraph 55 to the extent that they cite
only a selected portion of the Supervisory Observation Report. The entirety of the report
states, “Trooper Sceviour, you are issued this EES Observation report on case 2017-
######## (redacted) due to the negative and derogatory statements included within the
gist of your report. These statements were not elements of the crime nor did they
contribute to probable cause. Inappropriate commentary shall not be included in future
reports.”

56. The Defendant admits the allegations stated in Paragraph 56 to the extent that they cite
only a selected portion of the Supervisory Observation Report. The entirety of the report
states, “Sgt. Conant, you are being served an EES on Case 2017###### (redacted). This
arrest report was generated by Trooper Ryan Sceviour #4035 on October 16, 2017. The
derogatory and negative statements in this report are not part of probable cause or
elements of the crimes for which the defendant is being charged. You are being given this
EES for approving this report and allowing inappropriate commentary to be included in
the report.”

57. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 6 of 12

the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

58. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

59. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

60. The Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 60 to the extent that
Troopers Sceviour and Gilbert met with Major Anderson. The Defendant is without
sufficient information to either admit or deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 60.

61. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 61 to the extent that
Plaintiff “had done nothing wrong.” Defendant Anderson stated that Plaintiff had the
right not to sign the Supervisory Observation Report. Defendant admits the remaining
allegations contained in Paragraph 61.

62. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 62.

63. The Defendant admits to portions of the allegations contained in Paragraph 63, insofar as
Defendant stated to Plaintiff that the initial version of the report had been impounded by
the Worcester District Court. Defendant provided Plaintiff with a copy of the Motion to
Impound and stated the initial report needed to be revised.

64. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 64.

65. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 65.

66. The Defendant admits that the Plaintiff “did not want to make the edits,” but otherwise
denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 66.

67. The Defendant admits to the substance of the allegations contained in Paragraph 67
without admitting to the precise quotation referenced.

68. The Defendant admits to the substance of the allegations contained in Paragraph 68
without admitting to the precise quotation referenced.

69. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 69.

70. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

71. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

72. The Defendant admits that the substance of this statement was made at some juncture but
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 7 of 12

denies the sequence as presented in Plaintiff’s complaint.

73. The Defendant admits instructing Plaintiff to revise the original report, but otherwise
denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 73 to the extent that the revisions were to
“eliminate relevant and incriminating statements made by Ms. Bibaud from the report.”

74. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 74.

75. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 75 that Plaintiff wanted the
report to be marked as “Revised.” Defendant informed Plaintiff that she had previously
been instructed to mark his edited report as “Revised.”

76. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 76.

77. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 77.

78. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 78.

79. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 79.

80. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

81. The Defendant admits to the allegations contained in Paragraph 81 insofar as the Drug
Recognition Evaluation (“DRE”) report by Trooper Rei had been improperly included in
the daily administrative journal and that error was corrected.

82. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 82 to the extent that Major
Anderson ordered Trooper Sceviour to deliver the reports to Assistant District Attorney
Jeffrey Travers. Trooper Sceviour stated to Defendant that he had previously been in
communication with Travers and he would deliver the report.

83. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 83 to the extent that Major
Anderson “changed her mind.”

84. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

85. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

86. The Defendant admits to the substance of the allegations contained in Paragraph 86.

87. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 8 of 12

88. The Defendant admits to the substance of the allegations contained in this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

89. The Defendant admits to the substance of the allegations contained in this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

90. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 90.

91. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 91.

92. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 92.

93. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 93.

94. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 94.

95. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

96. The Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations
contained in Paragraph 96.

97. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 97.

98. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

99. The Defendant is without sufficient personal knowledge to respond to this paragraph of
the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

100. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 100.

COUNT I
Violation of Federal Constitutional Rights
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983
v.
All Defendants

101. The Defendant reasserts her responses to paragraphs 1-100 as if specifically


restated herein.

102. This paragraph of the Plaintiffs’ Complaint contains legal conclusions to which
no response is required. To the extent that facts are alleged, and a response is required,
the Defendant denies the allegations.

103. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 103.


Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 9 of 12

104. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 104.

105. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 105.

COUNT II
Violation of State Constitutional Rights
Constitution of the Commonwealth, Chapter
12, Section 11H
v.
All Defendants

106. The Defendant reasserts her responses to paragraphs 1-105 as if specifically


restated herein.

107. This paragraph of the Plaintiffs’ Complaint contains legal conclusions to which
no response is required. To the extent that facts are alleged, and a response is required,
the Defendant denies the allegations.

108. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 108.

109. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 109.

110. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 110.

COUNT III
Civil Conspiracy
State and Federal
V.
All Defendants

111. The Defendant reasserts her responses to paragraphs 1-110 as if specifically


restated herein.

112. This paragraph of the Plaintiffs’ Complaint contains legal conclusions to which
no response is required. To the extent that facts are alleged, and a response is required,
the Defendant denies the allegations.

113. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 113.

114. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 114.

115. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 115.


Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 10 of 12

COUNT IV
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
V.
All Defendants

116. The Defendant reasserts her responses to paragraphs 1-105 as if specifically


restated herein.

117. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 117.

118. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 118.

119. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 119.

120. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 120.

121. The Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 121.

COUNT V
Defamation
V.
All Defendants Except Defendant Anderson

122. The Defendant reasserts her responses to paragraphs 1-121 as if specifically


restated herein.

123. The Defendant neither admits nor denies paragraph 123 as factual allegations are
not asserted against her.

124. The Defendant neither admits nor denies paragraph 124 as factual allegations are
not asserted against her.

125. The Defendant neither admits nor denies paragraph 125 as factual allegations are
not asserted against her.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Without admitting the allegations set forth in Plaintiff's Complaint, the Defendant hereby
states the following by way of affirmative defense thereto:

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


Defendant says that each Count of the Complaint fails to state a cause of action for which relief
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 11 of 12

can be granted.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Defendant says that Plaintiff has waived any rights it may have had against the Defendants.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


The individual Defendant (Major Susan Anderson) is entitled to qualified immunity. The
Defendant has qualified immunity from this suit as the alleged acts complained of occurred
within the scope of the Defendant’s official duties.

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


The Defendant was privileged in conduct and acts, and, therefore, the Plaintiffs cannot recover.

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


The Defendant was justified in all acts and/or conduct, and, therefore, the Plaintiff cannot
recover.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Defendant’s acts and conduct were performed according to and protected by law and/or
legal process, and, therefore, the Plaintiff cannot recover.

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


Defendant says that the any alleged conduct or actions were not the proximate cause of
Plaintiff’s injuries.

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


Defendant says that the Complaint fails to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. s. 1983 against her as
the conduct alleged in the Complaint does not involve any particular right arising under the
United States Constitution and further that no violation of any federal or constitutional right has
been plead with the requisite particularity, and counts purporting to allege such violation must,
therefore, be dismissed.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


Defendant gives notice that they intend to rely upon such other and further defenses as may
become available or apparent during discovery proceedings in this case and reserve their rights to
amend this Answer to assert any such defenses.
Case 1:17-cv-12191-GAO Document 10 Filed 12/22/17 Page 12 of 12

Respectfully submitted,
For the Defendant, Major Susan Anderson
By Her Attorney,

/s/ Timothy M. Burke


Timothy M. Burke, BBO #065720
LAW OFFICES OF TIMOTHY M. BURKE
160 Gould Street, Suite 100
Needham, MA 02494
(781) 455-0707

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that this document filed through ECF system will be sent electronically to
the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing on December 22, 2017.

Dated: 12/22/2017 /s/ Timothy M. Burke