Trisha Kelly A.

Borja June 28, 2018

PSY 120
Jaffee v Redmond

On June 27, 1991, an Illinois police officer named Mary Lu Redmond shot and
killed Ricky Allen. Redmond was the first officer to respond to a distress call about a
fight ensuing in an apartment complex. When she arrived at the scene, Allen’s sisters
approached her squad car and told her that there had been a stabbing in one of the
apartments. Redmond claimed to have called her dispatcher to inform them and that
she had requested for an ambulance. She then exited her vehicle and started walking
towards the building. Before reaching the doors, she spotted several men running out.
She ordered them to get on the ground but they ignored her, and that is when she drew
her service revolver. Two other men came bursting out of the building, one of whom
was Ricky Allen. According to Redmond, Allen was waving a butcher knife and
disregarded her commands to drop the weapon. Redmond shot him when she believed
that he was about to stab the other man. Allen died at the scene. The neighbors started
pouring out putting blame even before other officers arrived, and a confrontation
between her and the crowd ensued.

The special administrator of Allen, Carrie Jaffee, filed suit against Redmond
claiming that she violated the constitutional rights of the victim when she used
excessive force during their encounter in the apartment. Allen’s family testified against
Redmond, stating information that deviates from her testimonies. They claim that
Redmond had already drawn her revolver when she exited the car and that Allen was
unarmed when he came out of the building. Redmond had already left the force at this
point. It was also during this time that the plaintiff’s found out that Redmon had been
undergoing counseling with Karen Beyer, a clinical social worker licensed by the State
of Illinois and employed at that time by the Village of Hoffman Estates. The plaintiffs
demanded the release of Beyer’s notes of her sessions with Redmond, with the purpose
of using them to cross examine the defendant. Beyer refused to submit, asserting that
she and the notes were protected under psychotherapist-patient privilege, but the
district judge rejected the argument. The notes were not released but the judge advised
the jury that it was permissible to think that the notes contained information which could
be unfavorable to Redmond. The jury ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, granting them five
hundred and forty-five thousand dollars, both in federal and state claims. However, the
Court of Appeals reversed the decision and demanded for a new trial. They concluded
that the psychotherapists and patients share a unique relationship and that it is
important for the latter to trust that information he/she will disclose will not be flaunted in
order for them to be comfortable enough to open up. In turn, the plaintiffs appealed it to
the Supreme Court.

When the case reached the Supreme Court, the American Psychological Society
(APA) intervened and stressed about the importance of therapist-client confidentiality.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeals and the APA, that the
client reserved the right to disclose personal information under protected privilege.