Free Reply Brief - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :06-cv-00018-JJF Document 46 Filed 05/21/2007 Page 1 0f 2
CLERK OF THE COURTS 06-018-JJF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT 05-I6-07
844 N.KING STREET
WILMINGTON,DELAWARE
SUPPORT OF SUMMARY
JUDGEMENT
DEFENSE DOES NOT DESPUTE THAT THE OFFICERS IN THIS CASE DID
FORCEABLY TAKE EVIDENCE FROM PLAINTIFF. THE DEFENSE CLAIMS
THAT IT WAS ALLOWED UNDER DELAWARE LAW. DELAWARE LAW
STATES THAT REASONABLE STEPS CAN BE USED IF ALLEDGED REFUSES
CHEMICAL TEST. 2I SECTION 2742. FORCE NOT MENTIONED.
THEREFORE THIS IS FACT THAT THE TOWN OF MILLSBORO AND THE
MILLSBORO POLICE DIRECT POLICE TO USE PHYSICAL FORCE TO OBTAIN
EVIDENCE NO MATTER OF THE DEGREE OF FORCE.
THAT THE PLAINTIFF WAS ALREADY IN CUSTODY AND HARM TO THE
PUBLIC WAS NOW AVOIDED.
THAT THE ACCUSED IN A DWI CASE IS ALLOWED TO MAINTAIN A DEFENSE
BY REFUSING TO GIVE EVIDENCE.
THAT THE DEFENSE ENTERED THE CONTRADICTIN G ST ATEMENTS,BY
OFFICERS, INTO DISCOVERY THIS SHOULD THEREFORE BE ALLOWED AT
TRIAL.
CC.BRUCE HERRON SENT U.S. RES E TFU LY
MAIL 5-16-07 "Q ; L
H. GH ON L EY
F Q L 527 AL IC AVE
5*-**-* - BROOKLYN,MD.2I225
H;:""”"'Z,‘] " *1 .Z """""?.
U.S. :;:.5 ia-:2:;: -_;OUFIT
DISTRICT OF QLQLAWAR
B9 :3·;;c:ur‘wve9'

Case1:O6-cv-00018-JJF Document 46 Filed 05/21/2007 Page20f2
U] ·
Ii ne; 2 :1 `
Eg _ gej {
i ,2 3 -- CT ..2
gf 5 ,.§ F. { N" ··-._, "`;
I'? J; A · E"
2* xp IQ S
53. Q Q}. (L ._:f
35 M) E
Q N EQ \;, /3..
$** ~¢<»¤¢/1 2
/` g $0 'E Q @2
*~··‘· + >%
3 "` ‘ Q ‘
zé 2 M é
Ll; la Ul Q J (Q':
`J 1 rr :3 "
“ 3 <¤¤ A '5 ia

L,
A)
rx}
\..
gl 0
rx
w S
Q T
§¤» is
Y" ¤
\ \/3 w