CHICAGO – Men who called themselves Southern Illinois Observers gave police probable cause to stop, search and arrest them, Seventh Circuit appellate judges ruled on Aug. 2.
They affirmed District Judge Stephen McGlynn, who found statements of a witness raised reasonable suspicion that a crime occurred.
Circuit Judge Diane Wood found the statements barred liability for wrongful arrest.
She wrote that she found no reason to believe police would “give a pass to someone who followed a stranger home and refused to leave her property.”
Plaintiffs Shane Lyberger of Sandoval, Andrew Lyberger of Centralia, and Robert Dailey of Salem created a YouTube channel to cover law enforcement.
One night in 2017, in Centralia, they saw a mother driving with a baby on her lap and they followed her.
The mother, Lisa Thompson, drove to her mother in law’s house and stopped.
Dailey got out with his camera running and confronted her.
Her husband Eric Thompson came out, told the Observers to get off the property, and took the child inside.
Dailey persisted and Lisa called police.
Wamac officer Scott Snider arrived and asked for ID.
The Observers refused it and Snider called his station for backup.
They asked him if they were free to go and he said he would detain them as part of an investigation of a suspicious person.
Centralia officers Andrew Harvard and Jamie James arrived and warned the Observers that they’d arrest them if they didn’t show ID.
The officers searched the car and confiscated the camera.
They charged the Observers with disorderly conduct and obstruction of justice.
Local prosecutors chose not to pursue the charges.
The Observers retained William Atkins of Peoria, who filed a complaint against Snider, Harvard, and James in 2019.
McGlynn granted summary judgment to defendants last year, finding no reasonable juror could conclude that there wasn’t probable cause.
He described probable cause as a fluid concept relying on common sense judgment based on the totality of circumstances.
“Probable cause deals with probabilities, not hard certainties,” McGlynn wrote.
He found Lisa Thompson provided the only information Snider had.
“We do not know what would have happened if the plaintiffs had complied with his requests, but their refusal was enough to sustain the officers’ subsequent actions,” he wrote.
He found it irrelevant that “nolle prosequi” orders were entered.
“The officers had probable cause to detain plaintiffs during the investigation, they had probable cause to arrest them for not cooperating in the investigation, and they had probable cause to search to verify they did not possess weapons," he wrote.
He taxed costs of $5,309.04 against the Observers.
Appellate judges found Snider immediately corroborated Lisa Thompson’s account.
Wood wrote that she pointed to the car and said those were the people she called about, and they admitted following her home.
“These specific facts were enough to give rise to a reasonable suspicion that the plaintiffs had committed a crime,” Wood wrote.
She found refusing to produce ID to police generally is not grounds for arrest in Illinois, but she didn’t count the obstruction charge as a violation of rights.
She found neither the First Amendment nor the Civil Rights Act protects the act of withholding ID.
Dominick Lanzito of Chicago represented Snider.
Brian Funk of Northbrook represented Harvard and James.