ACSO discrimination lawsuit to start trial next week

(From left) Former Sheriff Clovis Watson, former Sheriff Emery Gainey and current Sheriff Chad Scott. All three are on the witness list for the upcoming trial.
(From left) Former Sheriff Clovis Watson, former Sheriff Emery Gainey and current Sheriff Chad Scott. All three are on the witness list for the upcoming trial.
Courtesy of ACSO

A discrimination lawsuit against the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office (ACSO) will go to trial on Monday, with the entire week reserved if needed.  

Filed in 2023, the Eighth Judicial Court set a trial date in April last year. The lawsuit started under former Sheriff Clovis Watson Jr. but then continued under former Sheriff Emery Gainey and current Sheriff Chad Scott as the new head of the ACSO. 

All three are listed to testify along with other ACSO personnel. The witness list has 16 people who will be called, with another 46 people available to be called to the stand. 

Become A Member

Mainstreet does not have a paywall, but pavement-pounding journalism is not free. Join your neighbors who make this vital work possible.

The lawsuit claims that the Clovis administration racially discriminated against Sgt. Kevin Davis, who is white, by passing him up for promotions in favor of Black officers and then retaliated against him for filing complaints. 

The lawsuit has six counts for violations of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Florida Civil Rights Act and federal statute 42 U.S.C. § 1983.  

Davis started at ACSO in 1999 before leaving to attend the University of North Florida. He returned to the sheriff’s office in 2004 and has worked through the ranks to become a sergeant. 

Judge Gloria Walker. Courtesy Eighth Judicial Court (1)
Courtesy Eighth Judicial Court Gloria Walker

In its memorandum of law for pretrial stipulation, ACSO attorneys said Davis has no direct evidence of race discrimination, forcing him to prove the case circumstantially.  

“Perhaps the most telling evidence, however, that undermines Davis’s claim of race discrimination is that of the seven sergeants promoted to Lieutenant, six were Caucasian,” the defendants argue in the legal attachments. “[Eric] Hutchinson was the only African American. No reasonable jury, therefore, could conclude that Davis was passed over for promotion to Lieutenant because of his race.”   

However, Davis’s lawsuit lists seven proposed examples of this discrimination through promotions or reassignments. His lawsuit also points to two internal affairs investigations initiated by the Watson administration after he filed human resources complaints over the promotions.  

Clovis ended one internal investigation into Davis after admitting that ACSO made mistakes in handling the case, along with that of two other employees. 

“Upon information and belief, 100% of the black employees who have been eligible for promotion since Watson became Sheriff have been promoted, based at least in part on their race,” the Davis lawsuit said.  

Before going to trial, another issue remains. Attorney Bobi Frank, representing Davis, filed a motion last week to prevent law enforcement officers from wearing their service firearms when testifying in court.  

Frank said she didn’t realize officers planned to wear their service firearms until last week. According to the motion, she tried to settle the issue with the plaintiffs to no avail.  

The trial is expected to draw around 50 law enforcement employees, with Watson, Gainey and Scott on the witness list. Frank said service firearms serve no purpose in a courthouse already secured and protected by bailiffs. Frank added that the firearms might be a deterrent for witnesses and cause issues for what has been a “provoking” case.  

On Thursday, ACSO attorneys responded. They called the motion “unsupported and unpersuasive.” 

Frank supported her motion with three past cases, but the ACSO attorneys dismissed each.  

“Multiple Florida judicial circuits expressly permit law enforcement officers to carry firearms in courthouse facilities when present on official business or testifying as witnesses,” ACSO attorneys said. 

Plus, these law enforcement employees will appear in their official capacities as law enforcement officers since the case is about the sheriff’s office, the attorneys said. 

Judge Gloria Walker will preside over the case and make a determination on the issue. 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nancy morris

Guns are not necessary in courtroom.

Kevin O'Neill

As a retired SW Florida deputy I disagree. When in uniform even to testify or in the courtroom as observers, etc. you are on the job 24/7 and without your service weapon you could become a target of an angry defendant while walking through the hallways and while walking to your vehicle from the courthouse to the parking lot. Even if deputies were to store their weapons upon entering the courthouse anything can happen inside the building at any time. If you can’t trust the honorable deputies that protect you and everyone else, I hope that you never call the Sheriff’s Office for any type of assistance, Nancy. No one is intimidated by a law enforcement officer in uniform with their duty weapon. The public see’s them all the time and don’t run away in fear. You, Ms. Morris, just don’t like law enforcement in general, that is just my opinion. You have your’s and I have mine.

James

I am not surprised at all. As someone who grew up in the 60’s I truly believed in equality and embraced Martin Luther King Jr’s dream. I understood that in that time and throughout the 70’s & 80’s we had to tip the scale, but it is no longer needed. Do not judge a person by outside metrics beyond an individual’s control but by their character and ability for the betterment of all.

Kevin O'Neill

Well said James.

Nancy's Friend

Wow…what a jerk move. Is the attorney anti-cop? Liberal move!