United States District Court, W.D. New York
DECISION & ORDER
W. PAYSON United States Magistrate Judge
Miriam McKnight filed the pending lawsuit against the City of
Rochester and three of its police officers asserting
constitutional and state law claims arising from her arrest
on July 3, 2010. (Docket # 1). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(c), the parties have consented to the disposition of this
case by a United States magistrate judge. (Docket # 11).
judgment was granted in favor of the City and defendant Laura
Grande dismissing the claims against them. (Docket ## 56,
58). Two of the state law claims against defendants Gregory
Vasile and Michael Nicholls - those for trespass and
malicious prosecution - were also dismissed before trial.
(Docket # 56). As a result of those decisions, the claims
remaining for determination are claims against Vasile and
Nicholls under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive use of
force, and claims under New York State law for false arrest,
false imprisonment, battery, and abuse of process. (Docket ##
56; 76 at 5-7). McKnight seeks both compensatory and punitive
damages. (Docket ## 1, 56).
trial was conducted before this Court on January 11-13 and
February 26, 2016. (Docket ## 72-78, 80, 82). McKnight
testified on her own behalf and offered testimony from her
son Javion Jones and two expert witnesses, James Williams,
PhD, and Charles Ewing, PhD. The defense called Officer
Vasile, Sergeant Nicholls, and Sergeant Andrew McPherson as
witnesses. Both parties also introduced into evidence
portions of deposition testimony from Lieutenant Laura
Grande, who was a defendant in the action at the time of her
testimony. (Docket # 81). Following trial, both parties
submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.
(Docket ## 83-85).
upon the findings of fact set forth below, and for the
reasons explained more fully herein, judgment is granted in
favor of McKnight on her claims against Vasile for false
arrest, false imprisonment, and battery. Judgment is granted
in favor of defendants on the remaining claims.
A. McKnight's Call to 911
McKnight testified that she spent much of the afternoon of
July 3, 2010, on the front porch of her home at 232 Pierpont
Street. (Tr. 38-39, 44-45). She owned the house and was
living there at the time with her husband, Kelly, and her
sons, Malik, Javion and Naseem. (Tr. 38-39). From her porch,
she observed and heard a party that was taking place in the
backyard of her neighbor's house at 234 Pierpont Street,
which was situated directly north of her house. (Tr. 45).
According to McKnight, when she first became aware of the
party at about 3:00 p.m., approximately 40 to 50 people were
in attendance, and the party was noisy and involved music and
a barbeque. (Tr. 45, 171, 172). She did not know any of the
partygoers other than her neighbor and did not attend the
party. (Tr. 172, 173). McKnight recalled that the party began
in the afternoon and began to breakup about 10:00 or 11:00
p.m. (Tr. 45, 172, 173).
and testimony establish that McKnight's front porch is on
the northwest corner of her house near the property line
between 232 and 234. (Tr. 53-57; P. Ex. 16; D. Exs. 414,
415). A fence runs along her property line between the two
houses. (Tr. 179; D. Ex. 415). It runs parallel to the
northern facade of McKnight's house from a point several
feet east of the northwest corner of the house and into her
backyard. (D. Ex. 415).
approximately 11:00 p.m., McKnight was on her porch and
observed an argument between two women in front of 234
Pierpont. (Tr. 45-46, 175, 176, 209). She testified that a
man emerged from the backyard of 234, walked along her fence
line toward Pierpont Street, and tried to escort one of the
two women across Pierpont and to the north. (Tr. 46, 175,
177). The woman, who had had too much to drink, was screaming
at him to take his hands off her and to let her go. (Tr. 46).
At that point, McKnight observed the other woman run up, and
a physical fight ensued between the two women in the middle
of Pierpont Street in front of 236, the second house to the
north of McKnight's house. (Tr. 47, 178-79, 209).
McKnight testified that approximately ten people ran along
her fence line to the area where the fight was occurring in
an apparent attempt to break it up. (Tr. 47, 179).
point, according to McKnight, she told her sons to go inside
the house, and she herself went inside briefly. (Tr. 59,
180). When she reemerged on the porch, she saw the two women
fighting and heard someone say that someone had been stabbed.
(Tr. 180-81). McKnight went back inside her house and called
911. (Tr. 181).
herself as Olivia Coles, McKnight reported to the 911
operator that two females were fighting and that there was a
possible stabbing. (Tr. 62-63; P. Ex. 12). She testified that
she provided her middle name (Olivia), which she
“go[es] by, ” and her maiden name (Coles) because
she “wanted to report it, but not really be
involved.” (Tr. 40, 63, 183). Records reflect that her
call was made at 11:14 p.m. and that her address was
identified as 232 Pierpont Street. (Tr. 62; P. Ex. 12). Other
calls about the incident were also received by 911
immediately after McKnight's call and identified 236
Pierpont Street and the area of Pierpont and Bryan Streets
(across the street from 234 Pierpont Street) as the vicinity
of the stabbing. (P. Ex. 12; Tr. 271, 419).
testified that she remained inside her house until the police
arrived. (Tr. 63, 185). When the police arrived, she went
back outside, but before she did, she retrieved her cellphone
and turned on the voice recorder. (Tr. 64, 185).
The Arrival on Scene of Officer Vasile and Sergeant
Gregory Vasile, an officer with the Rochester Police
Department (“RPD”) since 2008, was dispatched to
the area of Pierpont Street and Bryan Street at 11:15 p.m. on
July 3, 2010. (Tr. 262, 270; P. Ex. 12). He testified that he
was dispatched in response to a call reporting a stabbing.
(Tr. 270). As he was driving to the area, he overheard more
calls reporting fighting, noise, and chaos in the vicinity.
(Tr. 274-75). Those dispatches reported that two shots had
been overheard and that a victim was on the ground. (Tr.
recalled that he was the first officer to arrive on scene at
234 Pierpont Street. (Tr. 272). He described the scene upon
his arrival as “noisy” and “chaotic”
and testified that he saw between fifteen to twenty people in
the vicinity of two to three houses. (Tr. 270, 287). He
observed a “crowd” on the stairs in front of 234
on either side of the sidewalk. (Tr. 277-78; D. Ex. 415).
According to Vasile, that crowd was closer to 232 than it was
to 236. (Tr. 277-78). Shortly after Vasile arrived, his
supervisor Sergeant Michael Nicholls arrived on scene. (Tr.
Nicholls, who had been employed by RPD since 1995, also
responded to the call about a possible stabbing. (Tr. 398,
410). Records demonstrate that at 11:19 p.m. he called out
that he was responding. (Tr. 412). He testified that the
dispatcher identified the address as 234 Pierpont Street.
(Tr. 412). On his drive to 234, he learned through dispatches
that other calls had reported that shots had been fired and
that another victim had been located approximately one block
from 234 Pierpont Street. (Tr. 417-19).
Nicholls arrived at the scene, one or two patrol cars were
already there; he parked in front of 234. (Tr. 416, 420). He
testified that the scene was chaotic and approximately
fifteen to twenty people were spread out between the houses
at 232 and 234. (Tr. 419-21, 430). He observed an apparent
victim on the ground in the area near the steps above the
sidewalk in front of 234. (Tr. 417, 419, 421). Nicholls
approached the victim and attempted to speak to him, but the
victim declined to respond to him. (Tr. 422). Nicholls
described the scene as “volatile” and observed
individuals yelling and screaming. (Tr. 424). At 11:22 p.m.,
Nicholls requested that more patrol cars be dispatched to the
scene. (Tr. 415; P. Ex. 12).
testified that sometime between 11:19 and 11:22 p.m., he
directed Officer Vasile to start securing the scene. (Tr.
425). As he explained, RPD General Order 401 provides that
upon arrival at a crime scene, police officers should
“provide aid and comfort to the victim(s), observe all
conditions, events, and remarks and secure the scene to
maintain and protect physical evidence, utilizing yellow
crime scene tape, as applicable.” (Tr. 426-27; D. Ex.
410 at 2). Nicholls identified several purposes served by
using crime scene tape to secure a scene:
To protect evidence, to prevent any egress or exit from the
scene. . . . [S]ometimes we'll have people inside of the
scene. It generally calms things down and people start to
understand that we're there and starting to take control
of what's going on. The initial scene is set up to
preserve the initial area where we believe that the stabbing
may have occurred. We reassess that later to determine
whether or not to expand it.
(Tr. 427). Nicholls explained that as a matter of practice
crime scene tape is affixed to “one house at a minimum
to either side of where we think the scene is.” (Tr.
457). In response to Nicholls's direction, Vasile walked
to his patrol car to retrieve his crime scene tape. (Tr.
280-81, 429). Nichols returned to the area where the victim
was on the ground to question the individuals present about
what had happened. (Tr. 429).
McKnight's Encounter with Officer
McKnight had called 911 and returned to her porch, at some
point she saw a victim with ambulance personnel near the
individual. (Tr. 59, 64, 186). She testified that the victim
was in the driveway between 234 and 236. (Tr. 59). She asked
a man who was standing nearby, north of her porch close to
234, whether the victim was alive. (Tr. 64). The man
responded affirmatively. (Tr. 65).
McKnight was watching the scene, she noticed a group of
teenagers come onto her yard in front of her house. (Tr. 65,
187-88). She testified that they were located near the
southwest corner of her property near her driveway, which was
on the south side of her property abutting the property at
230 Pierpont Street. (Tr. 65). McKnight called to them twice
to tell them to get out of her yard. (Tr. 78, 188, 204).
Because they did not respond, she got off her porch and
walked toward them and told them again they had to leave her
yard. (Tr. 78, 188, 204). She testified that the group began
to walk off, and she turned back toward her house. (Tr.
188-89, 204-05). At that point she noticed Officer Vasile for
the first time. (Tr. 65, 205).
to McKnight, Vasile was standing on the ground at the north
corner of the steps leading to her front porch affixing
yellow tape to her porch railing. (Tr. 66, 79, 85, 90, 216;
P. Ex. 8A). McKnight testified that he was tying the tape to
the knob at the top of the first spindle of the railing at
the bottom of the stairs. (Tr. 206, 245; P. Ex. 8A).
who had retrieved the crime scene tape, was tying it to
McKnight's porch railing when he first encountered
McKnight. (Tr. 280-89). He testified that because the crime
had occurred at 234 Pierpont Street and he had been trained
to “start bigger and then close it in” when
securing a crime scene, he chose 232 as a starting point.
(Tr. 281). Specifically, he stated:
232 [was] one house south of where it appeared that the crime
occurred at 234 and that's the nearest place for me to
logically attach the crime scene tape.
(Tr. 281). Vasile had intended to run the tape west from
McKnight's porch railing to a large tree in the apron
near the bottom of the stairs in front of 234 and then north
to another spot likely “to include 236.” (Tr.
283-84). According to Vasile, the presence of a substantial
number of people in the vicinity created an urgent need to
put up the crime scene tape. (Tr. 293). He explained that the
purpose of putting up tape was twofold: to keep people out of
the crime scene and to assist technicians to locate evidence.
testified that as she was walking toward her porch stairs,
she said to Officer Vasile, “Excuse me, Officer. You
cannot put that yellow tape in my yard.” (Tr. 66, 205).
She explained that she did not want the tape on her property
because of its negative connotations. (Tr. 79). He said,
“Yes, I can, ” and she responded, “You
can't, ” and told him that “[t]his is not a
crime scene” and “[t]he crime didn't happen
here.” (Tr. 66, 207-08). McKnight testified that she
pointed to the middle of the street where the victim was
located and told Vasile that the crime had happened
“over there.” (Tr. 66, 208-09, 211). McKnight
testified that she was walking up the south side of the
stairs as she was speaking to the officer. (Tr. 87, 206-07,
216; P. Ex. 8A). Vasile responded that he could put up the
tape. (Tr. 66). As McKnight approached or reached the top of
the porch stairs, she replied, “It's not going to
be here all night.” (Tr. 66-67, 87-89, 208, 212, 216,
218; P. Ex. 8A). McKnight testified that she did not mean
that she intended to remove it, but rather that the kids who
were outside would likely tear it down. (Tr. 67, 88).
According to McKnight, Vasile then came running up the stairs
behind her, declared, “I'm tired of this shit,
” and ordered her to put her hands behind her back and
grabbed her left arm. (Tr. 67, 89-90, 214, 218). McKnight
testified that she never gestured to the tape, touched it, or
tried to remove it. (Tr. 151, 217). Vasile acknowledged that
the tape rips easily. (Tr. 362).
testimony of the verbal exchange is similar to McKnight's
in many material respects except concerning his stated
conclusions as to her intent to rip down the tape. Vasile
testified that as he was putting up the tape he noticed
McKnight standing nearby. (Tr. 291). He heard her say to him
that he could not put up the tape. (Tr. 295, 297-98). At the
time, he was on the ground near the front bushes and porch
railing and she was on the walkway near the porch stairs.
(Tr. 294, 296, 300). Vasile replied, “[Y]es I can . . .
it's a crime scene.” (Tr. 295, 297-98). McKnight
responded that it was not a crime scene and told him that the
crime happened “over there, ” pointing in the
direction of 234. (Tr. 299). Vasile stated that he said he
did not care, to which she replied “something to the
effect of ‘This isn't going to stay up here all
night.'” (Tr. 298-99). Vasile testified that when
McKnight made that statement, she was “motioning toward
[the tape], moving toward it.” (Tr. 301). Vasile was
asked what movement McKnight made toward the tape, and he
testified, “She was extending her arm in a reaching
manner.” (Tr. 301). Vasile admitted that she made no
other movements toward the tape and did not rip it. (Tr.
302). He testified that he did not know if she touched it.
McKnight walked up the stairs toward her front door, Vasile
told her he had had enough of her “shit, ” to
turn around and put her hands behind her back. (Tr. 302,
304). Vasile testified that he believed McKnight was going to
rip down the tape and decided to arrest her for interfering
with his performance of his official duties. (Tr. 302-03).
According to Vasile, McKnight ignored his order to put her
hands behind her back and interpreted her actions as an
“attempt to flee inside of her house.” (Tr.
305, 309). He grabbed her arm. (Tr. 312, 315).
testified that he believed that he had told her several times
to go inside her house, although he acknowledged that he did
not hear that on the cellphone recording of the encounter.
(Tr. 299, 307). McKnight testified that no officer ever
ordered her to go inside her house. (Tr. 80).
recording of the encounter made from McKnight's cellphone
captures the following exchange, which McKnight testified
accurately recorded her statements to the teenagers and her
verbal interaction with Vasile:
McKnight: Y'all gonna have to get off my um yard.
McKnight: Y'all gonna have to get out my yard.
McKnight: Excuse me.
McKnight: Y'all gonna have to get out my yard.
McKnight: Ah, Officer, you cannot put that yellow tape in my
Officer: Ah, yeah I can.
Officer: Because it's a crime scene, that's why.
McKnight: This is not a crime scene.
Officer: There's a victim over there.
McKnight: It didn't happen here. It happen there.
Officer: I don't care.
McKnight: Well, this is not gonna stay here all night.
Officer: Turn around and put your hands behind your back.
I've had enough of this shit.
McKnight: I don't, I live here. What are you doing to me?
McKnight: Ah, get him.
Officer: Put your hands behind your back.
Javion: Ma Ma.
McKnight: Kelly. Kelly. Kelly. Kelly. Kelly.
(Tr. 70; P. Ex. 1; see also P. Ex. 2). The recording
reveals that approximately thirteen seconds elapsed from
McKnight's first statement to Vasile about the tape and
his direction to her to put her hands behind her back. (P.
Ex. 1). The recording also reveals that Vasile's
direction to put her hands behind her back occurred
instantaneously in response to McKnight's statement that
the tape would not stay there all night. (P. Ex. 1). Another
order to put her hands behind her back was issued four or
five seconds after the first. (P. Ex. 1). It is not entirely
clear which officer issued the verbal order, although the
timing suggests that Vasile did.
testified that the recording refreshed her recollection that
Vasile did not explicitly tell her she was under arrest, as
she had testified at her deposition. (Tr. 92, 152, 156-58,
219). Vasile likewise testified that, contrary to his
testimony on direct examination, the recording does not
reflect that he told McKnight that she was under arrest. (Tr.
358). The recording also does not reflect that Vasile told
McKnight, as he had testified during his deposition, that the
tape would be removed after the investigation. (Tr. 371). He
further testified that at the time of his deposition he did
not know that he had stated he had had enough of “this
shit.” (Tr. 377).
acknowledged that she understood that Vasile was attempting
to arrest her. (Tr. 221). She testified that Vasile grabbed
her left arm and tried to force her arms behind her back; she
attempted to turn left toward him to ask him why he was
arresting her. (Tr. 67, 92, 220, 246, 248). McKnight tried to
explain to him that she lived there. (Tr. 91). She
acknowledged that she attempted to get inside her front door
rather than go with Vasile. (Tr. 220-23). McKnight saw her
son Javion in the doorway and yelled, “Get him, ”
referring to her husband who was asleep inside the house, and
then screamed for him by calling his name, Kelly. (Tr. 67,
73, 225; P. Exs. 1, 2).
testified that the more she turned toward Vasile, the more he
turned behind her. (Tr. 222). According to her, Vasile threw
her against the front door and the front facade of the house.
(Tr. 67, 68). McKnight asked Vasile why he was hurting her,
and he did not respond. (Tr. 67). Another police officer
appeared and sprayed her with pepper spray in her face. (Tr.
68, 74, 93). McKnight testified that the second officer did
not give her any commands or say anything to her before
spraying her. (Tr. 152-53, 226). At that point, she
testified, she “just fell out . . . fell down.”
(Tr. 68, 74, 95, 230). She apparently dropped her cellphone
on the porch. (Tr. 74, 228). The officers handcuffed her,
dragged her down the stairs and to Vasile's patrol car,
and “threw” her in the back seat. (Tr. 68, 95,
227). She testified that she did not know how long she was in
the car, although it felt like “forever.” (Tr.
testified that McKnight ignored his commands to put her hands
behind her back and “began to move quickly up her
stairs toward her porch . . . more specifically towards the
front door of her house.” (Tr. 309, 312). He grabbed
her right arm at the wrist area, but her arm slipped out of
his grasp. (Tr. 312, 316). According to Vasile, her arm felt
as if it had some “slippery” substance on
(Tr. 316). She was holding onto the inside of the doorway
with her left arm. (Tr. 316, 318). Vasile attempted to employ
a technique known as a “straight arm bar” to
combat her resistance. (Tr. 317, 321). He explained the
I . . . take my right arm and grab the subject's right
wrist and then take my left hand and roll it around the
subject's left triceps for counterpressure to either
bring [the] subject to the ground or up against something in
order to be able to secure that arm and handcuff it.
(Tr. 317). Vasile testified that his attempt was not
successful because although he was able to grab her right
arm, he was not able to grab her left arm because she had it
hooked inside the doorway. (Tr. 317, 321). Vasile testified
that he tried the technique a second time using the house as
counterpressure, and his second attempt succeeded in
permitting him to secure her right arm behind her
Vasile was struggling with McKnight at the doorway, Sergeant
Nicholls ascended the porch. (Tr. 324). Vasile testified that
he did not hear Nicholls say anything. (Tr. 324). At the time
he noticed Nicholls, Vasile testified, “I had her right
arm secured at that point, and had her against the house and
was attempting to secure her left arm I guess, but never
really got that far.” (Tr. 324). Although he did not
see Nicholls deploy his pepper spray, he recognized that
pepper spray had been used because he could taste it. (Tr.
326). McKnight released the door, Nicholls took control of
her left arm, and she was handcuffed. (Tr. 321, 326).
testified that he assumed that the pepper spray was the
reason she released the door and allowed the handcuffing.
(Tr. 326). According to Vasile, he did not take McKnight to
the ground, and she did not fall on the ground. (Tr. 322,
328-29). He escorted her to the patrol car. (Tr. 326, 330).
Vasile testified that McKnight probably could not see her way
to the car because of the pepper spray. (Tr. 330). Vasile
acknowledged that McKnight never struck him. (Tr. 319).
also testified regarding his involvement in McKnight's
arrest. He explained that after he observed Vasile go to the
car to retrieve the crime scene tape, the next time he
noticed Vasile was with McKnight on the porch at 232 Pierpont
Street. (Tr. 431). From a distance of approximately twenty to
thirty feet, he observed that Vasile was trying to take
McKnight into custody. (Tr. 431-32). He described that Vasile
was trying to put McKnight's hands behind her back, but
she was pulling away from him and moving toward the house.
(Tr. 433-34). He recalled that they were either on an upper
step of the porch stairs or on the porch itself. (Tr.
432-33). Although he did not know why Vasile was trying to
arrest McKnight, he recognized from the way Vasile was
handling McKnight's arm that that was what Vasile was
trying to do. (Tr. 434-35).
went to the porch to assist Vasile. (Tr. 435). When he got to
the porch, he observed that McKnight had her left arm
“hooked” to the south side of the door frame and
was trying to pull herself away from Vasile and into the
house. (Tr. 436-38). He recalled that the front door was open
and that he did not see anyone else. (Tr. 469). Nicholls
testified that he commanded McKnight to put her hands behind
her back. (Tr. 439, 441). McKnight did not comply. (Tr. 446).
Nicholls successfully unhooked her arm from the doorway, but
lost control of her arm when she pulled it away and it
slipped out of his grip due to the presence of some lotion or
grease on her skin. (Tr. 441-44). McKnight then turned her
body toward him, at which point Nicholls sprayed a burst of
OC at McKnight. (Tr. 444). According to Nicholls, McKnight
ceased resisting and became compliant; her face went down,
Nicholls brought her left arm behind her back, and she was
handcuffed. (Tr. 450). She never fell to the ground. (Tr.
testified that the reason he used pepper spray was because
their efforts to gain McKnight's compliance through
verbal commands and joint manipulation had not succeeded.
(Tr. 446). He was concerned about both the possibility of
what she might do to him as she turned toward him, such as a
punch, and the possibility of her retreat inside a house
where weapons and other persons could be present. (Tr.
444-46, 449). For these safety reasons, Nicholls decided to
use the pepper spray. (Tr. 445-46). Based upon his training
and experience, Nicholls believed that use of pepper spray
was an effective technique to induce compliance without risk
of permanent injury. (Tr. 448).
testified that he had no further interaction with McKnight.
(Tr. 457). He also explained that because he had used force
on McKnight, RPD policy required him to request that his
supervisory lieutenant respond to the scene. (Tr. 453). At
11:24 p.m., he requested that Lieutenant Grande respond,
which she did. (Tr. 452). Nicholls testified that he did not
observe that McKnight had any injuries to her arm. (Tr. 475).
listening to the cellphone recording, Nicholls acknowledged
that he did not hear his voice on the recording. (Tr. 440,
465). He also acknowledged that he did not observe McKnight
engage in any acts that constituted obstruction of
governmental administration. (Tr. 467).
to Vasile, McKnight was alone in his patrol car for about
five minutes after he placed her there. (Tr. 341). At 11:48
p.m., Vasile called in that he had an individual in custody,
referring to McKnight. (Tr. 343; P. Ex. 12). According to the
job card, he departed 232 Pierpont Street at 11:53 p.m. and
drove to the Public Safety Building, arriving there at 12:01
a.m. (Tr. 341, 344, 346). He testified that he drove with the
air conditioning on. (Tr. 341). Vasile took McKnight to the
eye wash station as soon as they arrived and then to booking.
(Tr. 97, 100, 340-41). Vasile testified that he did not
observe that she was bleeding. (Tr. 348). He acknowledged
that the booking photographs show that her eyes are closed,
likely as a result of the pepper spray. (Tr. 375-76;
see P. Ex. 9).
The Criminal Charges Against McKnight
signed two complaints “upon personal knowledge”
on July 3, 2010, charging McKnight with criminal misdemeanor
offenses arising from his encounter with her that night: the
first charging her with obstructing governmental
administration in the second degree, in violation of New York
State Penal Law § 195.05; and, the second charging her
with resisting arrest, in violation of Penal Law §
205.30. (Tr. 337-38; P. Ex. 10). The complaint charging her
with obstructing governmental administration alleges that on
or about July 3, 2010, at 11:15 p.m., at 232 Pierpont Street,
Interfere[d] with [Vasile] while [Vasile] was attempting to
put up crime scene tape to secure a crime scene where a
stabbing occurred. Further, [McKnight] refused to go inside
her house and remove herself from the crime scene. [McKnight]
was yelling at [Vasile] not to put crime scene tape up in her
yard. [McKnight's] actions prevented [Vasile] from
securing a crime scene.
(P. Ex. 10). The complaint charging her with resisting arrest
alleges that at the same time and place McKnight:
Pull[ed] away from [Vasile] when [Vasile] attempted to take
her into custody for an arrest. Further, once [McKnight]
pulled away from [Vasile] she did attempt to flee inside her
house thus attempting to prevent [Vasile] from making an
(P. Ex. 10).
Vasile's Incident Report and Subject ...