Seven Years Since He Died Under a Cop's Knee, His Mom Is Getting Her Day in Court
Tony Timpa's story shows how far the government goes to prevent victims of abuse from seeking recourse.

Last month, the seven-year anniversary of Tony Timpa's death came and went. Today, jury selection in the civil trial surrounding that death—which occurred after Dallas police violated their training when they pinned him to the ground for about 14 minutes—finally began, providing an apt example of the legal odyssey alleged victims of government misconduct must navigate, should they want recourse.
Those seven years were filled with roadblocks, put in place by the government, which almost deprived Timpa's family not only of stating their case before a jury but of learning the very basics about what happened on the evening of August 10, 2016, when Timpa phoned 911.
That night, Timpa told a dispatcher that he was having a mental health crisis. He mentioned he had schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, and anxiety and that he had not taken his medication. Two private security guards handcuffed Timpa and waited for the cops.
They arrived shortly thereafter. For approximately 14 minutes and seven seconds, then-Officer Dustin Dillard, who was promoted last year to senior corporal, dug his left knee into Timpa's back, pressed his left hand between Timpa's shoulders, and periodically applied his right hand to Timpa's right shoulder. Timpa repeatedly cried out for help, yelling that he was "going to die."
He eventually went quiet. Because of the risk associated with the prone restraint, the Dallas Police Department (DPD) orders its officers to place subjects in an upright position or on their side as soon as any resistance abates. Instead, Timpa's silence induced Dillard to joke that he heard Timpa "snoring," after which Cpl. Raymond Dominguez and Officer Danny Vasquez suggested that "scrambled eggs" and "tutti-frutti" waffles could rouse Timpa from his slumber.
"You're going to kill me," Timpa had said. An autopsy found he suffered "sudden cardiac death due to the toxic effects of cocaine and [the] physiologic stress associated with physical restraint." He was 32.
Yet Timpa's mother, Vicki, would go years without knowing what happened to her son. It was not for lack of trying.
After the DPD notified her that her son was dead, the cops supplied several different stories. The police told her, Vicki said, that he'd had a heart attack at a bar, or that he collapsed by his vehicle, or that he fell unresponsive in an ambulance. None of those conflicting accounts could be reconciled, nor could any of them adequately explain why Timpa would have grass in his nose and bruises on his arms, which were apparent on her son's body when she went to the morgue.
Vicki then filed suit against the police. But the department refused to give her the body camera footage, threatening her ability to effectively outline what happened and meet the minimum standard required to file such a suit. The government then moved to have her complaint dismissed for not being specific enough, despite that it was the government that was withholding the specifics.
"The idea about this plausible pleading standard is to give defendants notice of what is being alleged against them," Joanna Schwartz, a law professor at UCLA and author of Shielded: How the Police Became Untouchable, told me earlier this year. "Well, the Dallas Police Department had all the notice in the world about what their officers had done, and yet used this tool to try to get the case dismissed."
It took three years before Vicki Timpa would be able to see how her son died. In August 2019, a court ordered the DPD to release the footage, clearing the way for Vicki to state in her suit what the officers knew all along.
In a practical sense, that was just the beginning. In July 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas gave the police qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that dooms suits against state and local government actors if the misconduct alleged was not "clearly established" in a prior court ruling. Timpa's family invoked Gutierrez v. City of San Antonio, a 1998 case in the same federal circuit in which police officers were denied qualified immunity after a man died while they similarly restrained him facedown. The man in that case was hog-tied—whereas Timpa was handcuffed with his feet zip-tied—which Judge David Godbey said was enough of a departure to render it ineffective at putting the Dallas officers on notice.
That thin distinction exemplifies how difficult it can be to overcome qualified immunity, with many courts demanding that victims find a pre-existing precedent that essentially mirrors their allegations. Such a ruling often doesn't exist. But in a surprise decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit overturned Godbey's ruling in December 2021, denying the officers qualified immunity and paving the way for Vicki to move forward.
"Within the Fifth Circuit, the law has long been clearly established that an officer's continued use of force on a restrained and subdued subject is objectively unreasonable," wrote Judge Edith Brown Clement. She also invoked the DPD's specific guidance on the prone restraint, which the officers appeared to ignore. Police can still receive qualified immunity even if they violate their own training, however, which puzzlingly assumes that officers are more likely to read decades of case law than they are their own department policy.
The police then appealed—again—asking the Supreme Court to intervene. The tactic is a common one used by government defendants, who have bottomless coffers of taxpayer dollars from which to pull. William Virgil, for example, filed suit in 2016 amid allegations that police framed him for murder; his conviction was overturned after he spent 28 years behind bars. Though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit declined to give the officers involved qualified immunity, the government continued to pursue vacuous appeals. Earlier this year, the city of Newport, Kentucky, finalized a $28 million settlement, although Virgil will not be able to enjoy any of it, as he died in January 2022, after waiting years for the privilege to state his case before a jury.
In May 2022, almost six years after Timpa's death, the high court rejected the government's request to intervene. A trial was set for July 2023. That was ultimately postponed after the presiding judge, Godbey—who penned the initial decision giving the officers qualified immunity—reportedly expressed his discontent with media coverage of the case.
So it wasn't until today, more than 85 months after Timpa's death, that Vicki, Timpa's mother, finally saw the jury that will decide if her family deserves recourse for the actions police took that night. It's a part of the race that many victims of government misconduct never see—and the trial has barely begun.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Can't we have a mostly peaceful protest for Tony Timpa?
We did.
I don't remember any "for" Tony.
I get paid over 220 Dollars per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. i never thought i’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 15k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do, check it out by Visiting Following Website
Click Here.. →→ http://Www.Easywork7.com
I'm still trying to understand this whole public trust thing.
They act like if protecting bad cops makes them appear more trustworthy than they would appear if they instead fired them.
Could it be that firing them means someone made a mistake when hiring them, so rather than make the hiring manager look bad they retain terrible hires?
I don't get it.
Why do you support Al Qaeda?
Think about the boner your sad little microchode almost sprouted through the whisky-dick when a racist black piece of shit cop with a history of leaving his gun in the shitter shot an unarmed woman in the face for misdemeanor trespassing, and then realize that's how most people feel about cops *in general* rather than only feeling that way about cops who murder their ideological opponents, like you.
See, wasn't so hard was it?
That man is a hero and he was awarded with a medal. Sarcs favorite cop.
... and he "saved countless lives that day"! Just ask him.
Who is "they"? What makes you think "they" care whether they are trustworthy?
So he died of a drug OD, the police lied and mommy is looking to get paid. If you think big cities are experiencing crime now, wait until we more fully embrace perfection with the benefit of hindsight as the standard for criminal penalties. You cannot have civil rights violations once you've destroyed civil society seems to be the current gameplan.
Didn’t know the cocaine part of Timpa’s story. It parallels St. Floyd more than I thought. Still looks like a cop error, but 90% of the blame goes to the victim here. I’m fine with people consuming drugs, but they can’t outsource personal responsibility to others.
FFS if the cop hadn't pressed down on him and violated the department's own procedures for all that time he'd be alive. That the cop's wrongful treatment of him wouldn't necessarily have led to his death is mitigation not a defence. Your attitude really is "blame the victim". And as for causation, see every single thin-skull case.
I agree that people should probably not do cocaine.
But police only have authority to enforce the law, not violate it.
There are laws in place, that if followed, would have resulted in Timpa surviving.
If Timpa is a cocaine user, the police can absolutely arrest him and charge him for for cocaine possession. But obviously, the way that Timpa is supposed to be held 100% responsible for his actions is that he is arrested, charged, and punished. If he is punished in some other way outside of the legal process, that violates the Constitution.
The laws that say that police may not use unreasonable force already take into account that the police have the authority to use some force. The police may use as much force as is needed to effectuate an arrest, with the important caveat that they may only use deadly force if doing so is necessary to prevent death or serious injury.
But once someone is subdued, the force must cease.
Let me repeat that. If the police have arrested someone and they are subdued, there is no longer any grounds for using force.
To intentionally use force after that point is not only against policy, it is actually a criminal act. And it is also a violation of the Constitution, which requires that seizures of people be reasonable.
To summarize, use of force to arrest someone who can lawfully be arrested is not a criminal act and is not a violation of the Constitution. But use of force after someone has been arrested and unable to resist is a criminal act.
So, you can see the issue right. The police here violated the criminal law. And they violated the Constitution.
And that violation of the criminal law and that violation of the Constitution resulted in someone dying who would otherwise not die.
The police are 100% responsible for that. It is true that it would have been better if the victim had not been high on cocaine. But one can't complain when the results of their criminal acts and violation of the Constitution causes results that are worse than expected.
Generally, two crimes don't make a right. Or, even if it is morally right as in some cases of revenge, it still isn't legally right. Here, the police don't even have the excuse of revenge. Timpa's use of cocaine was not an offense directed at the police in their personal capacities. What grounds do they have to seek revenge? In any case, if a person does commit revenge, they still generally must live with the consequences, even if the revenge is morally right. But here, I don't see how it can be morally right for the police to violate the law.
So, it was neither morally right nor legally right, I don't think.
But if you have a different opinion, I would love to hear it.
You're taking a lot of suppositions as if they were fact.
Really? I dunno, seems like justice can be done reasonably quickly and with pretty considerable payouts.
That's totally different because reasons...
So he died from a drug overdoes like George Floyd.
Part of libertarianism is that people have responsibility for their own actions. You want to do drugs? Great. But don't blame others when you die from it.
And FFS, don't call the cops when you "have a mental health crisis" induced by drugs. What exactly do you expect to happen? They are going to come and probably wrestle with you and restrain you.
And FFS, don’t call the cops when you “have a mental health crisis” induced by drugs.
Unfortunately a "mental health crisis" can be someone wandering around the street and pointing a gun, stabbing people, attacking people with machetes or hatches. You gonna call social workers for that?
Sounds like society wins either way if they do.
Already handcuffed and being detained by 2 security guards. So what was the reason for the cops showing up to : "For approximately 14 minutes and seven seconds, then-Officer Dustin Dillard, who was promoted last year to senior corporal, dug his left knee into Timpa's back, pressed his left hand between Timpa's shoulders, and periodically applied his right hand to Timpa's right shoulder." ?
Well and I'm that case, the use of lethal force is justified and nature takes its course.
No. The city said he died of an overdose. Do you really believe sny city when they say that anymore?
Technically the city said he died from the combined stress of an overdose and face down prone restraint. That leaves a reasonable conclusion that but for the prone restraint he would not have died.
Hospitals are actually quite good a preventing death by OD. I think whether you live or die is up to who gets to you first, the EMTs or the Cops.
How many times are they going to have to be told that throwing somebody prone and kneeling on their lungs is a bad idea ?
Yeah junkies get treated like kings in the psych ward you brainless faggot.
Drugged up.
Batshit crazy.
Off his meds.
Handcuffed by 'private security guards'. (where did all this happen?)
Have cops ever knelt on anyone who wasn't two or more of these things?
But he was about to go to college and turn his life around, he was a gud boy!
Many Rothbardians here:
4. Take Back the Streets: Crush Criminals. And by this I mean, of course, not “white collar criminals” or “inside traders” but violent street criminals – robbers, muggers, rapists, murderers. Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment, subject of course to liability when they are in error.
There is apparently never an error if the criminal was or may have been on/near drugs. So no need to ‘prove’ they were innocent of murder either. Or for that matter ‘insider trading’. Or ‘having a mental health crisis’. Or ‘looking at me with an attitude boy’.
Just unleash the cops. The kangaroos can take care of the courts/liability.
Coming from the chicken little panicked faggot who spent 3 years calling for the arrest of anyone caught not wearing a particle mask to prevent transmission of a respiratory virus an order of magnitude smaller than the particle filtration capability of said mask and had to seek medical attention to relieve the throbbing turgidity of his microchode when a racist black piece of shit cop shot an unarmed woman in the face for misdemeanor trespassing, this is pretty fucking rich.
Tony Timpa
George Floyd
Very similar stories with vastly different outcomes. One has to wonder why?
Not after one has searched out a photograph of the white boy.
There were no cameras recording for Tony. There was no outside evidence showing the cops doing bad things.
The difference was that the video in the Floyd case hit the news channels immediately, while the cops managed to bury the Timpa videos and other facts until it was extremely old news. So the prosecutor for the Floyd case felt extreme political pressure and reacted with a political prosecution. The officials in the Timpa case never felt political pressure, so they let the cops get away with murder (or at least, death partially due to reckless indifference), and fought the civil suit for 14 years.
MSM and basically at least 50% of the country:
"Who?"
who/what are you replying to?
"Tony Timpa's story shows . . . "
It seems like this article totally missed what Tony Timpa's story really shows . . .
Gee wonder why nobody has heard about this citizen murdered by the police? Hmm.
Because the cops controlled the cop-cam videos and kept it buried for a decade, until the news media were no longer interested. George Floyd had onlookers recording video independently of the cops and sending it to the news media immediately.
+1 points to Gryffindor.