Judge dismisses wrongful-death suit by family of a man who ODed while in Boston Police custody - and then lay dead in his cell for more than half a day

A federal judge yesterday dismissed a wrongful-death suit against an officer in Boston Police's D-4 district by the family of Cristhian Geigel, who ingested a fatal dose of drugs even though he'd been in a holding cell at the D-4 police station in the South End for more than a day and a half in 2019 - and then lay in the cell, dead, for another 14 hours before police realized he was dead.

In her ruling, US District Court Judge Denise Casper said that, to start, Geigel's daughter, Michelle, simply waited too long to file her suit and so she had no choice to dismiss the case for exceeding the Massachusetts wrongful-death statute of limitations.

But Casper said that even if that weren't the case, she would have to dismiss the suit against Ofr. Ismael Almeida because Michelle Geigel "cannot prove that Almeida acted with deliberate indifference to Cristhian’s serious medical needs." Geigel had initially also sued BPD, but Casper had earlier dismissed the action against the entire department.

According to Casper's summary of the case and other court filings, Cristhian Geigel, homeless at the time, was causing a disturbance outside the Target on Boylston Street in the Fenway around 1 p.m. on May 26, 2019, the day before Memorial Day.

Officers who arrived at the scene arrested him on a warrant out of a court in New Hampshire, and brought him to the D-4 station on Harrison Avenue, where he was booked and placed in a holding cell. Casper wrote:

On May 27, 2019 at approximately 6:13 p.m., video footage shows that Cristhian reached into his back pants and retrieved an item. At about 6:18 p.m., Cristhian walked over to the sink and appeared to be snorting a substance for the next few minutes. At 6:21 p.m., Cristhian walks back to the bed and lays face down on the bed with the hood of his sweatshirt over his head. At approximately 6:40 p.m., it appears Cristhian takes his last breath.

Almeida began working at the D-4 station on May 27, 2019 during the late night shift starting at 11:45 p.m. and working until 7:45 a.m. on the morning of May 28, 2019. During Almeida's shift, he conducted intermittent cell checks between midnight and 4:00 a.m. on May 28, 2019.

On May 28, 2019, at 8:39 a.m., another police officer entered Cristhian's cell and attempted to wake him for court. The officer observed that Cristhian was face-down on his cell bed and was very stiff and not moving. Police officers called Boston EMS which arrived at 8:45 a.m. and they subsequently pronounced Cristhian as deceased at 8:47 a.m. The autopsy report and declaration of death listed Cristhian's cause of death as acute intoxication due to the combined effects of fentanyl, oxycodone, methamphetamine and heroin.

In her suit, Michelle Geigel argued that a simple dose of Narcan could have revived her father if it had been applied on time, but that Almeida failed to adequately check his condition even though he was homeless, suffered from an opioid addiction and was in a police station on the front lines of the city's drug war, where officers guarding inmates should have known to take particular care to ensure none of their detainees were overdosing.

But Casper concluded that, when it comes to Almeida specifically, there was no evidence of the "deliberate indifference" required to make a case:

Deliberate indifference requires a culpable state of mind where the officer must have "actual knowledge of impending harm, easily preventable" and can be evidenced by "the officials' response to an inmate's known needs or by denial, delay, or interference with prescribed health care." ...

Here, the record does not support that there is a genuine issue of material fact that Almeida was deliberately indifferent to Cristhian's serious medical needs. Geigel argues that the deliberate indifference Almeida displayed was conducting a head count rather than a full, physical wellness check to ensure Cristhian was breathing. The undisputed evidence shows that Almeida was not the booking officer when Cristhian was brought into police custody and he was not present when Cristhian ingested drugs or overdosed. The undisputed evidence shows that Almeida came onto shift approximately five hours after Cristhian overdosed and there is nothing in the record that evidences that Almeida had any knowledge of Cristhian using drugs or having a serious medical need that he knowingly ignored. Geigel has pointed to no facts to suggest a genuine dispute that Almeida was aware or could have been aware of Cristhian's medical need prior to starting his shift and knowingly chose to ignore that need. Accordingly, there is no genuine dispute of material fact that Almeida did not have knowledge of Cristhian's medical condition, and therefore, did not show deliberate indifference. ... Although Geigel argues that Almeida failed to appropriately monitor Cristhian, "without the knowledge of an elevated risk of harm there can be no deliberate indifference" and Almeida's actions "[do] not rise to the level of a constitutional violation."

Similarly, the judge ruled, there was no "genuine factual dispute" on the question of whether Almeida somehow caused Geigel's death - simply, he did not, she wrote, adding that that similarly means Almeida is protected by a state law - the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act - barring suits against public employees doing their jobs.

As the Court has previously concluded that there is no genuine dispute of material fact that Almeida did not act with deliberate indifference to a serious medical need, the record does not support a claim that would fall outside of the immunity provided by the MCTA.