“Trump Train” convoy pictured on Oct. 30, 2020 (exhibit from court documents)
A civil lawsuit filed against a city in Texas over the police non-response to the “Trump Train” convoy’s tailing in October 2020 of a Biden-Harris campaign bus on I-35 between Austin and San Antonio has ended with a settlement — and a commitment to train the whole department.
Plaintiffs Eric Cervini, Wendy Davis, David Gins, and Timothy Holloway — “respectively, a volunteer, surrogate, staffer, and contractor for the Biden-Harris Campaign” — first sued under the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 back in June 2021, alleging that “law enforcement officials in the City of San Marcos abdicated” their responsibility to protect and serve on Oct. 30, 2020, by either refusing or failing to respond “when dozens of individuals in at least forty vehicles formed a self-labeled vehicular ‘Trump Train”” and surrounded the Biden-Harris bus in an act of blatant political intimidation.
The complaint was amended in November 2021 to name the City of San Marcos, San Marcos Police Corporal Matthew Daenzer, former director of public safety and current assistant city manager Chase Stapp, and Assistant Chief of Operations Brandon Winkenwerder.
“For at least ninety minutes, including during the entirety of the stretch of I-35 inside the San Marcos city lines, the Trump Train pursued and terrorized the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs tried to get help. They repeatedly called 911. They requested police escorts,” the complaint alleged. “San Marcos refused to help. From the moment dispatch received 911 calls pleading for help, the City of San Marcos chose not to mount a response. Instead, according to text messages and 911 audio recordings obtained by Plaintiffs, they privately laughed and joked about the victims and their distress, including by calling them ‘tards,’ making fun of a campaign staffer’s ‘hard’ breathing, and retorting they should just ‘drive defensively’ or ‘leave the train.’”
More Law&Crime coverage: ‘Trump Train’ convoy boyfriend and girlfriend sued under KKK Act for tailing Biden-Harris campaign bus apologize after settlement
The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants “had policymaking, decision-making, managerial, and/or supervisory authority within the City of San Marcos, had actual knowledge of a conspiracy of members of the Trump Train to knowingly intimidate constitutionally eligible voters out of providing support or advocacy in a federal election” but did not act.
A joint status report filed on Oct. 6 provided a hint that the case was close to being resolved after a series of “productive” recent conferences involving the lawyers.
Read Related Also: Laws of Combat in the Latest Palestine-Israel War
“The parties have found these conferences to be productive, and therefore agreed to further extend the suspension of all deadlines as described above to October 18, 2023 and that Defendant would ask the Court to further extend the City’s deadline to respond to […] to October 27, 2023, while the parties continue to explore resolution of the pending matters,” the brief filing said.
The signed settlement agreement included a statement from the City of San Marcos which says that while the city “continues to deny many of the allegations,” the San Marcos Police Department’s response “did not reflect the Department’s high standards for conduct and attention to duty.”
The statement added that the entire police department, “both sworn and professional staff, will attend training in the coming weeks.”
“This training will remind members of their obligation and role in developing and fortifying community trust and respect in local law enforcement,” the statement concluded. “Citizens and visitors to the City of San Marcos should have confidence in the San Marcos Police Department, and a review of this event has better positioned the Department to more fully meet the community’s needs and expectations.”
There is also a financial component to the settlement:
The Parties agree that Defendants shall, within 30 days of the completed execution of this Settlement Agreement and receipt of funding instructions and any law firm payees’ W-9, make a full and final payment of $175,000 to Plaintiffs as agreed upon by the Parties.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
