Nogales keeps paying out for false arrest


By Curt Prendergast

After failing to comply with a lawsuit settlement, the City of Nogales agreed on Wednesday to pay another $25,000 to a man falsely arrested by Nogales police for allegedly possessing child pornography.
The payout settles allegations by Gary Murray that the Nogales Police Department violated a previous settlement agreement, in which the city paid him $50,000, by destroying the property seized during a search of his home.
On Wednesday, the Nogales City Council voted unanimously to approve the new settlement, which was included as the last item in the meeting’s consent agenda.
The original lawsuit, filed in Pima County Superior Court and then transferred to U.S. District Court in May 2009, stemmed from an incident in May 2008 when Nogales police officers arrested Murray on a felony charge of allegedly possessing child pornography.
Murray was booked into the county jail and police officers obtained a warrant to search his home, where they seized a number of items.
However, the County Attorney’s Office dismissed the charges after reviewing the gathered evidence and concluding there was no evidence to support the allegation, according to the lawsuit.
Murray sued the city for false arrest, false imprisonment, unreasonable search and seizure, and infliction of emotional harm, as well as casting him in a false light in the community.
In April 2013, Murray and the city reached a settlement agreement in which the city would pay Murray $50,000 and Murray would drop the charges, according to a lawsuit filed in June 2013.
“In spite of the order and settlement, the County Attorney issued a letter to the NPD authorizing the destruction of the seized items,” said City Attorney Jose Luis Machado in an interview Tuesday.
The destruction of the unspecified items occurred after NPD officers were notified they were required to return the property as part of the settlement agreement, according to the June 2013 lawsuit.
Machado sent a letter to then-NPD Chief Jeffrey Kirkham in May 2012 advising him to return the property, and the attorney representing Kirkham sent a similar letter to Kirkham “immediately after the settlement agreement.” However, only a portion of Murray’s property was returned to him, the lawsuit alleged.
Murray sued the city for $100,000 in damages, but the city refused to offer more than $25,000 and Murray eventually accepted the offer, Machado said.
The County Attorney’s Office was not included in either of the lawsuits, he said.