Officer Who Shot Boy, 5, Can’t Sue on Rights Issue

Former Stanton policeman Anthony Sperl, who accidentally shot and killed a 5-year-old boy in 1983, cannot sue the City of Stanton for allegedly violating his civil rights, a judge ruled Wednesday.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Harmon G. Scoville ruled that Sperl’s Fourth and 14th Amendment rights were not violated when police supervisors allegedly forced him to sit for five hours in his blood-soaked police uniform while he was interrogated the night he shot Patrick Andrew Mason.

Otis Wright, attorney for the city, called Scoville’s decision “a big, big deal” that could save Stanton “big money, serious money.” He added, “As a practical matter, there’s nothing left to that (Sperl’s) case.”

Although Scoville said he did not believe evidence presented in the case indicated that Sperl’s rights were violated, he said he would permit Sperl’s new attorney to file additional argument papers on the matter within 15 days.

“We have 15 days to go back and state some more facts,” Daniel K. Spradlin, Sperl’s attorney, said after the hearing. “It will be pursued. . . .”

Patricia A. Ridge, Patrick’s mother, has filed a $20-million wrongful death suit against Sperl and the city, claiming her and her son’s civil rights were violated when the officer broke into their apartment the night of March 3, 1983, to check on their well-being.

Along with the civil rights issue, Sperl has filed a countersuit against the city and two former supervisors alleging fraud and improper training. It also alleges that they provided him with a service weapon and ammunition that he maintains are in violation of the Geneva Convention.

Dismissal of the civil rights counts--though it may be temporary--is good news for the city, Wright said.

In most civil suits, a winning plaintiff is awarded a single sum for damages and may or may not be awarded attorney fees as part of it. But Wright said that by law, attorney fees are added to jury awards in civil rights cases. That could have meant “a couple of hundred thousand dollars” extra the city would have had to pay to Sperl’s attorney if he had won his suit against Stanton.

The city has argued that Sperl has already been compensated for damages he suffered from the shooting through state worker compensation payments. Sperl disagrees and is seeking $25 million, alleging intentional infliction of pain and suffering.