Traffic stop results in a $105,000 judgment against City of Newton and officers

An Iowa jury has awarded $105,000 to a former college student whose YouTube video of a police traffic stop generated 1.6 million views.

In February 2023, Tayvin Galanakis of Newton sued the city and its police department for false arrest, civil rights violations and negligent supervision and training, after he was arrested for drunken driving despite passing all sobriety tests.

Late last week, a jury entered a $10,000 judgment in favor of Galanakis against Officers Nathan Winters and Christoper Wing on the civil rights claim; plus $10,000 against Winters, Wing and the City of Newton on the false-arrest claim; plus $55,000 against Winters for punitive damages; plus $30,000 against Wing for punitive damages.

Galanakis had alleged that shortly after midnight on Aug. 28, 2022, he was pulled over by Winters and Wing after he drove past their patrol car without dimming his headlights for oncoming traffic. Video of the traffic stop shows Galanakis telling Winters and Wing he was driving with his high beams on because one of his headlights had a broken bulb.

“How much have you had to drink tonight?” one of the officers asked, as seen in the body-camera footage later obtained and posted online by Galanakis.

“None,” Galanakis responded.

“What do you mean ‘none’?” the officer asked.

“I’ve had nothing to drink,” Galanakis said.

“OK,” the officer said. “Why would you — why would your eyes be watery and bloodshot?”

Later, the same officer asked Galanakis again how much he had been drinking.

“I’ve had nothing to drink,” Galanakis responded.

“OK, so your movements in the car, with you fumbling over the registration, kind of say otherwise,” the officer responded. “And so does the odor of alcohol coming from your person.”

“Great, let’s do a test then,” Galanakis said.

The officers’ video shows Winters subjecting Galanakis to a variety of field sobriety tests. The lawsuit alleges Winters falsely claimed Galanakis performed poorly on the tests, although, the lawsuit claims, the body-camera video shows otherwise.

Winters allegedly told Galanakis he had sufficient cause to arrest him based on his inability to find his registration, his bloodshot eyes and the field tests. Galanakis asked for a breath test which, when administered, showed he had a blood-alcohol level of 0.00, according to the lawsuit.

The video shows that immediately after the breath test, Winters began reading Galanakis his rights and then asked how much “weed” he had been smoking.

“I’ve had no weed tonight,” Galanakis can be seen in the video telling the officers. “Why are you saying — wait, I blew a zero, and so now you’re trying to say I smoked weed. That’s what’s going on. You can’t do that, man. You really can’t do that.”

“Absolutely I can,” one of the officers responded.

Galanakis was taken to the Newton Police Station where he agreed to a drug-recognition test and a urine test. According to the lawsuit, the department’s drug-recognition expert administered the tests and at 2 a.m. concluded Galanakis was not intoxicated or showing any signs of drug or alcohol use. Galanakis then asked to speak to Winters, who “remained defiant” and refused to apologize, according to the lawsuit.

Officers sued Galanakis for alleged defamation

A few weeks after the incident, Galanakis shared on Facebook and YouTube edited versions of the body-camera footage of the traffic stop. Newton Mayor Mike Hansen said last fall that the video had triggered hundreds of telephone calls from people complaining about the matter.

The mayor said he, the city administrator, the police chief, the police command staff and the city attorney had all reviewed the incident and concluded the traffic stop “was handled according to police departmental policy and according to the law.”

After Galanakis sued the city, Winters and Wing filed a counterclaim against Galanakis, suing him for defamation and invading their privacy by posting on social media the police body-camera videos documenting his arrest and then appending to those videos his own commentary on the incident.

As part of his social-media postings, according to court documents, Galanakis made several statements, alleging he “basically got kidnapped, then raped by the NPD all night,” and falsely indicated Winters had been “convicted” of domestic abuse for beating up a girlfriend.

In two separate rulings, U.S. District Judge Stephen Locher dismissed elements of the officers’ counterclaim, ruling that most of Galanakis’ public statements about the officers were “not actionable in defamation or under other theories,” while finding that “a few statements are sufficiently grounded in fact to state plausible claims for defamation and false-light invasion of privacy.”

With regard to the claim that Galanakis had filed two false complaints against Winters, Judge Locher ruled there was only one communication from Galanakis that could be construed as a complaint, and “because Winters does not allege these statements are untrue they cannot be defamatory.”

As for the complaint that Galanakis had been “kidnapped, then raped,” Judge Locher found that statement was a clear and allowable expression of opinion and rhetorical hyperbole.

Other false-arrest lawsuit is still pending

The city is still facing other potential liabilities arising from Galanakis’ traffic stop.

In 2022, another citizen, Noah Petersen, looked into Galanakis’ arrest and discovered that Winters had been the subject of a civil no-contact order related to allegations of domestic abuse. On Oct. 3, 2022, Petersen attended a city council meeting and, during the public-comment period, he began reading prepared remarks characterizing the police department as “violent” and “pro-domestic abuse.”

Mayor Hansen interrupted Petersen and directed Police Chief Rob Burdess to remove him from the council chambers. When Petersen insisted on finishing his remarks, Burdess arrested him for disorderly conduct.

On Oct. 24, 2022, Petersen attended another city council meeting. During the public-comment period, Petersen called Hansen and Burdess “fascists” who “need to be removed from power” — at which point Hansen gaveled him down, suspended the meeting and ordered Petersen to leave. As Petersen walked toward the exit, a police lieutenant intercepted him and arrested him for disorderly conduct.

Petersen later sued Hansen, Burdess and the city in federal court. Earlier this year, Chief Judge Stephanie M. Rose of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa ruled the city had been actively “silencing unwelcome criticism while permitting favorable commentary.”

She stated the constitutional violations stemming from that action “were not the work of overzealous subordinates acting contrary to city policy. They were the deliberate product of city policy, developed and implemented by the municipality’s highest officials.”

As part of her ruling, Rose granted Petersen’s motion for summary judgment alleging First Amendment retaliation by Hansen and Burdess. She also granted summary judgment in favor of Petersen as to the city’s liability in the manner, the violation of Petersen’s Fourth Amendment rights, and the violation of the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution in connection with the city’s selective enforcement of its rule.

In rejecting the city’s defense, Rose wrote that “the Constitution does not permit government officials to silence criticism under the guise of preventing defamation. Indeed, no court of last resort in this country has ever held, or even suggested, that prosecutions for libel on government have any place in the American system of jurisprudence. Yet that is precisely what (the city) attempted here.”

Rose’s ruling cleared the way for a trial to determine the damages to which Petersen was entitled. The city, however, has filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, pausing the proceedings in district court.