STL Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner Lawsuit Thrown out by Federal Judge

(AP Photo/Jim Salter)
Gardner - AP featured image
St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner speaks at a news conference Wednesday, May 30, 2018, announcing that her office dismissed felony computer data tampering charges against Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens. Greitens announced his resignation Tuesday, May 29, 2018, effective on Friday. (AP Photo/Jim Salter)


St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner suffered another courtroom loss today. Her lawsuit against the City and its police union, alleging civil rights violations was dismissed by Federal District Court Judge John Ross.

Gardner, who we’ve covered previously (READ: 34 of 36 People Arrested in St. Louis Between Sunday and Tuesday Have Been Released Without Summonses, and Chicago Isn’t the Only Town With a Problem in the Office of Its Chief Prosecutor), and who readers will recognize as the very same Circuit Attorney who elected to prosecute Mark and Patricia McCloskey, following the June 28 incident in which they displayed firearms after protesters entered their private street, filed this lawsuit in January asserting civil rights violations, along with violations of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871.

In her suit, Gardner alleged that “entrenched interests” were intentionally attempting to hamper her efforts at reform. The suit named the City, the St. Louis Police Officer’s Association, its business manager (Jeff Roorda), and Special Prosecutor Gerard Carmody. Carmody happens to be conducting the investigation into Gardner and her office regarding their prosecution of former Missouri Governor Eric Greitens. (READ: Is the Criminal Case Against Missouri Governor Eric Greitens About To Be Dismissed? and SURPRISE TWIST: Prosecutor Dismisses Charge Against MO Governor Greitens on Third Day of Jury Selection.)


As reported by St. Louis Public Radio, in his Order dismissing the suit, Judge Ross stated:

“Her 32-page complaint can best be described as a conglomeration of unrelated claims and conclusory statements supported by very few facts, which do not plead any recognizable cause of action.”

He continued: “Gardner presents no specific material facts, circumstantial or otherwise, to show that defendants acted with each other for the purpose of depriving her – or anyone else – of a constitutional right to equal protection. Her complaint is nothing more than a compilation of personal slights – none of which rise to a legal cause of action.”

Ouch. The full Order can be found at the end of this article by KSDK.

No word yet as to whether Gardner plans to appeal.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos