Ex-Burgettstown police officer sues, claims retaliation |

Ex-Burgettstown police officer sues, claims retaliation

A former Burgettstown police officer claims in a federal civil rights lawsuit that she was the target of a malicious criminal prosecution because she complained about a hidden video camera that may have recorded her dressing and undressing at the police station.

Amber Price says in the 75-page lawsuit filed Friday that former Burgettstown police Chief George Roberts and Washington County District Attorney Steve Toprani conspired with a county detective and two state police officers to violate her rights. Toprani and state police representatives couldn’t be reached for comment Monday.

Robert Clarke, the lawyer for the borough, said he’s confident there was no connection between the video camera and Price’s prosecution.

Price has been a defendant in at least four citizen lawsuits claiming she and other police violated their civil rights. Two of those lawsuits deal with a case in which state police charged Price with lying in an affidavit used to obtain a search warrant.

Price and Smith police Officer Michael North stopped Harold Huber and reported they found drugs in his car. Price signed an affidavit for a search of Huber’s house saying she saw him leave the house shortly before the traffic stop. Price admits she didn’t see Huber leave the house, and says in her lawsuit that North typed the affidavit and she signed it without noticing the statement.

Huber claims in his civil rights lawsuit that North and Price stopped him without probable cause, and did so specifically so they could search his home. The other lawsuit by Teresa Basile and her son, Adam Huber, involves the officers’ search of the Huber home.

State police in February 2009 charged Price with conspiracy, official repression and swearing to a false statement. A district judge dismissed charges in March 2009, but state police re-filed the charges and added a conspiracy and false swearing charge. The district attorney withdrew the charges in September 2009.

Price was suspended from the force when the criminal charges were filed and her career effectively is over, the lawsuit says. The borough disbanded its police department May 1.

Price says Toprani pursued the charges because she pressed for an investigation of the hidden camera she discovered at the police station in November 2008.

Price claims that Roberts and Toprani installed the camera to catch another officer having sex. Clarke said the district attorney had the camera installed for security reasons, and that it was placed to record people entering and leaving the police offices, which shared a hallway with the borough’s municipal offices.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.