A former Warrenton police officer who also worked for the Roanoke Rapids Police Department has given his responses to a civil lawsuit that alleges excessive use of force with a Taser on four defendants.

Meanwhile, in Mark Aaron Oakley’s criminal case in which he is charged with three counts of use of excessive force with a Taser, the court today agreed to reset his arraignment hearing until the March term of court before United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones Jr., according to court documents.

Response to civil case

In the document, Oakley admits to several specific facts regarding his employment and actions, specifically that he was a member of the Warrenton Police Department starting January 2018 and that he was previously a member of the RRPD. 

Former RRPD Chief Chuck Hasty confirmed last October that Oakley resigned before the completion of an internal investigation into a case where the former officer was alleged in 2015 to have slammed and tased a handcuffed detainee. 

The Roanoke Rapids case is not part of the current civil proceedings but was referenced in the section of the complaint that says the town of Warrenton and its police department “allegedly had actual or constructive knowledge of Officer Oakley’s ‘longstanding pattern of unlawfully threatening, harassing, detaining, macing and using excessive force’ against Warrenton’s citizens, especially its Black citizens.”

The person in the Roanoke Rapids case was White and has since died from complications not related to the alleged 2015 assault.

In the response, Oakley, through his attorney Stephen K. Pytlik, admits to deploying a Taser during the arrests of plaintiffs Shamayah Jones, Xavier Davis, and Dwayne Hicks.

He admits that he was not acting pursuant to an active warrant when interacting with Jones or Ishmill Smith.

He denies the majority of the specific allegations of wrongdoing and asserts several affirmative defenses:

He specifically denies deploying a taser during the arrest of Smith.

He argues he is entitled to various immunities, including qualified immunity, which protects government officials from liability unless they violated clearly established law.

He maintains that his actions were reasonable, performed in good faith, and involved only necessary force for self-defense or to maintain discipline.

He claims that any injuries sustained by the plaintiffs were a result of their own negligence or failure to comply with lawful commands.

Claims 

The filing responds to nine claims for relief, including excessive force, assault and battery, false arrest, and malicious prosecution. 

He requests that the court dismiss the complaint with prejudice and that the plaintiffs be responsible for his legal fees.

Criminal case

This morning the court approved moving his arraignment — originally scheduled for next Monday — to the March term of court.

Joseph E. Zeszotarski Jr., his attorney in the criminal matter, said in the motion for continuance that he and his client have been working diligently on preparing the defense of his case and evaluating Oakley’s options and potential resolutions, including work on the review of voluminous discovery and the interview of potential witnesses.