Wrongfully imprisoned man sues Kansas county for $93M
KANSAS CITY, Kan. (AP) - A Kansas man who served 23 years in prison for a double murder he did not commit is seeking $93 million in damages from the county where he was convicted and a former detective he says framed him.
Lamonte McIntyre, 45, and his mother allege in a lawsuit filed in 2018 that the Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas, is responsible for the actions of former Kansas City, Kansas, police detective Roger Golubski and other officers involved in his prosecution.
A federal judge on Thursday set a Nov. 7 trial for the civil case. The Unified Government wants to have the trial moved to Wichita because of extensive publicity in the Kansas City area, KCUR reported.
RELATED: Court awards $1.5M to wrongfully convicted Kansas man who spent 23 years in prison
McIntyre’s mom is also seeking $30 million. She and her son allege that Golubski coerced her into sex and then framed McIntyre for a double homicide in 1994 because she rejected the detective’s later sexual advances.
They also allege Golubski abused Black women for years and many officers were aware of his conduct. The pretrial orders includes initials of 73 women.
Golubski denies the allegations and has asked that they not be allowed as evidence in the case. If the allegations are admitted, he will argue he was a good officer during his career from 1975 through 2010, when he retired, according to his lawyers’ statement.
McIntyre was freed from prison in 2017 after a local prosecutor asked the court to vacate his convictions and to drop all charges. In 2020, he was awarded a certificate of innocence and $1.5 million from the state.
McIntyre, who now lives in Arizona, has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and suffered other negative emotional impacts from his imprisonment, according to the lawsuit.
His mother also has been diagnosed with PTSD and has sought psychological treatment for 17 years, the lawsuit says.
The local government contends even if the allegations of misconduct are proven it is not liable because the officers’ actions were outside the scope of their employment. It also denies the police chief knew about the alleged misconduct.