Correspondence from Winter to Bracey Re: Request for Assistance

    egal efenseF■ B iu n d NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. 
10 Columbus Circle, New York, N Y 10019 • (212) b8fc)-8397

May 23, 1980

William R. Bracey 
Chief of Patrol 
Room No. 1308 
One Police Plaza 
New York, N. Y. 10038
Re: Garner v. Memphis Police Department
Dear Chief Bracey:
I am writing to you to renew our request which has already 
been approved by the Department for your assistance as an 
expert in the above noted case. I have not contacted you 
until now because the status of the case has been most 
uncertain and because I have spent most oi my time in the 
last two months preparing for a trial in Mobile.
When I first spoke with you back in December, there were 
two cases in which we desired your assistance. The first, 
Madison v. Memphis Police Department was subsequently 
settled on the eve of trial, as I think I indicated to you 
in our last telephone conversation. In the other. Garner 
V. Memphis Police Department, I have just argued a motion 
for the district courts seeking a new trial after a remand 
from the Court of Appeals. At the time that we conferred, 1 
expected the cour to grant us that new trial. In late Janu­
ary, I f^led a Memorandum with the court explaining what we 
would seek to prove at such a trial, and designating what 
alternate procedures we would deem minimally necessary if a 
new trial were not granted. I filed an additional memo on 
related subjects in late February. Then, in late March,the 
court entered an order and an opinion finding against us 
on the merits of our claim, without affording us either a 
trial or an opportunity to brief and argue the merits. Ten

( .null ilinlioiis arc ih’iliictlhh’ for U.S. income ln\ pnrpo.ses

The NAACP LEGAL DLELNSE & EDUCATIONAL FUND is not part of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People although it 
was founded by it and shares its commitment to equal rights. IDF has had for over 20 years a separate Board, program, staff, office and budget.



Win. R. Bracey 
May 23, 19 30 
Page two

days later, I filed a Motion for Reconsideration pursuant 
to the Federal Rules, pointing out to the court that it 
should have at least afforded us the opportunity to file a 
brief and an offer of proof before ruling against us on the 
merits. That motion languished yet another month. On April 
29th, the judge granted my Motion for Reconsideration and 
gave us 45 days in which to prepare a brief and an offer 
of proof. Unfortunately, the clerk of the court failed to 
send me a copy of the judge's April 29th Order. As a 
result, I did not become aware of the judge's order until 
two weeks later. May 12th. Due to the oversight, I expect 
that we shall be able to obtain an extension from the judge 
if necessary.
Having just completed a 100-page brief in my case in Mobile,
I am now turning my full attention to the Garner case. At 
this time, we are attempting to assemble an offer of proof 
on the question of the Memphis Police Department's use of 
deadly force policy. It would be most he.pful if you coulc 
render us assistance by providing us with an affidavit 
regarding your views and experience on this subject, as we 
have previously discussed. If that is possible, I would 
suggest that the best way to proceed would be for me to m< et 
with you at your office to discuss the contents of the af­
fidavit. At that time, we can decide whether it will be more 
efficacious for you or me to do the first draft of the affida­
vit .
Thank you for your consideration of this matter. I am looking 
forward to meetinj with you again in the near future.

Sincerely,

Steven L. Winter ■7 It- ‘  >'

SLWrmm