NYPD sued for using sound cannon at Eric Garner protest

The New York Police Department has been sued in U.S. District Court by several individuals who say they were injured when the department deployed a high-powered sound cannon during a protest over the police-related death of Eric Garner.

In a 50-page complaint filed late Thursday in the Southern District of New York, the NYPD is accused of exhibiting “gratuitous and unlawful uses of force and authority” when two of its officers deployed a Long Range Acoustic Device, or LRAD, during a Dec. 5, 2014, demonstration.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs — Anika Edrei, Shay Horse, James Craven, Keegan Stephan and Michael Nusbaum — said the incident occurred during a protest in midtown Manhattan held after a grand jury declined to indict a white police officer in the death of Eric Garner, a black man from Staten Island who died while in police custody earlier that year.

The attorneys said the plaintiffs had been “lawfully and properly exercising” their First Amendment right to assemble when the officers engaged the LRAD and in turn “terminated or severely limited [the plaintiffs’] freedom of movement through pain compliance and threat of permanent injury.”

LRAD Corp, the manufacturer of the sound cannon, has claimed that the model used by the NYPD can “easily overcome engines, sirens and noisy crowds” and is capable of creating sounds louder than what a power saw can produce.

“The Long Range Acoustic Device is a safe and effective communication tool the department uses legally during disorderly demonstrations. It is used consistent with manufacturer’s recommendations,” Lt. John Grimpel, an NYPD spokesman, told the New York Daily News.

But in 2014, Amnesty International said in a report the health risks involved with close-range LRAD usage include loss of balance, eardrum rupture and permanent hearing damage.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs allege their clients have suffered from migraines, nausea and persistent ringing in the ears since the incident, and have missed employment opportunities as a result.

 

“The LRAD is more a sound weapon than a traditional loudspeaker or megaphone,” the lawsuit states.

Plaintiffs seek nonspecific damages and a jury trial.