Lawsuit alleges CSPD officer used excessive force, claims police chief failed to investigate officer’s lie
Tyler Cunnington
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (KRDO) – A new lawsuit claims that a Colorado Springs police officer not only used excessive force during a suspected DUI arrest in 2023, but also alleges that he lied about a key piece of evidence in the case.
The complaint, filed on behalf of 39-year-old Jessica Halling, also names the Chief of the Colorado Springs Police Department (CSPD) as well as the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s office, alleging they failed to act on a judge’s concerns about the officer’s credibility.
The lawsuit includes three separate files containing body camera footage from June 3, 2023, which totals over 1 hour and 16 minutes.
You can view those videos here, along with the lawsuit.
Allegations of excessive force:
The lawsuit stems back to a 2023 case, when 39-year old Jessica Halling was detained by CSPD officer Gregory Campbell on suspicion of DUI.
On June 3, 2023, Halling’s neighbors called police to report “numerous complaints” against her, including allegations that she had been sitting in her car, which had been parked on the street in front of her house for “hours.”
According to the lawsuit, Campbell approached Halling’s parked car and briefly spoke with her before noticing open cans of alcohol on the floor. He then asked her to step out of the car and placed her in handcuffs.
Body camera footage then shows Campbell attempting to search her twice, to which she moves her hips away from his hands and requests a female officer to come evaluate her instead.
From there, the encounter escalates, with Halling repeatedly making the same requests for a female officer, while she remained handcuffed on the ground as Campbell knelt on her.
Attorneys for Halling argue that she was fully compliant during the exchange; however, body camera footage shows Campbell eventually removing her glasses, warning that if she “doesn’t stop resisting” she’d be pepper sprayed.
Campbell then sprays her in the eyes, and just under 30 seconds later, sprays her again as she yells for a female officer.
During Halling’s trial for the DUI, Campbell was asked about his take down of Ms. Halling. The lawsuit writes that the exchange went as follows:
Defense: “Your testimony today is that you did not think you threw her hard to the ground?”
Campbell: “Correct.”
Officer Campbell was then presented with his body camera footage from the incident in which he specifically stated to another officer “…so I threw her hard to the ground.”
That footage, reviewed by KRDO13 on Thursday, confirms the quote from Campbell.
Attorneys allege officer lied about evidence, CSPD & District Attorney failed to investigate:
In addition to alleging excessive force, Halling’s attorneys claim Officer Campbell falsely stated on a state toxicology form that he personally witnessed two samples of blood being taken for Halling’s DUI on June 3, 2023.
During Halling’s trial, Campbell testified that he hadn’t seen blood drawn from Halling, which is reaffirmed by his body camera footage from that day.
However, Campbell had previously signed a P23 form, used in DUI cases, where he falsely stated he had personally observed the blood draw before submitting it as an official record. That form was later used to revoke Halling’s driver’s license for 18 months, her attorneys say.
Halling was charged with a DUI and obstruction of justice. Ultimately, she took a plea deal.
Regina Walter, the judge overseeing the DUI trial in late 2024, stated that the blood draw was not admissible into evidence “because of Campbell’s falsification,” calling him ‘incredible.’
The judge also entered a factual finding that officer Campbell had engaged in “blatant use of excessive force” against Ms. Halling.
Those findings prompted City Attorney Frederick Stein to request a continuance in order to challenge the finding that Campbell was ‘incredible as a matter of law’.
The lawsuit contends that Stein did not challenge Judge Walter’s findings that Campbell had used excessive force against Halling, nor did he challenge her finding that Campbell had lied multiple times on official criminal justice records in the case.
In that same hearing, the judge spoke into court record that she had personally emailed Colorado Springs Police Chief Adrian Vasquez as a result of what she had seen in the trial, informing him that Campbell had lied on the P23 form.
The email according to court transcript reads:
“Dear Chief, I have watched Officer Campbell’s body worn camera footage from June 3rd, 2023, People versus Halling, 23M4128. I would urge you to review the footage for training purposes and to determine whether you want to take any further action. Please be advised that Officer Campbell lied on the CBI toxicology request for laboratory examination. His testimony in court was that he did not observe the blood draw on June 3rd of 2023. He certified that he witnessed the actual withdrawal of blood from Jessica Halling.”
Later in August 2024, Halling made an official request for the Internal Affairs (IA) file investigating Campbell for his conduct, but was told a month later the investigation hadn’t been completed.
On April 30 of this year, Halling was sent a completed copy of the IA investigation, which stated that Campbell was just in his use of pepper spray against her.
Halling’s attorneys now claim that Vasquez, alongside the District Attorney’s Office, did not make an effort to investigate the judge’s credibility concerns in regards to Officer Campbell.
They’re now demanding Campbell be added to the Brady List – a public information resource about officer misconduct – which would also impact any current and future cases involving Officer Campbell, due to credibility issues.
Attorneys are also requesting that these violations be put on Campbell’s POST certification as an officer, which is currently blank.
KRDO13 reviewed CSPD’s Standard Operating Procedure and found that under “Credibility Disclosure Notifications to the DAO,” Internal Affairs is required to notify the District Attorney’s Office in writing if a sworn officer is proven to fit one of several stipulations, including:
Tampered with or fabricated evidence; or
Knowingly made an untruthful statement concerning a material fact, knowingly omitteda material fact in an official criminal justice record, or knowingly omitted a material factwhile testifying under oath or during an internal affairs investigation or administrativeinvestigation and disciplinary process
The same Standard Operating Procedure, under “Brady Notifications (Sworn & Civilian),” states that CSPD has a duty to report certain issues to the District Attorney’s Office in accordance with Brady v. Maryland, as they may include evidence relevant to a defendant’s guilt, innocence, or sentencing.
Just two of several stipulations include:
If a department member is found by a judge to have testified falsely under oath; or
If CSPD receives an allegation related to excessive or inappropriate use of force or thefailure to intervene in an excessive or inappropriate use of force; or
When KRDO13 reached out to the CSPD and the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s Office with questions about the allegations, we were told by both entities they would not comment due to ongoing litigation.