Martin Praisner Jr. – Eastern Connecticut State University Department of Public Safety

On September 1, 2008, Officer Praisner was involved in an incident where he allegedly deployed pepper spray against an intoxicated and violent prisoner in a holding cell and failed to promptly decontaminate the prisoner. He was placed on paid administrative leave and later indicted on federal charges of conspiracy to violate civil rights and deprivation of civil rights. After two trials resulting in hung juries, the charges were dismissed on August 10, 2011. Praisner sought indemnification for economic losses incurred due to the prosecution, but the court ruled that university police officers are not entitled to such indemnification under state law. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/connecticut/supreme-court/2021/sc20315.html?utm_source=openai))

## Officer Forum Links:
– [Martin Praisner Jr.](https://watchaudits.com/forums/topic/martin-praisner-jr/)

Forum Links

Posted in Audits Law Enforcement Agencies: Officer Names: States:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Welcome to Police Accountability Database

Our Mission

We're building a comprehensive database of police interactions to promote accountability and transparency in law enforcement.

How You Can Participate

  • View the Blog: Read about documented police interactions
  • Share Your Experience: Submit your own police interaction story
  • Browse the Forums: Check if your local law enforcement has been documented

Important Community Guidelines

It is strictly against our rules to:

  • Make threats of any kind
  • Share private information such as personal emails, home addresses, or phone numbers

Violation of these rules will result in immediate content removal and possible account suspension.

Why This Matters

By organizing this data, we can potentially demonstrate when officers were previously aware of laws they later claim ignorance of, challenging qualified immunity defenses and promoting accountability.