Opinion ID: 2720362
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Defendant Winslow

Text: On Saturday, October 3, 2009, Matthew Lalli was arrested and taken to Knox County Jail (“KCJ”) for allegedly being intoxicated and committing assault in violation of the terms of his release. Lalli’s arraignment on these charges was set for Monday, October 5. When Lalli arrived at KCJ, Defendant Winslow was on duty as KCJ’s shift supervisor. In accordance with KCJ’s intake procedures, Officer Stilkey, who was the booking officer under 2 Of course, “we need not accept [Penn’s] version of events if it is ‘blatantly contradicted’ by the evidence.” Medina-Rivera v. MVM, Inc., 713 F.3d 132, 136 (1st Cir. 2013) (quoting Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380(2007)). But Defendants nowhere argue the district court’s factual determinations, as summarized below, are blatantly contradicted by the record and our review of the record reveals no blatant contradictions. To be sure, Defendants argue that many of the district court’s factual findings and inferences are not supported by the record, but that is a very different argument--an argument we do not have jurisdiction to review at this time. See Cady, 753 F.3d at 359 (“Questions of ‘evidentiary sufficiency’--i.e., whether the record is capable of supporting a particular factual finding, rather than a particular legal conclusion--are not sufficiently distinct to warrant interlocutory appeal.” (marks and citations omitted)). -5- Winslow’s supervision, filled out both a suicide risk assessment form and a medical screening form for Lalli. The suicide risk assessment revealed that Lalli had, among other things, (1) lost two close friends to suicide, (2) attempted suicide himself two years prior, and (3) when asked whether he then felt like killing himself responded “not sure, feels that . . . life is over.” Under KCJ’s model suicide risk assessment form, a suicide risk score of 15 or more points qualifies as the highest suicide risk level and requires KCJ to provide one-on-one observation of the inmate and to conduct a mental health evaluation within one hour. When Lalli’s answers to the suicide assessment and medical screening forms are applied to this model, his risk of suicide scored at least 20 points. A final portion of the suicide risk assessment form calls for the booking officer to indicate with checkmarks which of five levels of intervention the detainee received ranging from “NO INTERVENTION/GENERAL POPULATION” to “PLACED ON SUICIDE WATCH STEP 2.” Neither Stilkey nor Winslow checked off any of these boxes. But Lalli’s suicide risk assessment and medical assessment worried Officer Stilkey. As a result, after completing the forms, Stilkey told Defendant Winslow: “[Y]ou need to look at this.” After reviewing Lalli’s intake forms, Winslow decided to place Lalli on “welfare watch,” which required staff to make separate log entries regarding Lalli’s condition when they conducted their fifteen-minute checks of his cell and ensured that -6- a mental health care worker would speak with Lalli the next time one was scheduled to visit the jail. Although KCJ had an available suicide prevention cell, Cell 127, which could be constantly monitored from the intake desk, Winslow decided to place Lalli in Cell 135. Officers sitting at the intake desk can hear people in Cell 135 if they make a loud noise, but have no view into Cell 135 itself. Moreover, Cell 135 is not stripped of objects a detainee could use to harm himself. For instance, Cell 135 contains sheets and bedding which a detainee could potentially fashion into a makeshift noose--as Lalli did here. Winslow had no further notable contact with Lalli and Sunday, October 4 was uneventful.