Quantcast

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Monday, September 30, 2024

Ex-Philly detective who allegedly committed sexual assault invokes Fifth Amendment in response to civil suit

Federal Court
Philadelphiapolicedepartment

Philadelphia Police Department | File Photo

PHILADELPHIA – A former Philadelphia Police Department detective who allegedly sexually assaulted individuals in his custody, including a man who spent 12 years in prison and was later exonerated, has denied the allegations against him and cited his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

Marvin Hill of Philadelphia filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on March 15 versus the City of Philadelphia and Philip Nordo, of Easton.

Hill, then 20, was arrested on Feb. 15, 2011, for the murder of Stacey Linwood Sharpe Jr., which had taken place in Philadelphia on Jan. 7, 2010.

In the days and months after Sharpe’s murder, Nordo investigated the crime and brought Hill in for detention and questioning at the Philadelphia Police Department Homicide Unit on more than one occasion, during which time “defendant Nordo interrogated, threatened and made repeated unwanted sexual advances towards the plaintiff.”

When Hill repeatedly rejected those advances, the suit says Nordo promised Hill that he would make sure Hill “never saw daylight again.” Allegedly, Nordo made good on those threats, finding witnesses who purportedly identified Hill as Sharpe’s killer in interviews – witnesses who much later recanted those identifications, saying they were under duress and/or coercion from Nordo.

Hill was convicted of Sharpe’s murder in January 2013 and sentenced to a prison term. However, surveillance video taken from just more than one block from the shooting, not presented at Hill’s trial and later offered for examination, proved conclusively that he could not have been Sharpe’s killer.

The suit alleges that the PPD had been aware of Nordo’s tactics since 2005, tactics which included grooming suspects for future sexual relationships, by promising leniency or reward money, using threats and coercion and then engaging in sexual assault.

Nonetheless, Nordo was not disciplined by the department and was promoted to the PPD’s Homicide Unit in 2009, giving him a wide latitude to continue committing his crimes for several years. Nordo was finally fired from the department in 2017, amid allegations that he had been engaging in police misconduct with potential witnesses and suspects for many years. This led to a grand jury indictment against Nordo in February 2019, for multiple counts of rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, sexual assault, misconduct, intimidation, and theft of city funds.

In December, Nordo was sentenced to 24-and-a-half to 49 years in prison after being convicted of those charges last June.

On Jan. 19, after spending more than 12 years behind bars, Hill was released from prison, pending his formal exoneration.

After the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office’s Conviction Integrity Unit reviewed the case and Hill’s claim of innocence, the Office requested that the Court enter a nolle prosse pursuant to Section 585(a), which was granted by the Hon. Barbara McDermott on Feb. 21.

The suit further explained that 18 other men were also convicted as a result of Nordo’s tactics and later fully exonerated, demonstrating the “pervasive patterns, practices and customs of official misconduct within the Homicide Unit of the PPD.”

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Gerald J. Pappert April 14 ordered Hill’s action be consolidated with seven other, similar actions also currently pending against Nordo.

“It is ordered that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a), the above-captioned civil action is consolidated with the actions previously consolidated before this Court under McCoy v. City of Philadelphia Et.Al, Civil No. 21-1458,” Pappert ruled.

UPDATE

Nordo answered the complaint on July 11 and denied the allegations against him, which included asserting his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

“Due to the fact that there are criminal matters pending against answering defendant Nordo, under the advice of his attorneys, is exercising his Fifth Amendment rights not to respond. To the extent a response may legally be required, any factual allegations of corruption, wrongful behavior and/or illegal behavior contained in Paragraphs 1 through 121 of the complaint are denied,” Nordo’s answer stated, in part.

“Plaintiff has failed to state claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the statute of limitations, the doctrine of latches, the doctrine of qualified immunity, the Political Subdivision Tort Immunities Act, the doctrine of waiver, his own conduct, actions and statements and the fact that he was guilty of the crimes of which he was accused.”

Four weeks later, Pappert explained a deposition of Nordo would take place, under the auspices of the Massachusetts Department of Corrections, where Nordo is incarcerated.

“Upon consideration of plaintiffs’ motion to depose incarcerated individual Philip Nordo pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2), it is hereby ordered that plaintiffs’ motion is granted. Plaintiffs are permitted to depose Philip Nordo in-person at a location to be determined in Massachusetts, and at a time and date convenient to the parties and the Massachusetts Department of Corrections. Plaintiffs shall coordinate with defendants and the Massachusetts Department of Corrections to schedule a time and place to conduct the deposition,” Pappert said.

For counts of malicious prosecution in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, deprivation of liberty without due process and denial of a fair trial and a Monell violation under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and deprivation of liberty under state law, the plaintiff is seeking damages, jointly and severally, in excess of $75,000, including costs of suit, interest, attorney’s fees, punitive/exemplary damages and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems appropriate.

The plaintiff is represented by Anwar Abdur-Rahman, Joshua Ryan Van Naarden and Julia R. Ronnebaum of VSCP Law, in Philadelphia.

Defendant Nordo is represented by William J. Fox of the Law Offices of William J. Fox, also in Philadelphia.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:23-cv-01002

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News