Gerald Parks Jr.

FLINT, MI - Genesee County Prosecutor David Leyton said a jail surveillance video "speaks for itself" in the case against a former jail deputy accused of assaulting an inmate.

Leyton's office released the video showing the 2012 incident involving former Sgt. Gerald Parks Jr. following a Freedom of Information Act by MLive-The Flint Journal.

However, Parks' attorney, Jay Clothier, claims the edited video fails to show the entirety of the situation.

The video release comes after Leyton's office earlier this month asked Genesee Circuit Judge Joseph J. Farah to reinstate the criminal case against Parks, which was dismissed by Genesee District Judge M. Cathy Dowd in July for a lack of probable cause.

The video shows the alleged victim, Justin VanHorn, in a safety cell at the jail when he claimed he began knocking on the window to get the attention of the deputies.

Three deputies, including Parks, approached the inmate who had retreated back to a concrete pad in the room.

VanHorn can be seen handing paperwork to Parks, who then throws it in the cell's toilet. Parks then twice pepper sprayed VanHorn.

Genesee County Sheriff Robert Pickell could not be reached for comment but has said previously that he supported the criminal case against Parks.

Leyton's office charged Parks in October 2014 with misconduct in office, misuse of a dangerous weapon and assault and battery after officials with the Genesee County Sheriff's Office claimed they uncovered surveillance video of the incident.

However, Parks' attorneys have claimed the case is retaliation for a lawsuit the former sergeant filed against the sheriff's office.

Clothier said the video fails to show VanHorn's entire time in the jail. He added that Parks previously warned VanHorn about acting out, and VanHorn's actions were disturbing other inmates.

Parks acted within the jail's policies when he sprayed an insubordinate VanHorn, Clothier said.

"That's not the whole video," Clothier said. "That's not the whole circumstances."

Prosecutors edited the video released through FOIA to the primary incident that precipitated the charges.

Leyton's office declined to release other portions of jail surveillance because individuals not associated with the case were included in the video, which prosecutors said would be a violation of the other individuals' privacy rights.

Leyton said the video and testimony from VanHorn established probable cause in the case, and he said it should have been bound over for trial despite Clothier's claims.

"It's a question of fact, and that is for the jury to determine not the district court judge," Leyton said.

Leyton's office claims Dowd abused her discretion by relying on a standard of proof higher than probable cause, which is all that is necessary to bind the case over to circuit court for trial.

"Despite (the inmate's) testimony that he had been punched by a deputy that he could not identify and (Undersheriff) Swanson's testimony identifying the defendant drawing his hand back in a punching manner, coupled with testimony that this was an unjustified use of force, the Court still declined to acknowledge that there was probable cause that any assault took place," Leyton's office argued in its appeal.

"Instead, the Court reasoned that because it could not been seen where the Defendant's hand was landing on the video - if it was striking the chair, the victim, or something else - it had not been shown to a probable cause standard that the Defendant had assaulted the victim under circumstances that did not justify assault."

Prosecutors also argued that Dowd relied on hypothetical situations that may have justified Parks' use of the spray.

"No facts were admitted, however, to bring justification out of the realm of the merely hypothetical," Leyton's office argued in the appeal.

Clothier, however, claims there is no question of fact and additional surveillance video provided to him shows Parks acted appropriately. He has not yet filed a response to the appeal.

This isn't the first time Leyton's office has challenged an attempt from Dowd to dismiss the case.

Dowd previously dismissed the charges against Parks in June 2015 after VanHorn was unable to identify him as the deputy who attacked him. The incident was caught on jail surveillance cameras, but Dowd refused to allow a second sheriff's deputy to identify Parks on the video.

The judge claimed it was inappropriate to allow a third-party identification based on the video since the alleged victim was able to testify. She dismissed the case before prosecutors finished presenting witness testimony.

Prosecutors appealed Dowd's decision to Farah, arguing they should have been allowed to introduce a DVD copy of the surveillance video and let the second deputy use it to identify Parks as the perpetrator of the alleged assault.

Farah ruled Dowd abused her discretion by failing to admit the surveillance video as evidence and stated she misinterpreted legal precedent when she did not allow the second deputy to identify Parks in the video.

He ordered Parks' preliminary exam to continue.

Prosecutors are again asking Farah to overturn Dowd and order the case be bound over to circuit court for trial.