Inset: Ronald McAbee. Background: Ronald McAbee, wearing a red hat and scarf, at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 (U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia).
A former Tennessee sheriff”s deputy who wore brass knuckle gloves to the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and assaulted law enforcement officers has been given the green light to sue a Washington, D.C., jail guard who sprayed him in the face twice with pepper spray for “not wearing a COVID-19 face mask.”
Ronald McAbee, of Unionville, claims he was “minding his own business” while locked up as a federal pretrial detainee in September 2022 for his actions on Jan. 6 when “jailer” Crystal Lancaster allegedly deployed the “chemical agents” on him for not wearing a face mask while receiving medication.
Judge Jia M. Cobb, a Biden appointee, denied a motion to dismiss his lawsuit on Friday and said McAbee “plausibly alleges” that Lancaster’s use of force was “unconstitutionally excessive,” giving it approval to proceed.
“If McAbee plausibly alleges that Lancaster used excessive force at any point during his interaction with her, he can survive Defendants’ motion to dismiss and get to discovery,” Cobb explained. “And the court finds that he has met his burden for doing so — at least by demonstrating that Lancaster’s second use of pepper spray was excessive.”
McAbee, who was convicted in 2023 of multiple charges related to Jan. 6 and sentenced to five years and 10 months in federal prison, claims Lancaster entered a common area at the Washington jail for the “routine purpose” of dispensing medication to him and others, according to his complaint. At the time, inmates were required to wear COVID-19 masks but not while consuming medication, per McAbee’s complaint.
“Defendant Lancaster saw Mr. McAbee approach and yelled at him to put a mask on,” the complaint says, alleging that Lancaster ordered McAbee back to his cell.
“Mr. McAbee replied that he was going to get his medication. … that he would return to his cell after receiving his medication,” his complaint alleges. “Lancaster then repeated her command to Mr. McAbee to return to his cell and then — entirely unprovoked, with no warning to anyone, and without calling for backup — administered at least a one-second burst of chemical agent directly to Mr. McAbee’s face, at pointblank range.”
Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.
McAbee claims he was restrained by Lancaster and two other guards afterward, including one who allegedly “pushed” McAbee towards a wall and almost “slammed” him face-first into it, the complaint says. McAbee allegedly extended his foot towards the wall to stop himself, prompting another alleged spray from Lancaster.
“Defendant Lancaster approached [the guard] and Mr. McAbee (whose hands were then behind his back, with one handcuff on his left hand and the second being placed on his right hand) and Defendant Lancaster then knowingly, maliciously, and sadistically administered a second burst of chemical agent directly into Mr. McAbee’s face from mere inches away,” the complaint alleges.
In her Friday order, Cobb stated that while the first pepper spray deployment could be perceived as necessary, given Lancaster’s insistence that it occurred after McAbee refused to follow orders, the second she deemed “excessive force.”
“Assuming that McAbee’s allegations are true, it was unreasonable for her to use such significant force against a person who was restrained, subdued, and compliant,” Cobb said. “Even if Lancaster was justified in initially deploying a chemical agent on McAbee, that conduct would still be within the scope of discovery on whether it was reasonable for her to spray him again.”
In her motion to dismiss, Lancaster argued that “even the second deployment of pepper spray was justified” because McAbee had “resisted” by putting his foot against the wall. But Cobb noted how reaching that conclusion would require the court to “draw inferences” from McAbee’s complaint in her favor.
“The court cannot do that,” Cobb said.
“[McAbee’s] allegations suggest that he stuck his foot out reflexively — only to ‘avoid being slammed into’ the wall — and he claims that his action ‘did not pose any physical threat’ to the officers,” the judge explained. “By the time Lancaster sprayed him again, he contends that he was in the custody of other officers, his hands were behind his back, and his handcuffs were almost on.”
Cobb concluded that at this early stage of the case, the court ultimately does not know if Lancaster or any other officer “even perceived that action to be a threat.” As a result, the judge said she “cannot ignore McAbee’s allegations, which sufficiently state a claim for unconstitutionally excessive force.”
Before Cobb’s Friday ruling, McAbee was suing both Lancaster and the District of Columbia for violating his Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. Cobb, however, dismissed the district as a defendant after McAbee failed to “sufficiently” allege that there was a municipal policy or practice “driving Lancaster’s actions,” according to her order.
