On Sept. 26, 2010, at approximately 6 p.m., plaintiff Matthew Frazier was in an altercation with several men at a hotel in Redding. Frazier allegedly fled the altercation and ran about a block away, where he hid at a closed gas station. When Redding police officer Jason Rhoads pulled into the vacant gas station, Frazier approached the police car. However, Rhoads used his pepper spray and took Frazier into custody. Frazier claimed that during his arrest, he suffered a shoulder injury, and abrasions to his face and head. Frazier sued Rhoads; fellow officers Rebecca Zufall, Peggy Porter and Will Williams; and the officers’ employer, the Redding Police Department. Frazier alleged that the defendants violated his civil rights when the police used excessive force to apprehend him. Zufall, Porter, Williams and the Redding Police Department were ultimately dismissed from the case. Thus, the matter proceeded to trial against Rhoads only. (This was a pro bono case involving a civil rights complaint, in which an earlier claim had been dismissed.) Frazier claimed that he was a victim of vigilantes before he fled from the altercation and hid at the closed gas station. He claimed that when he saw Rhoads’ police patrol car, he attempted to flag it down for assistance. However, he claimed that as he approached the vehicle, Rhoads jumped out of his car, pepper-sprayed him without cause, and forced him to lie on the ground. Frazier alleged that when he attempted to explain that he had been attacked, Rhoads told him to “shut up” and kneed him repeatedly in the back. He also alleged that when he looked back to say he had not done anything wrong, Rhoads punched him in the face, causing a black eye. Frazier further alleged that he sustained abrasions to his knees, arms and hands while he was being cuffed. Frazier claimed that Rhoads then roughly pulled him up from the ground by the handcuffs, causing a shoulder injury, and then threw him in the back of the patrol car, causing him to hit his head. Rhoads claimed that he was stopped at a light adjacent to the vacant gas station when he saw Frazier, looking bloodied and impaired, running in traffic near where the fight had been reported. He claimed that he then pulled into the gas station in order to contact Frazier and told Frazier to stop running. However, Rhoads claimed that Frazier failed to stop running and, instead, turned and ran toward him. He alleged that as a result, he thought Frazier was taking a fighting stance, causing him to pepper spray Frazier in order to take him into custody. Defense counsel argued that Rhoads, and other police officers, used reasonable procedures when dealing with Frazier. Counsel contended that Frazier had blood on his face and shirt when he ran toward Rhoads and that Frazier’s knees were already abraded. Counsel argued that these were likely caused by the prior altercation that Frazier was allegedly involved in. Defense counsel also contended that Frazier banged his head on the cage and window in the patrol car on the way to jail and that the driving officer had to pull over because of it. Counsel further contended that Frazier banged his head on the brick wall at jail, and argued that Frazier’s actions in the patrol car and at jail could have caused the alleged to his face and head., Frazier claimed he suffered a tear of a muscle and tendon in the left shoulder’s rotator cuff during his arrest. He also claimed he suffered abrasions and contusions to his face, head, knees and hands. In addition, he claimed he suffered a bout of asthma from the pepper spray. Frazier was subsequently taken by ambulance from the jail to an emergency room, where his eyes were flushed to rinse them of pepper spray and he was treated for the cuts to his head. Defense counsel argued that the abrasions and contusions were either caused by the alleged altercation prior to Frazier’s encounter with Rhoads, or from Frazier striking his own head in the patrol car and in jail. Counsel also argued that Rhoads only required superficial treatment for the cuts on his head. Defense counsel further argued that Frazier’s rotator cuff injury was not caused by the alleged incident. Counsel contended that although medical records and an MRI taken approximately two years after the incident showed that Frazier’s had suffered a partial rotator cuff tear, there was no way to tell what caused the injury. However, defense counsel argued that Frazier’s shoulder injury was inconsistent with the mechanics of what happened.