Citizen Report No. 1753226567 - 660210342

In February 2025, William Anthony McNeil Jr., a 22-year-old Black man, was violently arrested by deputies from the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office (JSO) during a traffic stop in Jacksonville, Florida. The incident, recently released on body-worn camera footage, shows McNeil being pulled over allegedly for driving without headlights or wearing a seatbelt—infractions he disputed, noting it was daytime. McNeil calmly locked his doors and asked to speak with a supervisor, prompting Deputy D. Bowers to break his window and strike him in the face. He was forcibly removed from the vehicle and restrained on the ground by multiple officers. McNeil suffered serious injuries including a chipped tooth that punctured his cheek, requiring stitches, and was diagnosed with a concussion and short-term memory loss. He was subsequently charged with resisting arrest without violence, driving with a suspended license, and minor drug offenses. He pled guilty to two charges and served two days in jail.

Deputy D. Bowers of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office has committed multiple Brady Offenses, rendering him a materially impeachable witness in this and all other cases in which he has participated or provided statements. His conduct during the February 2025 traffic stop of William Anthony McNeil Jr., captured on official body-worn camera footage, demonstrates a deliberate violation of constitutional standards and a willful disregard for lawful procedure. By escalating a routine stop into a violent encounter, forcibly breaking the vehicle window, and striking McNeil—who posed no immediate threat and had explicitly requested a supervisor—Deputy Bowers demonstrated a pattern of excessive force, abuse of authority, and dishonesty in characterizing the justification for his actions. These acts not only reflect a propensity toward unlawful and unethical behavior but are directly relevant to his credibility as a law enforcement witness in any prosecution. As such, under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), this conduct must be disclosed as exculpatory and impeachment material in every case in which Deputy Bowers serves as an affiant, arresting officer, or testimonial witness. The State’s failure to immediately identify and disclose Deputy Bowers as a compromised actor would constitute an ongoing Brady violation and would taint any past, present, or future prosecution involving his participation.

Sheriff T.K. Waters, by virtue of his office, bore constitutional and ethical obligations to ensure that the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office fully complied with Brady and Giglio requirements concerning the disclosure of exculpatory and impeaching evidence. However, his public conduct and internal decisions in this matter raise multiple concerns:

Sheriff Waters failed to proactively address Deputy Bowers’ misconduct, maintaining silence until the vehicular occupant's video went viral, signaling institutional indifference to potential officer misconduct. He refused to release all relevant footage immediately, asserting that body‑cam and cell phone footage lacked necessary context, rather than disclosing the entirety of materials to enable objective assessment by the public. The sheriff also failed to fully identify all deputies present during the incident, referring only to “other deputies” without transparency—undermining the public’s right to understand who participated in potentially unlawful conduct.

These omissions are compounded by Waters’ broader pattern of deferring accountability in high‑profile use‑of‑force incidents under his command. In 2023, he released body‑cam footage from the Le’Keian Woods traffic‑stop, asserting justification for force that civil rights advocates deemed excessive. His consistent pattern of withholding full disclosure, resisting independent oversight (rejecting invitations to meet with faith leaders and community advocates), and delaying personnel identification suggests a systematic disregard for Brady principles and citizen accountability.

Taken together, Waters’ conduct in this and similar cases demonstrates a failure to identify and disclose all material evidence, a refusal to provide timely transparency, and a lack of candor regarding officers’ identities and actions. These shortcomings compromise the integrity of criminal prosecutions, undermine public trust, and may constitute repeated violations of Brady v. Maryland and related due‑process obligations—making him jointly and severally responsible for perpetuating the potential suppression or concealment of exculpatory evidence.