CAMDEN, Maine — The federal lawsuit Linda Irving filed reads a lot like a strange mystery set in Camden. It involves twists and lots of finger-pointing in the small coastal town.
Irving was on a boat off the coast of Africa in March 2008 when her neighbor back in Camden noticed Irving’s basement window lying on the ground. Even though that same window had blown out a winter before, there had recently been some burglaries in town, so the neighbor called Camden Police.
Police searched the residence, but the TV was still there. The computer was there. Nothing was broken. The house was clean. The window that was outside was covered in dust and couldn’t have been broken into by human force, the police said. This was not the scene of a burglary, they concluded.
But when Irving returned to the midcoast days later, she noticed her filing cabinet had been broken into. She also noticed some CDs containing personal information on them were missing. She worried about identity theft, but her banks said there was no evidence her accounts had been tampered with.
Irving began pointing fingers at her neighbor who had a key to her house. After all, one Christmas he lifted up her Palm Pilot and looked at it for a while without her permission she told police. When she’d go on vacation, he’d save her mail for her, even though she hadn’t asked him to. Police did interview the neighbor, but nothing seemed suspicious. Police and the District Attorney said they couldn’t get a search warrant to further check her allegations because they had no solid evidence against the neighbor.
Irving persisted in seeking answers about who had broken into her house. She complained to the police chief that his officers weren’t doing enough. Not satisfied with his response, she complained to the town manager. Then she went to the town’s select board. No one did anything sufficient to appease her.
Then, in December of 2008, police apprehended some men who had been breaking into local homes. In a series of interviews, one of the men admitted to breaking into Irving’s home by using a credit card to unlock a door to her home. They stole bottles of vodka, the man said. They broke a filing cabinet looking for cash, but found none. They, the accused criminal said, did not take any CDs.
Subsequently, Irving filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the town, the town manager and the police chief in Camden. She said the town violated her civil right to equal protection and also stifled her First Amendment right to speak freely.
On Friday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Margaret J. Kravchuk effectively dismissed the lawsuit by issuing summary judgement in favor of the town, town manager and police chief and against Irving.
Simply put, Irving’s legal arguments were confusing. As Kravchuk wrote, there was a “moving-target strategy to this litigation” and it was disjointed.
“Irving is suing … on the theory that [the defendants] should be held accountable for what she perceives as a failure to properly investigate her allegations that her neighbor unlawfully entered her home to steal computer compact discs with the ultimate goal of stealing her financial identity,” the judge wrote. But “as of her January 19, 2011, deposition, Irving has never had anything happen to her to suggest that her identity was stolen as a result of the break-in at her residence in March 2008.”
Additionally, Irving didn’t try to sue the policeman who Irving said in her lawsuit didn’t do a thorough enough job investigating the burglary. Instead, she put the chief of police’s name on the lawsuit. The chief is not legally responsible for any alleged misconduct by a police officer, the judge wrote. So if Irving meant to sue over a supposedly shoddy police investigation, she targeted the wrong man in her lawsuit.
“Irving has in no way carried her summary judgment burden,” the judge wrote in her ruling.
Efforts to reach Irving Friday were unsuccessful.