City of Eugene Denied Defense for Ex-Police Officer
The city refused to represent a former officer sued for using force against a handcuffed arrestee.
Updated on Sept. 20, 2026 in Law Enforcement
Live Poll
Should cities fund legal defenses for police officers accused of using excessive force?
The city of Eugene has rejected a request for legal defense and indemnification from former police officer Stephen Lahm. Lahm is being sued in federal court by Jehoshaphat Commandest over a 2025 arrest.
Why it matters
The city concluded that Lahm violated department policies during the incident, leading them to deny him the municipal legal support typically afforded to officers acting within their official duties.
Stephen Lahm officially filed his answer in federal court on September 14, 2026, while the city continues to represent officer Lindsey Collier in the same litigation.
The players
Stephen Lahm
He is a former Eugene police officer who resigned following an investigation into his conduct.
Jehoshaphat Commandest
He is the plaintiff in a civil rights lawsuit filed against the city and a former officer.
Lindsey Collier
She is a police officer currently being represented by the city of Eugene in the federal lawsuit.
Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards and Training
This state agency is currently investigating the conduct of the former officer.
The details
Jehoshaphat Commandest alleged that Lahm punched and used a Taser on him while he was handcuffed during a January 2025 arrest. While Commandest later pleaded guilty to a trespassing charge, the city of Eugene cited violations of use-of-force policies as the reason for denying Lahm a defense.
Timeline
January 11, 2025: Jehoshaphat Commandest was arrested.
December 2025: Commandest pleaded guilty to trespassing.
July 2026: The lawsuit was filed in state court.
September 2, 2026: The case moved to federal court.
September 14, 2026: Stephen Lahm filed his answer to the lawsuit.
Legal Context
This case follows a pattern of heightened scrutiny regarding police conduct and departmental accountability in Oregon. The potential revocation of certification under state protocols marks a departure from standard municipal liability coverage.
The refusal to provide defense highlights the city's stance on policy enforcement, which may influence future transparency regarding officer conduct. Residents should note that the litigation remains active in federal court, potentially affecting public resource allocation.
The takeaway
This situation illustrates the tension between individual officer claims of duty and city-enforced disciplinary standards. It serves as a reminder of the legal complexities involved when municipal entities decline to back former employees in civil rights litigation.
Further reading
For more on how the department handles internal investigations, visit Law Enforcement.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Atlanta Black Star.
Live Poll
Should cities fund legal defenses for police officers accused of using excessive force?
