Red Wing Republican-Eagle: Lawsuit filed against police chief, trooper (July 25 2012) A lawsuit was filed in United States District Court last month against Kenyon Police Chief Lee Sjolander and Minnesota State Highway Patrol Officer Troy Siems alleging civil rights violations ... In it, Thissen alleges that both Sjolander and Siems used “excessive force” while taking him into custody on two separate occasions, depriving Thissen of his civil rights outlined in the U.S. Constitution. According to the complaint, Sjolander arrested Thissen in June 2009 for violation of a harassment restraining order that the Kenyon Police Department had obtained against him. Sjolander “slammed (Thissen) into a wall, hit him forcefully in the face with his elbow causing his nose to bleed,” the complaint says. The violation of a restraining order charge against Thissen was eventually dismissed. Kenyon Leader: Allegations are a sham, says Kenyon Chief of Police (Aug 2 2012) In an answering brief filed July 31, Sjolander denied all of Thissen’s claims, calling the allegations frivolous. He said Thissen repeatedly harassed, called and stalked Kenyon officers and Kenyon staff, which led Sjolander to file for and obtain a restraining order against him. Sjolander’s reply said the complaint by Thissen was brought in bad faith, without legal justification or proper inquiry, and that it was served only with the intent to harass him. Sjolander’s report asserts that he did not arrest Thissen on June 25, 2009, but that Thissen was arrested by a Goodhue County Deputy Sheriff for an arrest warrant issued by a judge earlier that month for violation of the harassment restraining order. No Kenyon officer was present or involved in that arrest, the report claims. In addition, Sjolander noted that contacts with Thissen were videotaped and contain Thissen’s threat to sue the City of Kenyon and its police department for harassment. Sjolander said he did arrest Thissen on November 3, 2010, and that previous allegations of excessive force, including being placed on the floor and handcuffed too tightly, are fraudulent and defamatory. The entire arrest is on videotape and had a proper inquiry been conducted, this lawsuit would not exist, said Sjolander. Which leaves us with the obvious question -- why was not a proper inquiry conducted?