This case arises from the preventable death of Dalton Milby, who died by suicide on February 12, 2022, while in the custody of the Larue County Detention Center (“LCDC”).
He was taken to LCDC, where he was put on suicide watch and issued an anti-suicide smock. Despite this, Milby managed to gain access to a standard jail jumpsuit, which he used to take his own life shortly before 4:00 p.m.
Plaintiffs offered the opinion of Timothy J. Murray to help the jury understand standards of care applicable to high-risk inmates like Milby and whether LCDC officers complied with those standards.
Corrections Expert Witness
Timothy J. Murray worked at various levels of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (“NYSDOCS”) for thirty-one years and has since served as a correctional consultant for nearly two decades.
Discussion by the Court
1. Qualification
Defendants contended that Murray lacked an understanding of the “qualifications required to serve as a jailer in Kentucky,”’ and that this makes him unqualified to offer testimony on whether Defendants complied with relevant standards.
Murray’s CV reveals that he worked in corrections in New York for over thirty years, serving at three separate correctional facilities.
Murray’s academic background supplements his lengthy career in corrections. He possesses a Bachelor of Science in Education, a Master of Science in Education, and a Certificate of Advanced Study in Educational Administration, as well as specialized training from the United States Department of Justice and the American Correctional Association.
2. Relevance
Defendants maintained that Murray did not review the LCDC policies and procedures or the Kentucky Jail Standards developed by the Kentucky Department of Corrections.
Notably, Murray’s report references both the Kentucky Administrative Regulations and the ACA standards of correctional operations.
The report explained that LCDC staff are bound by not only Kentucky legal standards, but also professional standards in the industry. Murray also opined as to what constitutes appropriate staff training for dealing with high-risk inmates and whether staff at LCDC were sufficiently trained and supervised.
Even if Murray did apply national standards, this does not automatically render his opinion unhelpful to the jury. Defendants did not point to any differences between the Kentucky standard of care and the national standard of care that would render testimony about the national standard of care entirely unhelpful to the jury. Furthermore, expert opinions that rely in part on national professional standards such as this are regularly found to be relevant.
3. Reliability
Defendants once again argued that Murray’s failure to apply Kentucky standards references his opinion unreliable. As the Court has already explained, however, Murray did reference the Kentucky standards in his report, and he testified that he reviewed the regulations in creating his report. Nor did Defendants explain why Murray’s reference to the ACA standards constitute an unreliable principle or method. They simply argued that Murray’s testimony amounts to “his belief as to what should have been done in an ACA accredited facility, not a Kentucky facility governed by the Kentucky Jail Standards and the Policies and Procedures of LCDC.”
Once again, Defendants pointed to no substantive differences between the ACA standard and the Kentucky standard such that the ACA standard would constitute an “unreliable” standard as applied to a Kentucky jail. Murray relied on the ACA, Kentucky regulations, and his own personal experience in corrections to provide an opinion on the appropriate standard of care. He compared the actions of Defendants against that standard using facts he ascertained from depositions and camera footage. He therefore explained the “how” and “why” he reached his conclusions.
Held
The Court denied Defendants’ motion to exclude the testimony of Timothy Murray.
Key Takeaway
The jury will be tasked with determining several key issues related to the applicable standard of care and whether Defendants complied with that standard of care. Understanding generally accepted correctional practices will help the trier of fact determine what constitutes reasonable conduct by jail workers dealing with a suicidal inmate.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Milby V. Underwood |
| Docket Number: | 3:23cv49 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Kentucky Western |
| Order Date: | April 13, 2026 |
Leave a Reply