Law enforcement officers from Ellsworth and Hancock County could have prevented a fatal crash if they had arrested a man who was driving while intoxicated instead of letting him off with a warning, a lawsuit filed Friday alleges.
David Worcester, of Lamoine, was killed on April 11, 2024, when Nicholas Libby crossed the center line on Route 1 in Steuben and crashed head-on into Worcester’s vehicle, state police said.
Before the crash, two Ellsworth police officers and a Hancock County sheriff’s deputy pulled over Libby for driving erratically but let him go with a warning, despite signs that he was intoxicated, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit accuses officers Zachary Chandler and Chad Wilmot, Deputy John Stanley, the city of Ellsworth and Hancock County of causing Worcester’s death, depriving him of his constitutional rights and violating the Maine Civil Rights Act. The suit was filed in the U.S. District of Maine by Lisa McGlothlin, Worcester’s girlfriend and the personal representative for his estate.
Officials from the Ellsworth Police Department, the Hancock County Sheriff’s Office and the county government did not respond to requests for comment on the lawsuit Monday. A spokesperson for the city of Ellsworth declined to comment.
Walter McKee, an attorney representing the plaintiff, said he was unavailable for comment.
Libby pleaded guilty to manslaughter last fall, the Ellsworth American reported. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison, with all but five years suspended, followed by four years of probation, the newspaper reported in February.
On the morning of the fatal crash, a 911 caller reported an erratic driver — later identified as Libby — who was “all over the road,” crossing the center line and almost crashing into other vehicles, according to the lawsuit.
Worcester Lawsuit by Maine Trust For Local News
Officer Chandler followed Libby and pulled him over. Upon doing so, Chandler noticed that Libby’s pupils were constricted — a potential sign of drug use — and learned that he was on probation, with conditions that restricted his possession of drugs and subjected him to searches, according to the lawsuit.
When Wilmot and Stanley arrived on the scene, the officers searched Libby and his vehicle, finding bottles of prescription pills and cannabis, and contacted his probation officer. One of the prescriptions had been filled two days earlier but had far fewer pills than it should have, indicating that Libby was taking more than was prescribed, the lawsuit says.
Despite what the lawsuit calls “reasonable articulable suspicion” to perform sobriety tests, the three officers let Libby go with a warning for erratic driving, telling him to be careful and pay more attention.
After the stop, two more 911 callers reported that Libby was driving erratically, the lawsuit says. Soon after, he crashed into Worcester’s car, killing him.
Libby tested positive for THC (the psychoactive found in cannabis), benzodiazepine, fentanyl and buprenorphine, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit argues that, by letting Libby back on the road despite his apparent impairment, his probation status and the drugs found in his vehicle, the officer’s actions constituted state-created danger, violating the Maine Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
McGlothlin is seeking an unspecified amount of financial compensation, plus interest and coverage of her legal fees. She has requested a jury trial.
Staff Writer Morgan Womack contributed to this story.
This story was updated on April 14 to add that the city of Ellsworth declined to comment on the lawsuit.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less