A Civil Rights Case, Public Records, and a $74,000 Pay Wall

I first wrote about Fareed Khlayel’s federal civil rights case back in December. At the time, it drew little attention. Months later, I decided to revisit it and see what had changed.

So I called him.

He answered. And he had documentation.

Over the past year, Khlayel has obtained a substantial set of records from the City of El Paso through the Texas Public Information Act. These are not leaks or anonymous tips. They are official documents the City itself released, complete with redaction logs. He walked me through them. What follows is a reconstruction of what those records show.

The Police Report

One document stands out.

The El Paso Police Department Public Information Report for Incident #24333032 was released by the City with minimal redactions, limited to dates of birth. According to the City’s own redaction log, dated September 23, 2025, no law enforcement or litigation exemptions were applied. By the City’s own determination, the report is public.

Under “Associated Names,” the classifications are as follows:

• Officers R. Najera and V. Ortiz are listed as victims
• The City of El Paso is listed as a victim
• Fareed Khlayel is listed as the offender

The narrative portion of the report is three sentences long.

There is no mention of force. No mention of injuries. No indication that the individual was handcuffed when struck. No reference to a denied wheelchair, family members on scene, or a second alleged use of force at a hospital.

Look at this picture and tell me that makes sense:

Those details appear elsewhere.

In a federal complaint filed in court and publicly accessible through PACER, Khlayel alleges he was struck five times while handcuffed, resulting in a fractured orbital bone, a fractured ankle, a broken tooth, and head injuries requiring sutures.

Same incident. Same officers. Two versions of events.

One version is contained in a brief public-facing report. The other is detailed in federal court filings.

Since the incident, one officer has resigned, another has been placed on administrative leave, and all criminal charges tied to the arrest have been dismissed.

Yet in the report released by the City, the officers are identified as victims.

The Cost of Digging Deeper

The initial records came at little to no cost.

The rest did not.

When Khlayel began requesting internal communications, personnel records, and documentation related to how his complaints were handled, the City issued a series of cost estimates:

• Approximately $14,000
• Then $28,284.60
• Then $31,981.20

All within a two-week period in September and October 2025. All issued by the same City employee, using the same billing structure.

Combined, the estimates total roughly $74,000.

Khlayel submitted fee waiver requests under the Public Information Act. According to the records, none were addressed. When he challenged one estimate, the City closed the request for nonpayment.

The contrast is difficult to ignore. A police report classifying officers as victims was released at no cost. Records that might explain how the case was handled internally came with a five-figure price tag.

The City and the Attorney General

Khlayel’s records are not the only ones at issue.

In September 2025, El Paso Matters reported that the City of El Paso filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Ken Paxton to block the release of legal billing records tied to police misconduct cases. The City Council later voted 7–1 to retroactively authorize the lawsuit, after it had already been filed. City Representative Josh Acevedo cast the sole dissenting vote.

El Paso is self-insured for police liability. Settlements and legal fees are paid from the general fund.

The lawsuit sought to prevent disclosure of how much the City spends on outside law firms defending these cases.

The Legal Department in Question

The records raise additional concerns about the City’s legal leadership.

The federal complaint names City Attorney Karla Nieman and Deputy City Attorney Sergio Estrada as defendants. Both remain in their positions.

Council evaluation records obtained through public information requests show Nieman received a score of 3.54 out of 5, with noted deficiencies in transparency and responsiveness. Despite that, the City approved a pre-negotiated severance agreement on August 27, 2025. The package totals roughly $300,000 in salary, accrued leave, and car allowance, contingent on her departure.

She has not left. She remains City Attorney while also being a named defendant in the case.

Records related to Estrada, including a November 2025 submission to the Attorney General, state that he supervises the City’s litigation division, including the Khlayel case. The same submission sought to withhold communications discussing whether he began work before taking an oath of office and references to irregular hiring timelines.

City records indicate no oath of office, loyalty oath, or onboarding documentation exists for Estrada.

He began work at a salary of $200,000 immediately after leaving a private law firm that had ongoing financial relationships with the City.

He remains in his role.

A third attorney, former Assistant City Attorney Mayra Stanton, signed the denial of Khlayel’s civil rights claim, then resigned. One week later, City Council voted 8–0 to ratify that denial.

Her former supervisor, Evan Reed, is now representing the City in the federal case.

The same legal office that made the initial decisions is now defending them in court.

A Broader Pattern

Khlayel’s case is not isolated.

In July 2025, 30-year-old Xavier Hernandez died in El Paso Police custody during a mental health crisis. The medical examiner ruled the death a homicide, citing asphyxia due to chest compression during restraint. His family filed a federal lawsuit in January 2026.

In September 2025, video showing officers striking a man who did not appear to be resisting drew national attention. A criminal justice professor at the University of Texas at El Paso publicly questioned whether the force used was justified.

In 2023, the City paid $600,000 to settle a case involving a man who was tased while attempting suicide.

Each case involves use of force against individuals who were restrained, in crisis, or not actively resisting.

Each settlement is paid from the same general fund.

The Missing Footage

One key piece of evidence remains out of reach: body camera footage.

According to the federal complaint, the City released body camera footage in a separate use-of-force case in August 2025. Footage from Khlayel’s arrest has not been released.

The discrepancy raises questions about consistency in disclosure.

Federal discovery may eventually make the footage public. Until then, the record remains incomplete.

What Khlayel Says

“These are the City’s own records,” Khlayel told me. “Their police report, their cost estimates, their submissions to the Attorney General. I didn’t create any of this.”

On the report itself: “I was handcuffed, barefoot, with a fractured ankle and eye socket. They wrote themselves down as the victims. The narrative is three sentences and leaves out everything that happened.”

On the legal structure surrounding the case: “The same people being sued are still making decisions about the case. That includes how taxpayer money is spent defending it.”

And on why he continued pushing for records:

“I spent a year going through every channel available. Open records requests, internal affairs, state agencies. The response was delays, cost barriers, and silence. At some point, the public deserves to see what their government is doing and decide for themselves.”

He added one final concern:

“I’m in a position where I could navigate the system. A lot of people aren’t. The question is how many others this has happened to who never get this far.”