A federal judge has dismissed a woman’s lawsuit against two Colorado Springs police officers who arrested her instead of looking into her report that she was the victim of domestic violence.

U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney found it problematic if the officers did not follow up on Rebecca Varney’s claim of being assaulted by her ex-husband. At the same time, Sweeney noted that according to Varney’s own allegations, the officers had probable cause to believe Varney had violated a court order forbidding the harassment of her ex-husband.

“And although the Court does not condone Defendants’ actions — if true as alleged and argued by Ms. Varney — the Court cannot conclude that the complained-of conduct was ‘egregious and outrageous,’” she wrote.

Varney alleged that she called Colorado Springs police on July 18, 2021 to report her then-husband fractured her hand two nights prior. Officers David Kester and Carlotta Rivera responded to Varney’s home. Varney told them she had been the victim of assault and domestic violence.

Varney showed the officers a home security video of herself trying to force her way into the bedroom where her husband was. She said she was trying to protect her dogs from him. During the encounter, Varney’s wrist was slammed in the door.

The officers learned there was a protection order, also known as a restraining order, in place prohibiting Varney from harassing her husband. Rivera called Varney’s husband to get his side of the story and told him Varney “is calling in today to try to get you arrested.” Varney’s lawsuit alleged that description of her intent was false.

After Varney’s husband stated he felt harassed by Varney’s conduct, Rivera said that “unfortunately for her, the restraining order is still in effect” and police would seek an arrest warrant for Varney. Kester submitted a statement in support of Varney’s arrest on suspicion of harassment and violating the protection order.

The district attorney’s office later dismissed the charges.

Varney sued the two officers, the police chief and the city of Colorado Springs for malicious prosecution, violating her right to equal protection of the laws and disregard of her right to due process.

She alleged the police department conducted an internal affairs investigation into her arrest, which concluded Rivera and Kester violated policy by failing to document Varney’s complaint of assault, interview other witnesses and consider other relevant factors of domestic violence. The defendants did not dispute the existence of the internal affairs report.

Varney also alleged another instance in which Rivera caused the arrest of an unidentified woman who, like Varney, reported she was the victim of domestic violence.

“Most fundamentally,” wrote Varney’s lawyers, “the information the Officer Defendants received from Ms. Varney during their initial interview made clear that the altercation between herself and her ex-husband did not satisfy the elements of either crime they ultimately charged her with.”

The defendants countered that Varney’s claim of malicious prosecution could not survive if the officers had probable cause to suspect her of a crime. In this instance, they did: the video Varney showed them of her trying to break into her husband’s room.

“Because Defendant Officers had probable cause to believe that Plaintiff violated her restraining order, they did not violate her constitutional rights by obtaining a warrant for her arrest,” wrote Brian Stewart with the Colorado Springs City Attorney’s Office.

Sweeney agreed with the defendants. Even if the internal affairs investigation found Kester and Rivera violated police policies during their investigation, the allegations did not demonstrate they had violated Varney’s constitutional rights through their determination she had harassed her husband in contravention of the protection order.

Sweeney acknowledged the allegation Rivera had previously sought the arrest of a woman who reported being the victim of domestic violence. But Sweeney noted it was unclear whether that unnamed woman was, like Varney, also subject to a protection order.

As for Varney’s equal protection claim, Sweeney concluded the allegations did not support the notion that the officers treated Varney differently than her husband due to her gender.

“It may be true that both individuals faced domestic violence allegations arising from the same set of facts,” she wrote. “But at the time of the incident, (Varney’s husband) — not Ms. Varney — possessed a court-ordered mandatory protection order against Ms. Varney which prevented her from harassing him.”

Attorneys for both sides did not provide comments on Sweeney’s order.

The case is Varney v. City of Colorado Springs et al.