Jefferson County has reached a $600,000 settlement with a former inmate who blinded himself while in custody at the Jefferson County Jail in March 2019, according to Jefferson County Attorney Chauncey Moulding. The settlement was initially withheld from publication at the County’s request to avoid influencing an active jury trial.
James Bingham filed a civil lawsuit against Jefferson County, Jefferson County Health Center, and Advanced Correctional Healthcare, Inc. after he self-enucleated—removing his own eyes and surrounding tissue—while incarcerated. The incident left him permanently blind.
Criminal Charges (Unrelated to the Lawsuit Claims)
At the time of the incident, Bingham was jailed on multiple charges: Arson in the First Degree (Class B Felony), Burglary in the Third Degree (Class D Felony), False Imprisonment (Serious Misdemeanor), Criminal Mischief in the Fifth Degree (Simple Misdemeanor), and Assault (Simple Misdemeanor). The adjudication of the first four charges was later dismissed by the court. Bingham entered a negotiated, voluntary guilty plea on the assault charge. These criminal charges were not part of the civil lawsuit, which focused solely on events occurring inside the jail.
Settlement Terms
Under the settlement, $600,000 will be provided to resolve the claims, with $485,000 going to Summit Structured Settlements and $115,000 to the Martin Diaz Law Firm trust account. The agreement was reviewed and supported by the Iowa Communities Assurance Pool (ICAP), the County’s insurance provider.
Moulding emphasized that the settlement does not include any admission of wrongdoing: “The County maintains that it was not at fault in this incident, and that Mr. Bingham took this action on his own volition.”
He added that Jefferson County is relieved to have its portion of the case resolved and hopes Bingham can make a healthy recovery.
The release does not dismiss claims against Jefferson County Health Center or Advanced Correctional Healthcare, Inc., and the lawsuit continues against those entities.
The Incident
According to court filings, Bingham was booked into the Jefferson County Jail on January 6th, 2019, and remained there until March 7th, 2019. Screening forms and medical records obtained during his confinement allegedly showed a long history of mental illness and previous self-harm attempts. Court documents state that Bingham exhibited abnormal behavior during confinement, including prior attempts at self-harm.
On March 6th, 2019, jail staff discovered that Bingham had swallowed a spork. He was taken to the Jefferson County Health Center emergency room, where medical staff removed the utensil. His visit reportedly lasted about one hour, including approximately five minutes with a physician. The lawsuit alleges that no mental health assessment or referral was documented during that visit.
Bingham was returned to the jail that evening. On the morning of March 7th, 2019, he was found to have damaged both of his eyes using his hands, causing permanent blindness.
The Claims
The amended petition alleges multiple failures by jail staff and medical providers, including not ensuring adequate mental health evaluation and treatment, inadequate monitoring of Bingham’s mental health condition, failing to prevent foreseeable self-harm, not providing accurate medical history to emergency room staff, and not referring Bingham for further psychiatric care following his ER visit.
Jefferson County denied all claims of negligence or wrongdoing, asserting that no illegal or improper actions occurred.
Plaintiff’s Attorney Perspective
Bingham’s attorney, Marty Diaz of the Martin Diaz Law Firm, explained what he believes went wrong in his client’s care.
“The principal problems were twofold: first, a lack of communication among the defendants, for which the jail has taken responsibility by offering a settlement that we accepted. But the lack of communication is not limited just to the jail. It also includes the jail nurse, who was employed by a company that had a contract with the jail,” Diaz said. “Secondly, there was a lack of interest on the part of the emergency room physician, who only spent three minutes with Mr. Bingham, failed to obtain an adequate history, and relied upon prior contact with Mr. Bingham that led her to misinterpret the situation.”
When asked about his satisfaction with the settlement amount, Diaz offered a nuanced response.
“The short answer is yes and no. Yes, because the jail recognized that it could have done better and was willing to accept some responsibility. No, because Mr. Bingham’s injuries were so significant that the amount of the settlement does not fully compensate him for his injuries,” Diaz said. “However, it’s my opinion that the greater responsibility lies with the emergency room and the jail nurse who had the knowledge base and power to protect Mr. Bingham by assuring that he received an appropriate mental health assessment that would have avoided the significant injuries that his mental illness ultimately caused. Fortunately, the opportunity exists to fully compensate Mr. Bingham at trial.”
Diaz explained the strategic decision to settle with Jefferson County while continuing litigation against the other defendants.
“The advantage of settling with the jail is that it provides Mr. Bingham some compensation while we continue with the case. I specifically took no fee to maximize his recovery. It also allows us to focus on the parties that we believe have the greatest responsibility,” Diaz said.
Regarding Bingham’s current condition, Diaz provided an update on his client’s quality of life.
“Since his injury, James has had to learn to adjust to a new lifestyle. It has been slow progress for him, but he seems to be gaining more confidence over time. I’m hopeful that the funds from the initial settlement will help him improve his life,” Diaz said. “His injury is complicated by his mental illness which, despite better control, still makes it difficult for him to cope with his visual impairment.”
Mistrial and Next Steps
The case against the remaining defendants—Jefferson County Health Center and Advanced Correctional Healthcare, Inc.—went to trial beginning November 4th, 2025. On November 10th, 2025, the court declared a mistrial.
Diaz took responsibility for the mistrial. “The mistrial was my fault. I asked a question and got into a subject that the court believed I should not have gotten into. A mistrial means that we start the trial over again with a new jury,” Diaz said.
A trial-setting conference was scheduled on December 11th, 2025. As a result, the new trial date has been set for August 24th, 2027.
Broader Implications
Diaz believes the case highlights systemic issues with mental health care in correctional facilities.
“Our society has gotten away from providing adequate facilities and programs for individuals with significant mental illness. For example, schizophrenia can be treated, but we don’t seem to have the energy or willingness to provide the resources to deal with this problem. Rather, we have chosen to deal with individuals with mental illness by incarcerating them. It is reactive and not proactive,” Diaz said.
He noted that approximately 45% of inmates in jails or prisons have been diagnosed with a significant mental illness.
“We’re asking our correctional officers to deal with an illness that despite their best efforts they are not adequately trained or prepared to handle. It’s a difficult enough job to take care of individuals who are not mentally ill,” Diaz said.
When asked about the most challenging aspect of the case, Diaz reflected on the difficulty of making people understand severe mental illness.
“I have done several suicide cases in my career, but this one is different in that mental illness caused someone to harm himself without dying. The common thread among these types of cases is that you must make people care about the subject, in the face of conduct that is hard to understand,” Diaz said. “But we live in a society in which approximately two-thirds of people have an ongoing diagnosis of depression or anxiety and mental illness seems to have had an impact on most people’s lives.”
Diaz emphasized the importance of reducing stigma around mental illness.
“The subject of mental illness is difficult to discuss because we have attached a stigma to it—a scab if you will. But if other parts of our body can get sick, why can’t our mind get sick? People need to be more willing to discuss mental illness just like they discuss heart disease, diabetes, or any other medical condition. It’s a fact of life,” Diaz said. “Our collective role as members of a community is to encourage that discussion. This case pokes at that scab and should provoke discussion.”