Monique not gettin’ no cash. No ghetto rich fo Monique.

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog7972:
Maybe one of the lawyers here can answer this. Because there was an award as small as it may be, does the City/County have to pay the plaintiffs legal fees?

This is an interesting aspect of Civil Rights Law. The first claim in this case (the one that the jury found the officer not liable on) was for a civil rights violation, essentially excessive force. When you sue for that under the US Code (42 USC 1983), if you win at all then yes the defendant would be liable to pay attorney fees to the Plaintiff.

In such cases, juries are instructed that if they find that the Plaintiff's constitutional rights were violated, but that there are no damages, they should award $1 as nominal damages to vindicate the constitutional violation. In that case, even if you won $1 (or $4 in this case) then the Defendant would still possibly have to pay attorney fees.

But in this case the jury seems to have applied that instruction to the second count, which was a simple state law negligence claim. That's how they came up with the $1 award for each person (mom and three kids) which amounted to $4 total, which was then reduced to $.04 because of the contributory negligence laws in Florida.

Winning on just a state law negligence claim will not typically entitle the Plaintiff to get attorney fees.

quote:

Originally posted by tatortodd:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:
Is this in lump sum or installment payments?

The ultimate insult would be to pay with a single Canadian penny annually to extend it to 5 years instead of 4 years

Don't be a piker, they could be paid 92.23 trillion Zimbabwe dollars per year! Riches beyond their wildest dreams!!

quote:

Originally posted by KenS:
JG Wentworth

877-Cash-Now!!!

Of course I'm glad the ghetto lottery didn't pay off for those pukes. But, the fact that the PD was found responsible - isn't that a bad thing? I mean, isn't that a very bad thing?

Such inaccurate reporting. Was it $4 or 4 cents? Both are listed. I mean we are talking 100% discrepancy here. That will make a huge difference in their quality of life.

quote:

Originally posted by frayedends:
Such inaccurate reporting. Was it $4 or 4 cents? Both are listed. I mean we are talking 100% discrepancy here. That will make a huge difference in their quality of life.

You're right - 4 bucks will get you two fo-tays!

quote:

Originally posted by frayedends:
Such inaccurate reporting. Was it $4 or 4 cents? Both are listed. I mean we are talking 100% discrepancy here. That will make a huge difference in their quality of life.

$4 damages, reduced by 99% negligence, 1% the defendants fault. Proportional negligence.

In the old days, and maybe still in some states, if the plaintiff was found to be negligent in any way, no recovery at all. This sometimes resultd in injustice, so many states have adopted proportional negligence rules, so that if the damages are $100,000, but each party is determined to be 50% negligent, the plaintiff only recovers 50%.

Curious. Was the lawsuit merely hoping to get a payout? Or did the fam really believe pointing a gun at a policeman is acceptable practice?

Reminds me somewhat of a case a couple of years ago, a Tongan Crip gang member on trial, didn't like what the witness said, grabbed his attorney's pen and charged the stand to stab the witness. The court deputy(?) fired 3-4 times, which ended the threat, permanently. The deceased's family sued for use of excessive force(?? ). I think it took not many minutes, incl a few seconds of video, to rule against the family. Did the family really believe the perps actions should be tolerated?

OF COURSE the believe point a gun at the cops is acceptable, as is assaulting cops, trying to snatch cops guns, and ramming cops cars. Because, uh, racism and all. Besides, he was just turning his life around and DIN DO NUFFIN!

quote:

Originally posted by Palm:

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog7972:
Maybe one of the lawyers here can answer this. Because there was an award as small as it may be, does the City/County have to pay the plaintiffs legal fees?

This is an interesting aspect of Civil Rights Law. The first claim in this case (the one that the jury found the officer not liable on) was for a civil rights violation, essentially excessive force. When you sue for that under the US Code (42 USC 1983), if you win at all then yes the defendant would be liable to pay attorney fees to the Plaintiff.

In such cases, juries are instructed that if they find that the Plaintiff's constitutional rights were violated, but that there are no damages, they should award $1 as nominal damages to vindicate the constitutional violation. In that case, even if you won $1 (or $4 in this case) then the Defendant would still possibly have to pay attorney fees.

But in this case the jury seems to have applied that instruction to the second count, which was a simple state law negligence claim. That's how they came up with the $1 award for each person (mom and three kids) which amounted to $4 total, which was then reduced to $.04 because of the contributory negligence laws in Florida.

Winning on just a state law negligence claim will not typically entitle the Plaintiff to get attorney fees.

Got it,thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:
Did the family really believe the perps actions should be tolerated?

probably a combination of:

obtaining all firearm “knowledge” from Hollyweird where shooting the pen out of the hand with a service pistol is routine despite the perp running. Therefore, the officer must have chosen to kill the perp.

a life time of getting paid without earning it

---

Ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity

DISCLAIMER: These are the author's own personal views and do not represent the views of the author's employer.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by frayedends:
Such inaccurate reporting. Was it $4 or 4 cents? Both are listed. I mean we are talking 100% discrepancy here. That will make a huge difference in their quality of life.

$4 damages, reduced by 99% negligence, 1% the defendants fault. Proportional negligence.

In the old days, and maybe still in some states, if the plaintiff was found to be negligent in any way, no recovery at all. This sometimes resultd in injustice, so many states have adopted proportional negligence rules, so that if the damages are $100,000, but each party is determined to be 50% negligent, the plaintiff only recovers 50%.

Oh, I see. I read too quickly. I thought the $4 was after it was reduced by 99%. ROFL

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:
Curious. Was the lawsuit merely hoping to get a payout? Or did the fam really believe pointing a gun at a policeman is acceptable practice?

Reminds me somewhat of a case a couple of years ago, a Tongan Crip gang member on trial, didn't like what the witness said, grabbed his attorney's pen and charged the stand to stab the witness. The court deputy(?) fired 3-4 times, which ended the threat, permanently. The deceased's family sued for use of excessive force(?? ). I think it took not many minutes, incl a few seconds of video, to rule against the family. Did the family really believe the perps actions should be tolerated?

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:
Did the family really believe the perps actions should be tolerated?

Imagine the kind of "family" that generates Crips gang members.

quote:

Originally posted by synthplayer:
You're right - 4 bucks will get you two fo-tays!

Ain't that what started this whole thing?

Tonight's NBC Nightly News (yes, I should have known better) had a segment that was disgustingly sympathetic to the "victim." They showed a statement from the police and said his blood alcohol was 5x over the legal limit, but it was more of the predictable "His kids are now orphans" crap.

WARNING: Your blood pressure may rise after watching.

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightl...police-1247066691937

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:
Did the family really believe the perps actions should be tolerated?

Imagine the kind of "family" that generates Crips gang members.

Therein lies the concern.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:
Tonight's NBC Nightly News (yes, I should have known better) had a segment that was disgustingly sympathetic to the "victim." They showed a statement from the police and said his blood alcohol was 5x over the legal limit, but it was more of the predictable "His kids are now orphans" crap....

So someone with 5x the blood alcohol, and a gun, is not likely to be dangerous?

On today's Front Page of our local Lib Mullet wrapper.

$4 wrongful death judgment infuriates a family

What’s a human life worth? If it’s in St. Lucie County, it could be as little as $4.

That’s what the family of Gregory Hill of Fort Pierce discovered to their horror at the conclusion of a federal wrongful death civil lawsuit May 24.

Hill’s mother, Viola Bryant, filed the suit against Deputy Christopher Newman and St. Lucie County Sheriff Ken Mascara after Newman killed Hill in January 2014, after responding to a complaint about loud music Hill was playing in his garage.

After a brief encounter with Newman and another deputy, Hill closed the garage door. Believing Hill was reaching for a gun, Newman fired four times. He hit Hill three times, including one shot to the head, according to police records.

Hill was later discovered dead inside the garage with an unloaded gun in his back pocket. Toxicology results showed his blood-alcohol level was several times the legal limit to drive.

A federal jury hearing the wrongful- death lawsuit was asked whether the victim’s civil rights had been violated — jurors decided the deputy had not done so — and whether his estate should be awarded damages. How much pain and suffering had Hill’s three small children suffered?

The answer, after 10 hours’ deliberation, was $4: $1 for funeral expenses and $1 for each child.

See WESTBURY, Page 13A

Anthony Westbury

Columnist Treasure Coast Newspapers USA TODAY NETWORK – FLA.

Hill


Westbury

Continued from Page 1A

That insulting number created a social media firestorm over the weekend.

The New York Times, Associated Press, Washington Post, NBC, CBS, CNN and other media outlets across the country picked up the story.

Jacksonville attorney John M. Phillips, who represents Hill’s family, described the ruling as “perplexing,’” according to the New York Times. Was the jury trying to send a message, Phillips wondered.

“That a black child’s pain is only worth a dollar is exactly the problem with the plight of the African-American right now,” Phillips said. “This says black lives don’t matter.”

People across the country responded. Phillips’ office coordinator told me the story was one of Facebook’s top trending stories for three days straight.

Phillips has since refined his comments.

In an email this week he wrote, “I have always said one of three things happened: The jury misunderstood the case, the (judge’s) instructions or the verdict form. They (may have) sought to punish the plaintiff. ... This verdict could easily be interpreted as a ‘blue lives matter’ verdict.

“(Or) they really believe this is the value of this case, that the pain of these children is only worth $1. That’s where my comment about black lives not seeming to matter comes in.”

Locally, many people seemed horrified by the case.

Port St. Lucie insurance agent and radio host Rudy Howard, who is black, said: “I think it was a disgusting, infuriating verdict that was meant to send a message. To me, it says black people aren’t worth much. It would almost have been better not to award any money at all. It was like spitting on you.”

Howard pointed out Hill was playing music inside his own garage. Maybe the lyrics were obnoxious to some, but “it doesn’t justify shooting him dead.”

Tiffany Kelly, executive director of the domestic violence counseling agency The Morning After Center for Hope & Healing in Fort Pierce, believes jurors were just very confused about the damages they should award.

“I don’t believe the (amount) was deliberate; I believe it came from a jury that was extremely emotional and upset,” Kelly said. She referred to reports by CNN and others the jury was hopelessly deadlocked shortly before coming up with a verdict.

Yet the verdict did highlight a worrying divide, Kelly said.

“To (black) citizens like me, officers aren’t seen as human,” Kelly said. “And, to some officers, populations like us aren’t seen as humans, either. Relationships have to be built.

“I shouidn’t have to be afraid for my 9-year-old son every time I see an officer. It’s not IF he goes to jail or gets killed, it’s WHEN. We have to respect law enforcement, but they have to respect us, too.”

I know many black parents who have had “The Talk” with teenage sons about how to respond safely to a traffic stop without getting their heads blown off.

Verdicts like this one — where it’s plain justice was not done — certainly don’t relieve such fears.

Phillips said plans for an appeal are being finalized.

This case badly needs a do-over. I hope it gets one soon.

That insulting number created a social media firestorm over the weekend.

The New York Times, Associated Press, Washington Post, NBC, CBS, CNN and other media outlets across the country picked up the story.

Jacksonville attorney John M. Phillips, who represents Hill’s family, described the ruling as “perplexing,’” according to the New York Times. Was the jury trying to send a message, Phillips wondered.

“That a black child’s pain is only worth a dollar is exactly the problem with the plight of the African-American right now,” Phillips said. “This says black lives don’t matter.”

People across the country responded. Phillips’ office coordinator told me the story was one of Facebook’s top trending stories for three days straight.

Phillips has since refined his comments.

In an email this week he wrote, “I have always said one of three things happened: The jury misunderstood the case, the (judge’s) instructions or the verdict form. They (may have) sought to punish the plaintiff. ... This verdict could easily be interpreted as a ‘blue lives matter’ verdict.

“(Or) they really believe this is the value of this case, that the pain of these children is only worth $1. That’s where my comment about black lives not seeming to matter comes in.”

Locally, many people seemed horrified by the case.

Port St. Lucie insurance agent and radio host Rudy Howard, who is black, said: “I think it was a disgusting, infuriating verdict that was meant to send a message. To me, it says black people aren’t worth much. It would almost have been better not to award any money at all. It was like spitting on you.”

Howard pointed out Hill was playing music inside his own garage. Maybe the lyrics were obnoxious to some, but “it doesn’t justify shooting him dead.”

Tiffany Kelly, executive director of the domestic violence counseling agency The Morning After Center for Hope & Healing in Fort Pierce, believes jurors were just very confused about the damages they should award.

“I don’t believe the (amount) was deliberate; I believe it came from a jury that was extremely emotional and upset,” Kelly said. She referred to reports by CNN and others the jury was hopelessly deadlocked shortly before coming up with a verdict.

Yet the verdict did highlight a worrying divide, Kelly said.

“To (black) citizens like me, officers aren’t seen as human,” Kelly said. “And, to some officers, populations like us aren’t seen as humans, either. Relationships have to be built.

“I shouidn’t have to be afraid for my 9-year-old son every time I see an officer. It’s not IF he goes to jail or gets killed, it’s WHEN. We have to respect law enforcement, but they have to respect us, too.”

I know many black parents who have had “The Talk” with teenage sons about how to respond safely to a traffic stop without getting their heads blown off.

Verdicts like this one — where it’s plain justice was not done — certainly don’t relieve such fears.

Phillips said plans for an appeal are being finalized.

This case badly needs a do-over. I hope it gets one soon.

Anthony Westbury is a columnist for TCPalm.com. This column reflects his opinion. Contact him at 772-221-4220, anthony.westbury@tcpalm.com, or follow him @TCPalmWestbury on Twitter.

Copyright © 2018 Journal Media Group
Powered by TECNAVIA

Anthony Westbury is a columnist for TCPalm.com. This column reflects his opinion. Contact him at 772-221-4220, anthony.westbury@tcpalm.com, or follow him @TCPalmWestbury on Twitter.
Copyright © 2018 Journal Media Group
Powered by TECNAVIA