I read the recent thread about red flag laws. I have complete faith and trust in the police. Nothing bad could ever happen, and if it does it is the civilian's fault

In this day and age all you need to do is give this national media attention, it will get resolved pretty fast.

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
Also there is a point when the fuck up reaches a point where those involved need to be PERSONALLY held to account for financial award instead of simply pushing the cost of their mistakes on to the backs of the taxpayers.

In a federal 1983 lawsuit, which I'm sure this is, the officer is personally responsible for the judgment. There is nothing in the law that pushes the judgment onto the taxpayers. The issue is that most all municipalities indemnify their employees against these judgments. From the LEO perspective that's often included in their contract. So yes the taxpayers do pay, but it is their own government agreeing to do so not the law making it so.

OP has exposed a fatal flaw in this system. They have a Plaintiff who is willing to settle for no money, but wants an apology, which is an admission of fault. They would much rather not admit fault, but settle for some amount of money. Strange as it may seem.

quote:

Originally posted by H&K-Guy:
h2oys,

The victim has a responsibility to take the severest legal action possible. If they don't, they only encourage such behavior.

It's the tiny fraction (<1%?) that ruin the reputations of the good men and women who serve. Make an example.

H&K-Guy

The good news for my friend was yesterday's decision by the judge. Basically the judge told the PD they violated the law, they were guilty, and to either settle the case or go before a jury.

Consequently the PD no longer has ANY legal defense and the only question now is will they make an offer or risk a jury deciding on the financial penalty based upon their multiple mistakes and subsequent attempt to CTA (Cover Their Ass).

quote:

OP has exposed a fatal flaw in this system. They have a Plaintiff who is willing to settle for no money, but wants an apology, which is an admission of fault. They would much rather not admit fault, but settle for some amount of money. Strange as it may seem.

Herein lies the problem. If there is no personal risk, the PD is risks nothing other than bad publicity as it will not personally cost them a dime.

Now that guilt has been determined, I am very curious to see whether the PD will offer what will be a probable "confidential" settlement, or, risk a jury deciding the financial penalty to the PD and the public exposure thereof.

Update in original post.

Yowsers.

I supervise/investigate exigent entries too frequently. Just finished 13 pages of typing last night from my last one.

I’m glad to say I’ve never been involved or investigated one that was found to be improper. And I’ve got more rookies on my shift than any other division in the city.

I don’t think it would even cross their mind to do something that stupid. But they do surprise me sometimes...

That story has some extreme incompetence associated with it. I have actually fired cops for less than that.

At the end of the day, there is blame on the agency for this unless they took steps to prevent this sort of thing (training, policy, etc). For example, at my job, nobody does an entry to a habitation without either an exigency including immediate threat to life, or contacting a supervisor for permission.

If one of my guys enters a habitation to investigate a misdemeanor theft of service, he is on his own, and the agency only picks up the tab after he pays the first $100k per chapt 108 tx cprc (in a non federal case, 1983 cases have no such rules, but the plaintiffs generally are going after the government to pay since no plaintiff lawyer wants a 3 year old pickup truck with a note larger than resale value)

very interesting.

thanks very much for the update.

--------------------------------------------

So the police investigated themselves and found themselves blameless?

What a surprise.

The St. Louis County PD and then the attorney's for St. Louis County really pushed their luck.

Denying it happened, no police report until he called to complain, lying about the facts, unwilling to apologize, offering him $1.00 to settle, delay tactics, etc.

My gut tells me the jury is going to find for my friend and probably in a big way.

Update in original post

Interesting and successful, but the taxpayers of St Louis County will pay for it. Are the cops in question, and the chiefs at the time it happened still around.

And how will the award be split between your friend and the ACLU?

If the taxpayers pay out the ass and find it unacceptable and painful to sit, then stand at the ballot box at every opportunity and vote to change it.


Insular thinking is a fool's loss.

And should it go to a jury, the incident, findings and all of it may well be a considerable reminder, and one that can be used properly to push for better leadership.

That's awesome. Blatant constitutional violation. Fourth Amendment is kind of important. Hopefully the deal also includes lawyers fees

ACLU gets 33%, fed tax gets 24%, and they get the remainder.

One of the cops is still on the force and the other left about 4 years ago.

Correction: one of the officers is now a sergeant in the same force and the other is a federal officer.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: h2oys,

quote:

Originally posted by h2oys:
fed tax gets 24%,

Another injustice.

I'm glad for them it all worked out.

quote:

Originally posted by h2oys:
FINAL UPDATE:

The case is over. St. Louis county sought an out of court settlement on the day (Monday) jury selection was to take place this week. STL County wanted a gag order on the settlement but my friend insisted on: 1) they finally admit their error, 2) there was no gag order.

They settled for $300k. Article below:

https://apnews.com/article/pol...9c0b04046dc0ffe9f794

Kudos to your friends for keeping going for 6 years. Justice taking that long is an additional injustice beyond the illegal entry.

quote:

The taxpayers will take the financial hit

It's an interesting comment that' made whenever a government is sued for wrongdoing to a citizen. Not quite sure the point that's being made by those who bring it up.

Most likely it will be paid by insurance coverage for E&O for the city.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

The taxpayers will take the financial hit

It's an interesting comment that' made whenever a government is sued for wrongdoing to a citizen. Not quite sure the point that's being made by those who bring it up.

Most likely it will be paid by insurance coverage for E&O for the city.

Actually St. Louis county is self insured to $2 million and insurance applies thereafter.