Inglewood Teen Sues Cops.
-
Remember... This is the American way: Someone screwes up, you take all their money away in court.:)
Yeah, but it's not the police's money -- it's the tax payers! We could have saved some court time by just giving the victim the cash without having to get beat up! X| My two cents... Chris
-
I'm sort of against the police force being sued by individuals in the public. Even if one particular person suffered at the hands of a police officer, suing the cops for $50,000,000 or whatever is going to take resources away from the police force. I'm sure criminals everywhere are very excited about this. If a cop does mess up he/she should be fired and replaced. I don't think a person should be set up for life on public money that was budgeted to fight crime. At the very least the money from law suits should go back into the public service somehow. Schools, hospitals, zoos, parks, whatever. Perhaps this Inglewood teen with his $50,000,000 (or whatever) will be shot dead on the streets because the cops were short of resources due to the law suit. What do you guys think?
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: If a cop does mess up he/she should be fired and replaced. I don't think a person should be set up for life on public money that was budgeted to fight crime. In this case, I would agree that a $50 million dollar amount seems excessive, but I doubt that a jury would award anything close. But before you make blanket statements, what would you say to Abner Louima. He was raped by a policeman who shoved a broomstick up his ass while he was in custody in a police station. He needed serious surgery to repair the damage and continues to suffer. Meanwhile, New York's finest cannot figure out who all committed the rape (the one who committed the rape was convicted, but they cannot identify who helped by holding Louima down). If the police cannot solve a rape that occurs in the police station, god help us when they are looking for terrorists! And I would say that Louima deserves millions. How much would you charge someone to let them do that to you? So the question of how much money is reasonable seems to me to depend on the severity of the injury sustained by the victim, not on an abstract absolute idea that the police should not be sued. Another piece of this is what happens when the state gets carried away with its sovereign immunity. Then people get injured by things that are clearly the state's responsibility and cannot even be compensated for their medical expenses (I have posted well-documented examples of this in the Lounge over the past year or so). So the key is that we must trust juries to come to reasonable conclusions as to what the damage was and whether the police were actually liable for the damage. For the most part, juries do very well at this. In the rare examples (those that get all the headlines) where juries really screw up, the award is often either reversed or reduced substantially on appeal.
-
Yeah, but it's not the police's money -- it's the tax payers! We could have saved some court time by just giving the victim the cash without having to get beat up! X| My two cents... Chris
-
Very true!
-
Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: If a cop does mess up he/she should be fired and replaced. I don't think a person should be set up for life on public money that was budgeted to fight crime. In this case, I would agree that a $50 million dollar amount seems excessive, but I doubt that a jury would award anything close. But before you make blanket statements, what would you say to Abner Louima. He was raped by a policeman who shoved a broomstick up his ass while he was in custody in a police station. He needed serious surgery to repair the damage and continues to suffer. Meanwhile, New York's finest cannot figure out who all committed the rape (the one who committed the rape was convicted, but they cannot identify who helped by holding Louima down). If the police cannot solve a rape that occurs in the police station, god help us when they are looking for terrorists! And I would say that Louima deserves millions. How much would you charge someone to let them do that to you? So the question of how much money is reasonable seems to me to depend on the severity of the injury sustained by the victim, not on an abstract absolute idea that the police should not be sued. Another piece of this is what happens when the state gets carried away with its sovereign immunity. Then people get injured by things that are clearly the state's responsibility and cannot even be compensated for their medical expenses (I have posted well-documented examples of this in the Lounge over the past year or so). So the key is that we must trust juries to come to reasonable conclusions as to what the damage was and whether the police were actually liable for the damage. For the most part, juries do very well at this. In the rare examples (those that get all the headlines) where juries really screw up, the award is often either reversed or reduced substantially on appeal.
Good points. God help me if I ever become one of these people who only see things one way and can never be shown another point of view.
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
-
I'm sort of against the police force being sued by individuals in the public. Even if one particular person suffered at the hands of a police officer, suing the cops for $50,000,000 or whatever is going to take resources away from the police force. I'm sure criminals everywhere are very excited about this. If a cop does mess up he/she should be fired and replaced. I don't think a person should be set up for life on public money that was budgeted to fight crime. At the very least the money from law suits should go back into the public service somehow. Schools, hospitals, zoos, parks, whatever. Perhaps this Inglewood teen with his $50,000,000 (or whatever) will be shot dead on the streets because the cops were short of resources due to the law suit. What do you guys think?
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
I hate to defend what looked like police brutality, but we didn't see the whole crime. We only see the beating. Wasn't the cop bleeding? How did that happen? I don't mind the cop getting a little excited and popping the perf in the jaw. He probably deserved it. I think when the cops start getting their jollies off of beating the bad guys senseless is when we have a problem. Rodney King was too much, and the Luima thing was too much. I don't think this cop went too far. If a guy cut me, I'd be all over him like flies on $#!+ :mad:
Jason Henderson
quasi-homepage
articles
"Like it or not, I'm right!" -
People sue people when they think they are wronged. What's wrong with this? Accrding to the news reports, the kid is seeking "unspecified damages". The $50 mil number you made up is misleading to say the least. From the looks of things on the video, that cop is the criminal. Why are people speaking up against the kid? When money is "budgeted to fight crime", that's what it should be used for. Paying a salary and giving a gun to the thug who beat up that kid while he was handcuffed is not "fighting crime". In fact, from what I've read, this all started over a routine traffic stop. They handcuffed the kid and started beating him. I've seen no reports that he did anything to provoke it (though I'd bet he smart-mouthed the cops, which is NO EXCUSE for a beating.) Maybe LAPD shouldn't be punished for this. Maybe they should. The cop sure should.
Did you see the whole video? Were you there? :mad: You must not have seen the part where the kid was trying to kill the officers in an effort to escape. Of cource being the law abiding citizen that you are, you would have helped them capture him. :~ The media (who thrives off sensationalism) will never show the whole story. You do know what he was wanted for don't you? My take...you don't want to get beat up, don't start a fight. :eek: Have you ever been in a fight where the other guy is trying to take your life? (Ex-military or fights with the ex-wife are not the same as police work if this happens to be your case...) It is not easy to turn the engines off like you are presuming an officer should be able to. The adrenaline does not exit the blood stream like electricity does at the flip of a switch. I'm not condoning beating handcuffed prisoners but I can tell you from experience that the slice in time you see on TV is just that...a slice that doesn't show the big picture, only what they want you to see so they can up ratings and sell advertising. ed The nice thing about egotists is that they don't talk about other people.
-
I'm sort of against the police force being sued by individuals in the public. Even if one particular person suffered at the hands of a police officer, suing the cops for $50,000,000 or whatever is going to take resources away from the police force. I'm sure criminals everywhere are very excited about this. If a cop does mess up he/she should be fired and replaced. I don't think a person should be set up for life on public money that was budgeted to fight crime. At the very least the money from law suits should go back into the public service somehow. Schools, hospitals, zoos, parks, whatever. Perhaps this Inglewood teen with his $50,000,000 (or whatever) will be shot dead on the streets because the cops were short of resources due to the law suit. What do you guys think?
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
The problem is this becomes a he said/he said case. Unfortunately for the officer the video only shows his actions. But how often on the news do you hear about the following: 1. There is video evidence that the officer was injured. How does the office get injured by a 'cooperating' person. 2. The officer claims that the person was still resisting even after he was handcuffed. He specifically mentions that the person grabbed his balls. (Which is doable when handcuffed from behind while the officer is still behind you.) But, alas. All that has to be done is to have RACISM and police brutality screamed. Then it becomes a witch-hunt. I don't know who is at fault. I do thing the officer probably went too far. But I also wonder about "kicking the crap out of the officer" and then giving up. Officer can't touch you. (Which is the right thing) But what happens to these twits. They still should get sent up the river. We have enough bad cops. We just tosses an ex-Sheriff in jail for murder. We don't have to go on witch-hunts looking for more. If the cop did wrong, he should be punished for it. However, the witch-hunt is making hard for him to get fair treatment. Tim Smith I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
-
Did you see the whole video? Were you there? :mad: You must not have seen the part where the kid was trying to kill the officers in an effort to escape. Of cource being the law abiding citizen that you are, you would have helped them capture him. :~ The media (who thrives off sensationalism) will never show the whole story. You do know what he was wanted for don't you? My take...you don't want to get beat up, don't start a fight. :eek: Have you ever been in a fight where the other guy is trying to take your life? (Ex-military or fights with the ex-wife are not the same as police work if this happens to be your case...) It is not easy to turn the engines off like you are presuming an officer should be able to. The adrenaline does not exit the blood stream like electricity does at the flip of a switch. I'm not condoning beating handcuffed prisoners but I can tell you from experience that the slice in time you see on TV is just that...a slice that doesn't show the big picture, only what they want you to see so they can up ratings and sell advertising. ed The nice thing about egotists is that they don't talk about other people.
I have to strongly disagree with these statements. I would like to point out that I am as much a law and order republican as anyone and am a gun owner and a fierce defender of our conatitution. In other words I am anything but a beeding liberal. However when one is in the custody of law enforcement and is renderd harmless he/she should not be mistreated in any sense by anyone. that is, in itself , a crime and must be trated as such. Not only would I fire all officers involved I would hold them up to criminal charges and prosecute them to the max. I don't care what the person did before he was in custody. There is no excuse except cowardance and inbred brutality for what I saw on that video. If getting rid of that type of action in America means firing cops right and left then lets begin. We are safer with criminals we can defend against than we are crooked cops that we can't defiend against. Richard Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions....there was never a country where the majority of the people were in their secret hearts loyal to any of these institutions. Mark Twain - The Mysterious Stranger
-
I hate to defend what looked like police brutality, but we didn't see the whole crime. We only see the beating. Wasn't the cop bleeding? How did that happen? I don't mind the cop getting a little excited and popping the perf in the jaw. He probably deserved it. I think when the cops start getting their jollies off of beating the bad guys senseless is when we have a problem. Rodney King was too much, and the Luima thing was too much. I don't think this cop went too far. If a guy cut me, I'd be all over him like flies on $#!+ :mad:
Jason Henderson
quasi-homepage
articles
"Like it or not, I'm right!"To which I reply - BULLSHIT!!! Why not just handcuff him and shoot him. Same thing - its just a matter of degree. Any one who hits a handcuffed person is a coward. Period. End of discussion. Richard Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions....there was never a country where the majority of the people were in their secret hearts loyal to any of these institutions. Mark Twain - The Mysterious Stranger
-
Jim A. Johnson wrote: The $50 mil number you made up is misleading to say the least. "...or whatever" Jim A. Johnson wrote: From the looks of things on the video, that cop is the criminal. Why are people speaking up against the kid? We don't know all the facts. Sure it's wrong to hurt an innocent handcuffed person, but whose to say the kid was innocent? For all we know this kid could have pulled a knife or a gun on them. What would you do? Until I know all the facts, which may never happen, I'm not gonna say one side was wrong while the other was right. That kind of knee-jerk finger pointing is what causes problems like this in the first place.
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: We don't know all the facts. Sure it's wrong to hurt an innocent handcuffed person, but whose to say the kid was innocent? For all we know this kid could have pulled a knife or a gun on them. What would you do? Until I know all the facts, which may never happen, I'm not gonna say one side was wrong while the other was right. That kind of knee-jerk finger pointing is what causes problems like this in the first place. There's NOTHING the kid could have done that would warrant or excuse the abuse after the arrest and handcuffing. The cop shouldn't be fired, he should be arrested. He should have been arrested on the spot by every other police officer on the scene. I rarely buy into police abuse claims, because I fully understand the danger a cop is under and why he must sometimes "fight dirty" during an arrest. But, as you yourself just said, the kid was already under arrest and was handcuffed. No excuses are available to this officer. This is hardly "knee-jerk finger pointing". William E. Kempf
-
Jim A. Johnson wrote: The $50 mil number you made up is misleading to say the least. "...or whatever" Jim A. Johnson wrote: From the looks of things on the video, that cop is the criminal. Why are people speaking up against the kid? We don't know all the facts. Sure it's wrong to hurt an innocent handcuffed person, but whose to say the kid was innocent? For all we know this kid could have pulled a knife or a gun on them. What would you do? Until I know all the facts, which may never happen, I'm not gonna say one side was wrong while the other was right. That kind of knee-jerk finger pointing is what causes problems like this in the first place.
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: We don't know all the facts. Sure it's wrong to hurt an innocent handcuffed person, but whose to say the kid was innocent? Umm.. it's wrong for the cops to hurt _anyone_ who is handcuffed and down. Did you see the damn video? Kid was on his stomach on the car; cop comes up, picks him up by the neck, and punches him hard in the face. There is no excuse, rationale, justification, anything for that. None at all. Zero. Zip. Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: That kind of knee-jerk finger pointing is what causes problems like this in the first place. No; what causes problems like this is that cops live in their own little world. They only socialize with each other; they see everyone who's not a cop as a possible criminal; and they're always on a hair-trigeer, fealing everyone around them could pull a gun on them at any moment. (Yes, some of it's justified.)
-
To which I reply - BULLSHIT!!! Why not just handcuff him and shoot him. Same thing - its just a matter of degree. Any one who hits a handcuffed person is a coward. Period. End of discussion. Richard Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions....there was never a country where the majority of the people were in their secret hearts loyal to any of these institutions. Mark Twain - The Mysterious Stranger
Richard Stringer wrote: Why not just handcuff him and shoot him. Same thing - What?! That's not even close to the same thing! Granted, the cop should not have man handled him, but I don't blame him for getting a little mad and popping him in the jaw. He should be reprimanded and maybe suspended for a short while, but he should not be fired.
Jason Henderson
quasi-homepage
articles
"Like it or not, I'm right!" -
I hate to defend what looked like police brutality, but we didn't see the whole crime. We only see the beating. Wasn't the cop bleeding? How did that happen? I don't mind the cop getting a little excited and popping the perf in the jaw. He probably deserved it. I think when the cops start getting their jollies off of beating the bad guys senseless is when we have a problem. Rodney King was too much, and the Luima thing was too much. I don't think this cop went too far. If a guy cut me, I'd be all over him like flies on $#!+ :mad:
Jason Henderson
quasi-homepage
articles
"Like it or not, I'm right!"Anger is no excuse for breaking the law. If the kid were not handcuffed I'd buy self defense even with out all the facts. Handcuffed... the cop committed a crime. William E. Kempf
-
Richard Stringer wrote: Why not just handcuff him and shoot him. Same thing - What?! That's not even close to the same thing! Granted, the cop should not have man handled him, but I don't blame him for getting a little mad and popping him in the jaw. He should be reprimanded and maybe suspended for a short while, but he should not be fired.
Jason Henderson
quasi-homepage
articles
"Like it or not, I'm right!"The cop was and is a punk. If he can't control himself he does not need to be a police officer. let him be an animal control officer if he wants to continue sucking from the public tit - but as far as being trusted by the populance to be a police officer and carry a gun and have the right given by his office to incarcerate or kill he has shown by his action that he does not possess the qualities needed. Put his sorry ass in jail like the person he arrested and let the grand jury settle it. If its good for the goose etc... Maybe that would stop the next quasi-brutal cop pretender from doing something similar. Richard Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions....there was never a country where the majority of the people were in their secret hearts loyal to any of these institutions. Mark Twain - The Mysterious Stranger
-
Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: We don't know all the facts. Sure it's wrong to hurt an innocent handcuffed person, but whose to say the kid was innocent? For all we know this kid could have pulled a knife or a gun on them. What would you do? Until I know all the facts, which may never happen, I'm not gonna say one side was wrong while the other was right. That kind of knee-jerk finger pointing is what causes problems like this in the first place. There's NOTHING the kid could have done that would warrant or excuse the abuse after the arrest and handcuffing. The cop shouldn't be fired, he should be arrested. He should have been arrested on the spot by every other police officer on the scene. I rarely buy into police abuse claims, because I fully understand the danger a cop is under and why he must sometimes "fight dirty" during an arrest. But, as you yourself just said, the kid was already under arrest and was handcuffed. No excuses are available to this officer. This is hardly "knee-jerk finger pointing". William E. Kempf
There's NOTHING the kid could have done that would warrant or excuse the abuse after the arrest and handcuffing. The cop shouldn't be fired, he should be arrested. He should have been arrested on the spot by every other police officer on the scene. What about grabbing the balls of the officer after he was handcuffed? This is "knee-jerk finger pointing" at its finest. Tim Smith I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
-
Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: We don't know all the facts. Sure it's wrong to hurt an innocent handcuffed person, but whose to say the kid was innocent? For all we know this kid could have pulled a knife or a gun on them. What would you do? Until I know all the facts, which may never happen, I'm not gonna say one side was wrong while the other was right. That kind of knee-jerk finger pointing is what causes problems like this in the first place. There's NOTHING the kid could have done that would warrant or excuse the abuse after the arrest and handcuffing. The cop shouldn't be fired, he should be arrested. He should have been arrested on the spot by every other police officer on the scene. I rarely buy into police abuse claims, because I fully understand the danger a cop is under and why he must sometimes "fight dirty" during an arrest. But, as you yourself just said, the kid was already under arrest and was handcuffed. No excuses are available to this officer. This is hardly "knee-jerk finger pointing". William E. Kempf
So you were there to see what happened before the tape started rolling? Please share.
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
-
Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: We don't know all the facts. Sure it's wrong to hurt an innocent handcuffed person, but whose to say the kid was innocent? Umm.. it's wrong for the cops to hurt _anyone_ who is handcuffed and down. Did you see the damn video? Kid was on his stomach on the car; cop comes up, picks him up by the neck, and punches him hard in the face. There is no excuse, rationale, justification, anything for that. None at all. Zero. Zip. Silver. Member No. 11300 wrote: That kind of knee-jerk finger pointing is what causes problems like this in the first place. No; what causes problems like this is that cops live in their own little world. They only socialize with each other; they see everyone who's not a cop as a possible criminal; and they're always on a hair-trigeer, fealing everyone around them could pull a gun on them at any moment. (Yes, some of it's justified.)
Yeah I saw the video. I prefer to give the police the benefit of the doubt though, or at least a chance to voice their side of the story. I haven't heard anything yet. Just a lot of hot-heads crying "Rodney King! Rodney King!"
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
-
There's NOTHING the kid could have done that would warrant or excuse the abuse after the arrest and handcuffing. The cop shouldn't be fired, he should be arrested. He should have been arrested on the spot by every other police officer on the scene. What about grabbing the balls of the officer after he was handcuffed? This is "knee-jerk finger pointing" at its finest. Tim Smith I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
Tim Smith wrote: What about grabbing the balls of the officer after he was handcuffed? Difficult to do when handcuffed (especially if the cop has had an ounce of training, as they learn how to avoid things like this). Regardless, this is not life threatening and would not warrant the response seen in the video. Tim Smith wrote: This is "knee-jerk finger pointing" at its finest. Well, you're entitled to that opinion, but I think it's wrong. It's a reasoned and logical conclusion reached despite having some knowledge of what a cop's life is like and a tendency to take the other side of the fence in most cases of claims of police brutality. Sorry, the cop really has no excuse for his actions. I may be pointing fingers, but it's not "knee jerk" and is more then warranted. William E. Kempf
-
So you were there to see what happened before the tape started rolling? Please share.
"I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?" -xterm
Did you read my post? What happened before the tape started rolling is irrelevant in this particular case. The kid was apprehended, HANDCUFFED, and sprawled against the cruiser for several seconds before the cop started to beat on him. Self defense doesn't apply, and anger is never an excuse for breaking the law. William E. Kempf