City Denies Man’s Claim After Police Shot at Him Mistaking Him for Christopher Dorner

[Glocktogo]

GTG: do you think the individual officers should pay for this, or should it be within the scope of their qualified immunity, and therefore dump the bill on the taxpayers (who, individually, didn't overreact and shoot multiple people in multiple incidents)?

I've always felt that if QI wasn't so iron clad, there might be fewer of these types of incidents. Would it get more officers killed due to hesitation? Possibly. It's a very tough call.

I think that ultimately, it should be the agency/governing body that pays the claim or lawsuit. The entity that pays should however be allowed to recoup their damages from the responsible individual(s). That's how we work it on civil cases where I work. We go after the certificated & regulated party. It's up to them to recover their losses from the individual(s) or subcontractors that committed the regulatory violation.

Let's face it, there's no way the two women in the truck would ever actually recover $2M from the officers who did it, regardless of the judgement. The agency should be responsible to make them whole and then get what they reasonably can from the officers. Yeah, that sucks for the taxpayers who didn't ask for the burden, but neither does the aggrieved party who files the claim. I think their individual damages outweigh the damage to the collective tax base. JMO, YMMV

 

[Lobsterknuckles]

What's worse is that when I talk about these two incidents, people are now using the excuse of a Bostonesque lockdown as a means to prevent these types of crime. "Well, if people were told (forced) to stay in their homes while these paramilitary manhunts are carried out, then random innocent civilians wouldn't be shot and possibly killed by police!" Uuuuggghhh.

 

[Lobsterknuckles]

I've always felt that if QI wasn't so iron clad, there might be fewer of these types of incidents. Would it get more officers killed due to hesitation? Possibly. It's a very tough call.

I think that ultimately, it should be the agency/governing body that pays the claim or lawsuit. The entity that pays should however be allowed to recoup their damages from the responsible individual(s). That's how we work it on civil cases where I work. We go after the certificated & regulated party. It's up to them to recover their losses from the individual(s) or subcontractors that committed the regulatory violation.

Let's face it, there's no way the two women in the truck would ever actually recover $2M from the officers who did it, regardless of the judgement. The agency should be responsible to make them whole and then get what they reasonably can from the officers. Yeah, that sucks for the taxpayers who didn't ask for the burden, but neither does the aggrieved party who files the claim. I think their individual damages outweigh the damage to the collective tax base. JMO, YMMV

Quite true, but while these incidents aren't quite "common" they ARE occurring more frequently, and they seem to be garnering larger and larger sums of money. 4.2 mil here, another 5 mil here, another 2 mil here, and before long you've got 50-100 million bucks wrapped in it all. And even still, shouldn't the officer be tried as criminals, let alone fired? And possibly relieved of any eventual future police work?

 

[EFsDad]

Here is Oklahoma, taxpayers aren't left holding the bag, property owners are.

 

[Lobsterknuckles]

^Maybe that why we should punish those who commit such injustices.^

 

[EFsDad]

Quite true, but while these incidents aren't quite "common" they ARE occurring more frequently, and they seem to be garnering larger and larger sums of money. 4.2 mil here, another 5 mil here, another 2 mil here, and before long you've got 50-100 million bucks wrapped in it all. And even still, shouldn't the officer be tried as criminals, let alone fired? And possibly relieved of any eventual future police work?

[video=vimeo;45476363]http://vimeo.com/45476363[/video]

Cities do routinely fire them and then an out of state (usually former union rep/member) arbiter reinstates them.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Owasso_releases_video_of_arrest_that_led_to_office rs/20120710_12_a9_owasso513100

 

[n2sooners]

But not Fox, because we get told that it's Right Wing, and not CNN because they're Left Wing.

Apparently you just can't believe anything anymore...

Funny thing is that when it comes to news (and not the prime time or daytime entertainment shows) FOX is a bit to the right and CNN is a bit to the left but both are closer to center than most other news sources.

 

[Glocktogo]

Quite true, but while these incidents aren't quite "common" they ARE occurring more frequently, and they seem to be garnering larger and larger sums of money. 4.2 mil here, another 5 mil here, another 2 mil here, and before long you've got 50-100 million bucks wrapped in it all. And even still, shouldn't the officer be tried as criminals, let alone fired? And possibly relieved of any eventual future police work?

Honestly, yes. Sadly, you'd be surprised how many times agencies have fired officers for these types of incidents, but the officer turns around and sues the agency for wrongful termination and wins reinstatement. It's just like EF'sDad posted. It's utterly unbelievable.

 

[Dave70968]

Honestly, yes. Sadly, you'd be surprised how many times agencies have fired officers for these types of incidents, but the officer turns around and sues the agency for wrongful termination and wins reinstatement. It's just like EF'sDad posted. It's utterly unbelievable.

And the solution to that is for get-tough-on-crime prosecutors to get tough on criminals who (shouldn't) wear a badge. If a private citizen had started shooting on such flimsy pretext, he'd be in jail by the end of the day. It'd be pretty tough for these clowns to continue as cops if they're doing five-to-ten for ADW, discharge of a firearm, etc.

 

[Glocktogo]

And the solution to that is for get-tough-on-crime prosecutors to get tough on criminals who (shouldn't) wear a badge. If a private citizen had started shooting on such flimsy pretext, he'd be in jail by the end of the day. It'd be pretty tough for these clowns to continue as cops if they're doing five-to-ten for ADW, discharge of a firearm, etc.

Not all, but a lot of prosecutors are reluctant to tackle the bad cop issue in criminal court, particularly when their fellow officers are part of the prosecutor's team for all the other cases in their jurisdiction.