Skip to comments.Judge to rule if sheriff, county will remain defendants in Costco shooting lawsuit
Posted on 06/03/2011 6:48:59 AM PDT by Fido969
The county, through Chief Deputy District Attorney Stephanie Barker, argued to be dismissed from the case because Metro is an independent legal entity that adopts its own policies, procedures and rules. Barker told the judge that under state law the county isnt liable for Metros conduct.
(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...
Then who is? Are these little independent paramilitary organzations?
And in the case of a huge lawsuit - do the PDs just declare bankruptcy and reorganize?
If I'm not mistaken it was LV City Police that gunned him down. In that case, I'd agree; the County Sheriff would not have any liability.
You are reading too much into it. The legal question here is that is the Sherrif / County responsible when they were NOT the responding law enforcement. As I understand it, the responding officers were from LVPD.
“The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (also known as the LVMPD or Metro) is a joint city-county police force for the City of Las Vegas and Clark County, Nevada.”
No, they were from Metro, which is the police force for the city AND county. There is a separate North Las Vegas PD, but they have nothing to do with this.
The Department is funded by the City of Las Vegas and Clark County... Both governments must approve the annual budget including their percentage of budget. Additionally the department itself generates approximately 33% of its funds through property tax, and the charging for certain services, such as special events, work cards, and privileged license investigations. Additional funding is generated from a special sales tax to fund commissioned positions.
My bad. Didn’t realize Las Vegas/Clark County were organized that way.
Another entity is can be formed when consolidating public services such as police and fire. They are frequently referred to as consortiums. Again, only the consortium can be sued leaving the signers of the entity free from liability.
This actually works in favor of the taxpayer by reducing insurance costs for the individual municipal entities.
I hope they bankrupt everyone. F’n killers.
I read the previous articles and witness statements. Sounds like the guy was stoned and acted stupidly. The cop that first shot him is a former marine.
“The cop that first shot him is a former marine.”
Well then, I guess that makes it ok.
I think it’s a widespread policy to have county law enforcement as a separate entity. I know it is here in Contra Costa County, CA. I asked my County Supervisor why the Board didn’t get involved in the miserable handling of the Jacyee Dugard kidknapping and was told that the board didn’t have any control over the Sheriff’s Dept. at all. They approve their budget, but have no say in operations or training. I guess it’s supposed to take “politics” out of law enforcement. It’s the same with the firefighters. Sadly, both groups have devolved into union thugs in uniforms and some with guns.
No, that makes him someone who should be familiar with weaponry and whether or not someone is pointing the shooting end at him or not.
"The power of the purse strings."
Abdicating authority does not necessarily remove responsibility.
Would he be able to tell if a gun that was taken out was in its holster or not?
From an article I read earlier the cop testified that the pistol was in a holster and that the cop had the same type holster and that one could easily shoot the pistol while it was still holstered. Don’t know the veracity of that statement, but having had many pistols and holsters I do know that one can shoot while holstered depending on the configuration.
Don’t know for a certainty that’s it’s a good shooting, but there are a lot of witnesses testifying that the dead guy was behaving erratically, and appeared to be under the influence of drugs.
First of all, the cop testified that he did NOT know the gun was in the holster when he fired. His "could have shot the gun while it was in the holster" was an afterthought.
Here's a picture from the scene, showing the gun in the holster:
Explain to me how you would shoot that gun while it was in the holster.
Cop's observation can be discounted by the fact he didn't know the gun was in the holster, and also can discount all the witnesses who didn't see the holster. The photograph shows what was there.
The pathetic "he could have shot from the holster" is a weak excuse.
First, I don't think people should be killed for what the COULD have done, and secondly, the statement is plain wrong - you can't shoot that gun while it's in that holster.
I read the original article and that’s what they reported he stated. Don’t bitch at me for his testimony. Secondly, I agree. From this side of the holster it looks like you can’t shoot while it’s in it. Do you have a picture of the other side?
Lastly, without defending this particular incident I can tell you that people get killed all of the time for what they “could have done.” That’s because no one is a mind reader and you make the best estimate you can while in the situation.