Posted on 10/30/2014 3:43:58 PM PDT by mykroar
“Attorney General Eric Holder said Wednesday that there was an obvious need for “wholesale change” in the Ferguson Police Department.”
They’re afraid of holder. It doesn’t matter he did the right thing and acted properly and within the law, he must be destroyed.
While I agree there seem to be some circumstances out of our control here, we don’t know these phones weren’t used in the grand jury.
It would seem those videos or pictures could have been moved off those devices and return to their owners. That isn’t right.
It’s a fair beef for someone to address.
Since witnesses seem to back up the officer’s version, I’m less inclined to think there’s a cover-up. The taken property should be returned in a reasonable time frame.
I haven’t heard a big stink over this. If you have, I’d appreciate you relating what you’ve heard on the subject.
“Frankly, I think whatever happens, he should walk away. Get a lawyer and negotiate a financial arrangement whereby he could live comfortably. Then just disappear.”
Yep.
There may be some reason behind it, but there should also be reasons why he should remain on the force. He performed his duties in a reasoned manner under duress. He didn’t go running after the perp and shoot him in the back. He remained at the patrol car, and only used deadly force when Brown returned of his own accord and approached in a threatening manner.
You could say any rookie on the force opens the township to litigation. Same difference here IMO. If he is exonerated, he should have no prejudice against him.
Holder is nothing but a big mouth now. His opinion doesn’t mean squat. He resigned under pressure. His time at Justice is tainted. He ruled as a crook more than an upholder of the law.
Oh, where is that Mayberry? Where is it, and I'll go there, too!
I don’t think he’s going to be ‘eased out’... sounds like a democrat lie.
He will resign eventually. He is never going to work again. How could you when you have a death mark on your head?
He can’t stay in Ferguson. He is a lightning rod to trouble at this point. If he would stay on the force, he would eventually be shot dead. His death would be an even bigger rallying cry for the protestors...
He will br given a desk job,,which he will have to stay in until this whole thing dies down and he can move on to a new career.
Darren Wilson is never going to wear an officer’s uniform again. He is a marked man for life, to include his girlfriend, another police officer and their pending child.
No one would want to work with him either for fear of catching the stray rounds coming at him.
His life is ruined just as Zimmermans was.
“I believe an indictment is necessary for a lawsuit. No indictment, no moola.”
Huh?
Your statement is incorrect at best.
Suing the Police
Authored by Peter Clarke, LegalMatch Content Manager
When Can I Sue the Police?
Most lawsuits against the police are for police misconduct. Police misconduct occurs when a police officer violates someone’s civil rights. Victims of police misconduct usually rely on 42 USCA § 1983; this statute makes it unlawful for anyone acting under the authority of state law to deprive another person of his or her rights under the Constitution or federal law. Most claims against police officers arise out of the following police actions:
Excessive or unreasonable force
Malicious prosecution
Intentional false arrest
Sexual abuse
Most states require victims to first go through all appropriate administrative remedies before they can sue the police. Administrative remedies include the following:
Reporting the incident to internal affairs division of the police department, and/or
Reporting the incident to the Department of Justice (DOJ) or a municipality’s Attorney General (AG).
Once you have made an appropriate report, most states also require the DOJ, AG, or the internal affairs division to give you a written notice of your right to sue the police.
Police officers may also be liable for their actions under negligence or intentional injury theories.
Who Can I Sue When I Sue the Police?
Most police misconduct suits involve any of the following three defendants:
The police officer(s) involved
The municipality
The supervisor of the police officer(s)
The police officer(s) involved are usually the primary defendant in police misconduct lawsuits. Suing a municipality may be more difficult because of the Government Immunity Doctrine, but in some states this doctrine has been abolished. Supervisors are not usually vicariously liable, and they can only be sued if they were personally involved in the incident or were a direct cause of the incident.
What Damages Can I Receive When I Sue the Police?
If you sue the police, you may be able to collect damages. Generally, those damages fall into three categories:
Civil Rights Damages - These damages are directly tied to police officer’s violation of your Civil Rights.
Actual Damages - These damages cover physical and emotional injuries, expenses, and costs associated with the incident.
Punitive Damages - These damages are meant to punish the police officer. Generally, municipalities are exempt from punitive damages.
http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/suing-the-police.html
Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas.
Where did Furhman end up after OJ? Idaho, iirc.
Heck, he’d be welcomed in the little New England town I grew up in. Problem is that it’s two close to a few urban areas and once the locals there found out he was working within 10-15 miles they’d go nuts.
Better to be in a small town with lots of distance from anything remotely urban.
You’re probably right about that. I’d still leave it up to the officer to do was he wants.
He may have family there, have lived there for many years, and have real roots there.
He may have a mortgage.
The guy didn’t do anything wrong. As far as I am concerned he should be making all the decisions about his own future.
I agree, I wasn’t inferring that holder did a good job, but officer Wilson. I probably should have been more clear.
Sometimes I realize the comment is valid, but I attack the premise for what it is. I didn’t mean to give you a hard time, because I think you addressed the issue on a solid point. I’m sure your original comment had merit.
My issue was, should it?
Thanks Duffee.
The good people of the town will stand with Wilson when the evidence clears him - and the same criminal types that hated the police before this incident will continue to hate the police.
It's a wash.
If the original story had been true - that an innocent black man had been shot because of the color is his skin - I would have been there protesting against to police too. Freepers can smell injustice. Lots of us would have objected.
But the story smelled of lies... the video showed the nature of the man involved... and belief in the the 'hands up' bull was suspect. The gentle giant's friend also looked like he was lying... then the poverty pimps started running in and it smelled of scam.
Wilson will be fine. A desk job until he's totally healed then back to the street.
The family can sue anyone it pleases, for any reason, whatsoever. Without a Grand Jury indictment, the chances for a successful civil lawsuit go down dramatically, as do the odds of an attorney taking the case on contingency.
“chances for a successful civil lawsuit go down dramatically, as do the odds of an attorney taking the case on contingency.”
Really?
Top Civil Rights attorney, Benjamin L. Crump already represents the family.
“What the police say is not to be taken as gospel,” Benjamin L. Crump told the Times, dismissing Officer Wilson’s account of what happened in the SUV that fateful day. Officer Wilson should be indicted by the grand jury and his case sent to trial, said Atty. Crump. “He can say what he wants to say in front of a jury. They can listen to all the evidence and the people can have it transparent so they know that the system works for everybody.”
The Brown family lawyer continued, “The officer’s going to say whatever he’s going to say to justify killing an unarmed kid. Right now, they have this secret proceeding where nobody knows what’s happening and nobody knows what’s going on. No matter what happened in the car, Michael Brown ran away from him.”
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_101879.shtml
“Crump represented the family of Marlon Brown, who DeLand police ran over and killed in the Spring Hill neighborhood during a traffic stop last year. Crump has taken on several cases with implications of possible civil rights violations.
In DeLand, Krystal Brown, the ex-wife and mother of Marlon Brown’s children, won a settlement — $550,000 which will be set aside for the children – against DeLand.”
http://crime.blogs.news-journalonline.com/10975/attorney-in-mo-shooting-had-deland-case/
The DeLand tort suit never went to trial. The city settled. Crump is gonna posture over the Ferguson case so there is a settlement. But I don’t see a civil suit coming up if the city doesn’t settle. Suits cost a lot of money. Without a grand jury indictment, Crump will have to get a lot of the evidence he needs by hiring people to get sworn affidavits and so on. That’s hundreds of thousands he won’t get back if he loses. Heck, given how incompetent Crump appears to be in doing anything outside of provoking a riot, the judge might stick him with the state’s bills, on top of his own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.