Posted on 12/08/2009 3:31:18 PM PST by The Magical Mischief Tour
A woman has filed suit against the Washington Park police officer who she says accidentally shot her in the leg.
Linda Hicks claims she called police to her house at 5731 Portland on Dec. 1, 2008, to request that her son be removed due to his disruptive behavior.
Responding to Hicks' request, defendant Washington Park police officer Donald Williams arrived at Hicks' residence where he arrested Hicks' son for an outstanding warrant, according to the complaint filed Nov. 30 in St. Clair County Circuit Court.
"As the officers were taking the plaintiff's son to the squad car, plaintiff's dog barked at Officer Williams," the suit states. "Apparently startled, Williams discharged his official firearm twice in the direction of the dog. The bullet or the ricochet of the bullet struck plaintiff in the leg."
Because of the incident, Hicks sustained temporary and permanent injuries, incurred medical costs and has been prevented from attending to her usual duties, the complaint says.
Hicks blames Williams for discharging his firearm contrary to policy, for discharging his firearm when he knew it would result in injury and for discharging his firearm in the absence of a threat to him.
The village of Washington Park is also named as a defendant because it is allegedly liable for Williams' actions.
In the two-count suit, Hicks seeks a judgment of more than $100,000, plus costs.
She will be represented by Philip B. Afeld and Lanny Darr of Schrempf, Kelly, Napp and Darr in Alton.
St. Clair County Circuit Court case number: 09-L-639.
Did her tazer malfunction? I mean obviously the old woman needed a good jolt to keep her in line too.
Oh, NO!
Well, that’s my take on it.
Never call the cops in a family dispute unless you are cursed with a crazy inlaw who is actively trying to kill you.
And if that’s the case, they’ll almost certainly arrive too late, anyway.
Candidate for dumbest post of the year!
LOL, and this wasn’t a trailer park??
Bears repeating!
We are always so quick to dismiss lawyers when they are not on our side. But when it suits us, we embrace their cause I guess.
Full disclosure, I'm a cop. So of course you'll say I'm an apologist. But I call cops out when they need to be called out. What I am seeing here is, the only word you have here is the word of the dog's owner as told by her lawyer. Maybe the benefit of the doubt is warranted for now.
“For a lot of home owners dogs are their security guards”
Nope, just speed bumps to slow the pricks down.
Our rifles’ll decide the situation after that.
Some cops are drawn to shooting dogs like a wino is drawn to booze.
Well, there’s no doubt in my mind the old broad is milking it. There’s also no doubt in my mind it’s a pretty STUPID thing to do to miss a dog and hit a person.
Who do you want me to give the benefit of the doubt to?
So do you advise multiple speed bumps then?
it states, and i quote "Williams discharged his official firearm twice in the direction of the dog." THAT... is the stooopidist thing imaginable.
you either shoot AT SOMETHING, or you DON'T SHOOT.
it really IS that simple.
do you hunt the same way???
sorry Clem... i heard a noise.
Yeah it's a different offence, related to
"This is Wiggum, reporting a 318! Waking a police officer!"
If the officer reasonably believed that, then it was a good shoot.
Also, shouldn't it be dog owner's responsibility to keep her dog locked away in such a volatile situation? She called the cops in the first place!
I would think people around here would be a tad apprehensive about a story like this. What if you were walking with your kids and a dog started barking a threatening your kid? You think it's about to attack your kid, you shoot, and you hit the dog's owner. See you in court! Say goodbye to your house! You can thank this lady and her lawyer for it.
Apparently to some people, being the owner of an "unruly dog" is sufficient to merit a bullet.
Is that what they call a hair trigger?
Let's put it another way. I'm walking my dog down the street and it starts barking at some kid. The kid's dad pulls out a gun and shoots me, but explains that he was aiming at the dog and missed.
I don’t really care if a cop shot the dam dog. My problem is that he MISSED and hit the lady.
You just can’t do that.
If I were king of the world, my judgement would be medical payments paid to fix up the bullet hole in the lady’s leg. Nothing more. The lawyer would go to jail. The cop would be suspended without pay until he can pass a vigorous marksmanship program...with a TEST. His first day back to work he will be sent to shoot the dam dog. If he misses the first shot, he’s fired.
If he had shot at a rabbit the answer would be yes..... ;<)
And really, she did not get shot. She caught some metal from a ricochet. A cop I work with caught a ricochet on the firing line a few months ago. He kept shooting until they made him stop and go to the hospital.
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.