It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BiffWellington
a reply to: infolurker
How about a 25-year minimum sentence for any police officer found to have filed a false report?
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: vonclod
Because the award should fit the crime (the abuse of force and, IMO, illegal kidnapping based on a lie) and the physical effects of the use of force (which appear to be none or minimal, but this activist-site article doesn't discuss that).
Now, let's just say that half of that is for the abuse of force (which would still be an excessive amount, IMO)--that still leaves $650,000 left over for the 10 days that he was held in jail. That breaks down to %$65,000 per day that he was in jail as compensation.
No, I'm sorry, that's ridiculously excessive--that's paying this man more than the average household income of an American family PER DAY that he was locked up, plus double that for the assault on him by the police officer.
Instead of condescendingly asking my why that's ridiculous, maybe you can back your insinuation that it's not? Those are 1,300,000 tax dollars going to this guy because he was jailed for 10 days (unjustified, I get that) and got taken down to the ground. There are apparently no medical bills or anything, it doesn't say that he lost his job...nothing that requires compensation other than the bail that he (for some strange reason) still had to post to get out.
$1,300,000.00 generally takes the average household 22.8 years to accumulate through an average income of $57,000.
This guy "earned" 23 years worth of average income because of this incident? No, I would submit that he did not, especially not at the expense of the local taxpayers.
So, my stance is that the officer's behavior and the subsequent jailing is unacceptable, as is the amount of compensation that Faulkenberry is receiving. Both are excessive and ridiculous--and that's an okay stance to have.
originally posted by: jjkenobi
originally posted by: KansasGirl
originally posted by: infolurker
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: infolurker
I bet this stuff would be reduced greatly if the officers lost their pensions when crap like this happened!
YES, YES, YES. GREAT idea!
As my brother, who is a retired police officer, would gladly tell you, police officer pension is next to nothing. It would take 100 years of his pension to pay the 1.3 million settlement.
Plus once the officers get fired or jailed they lose any chance at pension anyhow.
originally posted by: denybedoomed
a reply to: SlapMonkey
It is a ridiculously large sum of money. I agree, but I'd rather an innocent man go free and get paid than be in jail for the actions of scum like those LEOs
It didn't HAVE to go this way. Who do we blame?
And I doubt it was Faulkenberry's idea to try to get that much. But once you lawyer up, I'm sure they start telling you how much you CAN get. So why not set the bar high?
All in all, the crimes committed here rest on the shoulders of the officers, who hopefully lose their jobs, face jail time, and are made famous for their transgressions against the very people they are hired to protect and serve.
originally posted by: stormcell
The idea of a ridiculously large amount of money is to act as a deterrent on government workers and departments who would consider corruption as a part of their daily routine.
The minute he was arrested by the police, it is very likely that his employer would have fired him, the bank may decide to foreclose on the property, the car showroom takes back the car, his friends disassociate themselves with him. That amount of money is fair compensation.
originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: SlapMonkey
I wasn't trying to be condescending..just asked a serious question
I would be more than happy if these clowns were personally liable for the award, I agree it sucks the award is paid by the taxpayer..
The idea of these awards is partially to be punitive correct? Again I agree the taxpayer should not be stuck with it..time for the taxpayer to do something about it.
Maybe a form of insurance simular to malpractice should be instituted for LE, and/or they go to prison like joe citizen would..both preferably in this case.
The Los Angeles City Council in recent years has repeatedly settled costly, high-profile lawsuits, agreeing to spend millions of dollars to end litigation brought by grieving families, disability-rights groups and people wrongfully convicted of crimes.
City Hall leaders championed some of the settlements as having a silver lining for taxpayers, such as one in 2015 that created a program to fix L.A.’s buckling sidewalks.
But a surge in legal settlements, along with court judgments against the city, is outpacing the city’s ability to keep up.
With payouts projected to total at least $135 million this fiscal year, budget officials said Monday that the city needs to immediately borrow up to $70 million to avoid dipping into its emergency reserve fund.
In a new report, the City Administrative Office said the gap reflected “a new trend of increased liability payouts.” The report recommended raising the money through a bond that would be paid back over 10 years.
Such borrowing would cost the city millions of dollars each year in interest and fees. Under one scenario discussed Monday, the city would pay $9 million each year in principal and interest on a $70-million bond.