It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Utah nurse settles over rough arrest caught on video

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: nightbringr

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

$500K isn't really a big amount.


Say whaaaaat?

Those cops can rough me up for half the price. Hell, id take 20 grand.


Well...take 1/3 for her attorneys...

Lawsuits these days can rack up millions of dollars...for punitive damages and actual damages. It's ridiculous IMO.




posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: nightbringr

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

$500K isn't really a big amount.


Say whaaaaat?

Those cops can rough me up for half the price. Hell, id take 20 grand.


Well...take 1/3 for her attorneys...

Lawsuits these days can rack up millions of dollars...for punitive damages and actual damages. It's ridiculous IMO.

Ahh right. I almost forgot for a moment we are living in the 'special snowflake' age. A wonderful time where we can feel justified in suing McDonald's for serving you hot coffee, (the horror!), that we foolishly spill on ourselves while driving, then sue for millions.



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 11:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: nightbringr

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

$500K isn't really a big amount.


Say whaaaaat?

Those cops can rough me up for half the price. Hell, id take 20 grand.


I'd go even cheaper. No money, just let the officer serve the same jail time I would if I assaulted and handcuffed a cop while they were doing their job. He can even keep his job when he gets out, if he is still eligible.



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

Good for her--I despise a litigious society when so many lawsuits are frivolous in nature, but this one, and with all of the chances that the (ex) LEO had to correct his behavior and ultimately choosing to go the illegal-detention route, really validates this lawsuit and outcome.

I think that in the grand scheme of things, $500,000.00 is not ridiculous for someone having been illegally and forcibly removed from their job for doing the right thing, then illegally detained in a police vehicle without cause. Plus, she seems to have intentions to use some of the money in a decent way, so that's awesome.

(Ex) Officer Payne acted disgracefully, illegally, and unconstitutionally. He got a good chunk of what he deserved, but I'd still like to see criminal charges against him.



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

The criminal and civil rights violation investigations are still ongoing. Given Det. Payne appealed his termination even the IA portion is still incomplete.



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

How come the nurses settlement is ok, she was detained for what?..20 mins, but the guy in Texas who received 1.3 mill..was falsely charged and spent 10 days in jail was not ok? to top it off the Texas incident the police clearly lied like mofo's.
I agree the nurse deserved her settlement.

photographyisnotacrime.com...

With all due respect just a serious question.



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

Different states - different laws.

Settlements usually occur when both parties agree to the terms. The other question is how likely would a court rule against the city / pd in a lawsuit and what potential damages could be awarded and would that amount be more or less than a settlement?

The other side is that cities are way to eager to pay out a settlement, regardless of fault, in order to calm down the community and to end any bad pr coming from the incident. Law Enforcement often times will be thrown under the bus by a city giving a settlement when the police did nothing wrong. All to make the bad pr go away.

City officials are politicians and have to run for election. Re-election is more important to them than the truth or standing by their employees.



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Ok, thanks for your take on it, in the other thread Slapmonkey thought the 1.3 awarded to the Texan was way too much..to note, it was awarded via a jury, I'm guessing the nurse settled before court proceedings..she might of got more via trial I suppose.
I don't think 1.3 was too much to get for the 10 days, the false charge and all the possible ramifications that go with.
I just thought it odd that 500,000$ was ok for the nurses few hours but 1.3 mill was waaay too much for 10 days, the assault, and trying to potentially ruin the Texans life. Slap is a well read, knowledgeable guy, I just thought it inconsistent.
edit on 1-11-2017 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

I have to agree with Slapmonkey. Now days we are sue happy and entities being sued are way to quick to shell out money to make the situation go away. That in turn reinforces the idea that if I sue I can make some quick cash.

We need major tort reform in this country.



posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I agree with you as it pertains to frivolous lawsuits.
So what is the right thing to do in the Texas case? how much should someone get for these guys charging and jailing him on a false felony? that kind of thing will ruin lives.
Also and why would it be different in the nurses case..I'm unclear on your thought on the nurses settlement.
Personally I think it's is unfair that the taxpayer foots the bill..I would like to see a kind of malpractice insurance for LE, short of being personally libel ..for cases such as the one in Tx.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 02:31 AM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

The only restrictions i am aware of deals with suing a business in that any damages awarded cannot bankrupt the company in question. I need to refresh my memory on the specifics in that area though. Absent that I am not really aware of guidelines established for determining damages for people in the above situations. There might be, either in state law or in state supreme court rulings.

As for the difference between TX and the nurse the incidents occurred in 2 different states with different laws and state court rulings.

My opinion on the nurse is different than a lot of people. In my opinion the nurse broke the law and should not be entitled to any form of restitution. Insurance for law enforcement (at all levels) is more restrictive in that state laws are in place that specifically protects law enforcement in civil cases.

If an officer is sued (my state of MO is the example) they look at if the officer violated the law and or departmental policy. If the officer was in compliance on both they have whats called qualified immunity. It prohibits a civil case from being brought against the officer for their actions (the other is absolute immunity and applies to government officials / lawyers / judges / prosecutors etc).

I raised the points above in an effort to show how complex the legal system becomes when trying to sue government officials or bring criminal prosecution against them. The laws are in place specifically to prevent anyone from suing government officials with the only complaint being they dont like the person, their views or political leanings.

A person bringing a suit can speak to the media all they want. The people being sued cannot being its in their best interest not to reveal their defense strategy. Lawsuits can become long and drawn out (like my responses so my bad) and like I said before politicians are elected officials who have to be elected again at some point. They dont want issues hanging over them when election time comes. In addition, given the situation, the more something is in the news the greater chances it can affect tourism etc.

Payouts, imo, are more based on public relations and less on taking a stand and saying enough, we did nothing wrong and wont pay out. Given the current climate police have a rough time in this area since no real distinction is drawn between a moron cop who makes the news and the other cops who do their jobs with no issues. We are all lumped into one category and its easier for cities to thrown the police under the bus in hopes it appears like they are representing their constituents.

8 time out of 10 they are hurting their constituents by constantly paying out. If you get bored look into the amounts the NYPD pays out on a yearly basis. The amounts are more than double the entire amount of money a city generates from all tax sources in a single year / city budget.

It all revolves around public relations and nothing more.
edit on 2-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

For one, the officers responding to Faulkenberry's home did so under the information from the man's own son that he was drunk and carrying around--they had to approach with extreme caution and, most likely, extreme prejudice (that he was armed, drunk, and possibly dangerous...not that other type of prejudice). So, from the start, the officers who responded to Faulkenberry were already on edge based on their best information (again, from the man's own son).

With that in mind, I hope that you recall that I condemned the officers' behavior--my only beef was with the settlement amount, and in my argument about that, I have since learned that there was even an additional $350,000 on top of the $1.3-million that he was awarded and was cited in your biased website. So, that's more than $1,650,000 awarded to Faulkenberry.

But here is where my major difference lies--the ex-officer Payne has AMPLE time realize that what he was demanding was illegal. He had a nurse and a senior hospital administrator both telling him that they could not release a man's blood without a warrant due to fact that he was unconscious and could not consent and was not a suspect in a crime. Apparently, this went on for more than an hour, and Payne even had his superior on the phone other officers around him for this duration. Therfore, Payne and the SLCPD had more than enough time and resources to correctly assess the situation and respond legally and appropriately.

Instead, ex-officer Payne decided that the best course of action was to try and confiscate a nurse's private property, and then forcibly remove her from her workplace, in front of her peers, patients, and civilians, and put her into the back seat of a police cruiser and illegally detain her.

See, those are called mitigating circumstances--things that add up to making this situation bad because the police, having all of that time and those resources to research the state law, have no excuse in how the situation ended up, and it was all because of a nurse following the law and doing her job to protect her patient's fourth-amendment rights.

All of the information was there for everyone involved from the start, and yet they still used unnecessary force and disregarded that nurse's rights in making their intentionally piss-poor decisions.

As far as the detainment of Mr. Faulkenberry, the police department and the court system, to my knowledge was not immediately in control of the footage that eventually led to the truth about the LEOs' behavior. Without that knowledge, the court can only act under the rules set in place, meaning that they keep the individual detained until evidence presents itself to the contrary of the arresting officers' claims.

When that evidence was made known, he was released.

Like I've already noted, the officers were in the wrong, but the court and corrections system were not in between the arrest and the vindicating video. But the fact that he was detained on baseless charges is a massive problem, but not to the tune of $1.65+ Million dollars, IMO. I hate that it happened to either of these individuals, but for you to pretend that either of these incidents, when all mitigating circumstances are taken into account, are the same thing is ridiculous.

Plus, as Xcathdra notes, different states have different laws concerning how settlements occur and what monetary amounts are considered appropriate. I don't know the details in either case, but that's another variable to consider.

But to be honest, all I said is that I don't think that $500,000 is ridiculous, but that doesn't mean that I don't think it's on the higher side. To be fair, I would have thought something in the $100,000, or even a bit lower, would have sufficed as well.

The good thing in both scenarios, though, is that both victims of this maltreatment from police are walking free and able to talk about it--I knew that the nurse would get off, but I bet that if Faulkenberry didn't have that video, we'd be discussing a different outcome for him, sadly enough.

 



originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: Xcathdra

Slap is a well read, knowledgeable guy...

Dammit, don't make a bald man blush...there's nothing pretty about that.
edit on 2-11-2017 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: vonclod

Payouts, imo, are more based on public relations and less on taking a stand and saying enough, we did nothing wrong and wont pay out. Given the current climate police have a rough time in this area since no real distinction is drawn between a moron cop who makes the news and the other cops who do their jobs with no issues. We are all lumped into one category and its easier for cities to thrown the police under the bus in hopes it appears like they are representing their constituents.

Isn't that the sad truth, though?


8 time out of 10 they are hurting their constituents by constantly paying out. If you get bored look into the amounts the NYPD pays out on a yearly basis. The amounts are more than double the entire amount of money a city generates from all tax sources in a single year / city budget.

The City of Los Angeles isn't much better, and I think that I posted a link in the other thread about it--they actually have to take out loans in order to afford all of the payouts from lawsuits. It's a sad reality...



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

thank you for your input as i figured you would know how the review process works far better then most members sorry i been awol past few days have been absoloutly nuts for me so gonna try to get to more replies now that i have a few moments to catch my breath



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Xcathdra

thank you for your input as i figured you would know how the review process works far better then most members sorry i been awol past few days have been absoloutly nuts for me so gonna try to get to more replies now that i have a few moments to catch my breath


No problem ad no worries... Thanks for asking.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join