Judge rules 911 Operator may be held liable in man's death.

page: 1
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   
This story is one that made me give it a double take. It's incredible to think such a thing could happen and I have to wonder sometimes, how well trained or even concerned are 911 operators about the lives of those they take calls from? Not all operators are bad, I'm sure. This one was fired a month after causing this man's death on a dark Denver street. However, the level of damage that one bad operator can do is hard to underestimate. Case in point:


The 25-year-old was in a car with his brothers, Changkuoth Pal and Ran Pal, and another Sudenese friend, Joseph Kolong, in the early morning hours of April 1, 2012, when a group of Hispanic men allegedly pulled up along side, shouted racial slurs and shattered their windshield with beer bottles and "bottle rockets."

Ran Pal allegedly called 911 during the attack while his group fled to suburban Denver.


At this stage, he did what any intelligent person would do. He fled the scene of the attack, lest he be attacked further. It would seem he was in legitimate fear for his safety and well being. Certainly a reasonable concern, given what just happened to him. So he calls 911, expecting help and protection. What he got was an order that killed him. He was specifically ordered to go back to the scene of the attack and wait.


"After directing plaintiffs to park in a conspicuous location on a major road on which he knew the attackers had been traveling just minutes before, Mr. Rodriguez then instructed plaintiffs to activate their hazard lights, making them even more visible and obvious than they already were at that early hour of the morning. He then learned that the attackers had brandished a gun during the initial altercation. Despite this knowledge, Mr. Rodriguez did not suggest that plaintiffs find a more discrete location, even within the city of Denver, or otherwise make their whereabouts less obvious. Most egregiously, Mr. Rodriguez did not dispatch a police officer to plaintiffs' location at any time until after Jimma Pal had been fatally shot.
(Source: Courthouse News)

The last sentence is the clincher for me. He sent them back down to where this just happened and didn't even dispatch police to the scene. Not to mention, insuring they made as bright and obvious a spectacle of themselves as could reasonably be accomplished, short of getting out and waving their arms.

The judge here did dismiss their claims for the basis they'd filed them. That being racial discrimination and evidence of a pattern. However, he specifically left open their ability to amend and refile the suit against the operator with more fitting claims. I certainly hope they do. A man died for another man's blatant incompetence.




posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I've always thought that operators should be held responsible for things like this. I've heard stories of them not dispatching officers and listening to people die on the phone for years. They deserve jail time if they do something that results in the death of someone through their incompetence or negligence.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


From source:


"After directing plaintiffs to park in a conspicuous location on a major road on which he knew the attackers had been traveling just minutes before, Mr. Rodriguez then instructed plaintiffs to activate their hazard lights, making them even more visible and obvious than they already were at that early hour of the morning. He then learned that the attackers had brandished a gun during the initial altercation. Despite this knowledge, Mr. Rodriguez did not suggest that plaintiffs find a more discrete location, even within the city of Denver, or otherwise make their whereabouts less obvious.



The 911 operator is a F'ing idiot...


But, what label would you give to someone that follows that asinine advice..?


Unfortunately, we have another Darwin Award candidate.


Did I mention that the 911 operator sucks..?





posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by facelift
 


Most people would follow their advice, I'd be willing to bet. People think that a 911 operator is to be trusted, and they know what to do, so they listen to them.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Most people would follow their advice, I'd be willing to bet.


Of course...because most of the time, their advice is reasonable.


Being able to differentiate between the sane and ludicrous is a skill set we all have - some of us just got the short end of this stick, huh Zaph..?





posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:11 PM
link   
wonder why they didnt immediately dispatch law



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by facelift
 


I've heard of quite a few people following idiotic advice just because it comes from a 911 operator. They think that the operator is a member of the police since they're calling for police. I agree that people should use common sense, but they see the 911 operator as a voice of authority, so they listen to them.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by HomerinNC
wonder why they didnt immediately dispatch law


I'm thinking the victim in this incident just assumed police were already headed there and hence, why he'd be sent back to where this happened. He must have thought they'd be showing up any moment, when the bad guys saw him first and shot him. What a thing. To imagine, no police had even been alerted to the fact he was there and in bad need of assistance.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
20/20 hindsight. Initial call was for a broken window and bottle rockets? To the dispatcher it sounds like vandalism and its over. Go back there and wait. Only about a hundred calls pending for some kind of vandalism on the "hot board" at any given time.

The people that went back to that spot and waited were probably not familiar with that "hood" or the laws and just complied?

I wouldn't have come any where near that spot and told the operator so...

but I was raised here.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 
For the life of me I don't understand why the 911 operator didn't instruct him to drive to the nearest police station. It just seems like the logical solution. How many assailants are stupid enough to chase their victims to the police station? Maybe the operator was following procedure, but sometimes you have to pick common sense over procedure when someone's in fear for their life.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
20/20 hindsight. Initial call was for a broken window and bottle rockets? To the dispatcher it sounds like vandalism and its over. Go back there and wait. Only about a hundred calls pending for some kind of vandalism on the "hot board" at any given time.

I'm not sure what the general approach in America is ...

Here, the guideline if you come home and there is broken glass, or you're in an altercation like this is to get out of danger, and stay out of danger.

I've been advised by police to leave an area and asked if I'm being followed etc ... and I've been 'told off' / advised by police not to enter a building during the scene of a break in unless I was absolutely sure the persons had gone. Further to this, I've had an operator tell me to not hang up my phone until the police arrived and to continue moving away from a location.

Perhaps there are other factors contributing to this, but surely this isn't advised conduct.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   
For those interested in seeing just what the Judge had to say and his reasoning, here is the 14 page order he issued and explained his decision with.

Court Filings Re: Magistrate Judge Decision

Page 6 is of particular interest as is the footnote, where it notes the dispatcher acknowledged knowing it was possible the assailants would return. It's also mentioned on the page above, I believe, that there was no requirement for them to return from Lakewood, where they had fled to Sheridan St. in Denver (not a nice area) just to make the police report.

The language of the Judge makes clear that he's not the least bit happy and also references a disciplinary report subsequent to this incident and, I'd personally presume, related to the firing of this dispatcher within a month of the shooting. Unfortunately, I can't find the 911 transcript but it does say the call lasted 11 minutes and right through the shooting of the victim, after which the dispatcher finally had units respond.
edit on 19-6-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by facelift
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Most people would follow their advice, I'd be willing to bet.


Of course...because most of the time, their advice is reasonable.


Being able to differentiate between the sane and ludicrous is a skill set we all have - some of us just got the short end of this stick, huh Zaph..?





Its sad that someone died, but yeah.......

Thinking "someone" on the other end of a phone is going to give you the advice you need, and taking the advice even though its going to put you in harms way?


Its like a Lemming taking advice from a Lemming...............




posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

i feel like the judge will just include 911 operators under the blanket protection from responsibility that police enjoy.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



He then learned that the attackers had brandished a gun during the initial altercation.
That's the lawyer that pretty much screwed himself.

The operator THEN learned. That's a HUGE difference. Smashing a window and yelling racial slurs is not the same as brandishing a weapon and threatening to kill someone. If I were informed that someone had just had a window smashed I would tell them to drive to a well lit public area and wait for the cops. I got the impression that the young men were able to flee and lose the attackers. It basically states that. Then the dirtbags found them.

Let's not throw someone under the bus when, for all we know, they were acting in good faith and following procedure. If anything that operator probably deserves a hug and some compassion.

I also want to ask you who the real criminal is here. Was it the man that in hindsight didn't give the right advice, or the one that pulled the trigger?



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


If anything that operator probably deserves a hug and some compassion.





WTF..?


Lay off the Catnip chief...





posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


I think you may have misunderstood how this happened..and perhaps that's my bad in how I presented it.

They were attacked, directly on the street with beer bottles and bottle rockets. The attack was severe enough to shatter their windshield. They weren't chased, but were left to drive off and immediately left the area to call 911 from Lakewood, which is just across I-70 from Denver and where the truck stops are, if you've been in the area. They were safe and entirely out of contact with the bad guys.

The dispatcher THEN ordered them to go back to the spot of the attack and await police for a report...which he had not notified to respond. He just told them to go there..and I guess, was planning on eventually telling one of the units to head there, at some point. The kicker was telling them to run their hazards.....and this was all in the middle of the night. Not a time to be unnoticed.

The linked statement in my last post, to be helpful, said the 911 call lasted 11 minutes to the time the shooting started...and the report of the gun being brandished in the first attack came 3 minutes before the bad guys returned and opened fire. So... The timeline and events is pretty damning for the Dispatcher, which is what the Judge indicates in what I'd say is harsh language for a Judge in a written order.



posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
That is Criminal Negligence. To send them back to the area where they were attacked with their hazard lights on was stupid at best and negligent but to do that and not send the police (where one would assume that the hazard lights were for the police to quickly locate them) crosses the line into criminal negligence. If the dispatch was perpetrating a crime and his negligence caused a death then he would be charged with Murder. This is serious.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Just throwing this out there but the dispatcher's last name is Rodriguez and the car that attacked the guys was Hispanic men. Maybe the dispatcher has the same beliefs towards the Sudanese community as the attackers and that is why he sent them back to the spot they were attacked and did not contact the authorities until after the shooting happened.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by RickKilgannon
Just throwing this out there but the dispatcher's last name is Rodriguez and the car that attacked the guys was Hispanic men. Maybe the dispatcher has the same beliefs towards the Sudanese community as the attackers and that is why he sent them back to the spot they were attacked and did not contact the authorities until after the shooting happened.


This was my first thought that this was some kind of arrangement, perhaps even, orchestrated by the shadow government.





new topics
top topics
 
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join