Blue Byline

A cop's perspective of the news and South Sound matters

Ridiculous police lawsuits are a costly joke

Post by Brian O'Neill on Oct. 25, 2013 at 5:23 pm with 5 Comments »
October 25, 2013 5:23 pm
Courtesy kirotv.com
Courtesy kirotv.com

Picture this: You’re driving through town when you see police lights in your rearview mirror. You ignore the cop and driver home, where you find your street blocked by police cars and at least one officer on foot. Instead of stopping, you attempt to drive through them, striking an officer with your car. In return, police open fire and you are struck, putting an end to your night.

Variations on this scenario are common, but this example was borrowed from a TNT story (10/21) involving a 34-year-old Tacoma man who was shot after allegedly driving his vehicle at Tacoma police officers in 2011. The officer he struck was not badly injured, though the driver himself was shot as he continued to flee. Eventually, the driver decided to sue the Tacoma Police Department, alleging that the officer he hit was somehow at fault. Which is a fitting seque to the vocabulary word of the new millenium:  gall [gôl] noun 1. bold, impudent behavior.Recall that this individual allegedly refused to pull over for police (a misdemeanor) and commited a dangerous felony while attempting to flee (vehicular assault). Those crimes were compounded by a frivolous lawsuit which will ultimately require a taxpayer-funded defense to cover the legal costs, regardless of the outcome.

People have become so used to the idea of crazy lawsuits (remember the 3 million awarded in McDonald’s hot coffee suit?) that it is difficult to summon any outrage over this one. Yet the costs to police agencies and local governments are huge, especially for those that are self-insured (i.e. taxpayers’ money again).

Nowadays, the average cop should expect to be civilly sued at least once during his or her career. In fact, many officers have gone so far as to pay for supplemental insurance out of their own pocket simply to protect their personal assets.

To be fair, police officers do make mistakes. Sometimes the consequences are dire. In such instances, they should be held accountable.

But this does not alter the reality of police work, where the stakes can literally be life or death. The citizens who grant officers their authority expect them to be prepared to use deadly force to stop an imminent threat.

The Tacoma lawsuit alleges that the officer who was struck by the plaintiff’s ignored training by standing outside of his vehicle. Given the ever-changing dynamics of police incidents, it would be imprudent (not impudent – see “gall” above) to speculate on that point without further details.

In any case, what this plaintiff fails (or refuses) to acknowledge is that on the night in question he held all the cards. He could have turned his lights on, and thereby precluded a traffic stop. He could have pulled over when a patrol car activated his emergency lights. He could have stopped his car when an echelon of police officers blocked his path.

Instead, he ignored all of these options and plowed through a line of cops. In his single-minded decision to flee, he ignored the law and the safety of others. He was, to be precise, an imminent threat.

So the question is, in what universe does logic dictate that the police officer recklessly struck by a fleeing criminal is somehow at fault?

Answer: In the cosmic realm of civil litigation, where “Personal responsibility takes a backseat to a big payout.”

Buckle up, citizens of Tacoma. Looks like another sticky-fingered driver wants to take you for a ride.

Leave a comment Comments → 5
  1. smokey984 says:

    Ridiculous police lawsuits are a costly joke. Ya?

    I will tell everybody whats a costly joke..I think we all remember this story. Couple of years later the cop gets compensation…

    Read and Enjoy!

    Officer in UC Davis pepper-spray incident to get $38,059

    The former University of California, Davis police officer who pepper-sprayed Occupy protesters has reached a worker’s compensation settlement with the university system.

    The Davis Enterprise reports that a judge on Oct. 16 approved the $38,059 settlement between John Pike and the University of California.

    The 40-year-old former officer said he suffered depression and anxiety after death threats to him and his family after the Nov. 18, 2011 event.

    University spokesman Andy Fell said the case was resolved in accordance with state laws.

    Pike became well known after an online video of him pepper-spraying the protesters went viral.

    His address and other personal information were posted online afterward, and he received scores of death threats.

    Pike was fired in July 2012 after eight months of paid administrative leave

    http://www.kcra.com/news/local-news/news-sacramento/officer-in-uc-davis-pepperspray-incident-to-get-38059/-/12969376/22596160/-/xif5q7z/-/index.html?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=kcra%2B3

  2. simonsjs says:

    Smokey984, you’re only going to hear crickets? Brian can’t defend this article.

  3. smokey984 says:

    I understand.

    However my intent wasn’t to discredit Brian or his writings.

    My intent, was only to make sure both sides of the coin have been considered.

    We live in a society, unfortunately, of what i call “upside-down living”.

  4. Brian O'Neill says:

    I do recall this incident (I believe it was the subject of a previous column). If memory serves, Pike was the chief of the campus police who was relieved of duty and sent packing for his role in the pepper spray fiasco. His lawsuit appears as superfluous as the one which is the subject of this column.

    In Pike’s case, his payout ($39K is peanuts in civil litigation) amounts to little more than a nuisance fee. In other words, his agency and the state paid him off in lieu of spending more to defend itself.

    Thank you for bringing this lawsuit to the fore. Regardless of who brings this type of ridiculous litigation before a public agency, it is a travesty that taxpayers must foot the bill.

  5. Then you have SPD kicking cuffed people in the head and being found not guilty by a jury? When it’s on video? Thats what civil lawsuits are for….they go both ways, and yeah the one you are referencing sounds as stupid as the SPD officer being found not guilty criminally for his assault….. Frivolous lawsuits are a part of America unfortunately…

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0