This is a discussion on Woman arrested after pulling officer from wreck within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by ccw9mm No, the only remedy from this case was monetary. Citizens can indeed sue for redress and file charges. Going after the ...
Going after the individuals that wronged the womanis a separate issue. This award has nothing to do with that at all.It is not 'someone' who is going to be bummed. It is the people who pay taxes. The organizations will continue their funding without missing a beat. One would hope the police are not defunded because some jury/judge awards a ridiculous amount for money.At the end of the day, no public budget is endless. That $7M is coming from somewhere, and someone's going to be bummed if a series of these drains the coffers to the point when it stings that organization and its related governing entities.I agree completely. Those individuals involved with wrongs committed should be held responsible. But that is a separate issue to the unjust award this lucky woman received. Like I wrote earlier, if I could be treated as she was for ten months and receive $7M I would not hesitate to absorb the abuse. Maybe I should move to Chicago.Where's the beef, then? IMO, any such redress should have gone straight to the jugular of the individuals, as well, with charges of wrongful arrest, denial of civil rights, willful lying and falsification on a sworn affidavit/form by the officer(s) involved. Hard to make anything out of the lack of firings, jail terms or fines levied directly against the individuals involved, other than assuming the lawsuit sought sought none of those things.
The award was not only for "loss compensation" but rather losing her freedom for 10 months. To me my freedom is priceless.
It's not about lost wages. It's about lost freedom, opportunity, etc.
Her separation from family, the humiliation and degradation of strip & body cavity searches at jail, the social stigma, and all the other attendant negative experiences she did not deserve to suffer.
While I do think the award is excessive, numbers short of 7 figures seem insufficient to me.
"Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington
Officer BROGAN SHOULD BE FIRED STRIPED OF CERTIFICATION & MONEY TO GOOD CITIZEN BOTTEM LINE
"The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."
All I can say is this:
The fact that this happened in Chicago makes it completely believable and not far fetched at all.
Chicago is one of the few places in America we should wall off and just abandon. Heck, maybe all of Illinois seeing as how Barak Husein Obama is from there.
I can't say whether $7.7 million is excessive or not based on some of the awards handed down by juries. If this case follows the normal route it will be eventually reduced by quite a bit but I still find it hard to believe that it made it as far as it did. I really don't know which is dumber, this case or the Duke LAX case.
As the story said, she thought she was being brought in as a witness to the crash. Why would she consult an attorney or be resistant? She thought she was being a helpful citizen. No reason, from her view, to get an attorney. In her shoes, I would have done the same thing initially. Of course, as soon as she realized she was under suspicion she should have gotten an attorney involved, but it wouldn't seem necessary initially at all.
"War necessarily brings with it some virtues, and great and heroic virtues too. What horrid creatures we men are, that we cannot be virtuous without murdering one another?" -John Adams
Examples of cases where the award is reduced or zeroed are:
(a) The highly publicised case against Kerr McGee tried by noted lawyer Gerry Spence. A movie about this was made starring Meryl Streap. Afterwards the judgment was reversed to - 0 -, nada, nothing.
(b) The highly publicised McDonald's hot coffee case in Albuquerque, NM had that damages substantially reduced.
Les Baer 45
N.R.A. Patron Life Member
Equitable treatment == everyone is treated equally.
Just treatment == everyone is treated as he/she deserves to be.
In this case, the court decided the woman had been wronged. She was owed just recompense. She was wronged by the city. The decision was that the city compensate her for its actions against her.
As you are so quick to point out in so many threads, SD, the answer to this is to change the elected officials. If Chicago residents get tired of paying through the nose to clean up after the screw-ups of their elected officials and those officials' appointees, then they can elect people who will behave correctly. That is the just approach here. That's the way a representative democracy is supposed to work.
“What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia
SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.
I used equitable in that both parties are treated equally. In this case the woman received an award that was not equitable. And, it was not just either.I agree completely.In this case, the court decided the woman had been wronged. She was owed just recompense. She was wronged by the city. The decision was that the city compensate her for its actions against her.I also agree here. But the fact remains that the judicial system is not empowered to effect policy change or extort the citizens of a community. They are empowered to deice a specific case. Awarding $7M for ten months of inconveneience and mistreatment is obviously ridiculous.As you are so quick to point out in so many threads, SD, the answer to this is to change the elected officials. If Chicago residents get tired of paying through the nose to clean up after the screw-ups of their elected officials and those officials' appointees, then they can elect people who will behave correctly. That is the just approach here. That's the way a representative democracy is supposed to work.No ledger required. If the facts of the case are as portrayed here then she was certainly wronged and deserves more than her lost wages. I think the real measure is what would an ordinary person endure to gain the jackpot this woman received. Personally, I would spend five years in jail on minimum rations to be set for the rest of my life with $7M. $1.4M a year is pretty good for any job. Your mileage will vary but $7M is excessive for the abuse this woman received.Civil awards are composed of two parts: compensatory and punitive. There is no requirement in American law or common law that civil awards be limited to an amount tallied by a ledger book. There is always room for a legal smack upside the head on top of the actual losses entailed.