When a jury gets it right.

[WOT?*]

$15M for the family and estate of a 30 year old killed by police. Fife (Tacoma), WA.


www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/jury-awards-nearly-15m-to-family-of-unarmed-black-man-killed-by-swat-sniper-in-fife/

[sugarbear]

I rarely expect good things to come from Tacoma. Happy to be surprised. (Sad that I'm actually surprised.)

[mrsukyankee]

Good.

[thejackpot]

Wow. What an unbelievable escalation and use of force in a situation that was on the cusp of peaceful resolution. I am so impressed with the jury valuing his life.

[CrazyLucky]

I grew up with the idea that police were the good guys, deserving of respect. I still believe that in general, that most police officers are good people, and there are some bad apples. But I feel like the "Blue lives matter" people just completely ignore stories like these and/or believe the ridiculous lies the police put out to cover up. I now view every police shooting with skepticism. i wish police would do more to police themselves. I get wanting to protect your own, but something like this - where the broke the rules at every turn? If you want the public on your side, you have to show that you are trustworthy, and these stories show you are not.


I'm glad the jury found in favor of the family, and I hope there is some kind of financial oversight for the boy's money. A four year old is old enough to remember, and he's going to remember seeing his father shot and killed for no reason for the rest of his life.

[WOT?*]

@crazylucky - I totally agree with you. I grew up with cops and have some as friends and acquaintances. They're involved in our schools mostly in positive manners. Many join for the right reasons. I'm a firm believer that the militarization of the police and changing training because of it are largely at fault, plus it draws people with power complexes and issues.

My general belief is that most are good, but this is one instance where it flows from the top. If the commissioner/captains/etc. are no BS leadership the body will be as well. If you have a good partner and team you will be a good officer. I've said this before, but I tend to believe what I read once-upon-a-time: 10% are good cops 10% are bad cops and the majority fall in line with whichever direction leadership and their teams take. You'll have 90% good cops with good leadership and training, or you'll have 90% bad cops with ineffective leadership or partners.

I especially agree with your take on Blue Lives Matter. I was unfriended by a friend of mine who was married to a sheriff (one of the really good ones) back at Ferguson because of the Black Lives Matter posts spread across my feed. She felt that I wasn't supportive of her husband and it hurt her to see so many stories. I've had an aunt, my mother, and others post Blue Lives in response to Black Lives posts and stories. I've had to explain time and time again "Black Lives Matter doesn't mean that Blue Lives or All Lives don't. They all matter but in this case at this time, Black Lives Matter is a *different* story and message..."

[sillygoosegirl]

It sucks they weren't able to get a criminal trial.

It's great that the jury found in their favor, but will the money actually get paid? And if so, will it be paid by the right people, or do police departments have insurance for this sort of thing?

[WOT?*]

Jul 17, 2017 10:09:20 GMT -5 sillygoosegirl said:

It sucks they weren't able to get a criminal trial.

It's great that the jury found in their favor, but will the money actually get paid? And if so, will it be paid by the right people, or do police departments have insurance for this sort of thing?

Generally (at least in my experience) the city will have insurance coverage, and what the insurance (including any umbrellas) doesn't cover will be the responsibility of the city, as these are city employees and on-the-clock (I'm assuming that's how the lawsuit was filed, even though the jury found for each officer individually.) The city should have in its budget an amount for litigation. Unless the city is bankrupt (and it isn't) the plaintiffs can take a judgment and file it against the city, effectively attaching any bank accounts or city coffers.

What I *think* will happen (again, based on my experience) is that the city will appeal the decision and while it is pending, the attorneys will get together and settle for a lesser amount. The city now knows it's on the hook for $15M so they're not going to pull a "we'll settle for $500K" type deal. It will be in the seven figures, and they'll settle to end the case because it's already been a time-suck, expensive litigation and they'll want to end it. From the family's point of view, it's already taken up more than half the child's life to litigate this. The insurance company will step in (they also have attorneys, or it's likely that part of the team for the officers is insurance provided attorneys) and wrangle it so that they can purchase an annuity that will pay out over years (meaning less money up-front). The child's money will be placed in probate to be paid out over time (it can generally be used for living expenses but the fiduciary often has to approach the probate court to get a release of funds so the money isn't spent capriciously or unwisely. It's a total PITA so the family won't want to just go every month to say "hey, I need to feed the kid." The annuity will pay a monthly stipend and the remainder will be placed in probate, to be released to him when he reaches a certain age (based, again, on the settlement language - it can be 18, or 18/21/25 or even milestones.) Whatever happens, the child's share of the money will be placed in probate and overseen by the court and court-appointed fiduciaries (it can be the mother, another family member, trustee, attorney or banker or other disinterested party, etc.)