Search found 2 matches
Return to “When things go bang in the night (Suit for excessive force)”
- Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:42 pm
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: When things go bang in the night (Suit for excessive force)
- Replies: 6
- Views: 1089
Re: When things go bang in the night (Suit for excessive for
It is also illustrative of the idea that it is a really bad idea to mess with the evidence after the fact. See Campos and Ramos (IIRC their names). The evidence may not look great for you, but destroying it or hiding it pretty much screams guilty of something.
- Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:24 am
- Forum: The Crime Blotter
- Topic: When things go bang in the night (Suit for excessive force)
- Replies: 6
- Views: 1089
When things go bang in the night (Suit for excessive force)
I am not sure the Crime Blotter forum is an exact post for these kinds of things, but it involves actual crime, actual shooting, not hypotheticals, so here goes:
Supreme Court declines appeal in lottery winner's excessive force suit
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/20 ... force-suit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Highlights of story, in case the link goes dead:
During night time in April 2006, two deputies on foot are looking for a car thief on foot, in combination with a dog and a helicoptor and other cops. Sleeping homeowner awakened by his own dog barking and all the ruckus in the neighborhood. He gets his gun, goes outside, and hides in the bushes.
The two deputies pry some boards off the fence of this guy's yard and walk into the yard. The homeowner sees two figures move into his yard and calls out "Halt!" The deputies turn flashlights towards homeowner.
Deputies say they identified themselves as police officers three times and told him to put his gun down, but the homeowner instead raised his pistol, so they shot him seven times.
Homeowner (who survived) says he saw two figures come into his yard and when he called out they immediately shot him, THEN shouted identification, then shot him agains. Homeowner says he never pointed his gun at them, and kept it pointed at ground.
Homeowner is suing them for excessive force. Deputies have claimed qualified immunity. None of the lower courts have agreed with them, and the SCOTUS turned down deputies' appeal, so now the suit can go forward.
Interesting factoid #1: One of the deputies had an open mike on his uniform. According to the court record, the dispatch recording does NOT show either deputy identifying themselves before shooting.
Interesting factoid #2: The deputies and the sheriff's department have been sanctioned for destroying evidence in the case despite homeowner's lawyer's request to preserve it, to include: a laptop computer, the deputies's uniforms, their guns, all the department emails for that day, and all the emails for a year afterwards.
Trivia factoid: The homeowner had won the Florida Lotto two years earlier.
Supreme Court declines appeal in lottery winner's excessive force suit
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/20 ... force-suit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Highlights of story, in case the link goes dead:
During night time in April 2006, two deputies on foot are looking for a car thief on foot, in combination with a dog and a helicoptor and other cops. Sleeping homeowner awakened by his own dog barking and all the ruckus in the neighborhood. He gets his gun, goes outside, and hides in the bushes.
The two deputies pry some boards off the fence of this guy's yard and walk into the yard. The homeowner sees two figures move into his yard and calls out "Halt!" The deputies turn flashlights towards homeowner.
Deputies say they identified themselves as police officers three times and told him to put his gun down, but the homeowner instead raised his pistol, so they shot him seven times.
Homeowner (who survived) says he saw two figures come into his yard and when he called out they immediately shot him, THEN shouted identification, then shot him agains. Homeowner says he never pointed his gun at them, and kept it pointed at ground.
Homeowner is suing them for excessive force. Deputies have claimed qualified immunity. None of the lower courts have agreed with them, and the SCOTUS turned down deputies' appeal, so now the suit can go forward.
Interesting factoid #1: One of the deputies had an open mike on his uniform. According to the court record, the dispatch recording does NOT show either deputy identifying themselves before shooting.
Interesting factoid #2: The deputies and the sheriff's department have been sanctioned for destroying evidence in the case despite homeowner's lawyer's request to preserve it, to include: a laptop computer, the deputies's uniforms, their guns, all the department emails for that day, and all the emails for a year afterwards.
Trivia factoid: The homeowner had won the Florida Lotto two years earlier.