TexasCHLforum.com

Just saw a story on Channel 4 (DFW area) regarding Officer Collin Harris slamming a handcuffed
DWI suspect into a wall and then slamming him into the floor. Resulting injuries were brain
damage, busted eye socket etc. Ft Worth City Council gave the abused suspect $120,000 settlement.
A pittance, the man went bankrupt, can't work and has continuing medical bills. Plus, the PD dropped all charges.
Before you comment, try to catch the video clip Channel 4 aired during the 5:30pm news. I normally will
go out of my comfort zone to support LEO's. But, when it appears there is a clear abuse of power,
I bail. I have no intention of bashing all LEO's in this post. However, I do hold LEO's to a higher standard
of conduct. Ft Worth does not need this Officer to remain "serving the public".

Russell wrote:Obviously this guy didn't get the "Texas Hammer" as his lawyer if he settled for $120,000.

I would have went for the entire department. Renamed all the police stations after me

Sadly, I can hear the commercial for the "Texas Hammer" running in my head now..

He must have had a bad lawyer to settle for $120,000...

On a related note, I went up to Arlington for my buddy's birthday and spent 2 nights on Sundance Square in Ft. Worth (at least that what the locals called it, kinda like a clean 6th street). Every officer I saw was doing their job well, and I even talked to a few randomly or while looking for directions to specific bars. So yeah, there are some bad apples, but my general opinion of the Ft. Worth officers I encountered and observed was very positive.

Fangs wrote:On a related note, I went up to Arlington for my buddy's birthday and spent 2 nights on Sundance Square in Ft. Worth (at least that what the locals called it, kinda like a clean 6th street). Every officer I saw was doing their job well, and I even talked to a few randomly or while looking for directions to specific bars. So yeah, there are some bad apples, but my general opinion of the Ft. Worth officers I encountered and observed was very positive.

This is true of any PD. I don't think anyone here believes that the Fort Worth PD has a problem with hot headed officers. This is certainly an issolated incident. I also have always had good interaction with the officers in Fort Worth, particularly downtown.

jackal858 wrote:

Fangs wrote:On a related note, I went up to Arlington for my buddy's birthday and spent 2 nights on Sundance Square in Ft. Worth (at least that what the locals called it, kinda like a clean 6th street). Every officer I saw was doing their job well, and I even talked to a few randomly or while looking for directions to specific bars. So yeah, there are some bad apples, but my general opinion of the Ft. Worth officers I encountered and observed was very positive.

This is true of any PD. I don't think anyone here believes that the Fort Worth PD has a problem with hot headed officers. This is certainly an issolated incident. I also have always had good interaction with the officers in Fort Worth, particularly downtown.

.... and in my original post I never meant or intended to condemn LEO's as a group. I thought I made that clear.
However, this type of conduct can not be tolerated on any PD. If the other Officers present had felt the cuffed
suspect was any type of threat, I'm sure more than just Officer Collin Harris would have had their hands on him in
some form of restraint hold. After the man was slammed to the floor, two of the other Officers are seen walking away.
In my mind, they are distancing themselves from the actions of Officer Collin Harris. Maybe something the Ft Worth PD
needs to do, distance themselves from an Officer that shows no self control.

Oh I agree entirely that an officer who can't do his job correctly needs to be booted. This story seems to clearly fall in that category.

Just felt like mentioning my positive experience as a way of showing that this is probably a very isolated incident. There were some very drunk people that the officers I saw handled very kindly. One of my friends even commented on how clean everything looked, and the lack of raving drunk hobos and creepers that have seemed to become the norm in Austin, chalking it up to the PD doing a good job.

jackal858 wrote:

Russell wrote:Obviously this guy didn't get the "Texas Hammer" as his lawyer if he settled for $120,000.

I would have went for the entire department. Renamed all the police stations after me

Sadly, I can hear the commercial for the "Texas Hammer" running in my head now..

He must have had a bad lawyer to settle for $120,000...

I was married for a long time to a guy who dealt with insurance liability cases. He has had cases at one time or another with just about every heavy casualty lawyer in the business in Texas. He once said the "Texas Hammer" wasn't known for actually taking cases to trial. He just settled them left and right for the same amounts the claimant would have gotten from the insurance company to begin with. The only diff was the "Texas Hammer" got to keep 40-50% of the poor sap's settlement. Always ask your potential lawyer just how many cases he/she takes to trial and how many he/she wins.

TexasGal wrote:I was married for a long time to a guy who dealt with insurance liability cases. He has had cases at one time or another with just about every heavy casualty lawyer in the business in Texas. He once said the "Texas Hammer" wasn't known for actually taking cases to trial. He just settled them left and right for the same amounts the claimant would have gotten from the insurance company to begin with. The only diff was the "Texas Hammer" got to keep 40-50% of the poor sap's settlement. Always ask your potential lawyer just how many cases he/she takes to trial and how many he/she wins.

TexasGal. I think many of the advertising attorneys are wanting to find cases that either (1) will settle easily so they get the rake off or (2) will be referred to real working attorneys who will carry the case so the referring attorney can get a cut and pay for his advertising. The poor victim of this aggressive LEO probably fell into the first group. Because he got something he was probably happy. I wish he'd found a lawyer that would have fought for more.

TexasGal wrote:I was married for a long time to a guy who dealt with insurance liability cases. He has had cases at one time or another with just about every heavy casualty lawyer in the business in Texas. He once said the "Texas Hammer" wasn't known for actually taking cases to trial. He just settled them left and right for the same amounts the claimant would have gotten from the insurance company to begin with. The only diff was the "Texas Hammer" got to keep 40-50% of the poor sap's settlement. Always ask your potential lawyer just how many cases he/she takes to trial and how many he/she wins.

Sadly, this is almost always the case. Lawyers make a lot more for their effort ($/time) from settlement than trial almost every time. Sometimes it is better for the client also, but I fear most of the time it's only a better deal for the lawyer..

What? You're talkin bout "the Texas hammer" ? The tough, smart lawyer that will get you every penny you deserve for your car craysh?

TexasGal wrote:I was married for a long time to a guy who dealt with insurance liability cases. He has had cases at one time or another with just about every heavy casualty lawyer in the business in Texas. He once said the "Texas Hammer" wasn't known for actually taking cases to trial. He just settled them left and right for the same amounts the claimant would have gotten from the insurance company to begin with. The only diff was the "Texas Hammer" got to keep 40-50% of the poor sap's settlement. Always ask your potential lawyer just how many cases he/she takes to trial and how many he/she wins.

IMO, settling for policy limits on a claim is typical, and what most lawyers will get. Paying more money to an attorney than necessary (to support those stupid commercials) doesn't result in better service, just less money for the claimant.

I wonder how much money the typical victim of a drunk driver gets.