Those things have been discussed before, but here goes again.
How do you know the city would have lost the suit, much less that a jury would have awarded the family millions? The original jury did not award any money.
The original jury did not hear the evidence Marsh concealed from the Plaintiffs, namely the recording of the actual police broadcast the two officers received that night.
The cops
lied when they said they heard a broadcast about a shooting and a description of a car that matched the one they pulled over. They said they blocked the car's path, blinded the driver with a spotlight, and approached with weapons drawn because of that broadcast, but since they didn't hear any such thing there's no justification for their conduct. And even if they had heard the broadcast they described, it still doesn't exonerate them for firing multiple times into the vehicle after it came to a stop.
The supervisor who arrived at the scene of the shooting appears to have colluded with the dispatcher to cover-up what really happened. The city attorney concealed evidence that would have exposed their lies. And it was the third time in 6 months that Sierra had killed someone, and the second time his victim was unarmed.
In fact, Sierra was found to have shot his second victim multiple times in the back as the guy lay face-down and motionless on the ground. The city recently settled a wrongful death lawsuit in that case, too.
This city was stuck with trying to defend a killing it couldn't justify. The lies, the apparent cover-up, the city attorney concealing evidence, and Sierra's prior bad acts made settling the least risky and least costly course of action.
Chicago Tribune said:
Attorneys for Pinex's family had sought up to $10 million in damages, but after seven hours of deliberation, the jury on March 4 sided with the officers and awarded nothing to either Pinex's family or Colyer. In the courthouse lobby, Pinex's mother, Gloria, decried the jury's decision, shouting that the evidence had shown the officers to be liars.
A judge reversed that trial and ordered a new one, but why do you think a new jury would be so much more sympathetic toward this thug to award them millions? If I were on that jury, I'd give them about three fiddy for the questionable stop and not a bent penny for the shooting.
I have no doubt you see nothing of worth in any of the victims. But here's the thing: civil rights and the limits on the authority of government and its agents are not based on popularity.
It doesn't matter if the victims were paragons of virtue or puppy kickers. It doesn't matter if you admired them or despised them. It doesn't matter if they used a vernacular you dislike hearing, or if their names weren't traditional European ones. It doesn't matter if you truly hate them. The rights of citizens don't depend on your good opinion.
Note that the shooting itself was justified because Pinex, a violent felon who had an illegal gun, used his car as a deadly weapon. Note also that the two cops are not being charged with any crime in connection to the shooting itself.
IMO, this is one of the most important issues. The cops
lied about their reason for stopping the car. They lied about why they approached in an especially aggressive and threatening manner. We
know they lied. So why do you believe they're telling the truth about everything else?
They had to come up with a good reason for why Pinex was dead. So we get a story about how Pinex tried to run over a cop, which doesn't explain what the fuck that cop was doing with his gun out of its holster approaching a car that hadn't been reported for anything and containing two men that, to the knowledge of the cops that night, hadn't done anything.
As for noting that Sierra and Mosqueda are not being charged, I note that it took
5 years before Sierra was faulted for shooting an unarmed man in the back as he lay motionless on the ground, despite it being known that the guy was unarmed and Sierra had been pounding back the brewskis before going on shift that night.
I also note that this is the Chicago Police Department we're talking about. If you think the lack of charges against Chicago cops who kill unarmed civilians proves anything about the cops' innocence, you're incredibly naive. Or maybe just loyal to their 'side' despite being a civilian yourself.
This is from the initial reporting about Pinex:
NBC Chicago said:
According to police, once the vehicle was stopped, officers ordered Pinex and a passenger out of the car. The passenger opened his door and Pinex put the car in reverse striking and dragging an officer.
Pinex then put the car into drive in an attempt to strike another officer, but hit a light pole instead, police said. The officer said he feared for his life, fired his weapon and shot Pinex, who later died.
[..]
Pinex had more than two dozen previous arrests on his record, including drug possession, burglary and resisting arrest. His most recent conviction came last month, when he was given a conditional discharge for resisting arrest, the Chicago Tribune reported.
Despite that, Johnson insisted that her grandson was a good person who "didn't give anyone any problems."
The officer that was dragged by the car was taken to an area hospital with non-life threatening injuries.
I hope the injured cop sues Pinex' estate for the bodily injury and that Pinex family do not have much or any of their ill-gotten gains to show for it when it's all said and done.
Police Shoot Driver After Officer Allegedly Dragged
Where's your research on Sierra and Mosqueda?
Sierra killed 3 people in a 6 month span. Surely it's not that hard to get info on him.
Cedrick Chatman case:
City Reaches Tentative Settlement In Wrongful Death Suit because, contrary to what you've read at those truthy sites you visit, justification for the shooting is lacking. The video evidence does
not show Chatman menacing or threatening the cops in any way, and the decision to shoot him put passers-by in extreme danger. The cops were reckless, there's no evidence that supports their claims, and the city would have lost that suit, too.
Again, very doubtful that the city would have lost the suit, much less that the jury would have awarded the family millions. Let's look at who this Cedrick Chatman is.
From your article:
Chicago Tribune said:
Chatman, 17, was fatally shot by Officer Kevin Fry in January 2013 as he ran from a daylight traffic stop, court records show. The officer claimed he opened fire after Chatman, who was suspected in a carjacking, turned and pointed an object at him that the officer believed to be a gun. The object turned out to be a black iPhone box, records show.
The incident unfolded shortly after 1:30 p.m. on Jan. 7, 2013, when Chatman and two friends — Akeem Clarke and Martel Odom — beat and robbed a man inside his Dodge Charger while negotiating a deal to buy cellphone service from him, according to police records. After the beating, Chatman took off alone in the victim's car, the records said.
He was a violent criminal (to wit a robber and carjacker) who was fleeing a stop, holding a dark object (which turned out to be a black cell phone case). Police claim he pointed said object at them, but the video cannot conform or disconfirm this. Why was the cell phone case so important that he had to grab it while running away from police? Perhaps he wanted them to think he was armed, so they'd back off. In that case, he miscalculated severely. Note that his last words were ""I give up. I'm shot," and not something to the effect of "Why did you shoot me" indicating, perhaps, that he well knew he was in the wrong here. Too bad he had more self-awareness than the Chicago City Council.
Akeem and Martel were convicted in their roles in their crimes after pleading guilty to avoid trial for felony murder. This article gives more info about what the trio did.
Two Men Get 10 Years In Prison For Fatal Police Chase And Shooting
CBS Chicago said:
When the victims got to 76th and Essex, Clarke, Odum and Chatmen got into the back seat of the Charger, and Clarke’s sister, who had arranged the purchase, approached. She began yelling at the driver because she was upset about the phone she received, court records said. Clarke, who was seated behind him, grabbed that man around the neck and pulled him into the backseat.
Clarke, Odum and Chatmen then beat the man about the head and body, and demanded money from the victims, court records indicate. They took $400, a cell phone and the man’s shoes; as well as a coat, shoes, $40 and a cell phone from the woman. The woman then ran away down an alley, where someone assisted her and drove her home.
Clarke, Odum and Chatmen continued to beat the man, then pulled him out of the Dodge as witnesses approached. He was able to crawl across the street and saw the three men searching his car. Odom then crossed the street and demanded money from him again, court records said.
Chatmen then got into the Charger and drove away as the man flagged down a fire truck and ambulance. He was taken to Jackson Park Hospital, where he was treated for a fractured orbital bone, bruising and cuts, court records said.
Once again, it's not a popularity contest.
The police are required to respect the civil rights of every person they encounter, no matter how much of a shitbag he or she may be. They may not act in a reckless, brutal, or unlawful manner. They may not act as judge, jury, and executioner. They must act in accordance with the law.
If cops violate civil rights, that's a problem for society. If they act in a reckless, dangerous, negligent and/or unlawful manner and the police department and city looks the other way, then the entire department and the city are liable for damages because they allowed it to happen.
Like with the Pinex case, I hope the victim sues the Chatman estate and gets most if not all of the family's ill-gotten gains.
Chicago is much better off without either Pinex or Chatman running around.
You might be right. So what? Your opinion of their character has nothing to do with the city being liable for damages when Chicago cops act unlawfully, kill needlessly, and violate the civil rights of citizens.
