
Jury awards $22m to man locked in closet by police for four days - jackgavigan
http://www.cleveland.com/court-justice/index.ssf/2016/06/east_cleveland_cop_locked_inno.html
======
Jgrubb
I think the best solution I've heard is the one where instead of taxpayers
paying out for the misdeeds of the police, police are required to carry
something like malpractice insurance. When these awards are given, they come
out of the insurance pool and that officer's cost of carrying the insurance
goes up. Repeated offenders are priced out of the market and can't be police
without the insurance. Taxpayers don't have to foot this bill anymore.

Thoughts?

~~~
rayiner
I think we should do the opposite: ban municipalities taking out insurance for
judgments arising out of intentional torts, because that creates a moral
hazard that insulates voters from the consequences of their decisions.

Voters have a lot of say in their communities' police leadership. In East
Cleveland, where this happened, the police chief is directly appointed by the
mayor. In many places, sheriffs are directly elected. If voters were on the
hook for paying for the negative externalities of the "tough on crime"
policies they support, they might make better decisions.

~~~
foota
The problem is that each tax payer is only affected a slight amount such that
no one has a strong incentive to force accountability.

------
curiousgal
I doubt he'll get the $22 mi.

l Daniel Chong[0] was held five days in a very similar situation in
California. He only got $4 mil. Younger guy, drank his own piss, broke his eye
glasses and wrote 'sorry mom' on his arm when he thought he was going to die.
Kidneys were close to shutting down when they let him out. Makes me sick and
angry. Stories like this are why people hate cops. No excuse for this.

0.[http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/30/justice/california-dea-
set...](http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/30/justice/california-dea-settlement/)

------
jostmey
*$%! the money, the officers should be in jail.

Quote: "The city of East Cleveland told WJW television that the officers named
in the suit no longer work at the department."

------
jacquesm
So, how come none of these officers and their superiors are facing criminal
charges themselves? There have to be some limits of what you can get away with
while wearing a badge.

------
namuol
Why the hell aren't the officers involved being tried for criminal activity?

------
solotronics
its too bad the people of this city have to pay for these damages and not the
actual police involved.

~~~
jdavis703
Maybe then the people will vote in a government that cleans up this mess then.
In a democracy I think it's fair to hold the people liable when the government
they elect does something wrong (however it should probably be based on a
pattern of violations, not "one bad apple").

~~~
mtgx
Easier said than done in a country that doesn't value the idea of having
multiple parties (and therefore real competition between them). What do you do
when one party is racist and the other protects criminal cops? Or worse, if
_both_ protect criminal cops, and other government criminals?

~~~
jdavis703
There's no excuse for a dual or single-party system in muni-level politics. In
Oakland, CA (and probably other cities) they use non-partisan IRV
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-
runoff_voting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting)).

~~~
terravion
Oakland resident here. Oakland's IRV is terrible because we have no idea who
will win the election and even as a relatively informed voter I have no idea
who most of the 30-ish mayoral candidates are or what they stand for.

I think Oakland shows elections work both ways. One way, we pick leaders who
represent our deeply held views. The other, elections force us, the
electorate, to face facts about what combination of policies produces a
workable governing consensus, and maybe even changes our views to create a
consensus. When it comes to Oakland mayor, we just randomly declare a
preference in the dark and someone is declared winner with no real way to form
a coalition.

California's new top two system on the other hand is great. In liberal or
conservative areas we get offered two meaningful choices that reflect the
ideological split in the area. That is, do we want to be radical progressives
or just pro-business liberals? Alternately are we reactionary conservatives or
more just chamber of commerce Republicans? This gives real choice to the
general election electorate and helps forge meaningful consensus.

------
nzealand
>One of the police officers named in the suit, Det. Randy Hicks, testified on
behalf of Black after the city filed a lawsuit against him. The detective
corroborated the allegations against himself and the department, according to
Attorney Rob DiCello.

It is unusual for a police officer to incriminate himself.

> When asked to produce evidence from the traffic stop in the discovery phase
> of the trial, the city of East Cleveland told a judge overseeing Black's
> civil suit that they did not have dash cam video or police reports from the
> incident, DiCello said

If Hicks hadn't incriminated himself, it sounds like there was no evidence to
support Blacks claims.

> Black also testified that the officers put him in the storage closet to hide
> the severity of his injuries.

Normally if the police injure a suspect, the police charge the injured suspect
with assaulting an officer.

> Hicks testified at the civil trial that Police Chief Ralph Spotts confronted
> him several days after Black's arrest and forced him to resign. Hicks also
> testified that Spotts encouraged a culture of violence within the East
> Cleveland Police Department.

Hicks must have been offered some sort of amnesty.

~~~
lake99
> It is unusual for a police officer to incriminate himself.

I don't know how the system works, but from what I have learnt from TV &
movies, I guess took the deal to confess, in exchange for a lighter sentence.

> If Hicks hadn't incriminated himself, it sounds like there was no evidence
> to support Blacks claims.

We already know Black was locked up, bruised, and who his arresting officers
were. I seriously doubt if Hicks testified out of the goodness of his heart.

------
fsloth
Uh, how common is it for police to hold people like that? Is there some racist
undertone here not mentioned in the article? Or do they just bully people
randomly? I know when traveling one should avoid seedier parts of town but now
apparently one should avoid the police as well if and when I come visit the
states...?

~~~
millzlane
Not very common. But you're right you do not want to be in the seedier parts
of town. It's usually random as they pick and choose, they're not stupid. I
live in one of the seediest parts in a small major city in the north east. And
the police will stop you for being a different color. Yep you guessed
it...white. My friends have been stopped multiple times for those exact
reasons. or because they have a shitty car, or seemed disoriented because
they're not familiar with the one way traps.

~~~
azinman2
Here in the nice parts of the bay area my friend who is black is pulled over
once a month because he drives a Lexus SUV, and the police don't believe that
it's his car. They ask him "is this your car?" He'll reply, "yes," to which
they always ask "are you sure?" Every month.

~~~
millzlane
I can relate. I'm biracial and I'm stopped often with a branded company polo
and they're always amusingly surprised to learn I work in IT but live in the
ghetto.

------
Camillo
$22m is insane. Hopefully it will be reduced on appeal to something more
reasonable, like $220k.

On the other hand, there should be criminal charges against the cops.

~~~
ubersync
Let's put this another way. Would you, if given the option, go through this
humiliation for 220k? I wouldn't. Not even for 2 million.

~~~
dexterdog
220K - probably. $2 mil - absolutely. Can I do it more than once?

~~~
alasdair_
It's fine if you know you are going to get out.

It's much less fine if you honestly believe you could die in there.

