|
Title: What were they thinking? Post by: patric on April 08, 2009, 10:33:02 pm That OKC would use public tax money to defend these guys has to be the worst slap:
OKLAHOMA CITY — City Council members agreed Tuesday to hire a private attorney to represent three police officers named in a federal lawsuit filed by former University of Oklahoma quarterback Charles Thompson. Thompson sued the city, the police officers and Residence Inn by Marriott, claiming his civil rights were violated when he was arrested on a public intoxication complaint Nov. 18, 2006. Thompson was originally convicted but won a battle last year to clear his name when an appeals court threw out the conviction because of a lack of evidence. Police went to a Residence Inn that night after hotel managers said they had received multiple noise complaints. Thompson and a group of parents were at the hotel making banners for a youth football game. Thompson said he argued with officers when they told him he and his group had to leave the hotel. When Thompson stepped out the door of the hotel room, he was arrested. Thompson's conviction was based on the testimony of the responding officers, who claimed they smelled alcohol on his breath and that he slurred his speech. Five witnesses testified that Thompson had not been drinking. (NewsOK.com) Title: Re: What were they thinking? Post by: guido911 on April 09, 2009, 09:46:12 am That OKC would use public tax money to defend these guys has to be the worst slap: OKLAHOMA CITY — City Council members agreed Tuesday to hire a private attorney to represent three police officers named in a federal lawsuit filed by former University of Oklahoma quarterback Charles Thompson. Thompson sued the city, the police officers and Residence Inn by Marriott, claiming his civil rights were violated when he was arrested on a public intoxication complaint Nov. 18, 2006. Thompson was originally convicted but won a battle last year to clear his name when an appeals court threw out the conviction because of a lack of evidence. Police went to a Residence Inn that night after hotel managers said they had received multiple noise complaints. Thompson and a group of parents were at the hotel making banners for a youth football game. Thompson said he argued with officers when they told him he and his group had to leave the hotel. When Thompson stepped out the door of the hotel room, he was arrested. Thompson's conviction was based on the testimony of the responding officers, who claimed they smelled alcohol on his breath and that he slurred his speech. Five witnesses testified that Thompson had not been drinking. (NewsOK.com) I suspect this is a 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 civil rights lawsuit. While there can be no respondeat superior liability imposed on the department or city for the officer's conduct, retaining separate counsel for these officers is necessary to avoid any potential conflicts of interest. As for government picking up the tab, they may be contractually required to do so or they want to keep these officers pacified. By the way, this happens all the time Title: Re: What were they thinking? Post by: patric on April 09, 2009, 09:59:40 am As for government picking up the tab, they may be contractually required to do so or they want to keep these officers pacified. By the way, this happens all the time Pressure from a powerful police union? Sounds like another example of rewarding people for bad performance. Title: Re: What were they thinking? Post by: guido911 on April 09, 2009, 12:03:34 pm Pressure from a powerful police union? Sounds like another example of rewarding people for bad performance. Could very well be. |