Tulsa Police Chief Talks About Cuts

[patric]

The city looses a $270,000 lawsuit brought by a man who was only given a 5% chance of surviving a 2007 beating by Tulsa Police.

http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0110/696627.html
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20100116_14_A13_Thecit850977

Chief Ron Palmer said James D. Weakley, Jerad Lindsey and Ian J. Simmons are still with the Tulsa Police Department and that an Internal Affairs investigation found "no sustained misconduct" on their part.

The $270,000 will be drawn from the city's "sinking fund"

"It's an expensive lesson"  ...for the taxpayers.
A quarter of a million dollars could have gone for a lot of salaries and other city services.


http://www.kaltura.com/index.php/kwidget/wid/iolg51dp44/uiconf_id/48411

[rwarn17588]

Chief Ron Palmer said James D. Weakley, Jerad Lindsey and Ian J. Simmons are still with the Tulsa Police Department and that an Internal Affairs investigation found "no sustained misconduct" on their part.

Guess who I'd put first in line on the layoff list?

[pmcalk]

The city looses a $270,000 lawsuit brought by a man who was only given a 5% chance of surviving a 2007 beating by Tulsa Police.

http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0110/696627.html
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20100116_14_A13_Thecit850977

Chief Ron Palmer said James D. Weakley, Jerad Lindsey and Ian J. Simmons are still with the Tulsa Police Department and that an Internal Affairs investigation found "no sustained misconduct" on their part.

The $270,000 will be drawn from the city's "sinking fund"

"It's an expensive lesson"  ...for the taxpayers.
A quarter of a million dollars could have gone for a lot of salaries and other city services.


http://www.kaltura.com/index.php/kwidget/wid/iolg51dp44/uiconf_id/48411

They didn't "lose" the case, they settled.  Big difference.  I watched the video.  Unless I am missing something, I have no idea how that man could have gotten $270,000.  He gets up and walks with the officer to the car.  What I see is a drunk, obnoxious man, and an officer who maybe over reacts slightly.  If anything, it reminds me that officers really do have to put up with all sorts of cr*p.

[patric]

They didn't "lose" the case, they settled.  Big difference.

When your settlement means you are the one paying out, it could be argued you are the looser.

I watched the video.  Unless I am missing something, I have no idea how that man could have gotten $270,000.  He gets up and walks with the officer to the car.  What I see is a drunk, obnoxious man, and an officer who maybe over reacts slightly.

His settlement stems from the severity of his injuries.  When he's walking back to the car, his broken ribs have already punctured several major organs, and it was while he was in intensive care that he was given a five percent chance of survival.

I also saw a drunk, obnoxious man summoned out of his home in the dead of night.  He was in his shorts, another resident can be seen in a bathrobe.  One of the first things the officer comments on was that the man was drinking, and bluffs a stock laundry list of usual symptoms (slurred speech, stumbling, bloodshot eyes).
The officer becomes noticeably agitated when he fails a challenge to state what color the mans "bloodshot eyes" are.

He quickly looses composure.

At 6:52 minutes into the tape, officer moves in chest to chest, sticks finger in suspects face.  The suspect comments "back up" and the officer yells "No im not gonna back up!" and continues to yell while the suspect speaks softly.  By 7:50 the officer has moved so close into the suspects face that the suspect's teetering makes contact ("assault"), at which point the officer escalates the encounter into physical violence and begins shoving.

City legal saw they couldnt win this one. 
In Civil court, the ineptitude of Internal Affairs and the cronyism of the DA are all stripped away, and you have to deal with just the evidence.  The video plainly showed the officer had lost control of his professional conduct, and the city decided to cut it's losses and write a $270,000 check for the damage he caused.       

Anyone who has had to pay for hospitalization lately knows the victim isnt exactly rolling in cash now after having to pay two weeks of intensive care and subsequent rehabilitation.

This could have been a lot more costly if the city had to loose this in front of a jury.

The saddest part is that there were no consequences to those that acted irresponsibly on behalf of the city, and no apparent incentive to keep something like this from happening again.  The money to pay for lawsuits grows on the taxpayer tree, and we know that's limitless....   

If anything, it reminds me that officers really do have to put up with all sorts of cr*p.

Yes, they do.  They have to maintain their professionalism while having to deal with the worst of society.
Many succeed, but there are too many others that devolve to the point where they view everyone as the worst of society, and they become ineffective.

...and expensive.

Guess who I'd put first in line on the layoff list?

The union would prevent that, since they have seniority.
These are the people the FOP fight hardest to protect.
It will be the fresh, bright-eyed youths right out of the academy that will end up thrown under the bus.

[pmcalk]

When your settlement means you are the one paying out, it could be argued you are the looser.

His settlement stems from the severity of his injuries.  When he's walking back to the car, his broken ribs have already punctured several major organs, and it was while he was in intensive care that he was given a five percent chance of survival.

I also saw a drunk, obnoxious man summoned out of his home in the dead of night.  He was in his shorts, another resident can be seen in a bathrobe.  One of the first things the officer comments on was that the man was drinking, and bluffs a stock laundry list of usual symptoms (slurred speech, stumbling, bloodshot eyes).
The officer becomes noticeably agitated when he fails a challenge to state what color the mans "bloodshot eyes" are.

He quickly looses composure.

At 6:52 minutes into the tape, officer moves in chest to chest, sticks finger in suspects face.  The suspect comments "back up" and the officer yells "No im not gonna back up!" and continues to yell while the suspect speaks softly.  By 7:50 the officer has moved so close into the suspects face that the suspect's teetering makes contact ("assault"), at which point the officer escalates the encounter into physical violence and begins shoving.

City legal saw they couldnt win this one. 
In Civil court, the ineptitude of Internal Affairs and the cronyism of the DA are all stripped away, and you have to deal with just the evidence.  The video plainly showed the officer had lost control of his professional conduct, and the city decided to cut it's losses and write a $270,000 check for the damage he caused.       

Anyone who has had to pay for hospitalization lately knows the victim isnt exactly rolling in cash now after having to pay two weeks of intensive care and subsequent rehabilitation.

This could have been a lot more costly if the city had to loose this in front of a jury.

The saddest part is that there were no consequences to those that acted irresponsibly on behalf of the city, and no apparent incentive to keep something like this from happening again.  The money to pay for lawsuits grows on the taxpayer tree, and we know that's limitless....   

Yes, they do.  They have to maintain their professionalism while having to deal with the worst of society.
Many succeed, but there are too many others that devolve to the point where they view everyone as the worst of society, and they become ineffective.

...and expensive.


The union would prevent that, since they have seniority.
These are the people the FOP fight hardest to protect.
It will be the fresh, bright-eyed youths right out of the academy that will end up thrown under the bus.

Did you hear the entire tape?  ( I ask because the audio is pretty bad).  It is clear from the conversation that the officer had been there for a while even before the tape began.  The man was having a party.  The officer was there on the complaint of a neighbor about  noise and about a group of kids who were jumping of the neighbor's roof onto a trampoline.  Regardless of all those funny youtube videos, truly a dangerous thing to let kids do.  I am quite certain that the officers was concerned that a very drunk man responsible for kids was allowing them to jump off a roof.  In their conversation, it becomes clear that the officer was trying to talk to one of the kids, when the drunk man sent the kid away.  The officer asks to speak to the kids, but the drunk man refuses.  I don't know what the officer was thinking, but my first thought would be to find out if those kids had been drinking too.  In the conversation, you also hear that the man's wife had already come out and tried to calm the drunk guy down, to no avail.  The drunk guy repeatedly shows disrespect for the officer, by referring to him as "pal".  It may seem silly that the officer keeps correcting him, but he is trying to maintain control over the situation.  Then the officer finally loses his cool, and he and several other officers pin the guy down and handcuff him--something that is done routinely all over the country.  I'm not saying that this couldn't have been handled better, but it certainly was no Rodney King moment.  Just looking at the video, had I sat on the jury, I don't know that I would have given the guy anything.

I don't think you can say that "City Legal knew they couldn't win this one."  All trials are risks, and even going to trial costs money.  Juries are unpredictable, and are very likely to sympathise with an average joe.  Sometimes its just better to cut your losses.

[buckeye]

Then the officer finally loses his cool...

Yes, that's exactly the thing.  Officers can not afford to do that - for many reasons.

The drunk guy repeatedly shows disrespect for the officer, by referring to him as "pal".

Disrespecting a cop is reprehensible, but not illegal and certainly the training and public trust given to the police should prevent anyone's bones breaking for the same.  

I'm not saying that this couldn't have been handled better...

I think you're right about that.  The problem is that the department never admits an error and tells the public specifically what is being done to ensure that kind of error does not reoccur - rather, the department "circles the wagons", admitting no fault whatsoever and thereby appearing disappointingly disingenuous.  It's really unfortunate for all of us.

Admitting no fault says that there wasn't any other way to effectively protect those kids from danger.  What happened with those kids, anyway?  Did somebody stay behind to check on them after bozo was hauled off?

[FOTD]

This all pales in comparison to the waste and corruption in the Public Works Department.

[buckeye]

This all pales in comparison to the waste and corruption in the Public Works Department.

You're right about that.

[Conan71]

This all pales in comparison to the waste and corruption in the Public Works Department.

Are you and I the only people in Tulsa who seem to be aware, or at least give a rat's azz about this?

[FOTD]

Perhaps, but Public Works doesnt beat people up.
(that I know of...)

Depends on what your definition of "beats people up" is....my property continues to get beat up despite the 4 phone calls about a pile of next door debris next to my yard that continues to kill adjacent foliage. As a past developer, getting beat up was routine for the PWD. It showed their mighty power, their arrogance, their lack of open mindedness. Or their lack of interest in forecasting huge traffic congestion based on demand which they had no clue about. Or....oh, what's the point. The heads of PWD own city hall....

[patric]

Are you and I the only people in Tulsa who seem to be aware, or at least give a rat's azz about this?

Jamie Jamison came up with the best one-word assessment of the Public Works streetlighting arrangement:  "Scandalous"
...but there are other threads about that.     This one is about police spending.   

[Townsend]

Palmer just got fired.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=439&articleid=20100122_11_0_hrimgs444519

Police Chief Ron Palmer will turn in his resignation to Mayor Dewey Bartlett today at the mayor's request, sources have told the Tulsa World.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=439&articleid=20100122_11_0_hrimgs444519

[PonderInc]

KWGS just reported that they contacted Palmer to verify the above TW story, and he said he didn't know anything about it.

[patric]

KWGS just reported that they contacted Palmer to verify the above TW story, and he said he didn't know anything about it.

He apparently denied it, and is now denying he denied it.
What is truth, anyway? 

[Conan71]

Lead by example, start cutting from the top.