What would happen in MT? vs whats happening in CA

[Reziac]

Klapton makes a good point. We have a growing problem (especially in CA) with the police believing they are "more equal than others" which tends to make the public kneejerk against the cops regardless of the facts, and even when the cops are in the right. Reset the story with all parties being equal (not subject to various perceptual biases by being ID'd as police) and then see how it plays out -- seems to me that would indeed produce fairer perceptions.

Also remember that it's very likely some lawyer is eyeing a wrongful-death lawsuit and a fat fee (we're talking millions of dollars here), and may well be behind some of the protests. You can file a civil lawsuit even if there's no evidence (just "emotional damage" will suffice), and there's a good chance the jury will award the judgment in your favor.

[MTSilvertip]

That is exactly what the link I posted is talking about.

The officers were absolved of wrongdoing by the coroners inquest 2 years ago, this case in the link was for a wrongful death suit where the mother was sueing the state for 2 million bucks.

I agree that there have been abuses of power by the police, especially in larger population areas, but there have been 2 officer involved shootings in Helena alone in the past 6 months. It is a pretty rare occurance in this state, and the situation is looked at pretty close in every case. I think the fact it is something pretty rare, and the fact that the state has such a small population, and that the law enforcement stands out because there aren't that many of them, all these factors combine to create a situtation where it is more difficult to cover up any abuse by law enforcement.

California is a very different situation by laws, population and number of hungry ambulance chasers living there with juries only too happy to help some criminal hit the lottery by sueing.

[Mt-7]

Originally Posted by MTSilvertip

I know this is an old thread, but the second court case for the incident I noted in a prior post has just wrapped up.
Montana jury clears officers of negligence in Keeley trial | Great Falls Tribune | greatfallstribune.com

I was mistaken when I said that the kid who stole the car and shot at police was 16, he was 13 according to this article. I try to correct myself when I find I have put up incorrect information.

Anyway, the point still holds. The Montana jury only took 2 hours to find in favor of the Deputy and Highway patrolman involved.
The mother was suing the state for 2 million dollars for wrongful death. She said the LEOs should not have returned fire when the kid shot at them.

Other articles have noted the kid had told friends that he wanted to commit "suicide by cop" because he had just broken up with his girlfriend.

Sad case, but the law enforcement officers have now been found a couple of times to have acted properly when fired upon.

Yes the common sense of this current jury has restored my faith in my Montana neighbors. Sad situation but if my husband was the responding officer I would want him to respond as trained.
This kid's mother should be ashamed as to try to make a buck off her child's tragic end, as well as the torment she put the officer through.

[Reziac]

Originally Posted by Mt-7

This kid's mother should be ashamed as to try to make a buck off her child's tragic end, as well as the torment she put the officer through.

Tho I've never yet heard of this happening without some shyster suggesting it first. I'll bet the woman got a dozen calls from eager lawyers weeping crocodile tears.

Norse and Welsh law both had fixed rates for compensation, both for blood money and for other offenses to persons or property, and provided there wasn't mutual fault. No cranking it into the stratosphere via some easily-swayed jury. Methinks this might be a far better system than what we have today.

[Mt-7]

agree

[ElkHunter]

Originally Posted by Reziac

Tho I've never yet heard of this happening without some shyster suggesting it first. I'll bet the woman got a dozen calls from eager lawyers weeping crocodile tears.

Norse and Welsh law both had fixed rates for compensation, both for blood money and for other offenses to persons or property, and provided there wasn't mutual fault. No cranking it into the stratosphere via some easily-swayed jury. Methinks this might be a far better system than what we have today.

We have the same thing. It's called Minimum Sentence. You know, it's that thing that judges never follow. They are too concerned with "This guy wasn't treated fairly when he was a kid. He didn't have the same opportunities that the rest of us had."