New York City Ends Qualified Immunity For Police Officers, Becoming 1st In Nation To Do So
The protection has prevented officers from being sued or liable for misconduct.newyork.cbslocal.com
Or, maybe the governments agents being on the hook for frivolous lawsuits will make them finally fix the tort system ?
Cops in NYC go so far as to jump off curbs while holding knife handles to get "collars" for "illegal gravity knives." They brag about it in the cop forums.
Unless I’m wrong which is completely possibly because I’m not always certain of NYC laws but Cuomo repealed the ban on gravity knives in NYC (except on MTA buses and trains) back on May 30th, 2019. It has also been stated that they will no longer use the “wrist-flick” test for gravity knives. These are all thing on paper that have been stated. So I’m not sure how many people are actually getting charged with it as long as they following the rest of the stipulations. Are some of the stipulations annoying? Sure, like not carrying a pocket knife with it actually clipped to your pocket. From what I remember, the knife has to be completely concealed. So even if your gravity knife would normally be legal and under the 4” maximum length allowed in NYC per Administrative Code § 10-133, since you didn’t follow the laws that are also attached to it...you can be charged. As long as you follow all the laws you should be good to go. Now I’m not saying that I’m sure there are some asshole cops still trying to write it, but it’s most likely not as bad as most people make it out to be. Especially with all that is down on paper now saying how they are legal. The NYPD has stated that “...after repeal of the gravity-knife statute that New York City police officers will no longer be trained on, or authorized to use, the wrist-flick test to identify an illegal gravity knife. The NYPD will thus enforce the prohibition of weapons or other dangerous instruments on public transit under t he MTA regulations without reference to whether the weapon constitutes a “gravity knife” as defined under N.Y. Penal Law § 265.00(5) and without reference to the wrist-flick test.” So anyone that knows they 100% were legally carrying, it sure sounds like they have an extremely easy case to win if they do get charged. There are bad people in every profession be it cops, doctors, lawyers, teachers, electricians...you’ll never be able to get rid of them all.
I’m actually a very respectful person, just like most officers I know. The point that is being made about QI is that without it the person is able to attempt to sue any officer now for practically any interaction. Was it just one minor swerve inside the lane? Were they swerving to avoid something in the roadway? Did they swerve and travel into the opposite lane of travel where they could have caused an accident? Did they swerve multiple times unable to maintain the lane? It depends on the situation, but yeah a vehicle swerving can absolutely be probable cause to conduct a vehicle stop depending on the circumstances. Why should all the other law abiding citizens be burdened by having to share the same roadway with someone putting their lives in danger? Because you feel that traffic infractions don’t warrant enough for a traffic stop? I’ve seen enough people seriously injured, killed, and even children killed to know that people’s lives could have been saved from a simple traffic stop that could have been conducted based off of a simple traffic infraction. I’ve seen brain matter leftover in motorcycle helmets while their body is split in half completely hollowed out after smacking into a telephone pole. Being against “punishing the entire group because the actions of a few” sure seems like an argument I’ve seen made on this forum before for other matters but not this one, weird. For me personally I can honestly say I’ve never seen any officer from my agency or any other agency make an arrest for a crime that someone had not committed. It’s either you have the charge or you don’t, plain and simple.
If people can't do their job because they are afraid of getting sued, then either they shouldn't be doing that job that way, or you need to fix your tort system.
Why do you think it was repealed? Because cops WEREN'T doing that?
I'd much rather 1000 criminals get away than 1 innocent suffer.
The reason other citizens should be "burdened" with allowing people to drive without actually having committed a real, verifiable crime is because as of yet thought crime is not illegal in this country.
Police are civilians, so it makes sense.
It’s not what they are portraying those cases accurately .
www.forbes.com
Incorrect. Use of force lawsuits happen all the time. Just look at the payout NYC pays out for it.
It’s not what they are portraying those cases accurately .
Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case That Shields Cops Accused Of Stealing Over $225,000
“Thanks to qualified immunity, police can literally come into your home and steal from you, and the courts will shield them from liability.”
Look at Jessie v City of Fresno where the plaintiff claims that two officers executing a legal search warrant stole property. The basic thing he claims that the officers seized a certain amount of money on the search warrant and the plaintiffs claim they had more money than what was listed as recovered . Something drug dealers do as revenge on the arresting officers ( they claim they had two keys of Coke when they really only had one as to get the officers in trouble. It’s a common tactic).
They attempted to personally sue the two officers despite having no evidence at all that the two officers named stole anything even if they took what they claimed at face value. Meaning, if the plaintiff was telling the truth ( which is unlikely), they did not see those two particular officers steal anything of which anyone one else involved in the case may have. These were just the officers who voichered /recorded what they counted and reported to the court. The count is not usually done at the scene and often can be done days later after the seizure.
What is not mentioned is that police department can be sued for the difference. Not as a violation of civil rights but like any other loss or damage of property case.
Government agencies shouldn't be allowed to settle.
There isn’t anything to it because the DA would prosecute in a heartbeat. It’s so common for criminals to claim there was more money or drugs than there actually was.
Clearly you don’t know NYC
nypost.com
So they need protection against something a DA wouldn't prosecute because...?
There is no evidence that they stole anything. Even if the plaintiff if all of what the plaintiff says about actually having more than what was turned over to the court, there is no evidence that the two people named did it whatsoever. It’s like if you claimed something got lost in the mail or fed-ex and you personally sue your local postal carrier( mailman ) with no evidence that the package ever reached him.
