SmarterthanYou
rebel
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/radle...ther-b_b_2294165.html?utm_hp_ref=the-agitator
protect the police department at all costs, despite their obvious misconduct and civil rights violations.
In the first story, a Chicago cop was writing a ticket when the owner of the car came out to see what was going on. As he did, his seven-month-old puppy slipped out of the house, at which point the Chicago cop shot the dog. Note that the dog appears to have been hit by bullet fragments that chipped off after the bullet hit something else. Meaning that to protect himself from a bite from a puppy (that neighbors said was wagging its tail when it was shot), this cop put everyone around him at risk of getting struck by stray fragments of bullet. He then calmly finished writing the parking ticket.
The blue wall part of the story occurred later, after the couple who owns the dog went to the media. Chicago PD apparently didn't like the publicity, so they sent a couple cops to pay the couple a visit.
Two days after the shooting, a sergeant and a lieutenant from the Chicago Police Department showed up at the Phillips' home.
"I thought they were sending honchos over to apologize," Barbara told me.
Instead, Al and Barbara said, the police questioned why the family had gone to the media, and insisted that the officer who shot at their dog is a "good man." When Al and Barbara were clearly unwilling to promise "no more media," they were issued a ticket for Colonel being off-leash two days prior.
At first, the City denied this visit ever took place, however, a TV news crew happened to be there and caught it on tape.
The second story involves a drunk, off-duty Chicago cop who in 2007 was caught on video viciously beating bartender Karolina Obrycka when she cut him off. The cop wasn't even charged until video of the beating surfaced. The bartender recently won $850,000 in a federal lawsuit. The city has agreed to pay the amount and not appeal the verdict. But there's a condition.
The city and Obrycka's attorneys are asking a judge to set aside that verdict, as part of their deal to pay Obrycka the $850,000 she was awarded right away. The city would forego any appeals of the jury's financial award to Obrycka, in exchange for not being held legally responsible for the beating.
"By reaching this agreement, the plaintiff gets certainty and an immediate payment of the jury's award. From the city's perspective, vacating the judgment eliminates the risk that the judgment will be misused in a way that hinders the city's ability to defend itself in future cases," city Law Department spokesman Roderick Drew said in an emailed statement.
Why does the city want to pay the settlement and have the verdict set aside? Because of what the jury found when it reached its verdict.
The Chicago Police Department has been found guilty of covering up the beating of a female bartender by a city police officer, and was criticized for honoring a "code of silence" in which officers cover up for one another's misdeeds . . .
Obrycka sued the police department and former police officer Anthony Abbate for a 2007 incident in which Abbate jumped behind her bar at Jesse's Shortstop Inn and, when reprimanded by Obrycka, assaulted her.
The altercation was caught on surveillance tape, but Chicago police officers ignored the tape's existence and failed to mention in their police report that the assailant was a city cop. Obrycka's attorney presented evidence, including hundreds of phone calls between Abbate and other cops in the hours after the incident, that convinced the jury there was a widespread effort to cover up the attack.
So rather than take the verdict as a (yet another) sign that there's something seriously wrong within the Chicago Police Department, the city has chosen to pay out $850,000 to make the jury's findings go away. Otherwise, the city might have had to compensate other people beaten to a bloody pulp by Chicago cops. And we can't have that.
Let's hear it from the mayor himself.
"This agreement, in my view, closes a chapter on something - before I was mayor - happened, and it also allows us to protect the city against future lawsuits," Emanuel said.
protect the police department at all costs, despite their obvious misconduct and civil rights violations.
In the first story, a Chicago cop was writing a ticket when the owner of the car came out to see what was going on. As he did, his seven-month-old puppy slipped out of the house, at which point the Chicago cop shot the dog. Note that the dog appears to have been hit by bullet fragments that chipped off after the bullet hit something else. Meaning that to protect himself from a bite from a puppy (that neighbors said was wagging its tail when it was shot), this cop put everyone around him at risk of getting struck by stray fragments of bullet. He then calmly finished writing the parking ticket.
The blue wall part of the story occurred later, after the couple who owns the dog went to the media. Chicago PD apparently didn't like the publicity, so they sent a couple cops to pay the couple a visit.
Two days after the shooting, a sergeant and a lieutenant from the Chicago Police Department showed up at the Phillips' home.
"I thought they were sending honchos over to apologize," Barbara told me.
Instead, Al and Barbara said, the police questioned why the family had gone to the media, and insisted that the officer who shot at their dog is a "good man." When Al and Barbara were clearly unwilling to promise "no more media," they were issued a ticket for Colonel being off-leash two days prior.
At first, the City denied this visit ever took place, however, a TV news crew happened to be there and caught it on tape.
The second story involves a drunk, off-duty Chicago cop who in 2007 was caught on video viciously beating bartender Karolina Obrycka when she cut him off. The cop wasn't even charged until video of the beating surfaced. The bartender recently won $850,000 in a federal lawsuit. The city has agreed to pay the amount and not appeal the verdict. But there's a condition.
The city and Obrycka's attorneys are asking a judge to set aside that verdict, as part of their deal to pay Obrycka the $850,000 she was awarded right away. The city would forego any appeals of the jury's financial award to Obrycka, in exchange for not being held legally responsible for the beating.
"By reaching this agreement, the plaintiff gets certainty and an immediate payment of the jury's award. From the city's perspective, vacating the judgment eliminates the risk that the judgment will be misused in a way that hinders the city's ability to defend itself in future cases," city Law Department spokesman Roderick Drew said in an emailed statement.
Why does the city want to pay the settlement and have the verdict set aside? Because of what the jury found when it reached its verdict.
The Chicago Police Department has been found guilty of covering up the beating of a female bartender by a city police officer, and was criticized for honoring a "code of silence" in which officers cover up for one another's misdeeds . . .
Obrycka sued the police department and former police officer Anthony Abbate for a 2007 incident in which Abbate jumped behind her bar at Jesse's Shortstop Inn and, when reprimanded by Obrycka, assaulted her.
The altercation was caught on surveillance tape, but Chicago police officers ignored the tape's existence and failed to mention in their police report that the assailant was a city cop. Obrycka's attorney presented evidence, including hundreds of phone calls between Abbate and other cops in the hours after the incident, that convinced the jury there was a widespread effort to cover up the attack.
So rather than take the verdict as a (yet another) sign that there's something seriously wrong within the Chicago Police Department, the city has chosen to pay out $850,000 to make the jury's findings go away. Otherwise, the city might have had to compensate other people beaten to a bloody pulp by Chicago cops. And we can't have that.
Let's hear it from the mayor himself.
"This agreement, in my view, closes a chapter on something - before I was mayor - happened, and it also allows us to protect the city against future lawsuits," Emanuel said.