Roommates who sued a Maryland county Monday claim police officers illegally entered their apartment without a warrant, detained them at gunpoint without justification and unnecessarily shot their pet dog, which was left paralyzed and ultimately euthanized.

The dog, a boxer mix named Hennessey, did not attack the three officers who entered the apartment before two of them shot the animal with their firearms and the third fired a stun gun at it, according to the federal lawsuit.

The lawsuit seeks at least $16 million in damages over the June 2, 2021 encounter, which started with Prince George’s County police officers responding to a report of a dog bite at an apartment complex where the four plaintiffs lived. What happened next was captured on police body camera video and video from a plaintiff’s cellphone.

  • @Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    977 months ago

    Pretty fucked up, but not surprising… Why do settlements come from uninvolved taxpayers, rather than the police “union”!?

    • @ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      827 months ago

      Paying damages out of police retirement founds would be a simple, one step, foolproof solution to this problem. You don’t want lower retirement? Stop breaking the law. Oh, you’re one of the 5 good cops in the country and this would hurt you even though you did nothing wrong? Actually report the bad cops instead just watching. Thanks.

          • @jonne
            link
            227 months ago

            The legal fiction that is qualified immunity needs to be banned. It was just made up buy judges.

            • @SheeEttin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              10
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              It’s fine when used properly. When acting in good faith, officers, just like any company employee, should generally not be held liable.

              However, if they are not acting in good faith, or their actions deviate from good practice, then much like a chemical company employee dumping something toxic out into the environment, then yes they should face personal civil and criminal liability.

              For example, if there’s an active shooter, and the police shoot and kill him, I think most people would agree that that’s acceptable, and the family of the shooter should not have grounds to sue over the shooter’s death.

              If the police walk up and shoot your dog for no reason, that’s unacceptable and they should absolutely face personal liability.

              Per the article:

              “After reviewing all of the evidence in this matter a determination was made that actions of the officers didn’t generate criminal liability because they were acting in good faith,” the office said in a statement to The Post.

              I hope the court disagrees, but I’m not going to hold my breath.

      • @foggy@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        187 months ago

        Also: police should have to have insurance to carry firearms. If they’re bad cops, that insurance cost should eventually exceed their pay.

        Speed when you don’t have to? That hurts your insurance. Found conducting illegal terry stop? Hurts insurance. Unnecessary discharge? Lol, your insurance just got expensive as fuck for the next 5 years. How bad do you wanna serve and protect? Minimum wage sound good?

        • @ExLisper@linux.community
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -47 months ago

          Except this is America. It’s pretty much impossible to prove that the discharge was unnecessary, same as it’s impossible to prove that cop killed someone unnecessarily. That’s why people demand damages from the city, not the cop himself. You can argue that the police force was run incorrectly and demand money from the people that run it but the cop is always innocent. I know this is BS but this is how it works. That’s why money should come from the retirement found. If the entire organization is responsible the entire organization should pay.

      • RubberStuntBaby
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        That gives every cop a financial motive to lie for each other, cover up incidents and silence witnesses.

          • RubberStuntBaby
            link
            fedilink
            17 months ago

            When a psycho cop in the department shoots an innocent kid in the back, the other cops will have to decide either to plant a gun on him or have their their retirement funds drained by a lawsuit.

            • @ExLisper@linux.community
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              So you’re saying now cops don’t plant guns on people, don’t lie and don’t intimidate witnesses? Have you seen the news, like ever?

        • @ExLisper@linux.community
          link
          fedilink
          English
          47 months ago

          It doesn’t matter if they quit or not. It’s the police department that pays damages, no matter if the cops still work there or not (this is how it works now). Once the retirement found looses some $ and the retirements gets lowered cops will be very quick to report bad apples before they actually kill someone (as they should be doing now).

            • @ExLisper@linux.community
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              I don’t think I’m optimistic at all. Police departments already pay out damages. It’s not some wishful thinking. Police already lie, plant evidence, threaten witnesses and make deals with criminals. And they still do lose civil cases and pay. Of course it only happens in the most extreme cases but it does actually happen. If each such case meant they lose money they would try not to have such cases. How? By getting rid of the most aggressive officers. It would not fix all the issues but it would help.

    • @AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      197 months ago

      The police are funded by taxpayers, so it doesn’t matter if it’s the city or the police that pay for it, you still foot the bill no matter what. The only solution where citizens don’t lose is if cops are required to carry personal malpractice insurance, like doctors. IMO making cops personally liable for their murders is a good place to start.

      • Alien Nathan Edward
        link
        fedilink
        67 months ago

        it does matter though because if the money for paying for damages illegally caused by police comes out of their budget they’ll at least feel that until the next year’s budget kicks in. As-is, police are completely removed from any responsibility for their actions.

    • @Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      77 months ago

      FWIW, these judgements are typically paid by the city’s insurance, although that’s also funded by the taxpayers. I don’t know how department policies and the like affect the premiums, but I would really be interested in learning.

    • @Psychodelic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      17 months ago

      I feel like it’d be worse to have taxpayers care even less about what police are doing. That said, it’s mind-blowing taxpayers don’t seem to care as it is