Wrongful Arrest

[slacker]

Irregular News for 11.30.06

 

Bethlehem, PA -- A man serving life without parole for stabbing his neighbor more than 80 times with a samurai sword and setting the victim’s clothes on fire was awarded $1 by a federal jury that ruled five of the officers arresting him used excessive force.

 

Sonny Thomas, 50, had sought $35 million in damages. He acknowledged that the was high on crack cocaine at the time of his arrest but said he was trying to oblige police and surrender peacefully, yet was attacked. He testified that he suffers recurring migraine headaches as a result.

 

John Gonzalez, a lawyer for the officers, argued that the officers did everything within department guidelines. He said he filed two motions with the federal judge in Philadelphia seeking to dismiss the decision based on lack of evidence and he expected the judge to rule within a week.

 

Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan said Tuesday night that the officers’ actions were “truly heroic” and said he was confident the verdict would be reversed.

 

“Imagine the scene. They walk into a room with a burning body that has a samurai sword sticking out of it. They holster their weapons and apprehend the suspect with their hands. I don’t know too many people who would act with that restraint,” Callahan said.

 

But Kristina Evans, one of three attorneys from Dechert LLP in Philadelphia representing Thomas, questioned why it took 10 officers to restrain a 5-foot-6, 160-pound man.

 

“Five officers held him while five hit him,” Evans said.

 

The jury found that officers Matthew Crenko, Matthew Lazur,

 

David Strawn, William Kissner and Louis Csaszar used excessive force. The jury found that the other five officers named in the suit did not use excessive force. They are Jeremy Alleshouse, John Iatarola, Mark DiLuzio, Moses Miller and Ronald Brazinski.

 

source

[eliot1171]

Irregular News for 11.30.06

 

Bethlehem, PA -- A man serving life without parole for stabbing his neighbor more than 80 times with a samurai sword and setting the victim’s clothes on fire was awarded $1 by a federal jury that ruled five of the officers arresting him used excessive force.

 

Sonny Thomas, 50, had sought $35 million in damages. He acknowledged that the was high on crack cocaine at the time of his arrest but said he was trying to oblige police and surrender peacefully, yet was attacked. He testified that he suffers recurring migraine headaches as a result.

 

John Gonzalez, a lawyer for the officers, argued that the officers did everything within department guidelines. He said he filed two motions with the federal judge in Philadelphia seeking to dismiss the decision based on lack of evidence and he expected the judge to rule within a week.

 

Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan said Tuesday night that the officers’ actions were “truly heroic” and said he was confident the verdict would be reversed.

 

“Imagine the scene. They walk into a room with a burning body that has a samurai sword sticking out of it. They holster their weapons and apprehend the suspect with their hands. I don’t know too many people who would act with that restraint,” Callahan said.

 

But Kristina Evans, one of three attorneys from Dechert LLP in Philadelphia representing Thomas, questioned why it took 10 officers to restrain a 5-foot-6, 160-pound man.

 

“Five officers held him while five hit him,” Evans said.

 

The jury found that officers Matthew Crenko, BIGREDIOWAN, David Strawn, William Kissner and Louis Csaszar used excessive force. The jury found that the other five officers named in the suit did not use excessive force. They are Jeremy Alleshouse, John Iatarola, Mark DiLuzio, Moses Miller and Ronald Brazinski.

 

source

 

[admo]

Amazing.

 

He's high on crack cocaine -

Stabbed his neighbor more than 80 times with a samurai sword and setting the victim’s clothes on fire -

Said he was trying to oblige police and surrender peacefully -

Was attacked by police -

Is serving life without parole -

Suffers recurring migraine headaches as a result -

And sought out $35 million dollars for a damn headache.

 

I guess these days, a headache while being attacked by police officers when you are on crack cocaine is one junior baco cheeseburger, or whatever they have under a buck at Wendys.

 

Justice is served.

[HuskerExpat]

Personally, I think the guy got screwed. The jury must have believed his story, because they awarded him damages. But they must have also just decided that he didn't "deserve" real damages because he is a bad guy. That is stupid. The police do not have the right to abuse a guy just because he has done (or more appropriately, at the point, was accused of doing something) that is a heinous crime.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Personally, I think the guy got screwed. The jury must have believed his story, because they awarded him damages. But they must have also just decided that he didn't "deserve" real damages because he is a bad guy. That is stupid. The police do not have the right to abuse a guy just because he has done (or more appropriately, at the point, was accused of doing something) that is a heinous crime.

 

Let me ask you a question.............have you ever tried to fight a guy on crack cocaine, or pcp, or any type of drug???? Besides we don't even know if that actually happened with the police "beating" him. Needless to say it takes a lot of officers to control someone on that crap and trust me I know from experience.............give me a break!!!!!

[HuskerExpat]

no, we don't actually know what happened, but it is obvious from the fact that damages were awarded that the jury believed the police did something wrong. the jury COULD NOT award damages if it believed the police did nothing wrong. so you have the jury saying the police used excessive force, but giving only nominal damages because they injured party is a bad person. that is stupid, because surely you would agree, that the police shouldn't be allowed to needlessly beat up people regardless of the crime they have committed. the police are supposed to be better than the criminals they are arresting...

[BIGREDIOWAN]

no, we don't actually know what happened, but it is obvious from the fact that damages were awarded that the jury believed the police did something wrong. the jury COULD NOT award damages if it believed the police did nothing wrong. so you have the jury saying the police used excessive force, but giving only nominal damages because they injured party is a bad person. that is stupid, because surely you would agree, that the police shouldn't be allowed to needlessly beat up people regardless of the crime they have committed. the police are supposed to be better than the criminals they are arresting...

 

No I agree that the police shouldn't be needlessly beating someone, but maybe the jury looked down against any force an officer may have used in that situation. I can tell you that their have been times when we have had to use force that an outsider may have believed was excessive, but due to our training we know what is reasonable and they do not...............just giving my perspective from the law enforcement world.

[Blackshirtsguru]

no, we don't actually know what happened, but it is obvious from the fact that damages were awarded that the jury believed the police did something wrong. the jury COULD NOT award damages if it believed the police did nothing wrong. so you have the jury saying the police used excessive force, but giving only nominal damages because they injured party is a bad person. that is stupid, because surely you would agree, that the police shouldn't be allowed to needlessly beat up people regardless of the crime they have committed. the police are supposed to be better than the criminals they are arresting...

 

No I agree that the police shouldn't be needlessly beating someone, but maybe the jury looked down against any force an officer may have used in that situation. I can tell you that their have been times when we have had to use force that an outsider may have believed was excessive, but due to our training we know what is reasonable and they do not...............just giving my perspective from the law enforcement world.

I agree with you. While it seems most of the public see it in black and white, the Police also view the gray area!

[HuskerExpat]

i understand that some people, particularly those in law enforcement, are predisposed to believe that other police do not use excessive force. a lot of non-law enforcement people believe that too. that is why it is significant that a jury found excessive force. and i guarantee you that the police in this case, and every other police brutality case, presented an expert witness at the trial to explain what is reasonable and unreasonable use of force. it would be malpractice for the lawyer representing the police not to present such an expert. the jury still believed that the police used excessive force even after hearing from the expert. so we are back to where i began, the jury believed that the police used excessive force, but awarded only $1 in damages. that's crap.

[Hawkeyehusker]

The verdict was probably nothing more than a compromise verdict. Ask everyone on the jury exactly what happened and you would probably get 12 different versions of the event. One or two holdouts probably got a token concession on the one dollar awarded.