75-year-old protestor sues cops who fractured his skull

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2021/02/23/75-year-old-protestor-sues-cops-who-fractured-his-skull.html


This reminds me of something I’ve never understood… how come we don’t hear more about what must be the many, many brain injuries that occur when police break up demonstrations with batons? I still remember and to some degree feel that childhood shock when I first saw footage of cops using force on a protest (but sadly we’re all probably inured or at least well-used to it now).

These days however we understand so much about boxing/NFL/rugby head trauma, accidental life-changing injuries from acquired brain injury, the vital importance of bike helmets, the tragedies of “one punch” fights ending in death or permanent disability… basically how damn easy it is to damage the wonder of biology that is the human brain.

So how the hell can cops in supposed democracies still be smashing skulls with heavy sticks, and getting away with it???


It will be interesting to see how a jury responds to an attorney who – unlike the prosecutor – is more interested in seeing justice for this man than he is in letting the cops off the hook.


Shameful and clear cut case of disproportionate use of force.


It’ll never reach a jury, the city and police union will settle.


Only in the sense that any use of force would have been disproportionate, because there was no force they needed to overcome. Any use of force was illegitimate.


It’s okay to sue their asses, but civil court isn’t really about justice and punishment.

1 Like

Good luck to this man in his lawsuit, but there’s no deterrence in granting a settlement in such cases unless the fines come out of the police departments themselves.


Always. This. Fucking. Response.

Once again, for the choir, if your procedures and directives call for unnecessary use of force and almost killing people because they weren’t where you wanted them to be, then your procedures and directives are wrong!

Always retreating to the Nuremberg Defense should be a bright fucking indicator that you’re morally compromised.


100% this!

As long as we expect the police to function as a paramilitary force with the general public considered to be the potential enemy, these are the results we will get. If we are ever to establish a police force that works FOR the greater good, they have to be trained to consider the citizenry as humanity to be protected, and not ruled over.


For the same reason you don’t hear coverage about the menstrual issues and asthma attacks caused by tear gas. It would mean actually facing the effects of police violence over a long period of time. We still haven’t faced the uses of dogs, which are easy and clear cut. We’re probably decades away from coming to terms with the slower more insidious actions. The media has a mixed incentive structure that doesn’t favor long term coverage of such issues. The audience is impatient and police control access to materials for a bunch of other classes of stories.


Speaking of police corruption in western ny

If it wasn’t for being so effing cold right now, they would have been alot of protests in both cities this week


They say a competent DA can get an indictment against a ham sandwich, but I guess they make an exception when it’s another kind of pork.


Fundamentally, rules of engagement, squad tactics, and use of force are completely incoherent for the Capital breach, the BLM protest near the Whitehouse, and this case. We can neither repel violent extremists nor support citizens seeking redress. It is not economically feasible to allow the marginalized to speak out, or for the white middleclass to be subject to policing. The department can survive a lawsuit for wrongful death from the poor, but not one for curbing the politically connected upper class’s racist and nationalistic behaviors. White suburbanites can force their way into the Capitol and just turn themselves in.

Ah, the “just following orders” defense.


Isn’t a settlement contingent on the offer being accepted by the plaintiff? If he doesn’t accept a settlement it pretty much has to go to trial, right? With how often these settlements come with “and we admit no wrongdoing” clauses, I can see this guy not being interested in going along with one.

1 Like

Came here to say that that wasn’t an acceptable defense after World War II either.

1 Like

Damned hard to fight against police immunity and impunity, especially in a place like Buffalo where excessive PD force is an accepted near-daily occurrence.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.