Monetary Payment For a Non-Monetary Loss

Grappling does not involve placing an arm around a neck!

The upcoming trial is a disciplinary trial to determine if Pantaleo will be allowed to keep his job.

www.cnn.com/2018/12/06/us/Eric-garner-nypd-daniel-pantaleo/index.html

That depends on what you mean by place an arm around a neck. It involves reaching around someone from behind and holding on to their torso pretty close to their neck.

Here is a more recent case from last week.



Again, the actual damages here were less than $8k, but there is a charge for pain and suffering and a bigger charge to encourage these millionaires that you don't have carte blanche to beat on your neighbor and then just pay a fine to make it go away. I'm sure a lot of richer people would beat up a neighbor if they thought they could pay $8k and walk away.

There are actual calculations for pain and suffering.

Some are in the form of lost opportunity costs. E. g. If a person misses a lot of work due to their trauma, they could easily lose their job. There are also calculations which can be made regarding diminished quality of life.

Just because someone isn't out any cash today, doesn't mean future earnings of tomorrow couldn't or wouldn't be impacted.

jespah-

Thank you.

1) I think a payment to the victim for the possibility that he may experience some hardship in the future as a result of the subject incident, is a speculative basis. The future is unknown.

2) I accept the logic of making the wrongdoer pay punitive damages on top of the compensatory damages that he also pays.

I don't accept the logic of paying the punitive damages to the victim. The victim already received the amount needed to put him in the same position he was in prior to the subject incident. Instead I would pay those funds to a charity or governmental agency.

In the Eric Garner case, the family received $5.9 million. The payer is not Officer Pantaleo but New York City Citizens.

Do you reject the idea that an employer is responsible for the conduct of their employees? To solve the problem of police misconduct... you have to create an organization that

1) Screens officers and hires only officers that will act ethically.
2) Trains officers in how to act ethically.
3) Disciplines and removes officers who are not acting ethically.

If you don't hold the police department responsible as an organization for the actions of their officers, then there is no motivation for police organizations to have policies that prevent these horrible incidents from happening.

Exactly!

This Garner case isn't a good example to use. But for those cases where there is actual police misconduct, if a community does not want to keep paying out damages, then what they need to do is make their police officers stop acting unlawfully.

Get your elected officials to stop settling meritless cases.

maxdancona-

I don't reject the idea that an employer is responsible for its employees.

I think New York City tries to hire as police officers only those of its applicants that will not engage in misconduct. To that end, I believe it screens applicants and trains officers in how to act ethically. I think its ability and performance in disciplining and removing officers is circumscribed by civil service and other law and union contracts. It strains credulity that New York City could have anticipated that Officer Pantaleo would use the impermissible (but not illegal) choke hold on a citizen who was resisting arrest.

Especially since he didn't do any such thing.

Like I said, this is a bad case to use as an example. However, when it comes to actual abuse, the community is responsible for the conduct of the police officers that it hires.

The concept that an employer is legally responsible for the acts of its employees while at work is well embedded in our legal system. This stops a company (or the government) from throwing employees under the bus when something goes wrong to avoid liability. If the company is dumping chemicals in the river, it doesn't matter if it was a "rogue" plant manager. A ship captain is drunk and drives his oil tanker aground spilling oil all over sensitive fisheries, the employer is on the hook. Employers who entrust their employees with critical tasks are responsible for how they perform them.

As much as we would like to believe this, it clearly isn't true. I've recounted this story several times, but it's such a good illustration, I will do so again. James Blake was a top five American tennis player. He attended college at Harvard, is well spoken, very personable. He was waiting outside his hotel for a cab to take him to the US Open where he was scheduled to provide an interview. A man ran up to him, grabbed him around the neck and threw him to the ground. Several other men ran then ran up and they cuffed him. They were undercover police officers who mistook Blake for a suspect in a non-violent crime. After holding him cuffed on the pavement for fifteen minutes, a bystander told them who he was and they released him. The officer that threw Blake to the ground was found to have used excessive force (all of this was captured on a security camera). So should the NY police department have known that Officer Frascatore would run up to a person standing outside his hotel, fail to identify himself and throw him to the ground? Turns out the officer was the subject of five civilian complaints. He has also been named in two federal lawsuits — including for falsely arresting, beating, and pepper spraying a man. He once opened a car door during a traffic stop, punched the driver in the mouth, and then sued the driver for biting his fist. While I believe the majority of police are good folk working hard to protect and serve, there are bad apples and you can't count on the police force to police itself. This officer was a known issue, but was still out there throwing people to the ground. Large settlements like this make a difference to police departments that bad publicity does not.

engineer-

Thank you.

I hope I will be able to read more about the case you cite. Did his supervisor or other official take any action against him (e.g., suspension, initiate the firing procedure)?

If not why not?

Two years after the event, an internal review board recommended the officer lose ten vacation days as punishment. The actual punishment was five days.

The officer then sued Blake saying he defamed him (like he sued the guy who he punched). That suit was dismissed.

engineer-

Thank you.

I read The New York Times and I remember reading articles about this case.

That said I don't have as much knowledge as you do.

Do you have a source other that the newspapers?

My posts above have links in them you can follow.