Lawsuit for a false complaint?

[AggieDave 6]

This article comes from of our cousins to the north.

The end of the article shows what happens when a serious complaint comes about towards an officer. Many times they're put on admin-leave until the complaint is cleared or shown to be true. True complaints are fine and well, sometimes a complaint that turns out to be true is of no real value or problem to the officer. This is due to the officer acting within the law and within the department's policy, but the persons comlete lack of understanding of the law results in a complaint. Examples would include complaints from people who don't understand traffic law complaining about an officer issuing them a traffic citation in an accident that the party was responsible for.

However, bogus and false complaints are sometimes persued fully, if they are plausable.


All in all, this is a really interesting article and I was interested to see what others thought about it.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1158617412008&call_pageid=968332188492

Quote

Police accusers could face lawsuits
`Scary' proposal from McCormack
Bogus complaints come under fire
Sep. 19, 2006. 01:38 AM
NICK PRON
STAFF REPORTER

Anyone who makes a false complaint against the Toronto police could lose their home or their car under a controversial new policy being proposed by one of the candidates in the race to head up the force's powerful union.

If there is "clear and convincing evidence" that the complaint made against an officer was false, that person could be sued by the Toronto Police Association, says presidential hopeful Mike McCormack, stressing the threat of a civil suit would be only in "extreme cases."

But critics claim such a move by the union would have a chilling effect on legitimate complaints against police officers.

"Scary and intimidating" is how Toronto councillor and police services board vice-chair Pam McConnell described McCormack's proposal.

"I defend the right of all people to voice complaints," she said in an interview last night. "We want a system where people can come forward if they have a complaint, not a system where people are frightened to speak up against the police."

She said, in general, people often find it hard to say anything bad about the police and under the new proposal there would be even more barriers for those who have a legitimate gripe.

"It's hard enough for people to come forward and file complaints against the police without this kind of threat from McCormack," said Alan Borovoy, legal counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

He went on to say that there is "a perception" that if you file a complaint against the police they would "retaliate." Such a fear among the public "will now be exacerbated" with McCormack's proposal, he added.

Lawyer Ashton Hall said that while he understands how damaging a false complaint can be against a police officer, he said McCormack's proposal would have a "chilling effect" on those who might have a legitimate gripe.

"I'm mindful of their concerns," he said in an interview, "but my fear here is that people with a legitimate complaint will fear that if they lose the union might come after them."

McCormack said last night that if he wins the October election he will ask his board to get a legal opinion on suing those who make false allegations because of the damaging effect that "numerous false complaints" have had on the lives of officers in the 7,700-member union.

"Where a clearly false complaint has been made the association will seek full compensation ... including the pursuit of any assets the complainant may have" if the union wins a civil suit, said McCormack.

When asked if that meant seizing a person's house or car, McCormack said the union would seek to "satisfy any civil judgment that is awarded" to the officer.

The first test case could be Cons. Michael Kiproff, an officer accused of using excessive force and making an unlawful arrest of a person of colour, said McCormack.

Those police act charges were eventually dropped but Kiproff's lawyer, Peter Brauti, said last night the officer's career was put on hold for more than three years while he fought the case.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Those police act charges were eventually dropped but Kiproff's lawyer, Peter Brauti, said last night the officer's career was put on hold for more than three years while he fought the case.

Sounds like the fault of the system taking three years, not the guy filing the complaint in this case.

I can see a need for accountability for filing a false report, but this seems like a really bad idea.

[lawrocket 3]

I thought it was great until this part: "If there is "clear and convincing evidence" that the complaint made against an officer was false, that person could be sued by the Toronto Police Association"

Why not let the poor cop who was falsely accused sue? Why should this turn into a cash cow for the union?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Shawndiver 0]

Quote

True complaints are fine and well, sometimes a complaint that turns out to be true is of no real value or problem to the officer. This is due to the officer acting within the law and within the department's policy, but the persons comlete lack of understanding of the law results in a complaint. Examples would include complaints from people who don't understand traffic law complaining about an officer issuing them a traffic citation in an accident that the party was responsible for.

So, as I understand how you wrote it, even if there is a true complaint it may not a problem for the officer. However, if this is enacted, a person without a lawyers knowledge of traffic law could possibly lose their house and assets if they are proven wrong. How can this be even remotely considered as fair?

_________________

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

However, if this is enacted, a person without a lawyers knowledge of traffic law could possibly lose their house and assets if they are proven wrong. How can this be even remotely considered as fair?

I have no clue how Toronto will be handling this. I was just stating what can sometimes happen with complaints. The article did state that the union would only persue the complaintants that were grossly in violation. However, as Lawrocket stated, it seems odd that the union would be handling the civil proceedings.

For many states a complaint is a legal police report and false report laws apply. I have no clue what the laws are and how they apply in this regard in Canada.

Reading this article I found it interesting, although I won't state if I am personally for or against the purposed here. Some will think I'm for it, some will think I'm against it, it doesn't really matter...I just wanted to know what others think about it.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Canadian law, much like British and American law I believe, holds that such action would only be libelous if it were false, the utterer knew it to be false, and it was in fact malicious in intent. Furthermore the only damages the Toronto Thugs err,.. Police Association could claim would be direct damage (costs) incurred by them. Since an officer on administrative leave does not lose wages they would not be on the table unless the city of T.O. was doing the suing. Most litigation in Canada is loser pay. if the TPA is too aggressive they will get slapped with some hefty court costs and defendant (formerly complainant) legal fees; the judiciary will cast a very jaundiced eye on them if they feel they are being heavy handed to the public. On the other hand if people are intentionally bringing false complaints against cops, fuck 'em, let 'em lose their house

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

On the other hand if people are intentionally bringing false complaints against cops

That happens quite a bit actually.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[fireemt97 0]

It sucks being a peace officer in this day and age sometimes. Although I have not had a complaint brought against myself, I do know co-workers that have. Some have been complete lies while others where just someone who was misinformed. Even when a police officer has been found not guilty because the stop was recorded (clear and convincing evidence), most counties will not bring charges against the person who intiated the complaint because they have bigger fish to fry. At least that is how it is here in liberal California. Having a complaint brought against an officer does cause some stress. Even though the officer is confident he was in the right, it makes you second guess yourself because you are being investigated, your life is put on hold, and you are made to look like a bad person. I do believe that a complaint process must be in place because like any other job there are police officers that do not do the right thing. I will leave my views as to what should happen to a person who filled a false complaint out of this.

SUCK IT UP BUTTERCUP

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

I thought it was great until this part: "If there is "clear and convincing evidence" that the complaint made against an officer was false, that person could be sued by the Toronto Police Association"

Why not let the poor cop who was falsely accused sue? Why should this turn into a cash cow for the union?

Exactly! This will do nothing but INCREASE their power and leave little or nothing for the private citizen to do when the police over step their power, and especially since 9-11, the police are feeling their oats. Every complaint should be recognized and investigated. The Good'ol Boy network cover their tracks very well. Nothing like living in a police state when you are the police! Nothing like having power over people, bust them in the head and have a Union and a City to give them unlimited backup!

I have been reading about innocent people who spend years in jail and are cleared of the crime......Why are the investigating officers, prosecutors and judges not investgated, held accountable and on trial for their mistakes? Above the law?

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

It sucks being a peace officer in this day and age sometimes. Although I have not had a complaint brought against myself, I do know co-workers that have. Some have been complete lies while others where just someone who was misinformed. Even when a police officer has been found not guilty because the stop was recorded (clear and convincing evidence), most counties will not bring charges against the person who intiated the complaint because they have bigger fish to fry. At least that is how it is here in liberal California. Having a complaint brought against an officer does cause some stress. Even though the officer is confident he was in the right, it makes you second guess yourself because you are being investigated, your life is put on hold, and you are made to look like a bad person. I do believe that a complaint process must be in place because like any other job there are police officers that do not do the right thing. I will leave my views as to what should happen to a person who filled a false complaint out of this.

Three times in the last year I have been unjustly singled out by the police for very minor reasons and treated like an ax murderer. The last time the cop did everything in his power to get me into a fight. This peace of shit got in my face and spit on me, yelled, held his flashlight with his left hand and balled his fist with the right and with jumping forward like he was about to strike. This went on for 10 minutes.....and my reaction was nothing but stand there, keep my cool and watch this ass make a fool of himself. Maybe I could understand if I had given a hard time, but I was very professional and would not even consider myself to be a "problem". Not to mention this guy has trailed me twice in the last few months. I now carry my mini disk recorder around everyday so I can record the next stop.....I may not be able to use in court(wonder why??????) but when people hear it, they will know who the thief is.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[fireemt97 0]

Quote

Quote

I thought it was great until this part: "If there is "clear and convincing evidence" that the complaint made against an officer was false, that person could be sued by the Toronto Police Association"

Why not let the poor cop who was falsely accused sue? Why should this turn into a cash cow for the union?

Exactly! This will do nothing but INCREASE their power and leave little or nothing for the private citizen to do when the police over step their power, and especially since 9-11, the police are feeling their oats. Every complaint should be recognized and investigated. The Good'ol Boy network cover their tracks very well. Nothing like living in a police state when you are the police! Nothing like having power over people, bust them in the head and have a Union and a City to give them unlimited backup!

I have been reading about innocent people who spend years in jail and are cleared of the crime......Why are the investigating officers, prosecutors and judges not investgated, held accountable and on trial for their mistakes? Above the law?

I do not know where you are from cloudseeker but I think you are over doing it a little. Most police officers are not feeling their oats since 9/11. Most have gone about things as normal with a little extra thought about security of terrorist targets. The Good'ol Boy network is not as big as you think it is. Don't get me wrong, the Good'ol Boy network might be around in some places. I would be a fool to say that it did not. I know officers that have been fired because other officers did not cover for them during investigation. Yes, the Union will back an officer up if they are sued or a complaint is made but it is not unlimited. You loose that back up if you were not within policy for what ever reason. I do agree with you that every complaint should be recognized and investigated. But if the complaint was false we should have rights just like any other person. If I illegally detain someone without proper cause I can be sued and loose my job because I violated the persons rights. So why should I not have a right to something when someone knowingly falsely accuses me of something? I think to often people think because we are held to a higher standard then the rest of the world that they forget we have rights just like anybody else. I'm starting to go off on another path so I will end this part of the discussion.

As far as people that are found guilty when in fact they are innocent, that is a whole different issue. I know personally if I put someone in jail who was innocent I would feel completely horrible. If you are going to hold investigating officers, prosecutors, and judges accountable, you need to remember that it was a jury of twelve men and/or women that help put them in jail. Should those twelve people also be held accountable? Unfortunately, we do not live in a perfect system and probably never will. Until this perfect system is found this will continue to happen. It could be worse, you could be somewhere that puts you in jail without a trial at all.

Keep in mind, I'm not starting an argument here, I'm just putting dialog out in the open from the other side. I find that often in these forums people get upset and act like kids when you do not agree.

SUCK IT UP BUTTERCUP

[fireemt97 0]

I'm sorry this has happened to you and this is why people think of the police the way they do. Do not let a bad apple make you think a all are like this. You did the right thing by keeping your cool. It is possible to get it into court. If they could the Rodney King tape into court, I'm sure a lawyer could find a way to get yours in. I have never tried to get someone firied up on a stop. This would be a safety issue, you never know what someone might do. I have never hated someone I have taken to jail, even the guy who was drunk and killed a man while driving. I thought he could have made a better decision then to drink and drive but he is a person.

SUCK IT UP BUTTERCUP

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

I have never hated someone I have taken to jail

That's something that people don't realize. If officers took anything in their job personally, they would burn out within a month, the suicide rate is already high enough in the LEO profession. Typically the ones that end up working using their personal emotions are the ones that loose it, I would venture to guess as in the case of Cloudseeker2001's supertrooper.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Armour666 0]

this is just bad !! the My city force here has had some bad icidents that would have resulted in inocent people doing some serious jail time and they come up with this? while I'm no fan of people making false complaints there has to be some checks and balnces and this is not one of them.

SO this one time at band camp.....

"Of all the things I've lost I miss my mind the most."

[SkyDekker 1,120]

Quote

That happens quite a bit actually.

Yup and it happens the other way around too....cops protecting cops, the brotherhood, the blue line or the blue wall. This would just remove one set of checks and balances in this system.

You may also want to check out McCormack's family relationship with the TPS and some of the history to shine some light on all of this.

[bigbearfng 9]

There was a court decision in liberal ca that let the individual deputy sue the false complaintant. Our county-San Bernardino-T stop, he cited her, she P formed him, said he said he'd let her go if she agreed to have sex with him.
And good deputy had his tape recorder running. It came to a lawsuit filed, and before it went too far the county counsel asked her lawyer if he'd like to hear the tape.....
Afterwards the deputy did get to sue the subject and won. Minimal amount that you could never collect anyway of course.
And being Ca. a subsequent court decision reversed the prior so we can no longer sue for malicious false accusations....of course!!!

And to the previous posters talking about cops trying to escalate situations...yes they do exist, rare but do exist. And I can assure you they do go down for it too. I always figure there is a camera rolling, plus my tape. Case in point Webb- guy with a phone cam was nearby. He's on trial right now for attempt manslaughter- do a search if you dont believe me-our county also. And the good cops don't care for those guys either, makes the job a lot harder!

[livetofall 0]

Did you read the second to last sentence.."unlawful arrest fo a person of color"? Talk about racial profiling..is ther a certain special way you need to arrest a person of color? I think right there explains why they might need this. I know i dont have to go anywhere with this, Imsure everyone notices today that if they speak of a criminal on the TV that was arrested and show no picture..guess who? White guys..allways a pic. Ive met alot more god cops than bad cops, and for some guy to lose 3 yrs of his job and pension to that is highway robbery. Your color doesnt decide whether you decide to be a criminal or not..just some groups glorify criminals acts...
listen to rap. If there is no penalty for false complaints..why not bog the courts down and take more polkce off the street..the criminals dream. I hope that passes. It would still allow for justifiable complaints.

www.911missinglinks.com the definitive truth of 9/11..the who and why, not how

You can handle the TRUTH www.theforbiddentruth.net

[Airman1270 0]

...I do not know where you are from cloudseeker but I think you are over doing it a little. Most police officers are not feeling their oats since 9/11...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

True. It's been going on much longer than that...

The problem with police/citizen relations is that the cops today routinely do things that were unthinkable 30 years ago. They think they have the right to stop people just to check them out, in the absence of any evidence a crime has been committed.

During my glorious radio career I spent over four years reading police reports on a daily basis. You would not believe how often they respond to a minor incident with an iron fist, making arrests when they could write tickets, searching automobiles without cause, and demanding to see ID from someone who is guilty of nothing more than walking along the roadside late at night.

Of course, look at it from their perspective: These guys grew up in a world of random locker searches and parking lot drug "sweeps" in high school. They assumed it was perfectly normal to have to take a piss test to join a sports team or get a job. Add to this a minimal amount of education regarding the nation's founding, the Bill of Rights, etc.

As they got older and began to pay attention to current events and political discussions, they learned that people like me who speak out about such things are "extremists" who probably have "something to hide" and need not be assigned credibility. They thought nothing unusual about grandstanding legislators passing new laws and inventing new crimes in an effort to prove how much they care about (insert issue du jour here.)

It's not that they hold your rights in contempt; more likely they have no clue they're violating them in the first place.

Police work, old days: Help people and chase bad guys.

Police work, today: Help people, chase bad guys, enforce liberalism, and hassle people for doing things that used to be okay.

Cheers,
Jon S.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Police work, today: .... enforce liberalism ...

Huh???
I'm going to have to think about that one for a while....

[AggieDave 6]

30 years ago police officers would routinely just kick someone's butt "if they needed it" instead of taking them to jail. You do that today and not only will you loose your job, you'll get sued.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Shawndiver 0]

Quote

30 years ago police officers would routinely just kick someone's butt "if they needed it" instead of taking them to jail. You do that today and not only will you loose your job, you'll get sued.

Absolutely. Ass whuppin without citation = no county revenue. Definitely a fireable offense!

_________________

[justinb138 0]

Quote

30 years ago police officers would routinely just kick someone's butt "if they needed it" instead of taking them to jail. You do that today and not only will you loose your job, you'll get sued.

Which is sad, because I think a good ass-kicking would be better for some people than a ticket or a night in jail.

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Quote

30 years ago police officers would routinely just kick someone's butt "if they needed it" instead of taking them to jail. You do that today and not only will you loose your job, you'll get sued.

Which is sad, because I think a good ass-kicking would be better for some people than a ticket or a night in jail.

Heh...back when I was a social worker, I called the Sheriff of some county...don't remember which one...about a child sexual abuse disclosure. I told the sheriff what we had learned, and he said, [Arkansas drawl] Well, I think I'm gonna have to pay him a visit. Take him out to the shed. [/Arkansas drawl]. Betcha he did too....

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[dorbie 0]

Quote

30 years ago police officers would routinely just kick someone's butt "if they needed it" instead of taking them to jail. You do that today and not only will you loose your job, you'll get sued.

Is that a tinge of regret I'm detecting?

Hopefully if you get caught doing that today you go to jail, badge or not. Getting sued should be the least of your worries. Wearing a uniform and assaulting someone is an aggravating circumstance IMHO. I wonder what kind of mentality it takes to want to be a cop then commit crimes like that, but I did know some bouncers once (some of them intelligent, one working towards med school) who liked fighting and would boast of beating up some customer or other they considered to be bad guys and they aspired to being cops. Funny enough that was in Texas.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Is that a tinge of regret I'm detecting?

Absolutely not.

Policing has changed drastically over the last 30 years. Its a much more professional organization with better training and harder requirements to get hired as well as licensed. To say the least, that side of policing has drastically changed for the better.

The advent of portable video recorders has also changed policing for the better. Literally 90% of all contact with the public is recorded by the officer, either audio, video or in most cases, both. The rest of the 10% is in many times recorded by the public. That has definately changed policing for the better. It helps people who would do harm in check, regardless on if their wear a badge or not.

Quote

I did know some bouncers once (some of them intelligent, one working towards med school) who liked fighting and would boast of beating up some customer or other they considered to be bad guys and they aspired to being cops. Funny enough that was in Texas.

Think about the requirements and the training required to be a bouncer. Basically none.

I will not discount that there are bad officers out there, just as I will not discout that there are bad people in society. Thankfully their careers in law enforcement, if they even get one started, are ungracefully short.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."