> Regarding a proposed brutality settlement, Eva Young wrote: > > > > If this is just a "family business" as Barb Johnson said - how is it > that the settlement proposed is so high? This would suggest the city > lawyers are totally incompetent. > Terrell Brown: [TB] What I don't understand is why the City continues to pay for cops > misbehaving but doesn't fire the cops whose behavior results in paying > the settlements. > > If the behavior is so egregious that it merits payment, it is egregious > enough to justify termination of the particular officer(s)' employment > by the City of Minneapolis.
Mark Anderson responds: Nothing new here. Don't you recall when SSB tried to fire Mike Sauro? He was responsible for two very large settlements against the city. A judge threw out the case, as I recall. Some time ago on this List I asked why it was so hard to fire thumpers? Is it because of restrictions in the contract we have with the Police Federation, or was it just common law relating to employee's rights? The silence was deafening, so I assume no one here knew the answer. I do think part of the problem is that the city often agrees to pay settlements when the facts aren't totally clear, because of the risk of losing even bigger in the courtroom. But I can see how those same unclear facts would make it impossible to pin guilt on the officer involved. So the city loses both ways. Maybe we should go to court more often, so we can achieve true resolution. Mark V Anderson Bancroft REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
