Qualified immunity refused in wrong address case

[vantec08]

http://www.kcbd.com/story/18169737/judge-refuses-to-toss-out-elderly-mans-lawsuit-against-lubbock-police

next . . . .. some mandatory punitive damages (one hopes)

[dominic]

"qualified immunity" is meant to protect officials from being sued unless they're incompetent or knowingly in violation of the law.

I would say that going to the wrong address qualifies as incompetence.

The judge ruled that there are too many disputed facts to allow the officer to have qualified immunity. The judge was very clear to say in his ruling that he was not deciding who was right or wrong, only that the case has factual disputes and therefore the lawsuit stays on track to be presented to a jury.

[vantec08]

Dam right dominic. It is way past time for some judge, somewhere, to step up to the plate and say NO.

[glbtrottr]

outstanding...

[OleCuss]

Not enough particulars for me to find it too awesome or otherwise.

But it is interesting. . .

[vantec08]

Not enough particulars for me to find it too awesome or otherwise.

But it is interesting. . .

Police were at the WRONG address. That much is established.

[littlejake]

The immunity we need to nullify is that given to the legislature and governor. Author, vote for, or pass a law that is found unconstitutional, lose immunity and pay civil damages to all who were harmed by the law.

[Mute]

Kudos to this judge for finally thinking through one of these cases instead of just falling back to the default position.

[morfeeis]

http://www.kcbd.com/story/18169737/j...lubbock-police

next . . . .. some mandatory punitive damages (one hopes)

This put such a smile on my face, thank you vantec!

[OleCuss]

Police were at the WRONG address. That much is established.

No argument on that.

But is it possible that as the information develops in court that qualified immunity may be granted at a later stage?

I just don't know.

[Lives_In_Fresno]

"qualified immunity" is meant to protect officials from being sued unless they're incompetent or knowingly in violation of the law.

I would say that going to the wrong address qualifies as incompetence.

Yeah, possibly. They didn't go to the wrong block, or city. They went next door, which seems to mean 10 feet away (but we don't know this, obviously. It was an apartment that the older gentleman was in, after all.).

We don't know many of the facts, and the article doesn't talk about what the disputed facts are (except for who shot first).

[AEC1]

I Love it when law enforcement Officers are held to the laws. It so pisses me off that LEO's dont use turn signals and routinely look the other way when witnessing people speeding. If the law says 65, then it should be enforced at that. I know they dont enforce till 70+ but..

ok ok I am not going to thread jack and start a flame war....

[bwiese]

The immunity we need to nullify is that given to the legislature and governor. Author, vote for, or pass a law that is found unconstitutional, lose immunity and pay civil damages to all who were harmed by the law.

Whoa, but that might offend the Prop 8 anti-rights people.

[SilverBulletZ06]

I have no problem with this. If we hold health care workers to the standard of "right person, right meds, right time, right method" then I'm pretty sure we can hold police to the standard of "ensure you have the right address".

[Munk]

Whoa, but that might offend the Prop 8 anti-rights people.

Good thing no one has a right to not be offended.