7-Year-Old Handcuffed Over Lunch Money by Police

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.thenewyorkworld.com/2012/...awsuits-surge/

Lawsuits against the city’s police soared to a record 2,004 cases entering the courts in the year that ended July 1.


That’s a 28 percent increase over the previous fiscal year, as recorded in the recently released Mayor’s Management Report. It indicates that the flood of cases brought against the New York City police — which have seen a 63 percent rise over the last decade — has not subsided.


Because cases against the NYPD can take at least two to three years to conclude, a spike now means that payouts for court judgments and settlements are likely to squeeze the city budget in coming years.


City Councilmember Peter Vallone, Jr., who chairs the council Public Safety Committee, contends that too many cases gets settled regardless of actual wrongdoing, and that the Law Department should be taking even more to trial.


“Their policy is to settle way too many cases,” said Vallone about the Law Department. “If the Corporation Counsel only settled cases where the police department were wrong, the police could learn a bunch of stuff from that. But if they settle for reasons unknown, then it makes it much harder for police to know.”


To save millions of dollars down the road, the city’s approach to police claims, said Vallone, should be “settle when you’re guilty, learn from it, and fight like hell if you’re not.”

http://queenscourier.com/2013/claims...pd-up-in-2012/

Councilmember Peter Vallone, chair of the Public Safety Committee, defended the NYPD. Vallone said claims against cops surge when the Corporation Counsel of the city’s Law Department settles too many “nuisance” cases regardless of merit.


“The Corporation Counsel settles everything, and they settle for reasons that have nothing to do with guilt or innocence,” he said.

“When you settle cases when the police are not doing anything wrong, it’s going to lead to more and more cases and more tax money being wasted.”

Well, there you go, bitch. Two independent sources confirming EVERYTHING I've said.

Now why would I take a bet where any payout, no matter how small, would make me the loser, when it's well known to anyone with a brain (which disqualifies you) that the city hands out nominal payments on huge lawsuits to make them disappear?

The terms I offered were more than fair. Now grow a pair and take the bet, or admit your epic pussy status.

Oh, the epic pwnage!

Please mark in red above, the specific mention of this case, where it says this case specifically will disappear as you claimed it would. Do that, and you can claim victory. If not, your still a pussy know nothing who posts family reunion pictures when he gets flustered.

[taft2012]

Please mark in red above, the specific mention of this case, where it says this case specifically will disappear as you claimed it would. Do that, and you can claim victory. If not, your still a pussy know nothing who posts family reunion pictures when he gets flustered.

Please pay attention pussyboy....

I said this affirms what I said about the city commonly paying off nuisance lawsuits against the police regardless of whether or not the police actually committed any misconduct. It further affirms what I said about cases averaging 5 to 10 years to resolve. It further affirms what I said about nominal payouts being made to make nuisance cases disappear.

I didnt' say these stories are speaking specifically about this particular case, and if that shoddy strawman is the best you can muster at this point, you may as well just run up the white flag.

I've proven what I meant about "disappear"... now it's time for you to show a bit of testicular fortitude. Put up or shut up, bitch.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Please mark in red above, the specific mention of this case, where it says this case specifically will disappear as you claimed it would. Do that, and you can claim victory. If not, your still a pussy know nothing who posts family reunion pictures when he gets flustered.

Please pay attention pussyboy....

I said this affirms what I said about the city commonly paying off nuisance lawsuits against the police regardless of whether or not the police actually committed any misconduct. It further affirms what I said about cases averaging 5 to 10 years to resolve. It further affirms what I said about nominal payouts being made to make nuisance cases disappear.

I didnt' say these stories are speaking specifically about this particular case, and if that shoddy strawman is the best you can muster at this point, you may as well just run up the white flag.

I've proven what I meant about "disappear"... now it's time for you to show a bit of testicular fortitude. Put up or shut up, bitch.

Immaterial.

This nonsense does nothing to prove your contention that this particular story will disappear. Now, either you can prove it, or you cannot. Since you're too much of a pussy to bet your posting rights, you obviously cannot prove your statement.

Put up or shut up, bitch.

[taft2012]

Immaterial.

This nonsense does nothing to prove your contention that this particular story will disappear. Now, either you can prove it, or you cannot. Since you're too much of a pussy to bet your posting rights, you obviously cannot prove your statement.

Put up or shut up, bitch.

You made an assumption on what I meant, and when I explained what "disappear" means in NYC regarding lawsuits, and provided ample evidence to support that, you backpedaled in the most transparently chicken-shitted manner imaginable.

Now that your chickenshit status is apparent to all, let's continue.

Of what purpose would this wager be? If 5-10 years down the road, NYC gives this woman a check for $30,000 to "just go away", equaling less than 1/10 of 1% of what she sued for...

.... and that payments of that sort are commonly made regardless of any impropriety, illegal, or outside guidelines behavior on the part of the police (established fact)....

.... then, what exactly is the point of the wager?

And finally, how are you coming along on that project to identify any illegal, improper, or outside the guidelines behavior on the part of the police in this matter?

[Marcus Aurelius]

You made an assumption on what I meant...

no, I took your exact words and expected you to abide by them. That appears to be a mistake with you, as you change the meaning of your own words like the rest of us change underwear.

[taft2012]

no, I took your exact words and expected you to abide by them. That appears to be a mistake with you, as you change the meaning of your own words like the rest of us change underwear.

Yes, you knew precisely what I meant by "disappear"... even after I've provided irrefutable evidence to support what I meant.

So what do you presume to be the basis for the success of this lawsuit?

In order to be successful they would have to demonstrate some behavior by the police that was illegal, improper, or outside the guidelines which was...?

[Marcus Aurelius]

Yes, you knew precisely what I meant by "disappear"... even after I've provided irrefutable evidence to support what I meant.

So what do you presume to be the basis for the success of this lawsuit?

In order to be successful they would have to demonstrate some behavior by the police that was illegal, improper, or outside the guidelines which was...?

please show me the post where I said the lawsuit would be successful, dip-shit.

YOU claimed it would disappear, I said it would not. I don't recall saying the suit would be successful.

Your spin is amusing, but furthers your FAIL with each post you make.

[taft2012]

please show me the post where I said the lawsuit would be successful, dip-shit.

That's true enough. It's tough trying to figure out WTF you're talking about at this point.

Are you saying Wilson's mother has a case? Or that she doesn't have a case?

Or that she might have a case? What might that case be based on?

[Marcus Aurelius]

Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

please show me the post where I said the lawsuit would be successful, dip-shit.

That's true enough. It's tough trying to figure out WTF you're talking about at this point.

Are you saying Wilson's mother has a case? Or that she doesn't have a case?

Or that she might have a case? What might that case be based on?

I accept your capitulation. Please, be gracious in your defeat. Take it like a man.

[taft2012]

I accept your capitulation. Please, be gracious in your defeat. Take it like a man.

A question is a capitulation in your world?

Don't expect me to end this, this is waaaaay too entertaining.