• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Habersham County Will Not Pay Medical Bills For Toddler Injured In Drug Raid

TeleKat

TeleKat

Banned
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
3,775
Location
Ask the NSA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Habersham County officials say they do not plan to pay for the medical expenses of a toddler seriously injured during a police raid. Bounkham Phonesavah, affectionately known as "Baby Boo Boo," spent weeks in a burn unit after a SWAT team's flash grenade exploded near his face. The toddler was just 19-months-old and asleep in the early morning hours of May 28. SWAT officers threw the device into his home while executing a search warrant for a drug suspect. Habersham County officials are defending their decision not to pay, but the child's family isn't giving up. After weeks of recovery at two different hospitals, Channel 2 Action News was there in July as the little boy walked out of a hospital with his family. He is doing better, but late Friday afternoon, his family's attorney told said the family’s medical bills are mounting. “But at this point, the county is refusing to pay,” said attorney Muwali Davis.
Click to expand...

County will not pay medical bills for toddler hurt in... | www.wsbtv.com

Wow, just wow.
 
The reply from the County was this:

Habersham County’s attorney provided the following statement, saying: "The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses. After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so."
Click to expand...

Seems the next course of action to end this is for someone to prove it is not illegal for the county to pay for this and pave the way forward.
 
TheNextEra said:
The reply from the County was this:

Seems the next course of action to end this is for someone to prove it is not illegal for the county to pay for this and pave the way forward.
Click to expand...

No, I think "the next course of action" is a lawsuit against the police department. Their legal team would probably encourage them to settle a filed lawsuit, but a lawsuit is probably the correct mechanism.
 
MaggieD said:
No, I think "the next course of action" is a lawsuit against the police department. Their legal team would probably encourage them to settle a filed lawsuit, but a lawsuit is probably the correct mechanism.
Click to expand...

If someone could prove that it isn't illegal for the county to pay, problem solved. The county is hiding behind this and if proven wrong they will have to pay.
 
TheNextEra said:
If someone could prove that it isn't illegal for the county to pay, problem solved. The county is hiding behind this and if proven wrong they will have to pay.
Click to expand...

The problem would not be solved. You are naive. They aren't even going to TRY to prove it's legal for the county to pay. The correct mechanism, and the one that will be initiated, is a lawsuit . . . for medical bills, pain and suffering.
 
MaggieD said:
The problem would not be solved. You are naive. They aren't even going to TRY to prove it's legal for the county to pay. The correct mechanism, and the one that will be initiated, is a lawsuit . . . for medical bills, pain and suffering.
Click to expand...

Ok I'm "naive" because I have a different perspective than you ok. :roll:

You go get em then. :roll:
 
Why is nobody mentioning the responsibility of the drug dealer in the house? After all, if they weren't allegedly dealing drugs, there would have been no raid.
 
Cephus said:
Why is nobody mentioning the responsibility of the drug dealer in the house? After all, if they weren't allegedly dealing drugs, there would have been no raid.
Click to expand...

They raided the wrong house! There was no drug dealer.
 
TeleKat said:
They raided the wrong house! There was no drug dealer.
Click to expand...

No, the drug dealer wasn't home at the time of the raid, at least from everything I've read. It was the correct house.
 
Cephus said:
No, the drug dealer wasn't home at the time of the raid, at least from everything I've read. It was the correct house.
Click to expand...

Well, the man wasn't there and they didn't even know there was a kid in the house. Sounds like they didn't know a damn thing about the house they were raiding. The attorney of the family even uncovered some evidence that the unit used faulty information to get the search warrant, simply so they could do the raid. You're right that it's not 100% certain it was the wrong house, I misread, but there's evidence out there that suggests it might have been the wrong house. That's why we have investigations.

With that said, since when did a search warrant grant you the ability to send a SWAT team to break into a house and wing grenades everywhere? Even if it was the right house, which we'll know after the investigation clears, they should still be held accountable for their careless actions. They weren't paying attention to where they were throwing it, they were acting with excessive force to begin with, and they didn't get enough information on the house before they acquired the warrant. The county should pay the medical bills at minimum.
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
No, the drug dealer wasn't home at the time of the raid, at least from everything I've read. It was the correct house.
Click to expand...

The people were visiting family because their other house burned down.

still it is the police's job to do due dilligence when executing a raid. they should have checked to make sure what they were doing.
that no innocent person was in the way.

there was plenty of evidence that a child or children were in the home.
i agree with maggie a lawsuit for medical bills and pain and suffering is the only way to settle this.
the drug dealer isn't going to pay anything as he was arrested later as he was kicked out of the house as soon as they found out what he was doing.

Baby in Coma After Police ‘Grenade’ Dropped in Crib During Drug Raid - ABC News
 
TeleKat said:
Well, the man wasn't there and they didn't even know there was a kid in the house. Sounds like they didn't know a damn thing about the house they were raiding. The attorney of the family even uncovered some evidence that the unit used faulty information to get the search warrant, simply so they could do the raid. You're right that it's not 100% certain it was the wrong house, I misread, but there's evidence out there that suggest it might have been the wrong house. That's why we have investigations.
Click to expand...

They were told by their informant, the one who bought drugs at the house, that there were no children present. The baby may not have been in the house at the time of the buy. It isn't like the police tip-toed into the room and purposely put the flash-bang grenade into the crib as a joke.

With that said, since when did a search warrant grant you the ability to send a SWAT team to break into a house and wing grenades everywhere? Even if it was the right house, which we'll know after the investigation clears, they should still be held accountable for their careless actions. They weren't paying attention to where they were throwing it, they were acting with excessive force, and they didn't get enough information on the house before they acquired the warrant. The county should pay the medical bills at minimum.
Click to expand...

They didn't wing grenades everywhere, they threw one. They fired it into the house from outside, from my understanding. You're just trying to blame the police when the real fault is with the drug dealer, or with the parents if they knew that there was drug dealing going on in the house. Who in their right mind allows their child to be in a drug den?
 
ludin said:
The people were visiting family because their other house burned down.

still it is the police's job to do due dilligence when executing a raid. they should have checked to make sure what they were doing.
that no innocent person was in the way.

there was plenty of evidence that a child or children were in the home.

i agree with maggie a lawsuit for medical bills and pain and suffering is the only way to settle this.

the drug dealer isn't going to pay anything as he was arrested later as he was kicked out of the house as soon as they found out what he was doing.
Click to expand...

Where is this evidence? I haven't seen it suggested in any of the stories I've read, which granted hasn't been a lot. From what I've read, their informant said there was no evidence of children in the house. Where is your evidence otherwise?
 
Cephus said:
Where is this evidence? I haven't seen it suggested in any of the stories I've read, which granted hasn't been a lot. From what I've read, their informant said there was no evidence of children in the house. Where is your evidence otherwise?
Click to expand...

the ladies SUV parked out front of the house with children stickers on the back and car seats in the seat. would be a dead give away to me.
evidently the police where not paying attention.

i edited it an included a link to a different story.
 
Cephus said:
They were told by their informant, the one who bought drugs at the house, that there were no children present. The baby may not have been in the house at the time of the buy.
Click to expand...

You're telling me that all evidence of a child magically disappeared as soon as the informant stepped into the house? Bottles, cribs, diapers, high-chairs, toys, everything? The purpose of an informant, is to get information. Obviously he did not do his job. It's not that hard to figure out if there are children living in a house.

They didn't wing grenades everywhere, they threw one. They fired it into the house from outside, from my understanding.
Click to expand...

Exactly, they tossed it in any general direction not caring where the **** it went. Also, why were they throwing a smoke grenade in there to begin with? They had a search warrant to search the house and there was no clear threat. I mean, the guy in question wasn't even there. Explain to me how a smoke grenade is necessary to searching a house.

You're just trying to blame the police when the real fault is with the drug dealer
Click to expand...

Since when does selling an addictive substance make you responsible for police carelessness and irresponsibility? Drug dealing does not warrant grenades blowing up in toddlers' faces. Just saying. The police ****ed up. I'm not saying they did it on purpose, but they ****ed up. They didn't get enough information, they used a smoke grenade when unnecessary, and didn't pay attention to where they were throwing it. Even you said they just kinda wung it in the house. They should pay for their carelessness. Being a cop does not make you immune to consequence. In no other career path would blatant carelessness be protected like police carelessness is.

 
TheNextEra said:
If someone could prove that it isn't illegal for the county to pay, problem solved. The county is hiding behind this and if proven wrong they will have to pay.
Click to expand...
You think it should be legal for the County board to just give any amount of money to individuals because they think it'd be a good idea? What would stop corrupt officials just giving all the public money to their friends or family? Sure, they'd be kicked out of office eventually but nothing else could be done and the money would be gone.

That's why a formal legal procedure is the correct way to address this, to clearly establish where the County has a responsibility to pay out and how much.
 
Cephus said:
Where is this evidence? I haven't seen it suggested in any of the stories I've read, which granted hasn't been a lot. From what I've read, their informant said there was no evidence of children in the house. Where is your evidence otherwise?
Click to expand...

The informant either failed to notice or more likely simply lied. The childs playpen was a hit by a flashbang throw from the doorway, meaning it would have been visible based on the informants story. Informants normally are coerced into getting "results" with threat of jail time, so they have every incentive to conceal information that would prevent the cops from doing a raid and getting them their get out of jail free card.

The bottom line is that the police acted completely inappropriately. They should have simply covered the exits to the house, knocked on the door and served a warrant. They were arresting someone for a minor drug charge, there was zero cause to start throwing around flashbangs unannounced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom