• 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!

Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes?

Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes?


  • Total voters
    34
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Sorry, but this is one of the stupider ideas I have heard in a very long time. It would totally hamstring the police, who would be afraid to act fearing that some one might get off on a technicality and they end up screwed.

Absolutely agree. But it may be high time that people listened to each other...the police(mostly) are no longer "goons", the judges are no longer "perfect" (never were!!)..
Attitudes must improve.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

It is called an arrest charge. The D.A. can dismiss the case, but then again you could still be out of a job because some employers don't like to continue employing those who have been recently arrested.

Police can arrest you on suspicion of a crime. The courts determine whether there is enough evidence to proceed with a trial. If you employer fires you for being arrested, but not charged and tried for a crime, they're just opening themselves up to a massive lawsuit.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Well, if the incident that really pissed you off was actually an error then you will in all likelyhood be compensated. If you're looking to never ever work again it will be a long shot.

And, I hate to break the news to you but in lawsuits against the police, citizens who are on the jury are far more likely to side with police than they are with criminals.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

  • Just because you're found not guilty doesn't mean you were falsely arrested...nor does it mean you're innocent.

I am convinced that under US Federal Law and the American Constitution, being found not guilty means you're innocent. Remember, innocent until proven guilty.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

I am convinced that under US Federal Law and the American Constitution, being found not guilty means you're innocent.

all that being found "not guilty" means is that the prosecution did not present a compelling enough case to convince 12 people that you did it, beyond a reasonable doubt.

under the law, "not guilty" =/= "innocent"
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

I am convinced that under US Federal Law and the American Constitution, being found not guilty means you're innocent. Remember, innocent until proven guilty.

That is not how she meant it. Innocent in the eyes of the law, and innocent as in you did not do it, are two different things.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

That is not how she meant it. Innocent in the eyes of the law, and innocent as in you did not do it, are two different things.

that is why the verdict is officially given as "not guilty", instead of "innocent"
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

No, police shouldn't have to pay out of pocket for wrongfully charged crimes. Should they take a gamble every time they decide to act? I can't support this.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

In general, would you agree with a new law that requires individual police officers to pay, out of their own pockets, all costs that accrue from a false or wrongfully charged crime?

After all, if the individual suspect is eventually cleared of the charges, it doesn't mean they're not affected by being charged with a false crime. They have to pay the lawyer fees and they may even lose their jobs because of such charges. And without such a law, they're forced to eat all costs despite the fact that the charges have been dropped or dismissed.

I know I was pissed when the cops pulled me over and charged me with a false crime. I was on my way to work and I could have lost my job. Thank God I didn't, but I did lose a day's worth of pay and that isn't cheap. My lawyer's fees are also not cheap and if since I'm completely innocent, why is it my obligation to just eat the costs? If not the police officers, perhaps the courts should retrospectively pay all my costs that I've accrued thanks to their ridiculous laws and incompetent enforcers.

If we held them liable for their own wrongdoings, perhaps it would provide a crucial incentive for them to prevent any future wrongdoing.

No, but they probably should be repremanded in some way. Anything from unpaid suspension to being fired. The cops do need to be controlled for sure, any and all branches of the government must be controlled. We don't take it seriously now and I think that's why we start seeing the attitude and actions now that are so previlant amongst cops. I don't know if we should make them pay out of pocket; but they do need to be punished particularly for wrongful arrests. They have too much power and have stopped being challenged so they think they can do whatever they want. Gotta reel that dog in, make it understand who the real master is.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

No, but they probably should be repremanded in some way. Anything from unpaid suspension to being fired. The cops do need to be controlled for sure, any and all branches of the government must be controlled. We don't take it seriously now and I think that's why we start seeing the attitude and actions now that are so previlant amongst cops. I don't know if we should make them pay out of pocket; but they do need to be punished particularly for wrongful arrests. They have too much power and have stopped being challenged so they think they can do whatever they want. Gotta reel that dog in, make it understand who the real master is.

Please give us an example of a wrongful arrest.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

I am convinced that under US Federal Law and the American Constitution, being found not guilty means you're innocent. Remember, innocent until proven guilty.

Under the law, yes because one is innocent unless proven guilty.

However, the person has not been proven to be innocent. They've simply been proven to be not guilty. There's a difference between literal speaking and legal speaking.

The government comes from a stance that everyone is innocent, so there's no need to prove innocence. Due to that however, the courts do not directly proclaim someone as "innocent" but as simply "not guilty". In some cases, the level to be "not guilty" could have every person strongly believing you're guilty but not enough to bypass a reasonable doubt. Legally, that would mean you're not guilty and in a legal sense guilt and innocence are binary...0 and 1...guilty or innocent. In a realistic and literal sense, anyone that understands or looks are our legal code can understand that's not the case and that there is grey area between the two.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

I am convinced that under US Federal Law and the American Constitution, being found not guilty means you're innocent. Remember, innocent until proven guilty.

You are wrong. Being found not guilty doesn't even mean you won't lose a civil lawsuit for the same conduct. Just because the state couldn't meet the standard of ""proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not necessarily mean one is innocent.

A jury's choice is Guilty or Not Guilty. It isn't Guilty or Innocent.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Please give us an example of a wrongful arrest.

Here's the story of the Hurricane
The man the authorities came to blame
For something that he never done
Locked in a prison cell but one time
He could have been the champion of the world
 
Re:

Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

If its found out that they deliberately lied then sure those police officers should loose their job and pay any costs. The question is how do you prove that they lied. Charges being dropped or dismissed does not mean the police deliberately lied or knowingly tried to charge you with a crime you didn't do.
 
Re:

There is no law that says you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is a precept that is often followed but it isn't a law. It also isn't reality. I worked a case where a college student was stabbed to death by a stranger. The stranger had possession of the bloody knife, clothing saturated with the victims blood, and he confessed. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity. He certainly wasn't innocent. And, six months later when the hospital said, "It's a miracle. He's all better," that wasn't justice either. Actually, the hospital actually said they had no reason to believe he was ever insane and the hired experts had conned the court.

Anyway, there is no law concerning innocent until proven guilty and an acquital means the state did not prove their case beyond a resonable doubt. It does not mean the defendant isn't guilty as sin.

And that doesn't address the use of the exclusionary priniciple where all evidence may be supressed over an error resulting in a clearly guilty defendant giggling and going free. Does the name William Ayers ring a bell. He's quoted as saying, "Guilty as sin...free as a bird," and laughing.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Ok, I'm done answering alot of your questions Elijah.

Did I ask you to answer them? You're certainly not the all-knowing Guru that I look toward for answers.

It seems to me that every single thread that I have ever seen you post in regards to the law, police, and court system is all about "poor <insert your percieved victim here>".

I'm so sorry If I'm so quick to take the side of individual liberty over government. I'm not victimizing anyone, however, but merely demanding that the courts take responsibility for their own failures and misdoings. You're the one making victims out of people shouldn't be seen as such, like drug addicts and alcoholics.

You really come across as someone who wants anarchy.

Calling a libertarian an anarchist is a lot like calling a democrat a communist and a republican, a nazi. After a while, it gets old and starts to wreck of McCarthyism.

I've argued with people like that before and I've gotta tell you, it is NEVER satisfying to do so. It is much like argueing with John Lear about there being snow capped mtns and lakes and breathable air on the far side of the moon.

And in case you don't believe me about him....

Link

And yes...I HAVE argued with him about it.

Then by all means, STOP replying to my posts. Despite the fact that we may agree on certain things, I find you to be one of the least interesting people on DP. I'm sure you feel the same about me, so leave my threads alone. The only thing more stupid than wasting your time on an argument you loathe is to know that you're wasting your time. So save your energy for someone else.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Of course not, it would weaken the police extremely, their effectiveness would go down tremendously, and it would hinder their ability to pursue cases.

And what about the courts? Should they pay for the damages associated with a wrongful arrest and/or absolved charge?
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

  • Police officers should not be held personally responsible for discharging their duties within the confines of those duties and responsibilities.
  • Just because the state decides not to prosecute doesn't mean you were falsely arrested...nor does it mean you are innocent.
  • Just because you're found not guilty doesn't mean you were falsely arrested...nor does it mean you're innocent.
  • Everything that happens to you is not recompensable. There is cost to living life.

Yes, but that cost should not come from the authoritative grip of a government's hand.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Worse than risking police not pursuing suspects is the idea that a police officer, once he arrests someone, may work with his fellow officers, who one day may be in the same position and will want the favor returned, to plant evidence or do other illegal actions, such as writing false reports, to ensure that his suspect is in fact found guilty.

Please allow me to refer you to Frank Serpico:


When the massive scale of corruption was discovered, there was no such law (as the one I'm proposing) in existence.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

really? do you really not get it? WTF dude, why do you have such a hard on for the cops?

I have the hard on? You're the former cop. If anyone here is sucking black & white dick, it isn't me. :) No offense.

Anyone smell bacon?
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Being found "Not Guilty" is not necessarily the same as being "innocent" and therefore "Wrongfully" charged. How exactly would you define "wrongfully charged"? Are you meaning anyone that is charged with a crime and found to have not had sufficient evidence to be convicted?

Well, let me see, if there's not enough evidence to convict you of a crime, does that mean you should have been tried in the first place? Are we all suspects of a crime until proven not guilty?
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

I have the hard on? You're the former cop. If anyone here is sucking black & white dick, it isn't me. :) No offense.

Anyone smell bacon?

What a mature reply? I'm out of here. With your level of maturity I'm assuming you will run afoul of the law again.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Please allow me to refer you to Frank Serpico:


When the massive scale of corruption was discovered, there was no such law (as the one I'm proposing) in existence.


And this massive corruption is where?

Seriously, there is no guarantee in the constitution that the occasional mistake might not happen. It will. It sucks, but that is just the way it is, and it is a whole lot better than making random changes to a working system.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

Police can arrest you on suspicion of a crime. The courts determine whether there is enough evidence to proceed with a trial. If you employer fires you for being arrested, but not charged and tried for a crime, they're just opening themselves up to a massive lawsuit.

Only in the eyes of a progressive attorney. Employers own their businesses and can pretty much drop you for whatever reason they feel necessary, with the exception of disability and pregnancy.
 
Re: Should individual police officers pay out-of-pocket for wrongfully charged crimes

And what about the courts? Should they pay for the damages associated with a wrongful arrest and/or absolved charge?

No, it would just make prosecutorial misconduct more, and more prevalent because there would even be more pressure on them to get a conviction. This would undermine our whole court system.
 
Back
Top Bottom