A Federal Judge has ordered that the James Chasse jr. trial be split in two this morning, between the individual police officers and the training policies of the City of Portland, in a move that could drastically affect the outcome of the case.
Chasse Family Attorney Tom Steenson: Determined before court today…
Federal Judge Garr King this morning approved the city’s motion to bifurcate the case, splitting it into two trials, one to decide whether Officer Christopher Humphreys, Sergeant Kyle Nice, and Sheriff’s Deputy Brett Burton were liable for Chasse’s death, and whether the city was also liable for disability discrimination, negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and a separate trial to decide whether the city was responsible for Chasse’s death by failing to adequately train and supervise those officers. There’s lengthy analysis after the jump.
While the city and county will end up paying for damages in both trials, the decision to split the case in two is controversial, since Steenson has been arguing all along that the city and its cops were dually responsible for what happened. There’s a chance that with the cases split in two, the cops will be able to point fingers, saying they were following the city’s training policy and procedure.
Importantly, Judge King granted the motion to bifurcate the case based on the city’s assurance that it will not rely on a “qualified immunity” defense. In other words, Officers Humphreys, Nice and Burton, do not plan to argue that they are immune from prosecution because the law, and the city’s policies, did not explicitly prohibit them from handling Chasse the way they did. Often, police officers use the qualified immunity defense to avoid prosecution in cases like these. For example, a boiled-down qualified immunity defense is: “You didn’t tell me I couldn’t hit him in the head with my fist.” That’s different, technically, from arguing that they were following procedure—the crux is in “explicitly forbidding” certain behavior, in a qualified immunity defense.
It’s likely that the city would prefer to split the cases in two so that Steenson is less able to show a jury that the officers involved are representative of the systemic failure of the police bureau to train and adequately supervise its officers. Strategically, it makes the case harder for Steenson to win by breaking it down into smaller, less emotionally loaded chunks. But waiving the qualified immunity defense also places the individual officers at higher risk of being found liable for what happened in the first trial.
It’s also arguable that the policy and training issues won’t distract a jury from the facts in the case.
Judge King also denied the city’s motion for summary judgment to dismiss injunctive relief in the case today. Essentially, the city was arguing that if it is found guilty of causing Chasse’s death through lack of proper procedures, by, for example, ignoring one of the key recommendations of the 2004 Parc Report to raise the level of impact strikes to the head, sternum and ribs to “deadly force” level, it shouldn’t have to do anything to change its policies and procedures after the trial. Judge King said it’s way too early to tell.
Chasse’s father, brother, and mother were in court today. So was Sheriff’s Deputy Brett Burton.
Chasse’s father, James Senior: Walks into court this morning…
Before court this morning, Steenson said: “The Chasse family has been very committed to seeing that the city makes changes to its policies and procedures.” On the bifurcation, he said the city and individuals’ responsibility “should not be separate,” and he is likely to be disappointed by today’s outcome.
The case continues. Currently a trial date is set for September 2009, although Judge King this morning talked about moving for an earlier trial, possibly in early 2009. You can also find out more about the case here.
What’s the cost to the City of defending this case to date? Does the City Auditor have a role to play as a judge of best defense for the dollar?
With this change to “bifurcate” the case, how does this impact the ability of the plaintiff to present the case evenly? Sounds like a much greater financial risk for them.
Any JDs out there care to speculate?
There are some cases that the city cannot afford to settle. I would imagine in a case like this the city would not want to admit any liability because of how it would negatively impact the relationship between the city and the police officers [ and perhaps more importantly the union]. Imagine the reaction of Robert King and your average cop if the city admitted that Humphreys and the other officers screwed up.
Sometimes it may be useful to take a case to trial because the long term impact from additional copycat plaintiff or other non-economic harms [disgruntled cops] is worth more than the cost of extensive litigation. In other words, you can’t simply look at the amount of dollars the city is spending on the case, you have to value the other non-economic concerns as well.
with justice-minded jurors hopefully to
hear this case, then surely Humphreys,
Nice, and Burton will be made HOMELESS
and have to roam the city like the very
people they like to “kick when they’re
down” and get a taste of their own doings
…it’s only JUSTICE after all!
I, like so many others in my residence,
pray that we’re selected for Jury Duty to
hear this case…either the copsters or
the City…both will pay till they’ve
broke as the Punitive Damages is really
at the discretion of the jury, whereas
the actual damages is haggled via the
proceedings. Punitive Damages will rule
the day…wait and see, and then
join in the shout…”Humphreys, Nice and
Burton are HOMELESS roamers cause the
Chasse Family will own their homes…”
Here’s a good one to ponder: once Burton, Humphreys and Nice are homeless and roaming the streets of Portland, will they dare to piss on the streets, for it was their contention–on some similar nonsense–that it was their “training” and “procedures” that they followed–seemingly to the letter–that set up such a train wreck that happened. Will they dare to piss knowing their erstwhile peers at PoPo were “trained” the same way and would use the same lame defense in stomping them should they piss on the sidewalk? Interesting thinking arises, does it not?
Their is no amount of money that will bring this man back form death. Whats at cost is the accountability of our public servants.
It is obvious to the average citizen that the police are never charged with asualt or attempted murder event hough their intentions and behavior suggests they deserve the same treatment that a DA puts on the average citizen.
Not a Good Queer on Google
“444zot7sdz”
what’s up dude? we just don’t “get it”
and seek your further clarifications..?