- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Michigan court rules okay for police to kill your dog
Posted on 12/25/16 at 12:30 pm to FalseProphet
Posted on 12/25/16 at 12:30 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
No one has posted the best part of the opinion yet, which may or may not be in the article I didn't click on.
Some turncoats in the department were going to testify for the dog owner that the police in that precinct take great pride in shooting dogs, to the point when an officer shoots a dog he gets a sticker on his locker as a badge of honor. Court: that's pretty bad, but it still doesn't make them responsible for shooting these two particular dogs.
At the very least this is willful destruction of private property.
1
Posted on 12/25/16 at 12:38 pm to SlapahoeTribe
Page 22 first full paragraph expressly states there was NO evidence of a tally. So...
ETA the above portion of the opinion:
Despite this evidence, we find that Plaintiffs failed to provide evidence showing that “the need” for a specific policy and/or training “was so obvious and the likelihood that the inadequacy would result in the violation of constitutional rights was so great that the [City] as an entity can be held liable here for the extent of [Plaintiffs’] determined damages.” Leach v. Shelby Cty. Sheriff, 891 F.2d 1241, 1248 (6th Cir. 1989). This is largely because there was no evidence indicating that participation in the tally system was systematic or widespread, and there was no evidence that the police department’s supervisory personnel sanctioned such a system or even knew of its existence.
LINK
ETA the above portion of the opinion:
Despite this evidence, we find that Plaintiffs failed to provide evidence showing that “the need” for a specific policy and/or training “was so obvious and the likelihood that the inadequacy would result in the violation of constitutional rights was so great that the [City] as an entity can be held liable here for the extent of [Plaintiffs’] determined damages.” Leach v. Shelby Cty. Sheriff, 891 F.2d 1241, 1248 (6th Cir. 1989). This is largely because there was no evidence indicating that participation in the tally system was systematic or widespread, and there was no evidence that the police department’s supervisory personnel sanctioned such a system or even knew of its existence.
LINK
This post was edited on 12/25/16 at 8:36 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News