Victim Sued By Criminal

[gmark340]

Sometimes people post about this jokingly, but when it happens it's no joke. Even if the suit fails, the defendant will have incurred the costs of defense and time. Citizen's arrests lack the limited immunity that covers the police so a criminal can always take a shot (no pun intended) and sue, hoping to be paid something for nuisance value, at a minimum, or to get the insurance coverage of the defendant, if any applies in the case of deliberate acts, to pay off.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...T?SITE=1010WINS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Jul 30, 3:13 PM EDT

Inmate sues man he's convicted of burglarizing

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) -- A Florida inmate is suing the man he's convicted of burglarizing, claiming the man and two others roughed him up during a citizen's arrest. Michael Dupree is serving a 12-year sentence for burglary and cocaine possession stemming from a 2007 break-in of a van in St. Petersburg. Dupree allegedly stole a bicycle locked inside and was apprehended after the owner, Anthony McKoy, saw him with the bike down the street.

Dupree said McKoy and two others pointed a gun at him, handcuffed him and placed a knee painfully in his back. He's seeking $500,000 for disabilities and distress suffered during the takedown.

Dupree filed the civil lawsuit on his own, without the help of an attorney.

After being served with the suit, McKoy said, "I thought it was a joke. I'm the victim."
---
Information from: St. Petersburg Times, http://tampabay.com
© 2010 The Associated Press.

 

[Kleanbore]

One very very good reason to not try to effect a citizen's arrest.

Where I live, arresting someone after he had committed a crime that I had not witnessed would land me in jail even without the issue of excessive force.

Add that to the fact that the person or persons effecting such an arrest (or the community, if the arrest was made by sworn officers) are completely liable for any injuries sustained by the detainee during detention and--well, its just not a good idea at all.

One has to wonder just what these guys were thinking.

Probably too much television....

 

[JellyJar]

Counter sue the criminal for $1,000,000.00 plus court costs.

 

[Kleanbore]

Counter sue the criminal for $1,000,000.00 plus court costs.

Basis? You have to have standing and you must be able to substantiate an amount for damages. And suppose you did, and suppose you could? Think that guy has any money? No. Big waste of your time, emotions, and cash balance.

A lot of people seem to view civil suits as some kind of punitive undertaking in which one can scream "sue" and name the price and go in and wreak havoc. Not so. I have yet to ever meet either a plaintiff or a defendant who was satisfied with the process, the cost, or the results of a civil suit.

Now, if you get hurt, or lose income, go for it. But you won't be happy.

The burglar here won't be happy either, but the guys who put him in cuffs most surely won't. Matter of fact, they're lucky they haven't been charged with having committed crimes. Maybe the state law there wouldn't require that, but they would in a lot of places.

I cannot imagine any reason for a civilian to own handcuffs. They're nothing but trouble even if you do not get injured while tying to use them.

 

[mljdeckard]

Yep. Rule #1 of litigation. Never sue poor people.

 

[Gouranga]

In NC, this is not an issue as we have no authority to citizens arrest. You end the threat, period. In that case, hurling him out the front door if he is unarmed is allowed. Should be have a weapon though, he is toast.

 

[G.A.Pster]

This is why if you ever have to shoot someone you might as well emty the mag and insure they're dead, dead men tell no tales and file no lawsuits.

 

[wishin]

Fight it as a frivilous lawsuit and sue for legal fees.

 

[Cosmoline]

Anyone can sue anyone for anything. A suit is not a judgment. It's often a very long way from a judgment. And there are steps that can be taken to stamp out this sort of thing.

I did a pro bono case last year where the rapist sued his victim, believe it or not. On my motion, the court dismissed the suit and put him under a permanent restraining order barring him from any further suits without court approval. A number of states have approved similar procedures. Up here we also have a "loser pays" system that acts as a check against frivolous suits.

 

[mljdeckard]

I'm a BIG fan of loser pays.

 

[Robert Wilson]

Cosmoline, I have heard that inmates sometimes use lawsuits almost as a hobby. Do you know if there is any truth in it?

 

[Kleanbore]

This is why if you ever have to shoot someone you might as well emty the mag and insure they're dead, dead men tell no tales and file no lawsuits.

Do not be misled. The forensic evidence tells tales, and estates file lawsuits. Remember the successful suit filed by the Goldman family?

However, that's all beside the point. There was no shooting in the case at hand--just a citizen's arrest. The suit apparently has to do with a claim of excessive force. Had anyone been killed, it would have been a suit for wrongful death. That in addition to obvious murder charges.

 

[Buck Snort]

This is why if you ever have to shoot someone you might as well emty the mag and insure they're dead, dead men tell no tales and file no lawsuits.

Sometimes we need to exercise prudent restraint with what we post on the internet. Everything we post can be reclaimed and (possibly) used against us in a court of law.

 

[scythefwd]

G.A.Pster - dead men don't tell tales... that is correct. They also don't file lawsuits, but their families do. On occasion, the families win.

 

[Oyeboten]

With the advent of Cell Phones, it is easy to be in communication with 911 Dispatch, while monitoring the on-going route or path or other developments relating to a suspect one has seen committing a burglary or other propety crime.

Intervening in property related Crimes, when it is not one's own Property, is easily kinda dicey unless working 'with' dispatch to keep them posted on what the suspect is doing, while the Cops are on their way.

Many problems can occur trying to forcibly detain a suspect.

 

[mustang_steve]

Never detain...he should have performed some recon while coordinationg with police.....let them know where the guy is.

NEVER detain....that is very risky water, and very likely to backfire. If you need to shoot, just shoot....but in this case they chased the thief down, which meant he was fleeing initially, so the use of a firearm was unjustified as they in essence prolonged the situation (in FL you CANNOT use a firearm to protect property, the car part of stand your ground is an occupied vehicle).

As messed up as it is, the crook has a fighting chance on this.

 

[Bighouse Doc]

Inmates do like to file lawsuits.

It is however rare, that attorney's represent them. I suspect they don't like to lose.

Most inmates hand write their own court papers in the prison Law Library.

Almost all of them are meritless get dismissed when confronted by a real attorney.

 

[shootistpd27]

Thank God that I live in Mississippi. Here we have the castle doctrine and according to state law, folks that are killed, or injured breaking into your castle are not allowed to sue. I know in Alabama if you have in any way, contributed to the situation for which you are suing, that you are not allowed to sue either. I hate to say it but it makes sense that if they break in, go ahead and make sure the coroner comes and gets them, dead men dont sue and make horrible witnesses against you. And no, this statement was not politically correct. All complaints should be addressed to your local waste receptacle.

 

[valorius]

One very very good reason to not try to effect a citizen's arrest.

Where I live, arresting someone after he had committed a crime that I had not witnessed would land me in jail even without the issue of excessive force.

Add that to the fact that the person or persons effecting such an arrest (or the community, if the arrest was made by sworn officers) are completely liable for any injuries sustained by the detainee during detention and--well, its just not a good idea at all.

One has to wonder just what these guys were thinking.

Probably too much television....

I think they were thinking, "Hey, that scumbag stole my bike, and i'm getting it back."

***...

I cannot imagine any reason for a civilian to own handcuffs. They're nothing but trouble even if you do not get injured while tying to use them.

Cops are civilians. And your sex life must be pretty boring.

With the advent of Cell Phones, it is easy to be in communication with 911 Dispatch, while monitoring the on-going route or path or other developments relating to a suspect one has seen committing a burglary or other propety crime.

Intervening in property related Crimes, when it is not one's own Property, is easily kinda dicey unless working 'with' dispatch to keep them posted on what the suspect is doing, while the Cops are on their way.

Many problems can occur trying to forcibly detain a suspect.

Where i live response time for a stolen bicycle call would be about, oh....they wouldn't even show up.

We had a pitbull running lose acting threatening and growling at kids last year, the cops were called by about 10 different households over and over for 4 hours. They never came.

We ended up dealing with the issue ourselves.

When you have seconds to act, cops are just minutes (or hours if you live in a bad area) away.

Sometimes men have to act for their own good, or they're not men at all, but sheep.

 

[Shopping A Round]

I'm calling bluff Valorius. Without pictures, you're just dragging us along.

Check out Gerald's Game by Stephen King where a situation with hand cuffs can go horribly.



Sorry for off topic.

 

[LibShooter]

Thank God that I live in Mississippi. Here we have the castle doctrine...

I'm not sure the Castle Doctrine would help much if you chased a guy down the street, tackled him and roughed him. That's what happened here.

If the bad guy is running away, even with my stuff, I would consider that a successful conclusion to an interaction with the criminal element. The last thing I want to do is run after him to extend the interaction.

 

[ONLY]

I carry a pair of handcuffs in my truck for my job. Im not law enforcment but a bail agent. Would I arrest some one other than those who have missed court not no but h*ll no! That is asking for trouble. Now if you run into a situation where your out in the sticks like me and some one just commited a heinous crime against me or my family. There is alot of swamps around here.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by shootistpd27: Thank God that I live in Mississippi. Here we have the castle doctrine and according to state law, folks that are killed, or injured breaking into your castle are not allowed to sue.

Irrelevant. The guy here was not injured while breaking in.

I hate to say it but it makes sense that if they break in, go ahead and make sure the coroner comes and gets them,...

You don't want to do that. If you lawfully use deadly force, the perp may die, but he may not; 80-90% of people shoot by handguns survive. If the evidence indicates that you fired to kill after stopping the perp, you'll see both criminal charges and civil suits.

...dead men dont sue and make horrible witnesses against you.

The estates of dead men sue all the time. Forensic evidence is likely more to be credible than the testimony of a burglar.

And no, this statement was not politically correct.

Not only that (and that's not really important at all), but in the event that you ever get involved in a shooting in which the evidence is not very clearly in your favor, it can and will be used against you as evidence of a potentially criminal state of mind. That could be really important indeed.

A number of states, including mine, have enacted laws intended to protect those who acted lawfully in self defense from civil suits; such suits had presented a real problem for honest law abiding citizens. Such laws have reportedly dissuaded attorneys from taking on cases that some of them might have agreed to pursue in the past, and that's good. However, they are largely untested, and attorney friends of mine tell me that I do not want to be the one to establish the case law. Scary, eh?

 

[IllHunter]

LIbShooter, name pretty much tells your story, I think your response is weak cheese and leads to social deterioation. The criminal wins and you go home scared and frustrated. I say chase down the thief and get it back. Life will be better, I have my thing and the thief has a learning experience that is not rewarding or reinforcing to his lifestyle.

 

[Kleanbore]

I say chase down the thief and get it back.

Sometimes OK, sometimes no. Don't use or threaten deadly force to recover property that has already been taken unless you live in a state that was once a republic and the conditions are appropriate. In some states, one would have to be in hot pursuit to be justified in using any force at all. Check the laws.

The defendants here may be lucky--in most places they could also face criminal charges.

The could also have been shot with their own gun. That's happened.