Should Michael Brown's parents be able to sue the city over son's death?

2015-04-23T15:46:19-04:00

I get it!

What happened between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson was tragic.

But the GRAND JURY found that officer Wilson was NOT at fault, how is another jury going to say that Brown's death was wrongful? I believe Officer Wilson was the victim in this case. Just much like the case I just sat on. If the lead detective says he can't say the defendant was in possession, then how does he expect us to?

Even more so, I don't understand how two parents that left him a gammys are able to bring up a lawsuit. He lived there until his death. Grandma should be getting that money, if there is any won.

AND moms might face some felony charges of her own... because of money.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/michael-brown-mom-face-felony-armed-robbery-charges-article-1.2001373

SO if this doesn't prove that all they were interested in was fame and monetary gain, I don't know what else will. I think this has gone beyond Ridiculous.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/civil-lawsuit-set-filed-michael-browns-death-30519005

U.S. News | National News

ABC News reports on United States politics, crime, education, legal stories, celebrities, weather, the economy and more

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Apr 23 at 2015 3:47 PM

2015-04-23T15:47:15-04:00

The right to seek redress for grievances even through lawsuit should not be limited.

Response by Lt Col Fred Marheine, PMP made Apr 23 at 2015 3:48 PM

2015-04-23T15:48:39-04:00

Every citizen has access to the legal system. In this case, they also (will hopefully) have the right to pay court costs when it is thrown out for being absolutely frivolous.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Apr 23 at 2015 3:48 PM

2015-04-23T15:48:40-04:00

If anyone has a claim on the suffering, it would be the Grandma who had him dumped on her.

Response by CW5 Jim Steddum made Apr 23 at 2015 3:57 PM

2015-04-23T15:57:10-04:00

Should they be able to sue. Yes. should they win... Absolutely not! Should they pay legal fees, YES!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 4:03 PM

2015-04-23T16:03:07-04:00

Now SGT Private RallyPoint Member, before you tear me a new sphincter, let me explain.

They should be able to sue. However, they should ALSO be held liable for any fees that are charged & be able to face countersuits from named private individuals (chief of police & officer Wilson). To quote the family lawyer, "The evidence has not changed, but the way it will be presented has."

So, how can he possible change the way the evidence will be presented to make it refute the findings of the local & federal investigations? This is nothing but a game to extend 15 minutes of fame that never should have been. HE caused his own death. HE chose his actions that day: strong-armed robbery, walking down the middle of the street (which is what got him noticed by officer Wilson), & then attacking officer Wilson.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 4:03 PM

2015-04-23T16:03:33-04:00

It is a great country. In it anyone can sue anyone for anything.

Too bad there are always lawyers who will take the suit.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 4:06 PM

2015-04-23T16:06:09-04:00

I have long supported a premise that would eliminate silly suits. Anyone suing another should be liable for up to the amount they are suing for show the suit be found groundless.

Everyone immediately says that discriminates against the poor. But could be covered by lowering the amount of liability to accommodate.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 4:19 PM

2015-04-23T16:19:41-04:00

Just because they file doesn't mean they are going to win the 75K. They are free to file. I think 75K isn't enough. If they file, they should ask for six figures.

Response by MSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 4:47 PM

2015-04-23T16:47:41-04:00

Omg NO!! Brown was a criminal shot while committing an unlawful act. It was a legal shoot. Plain and simple. Tired of this crybaby crap for a man who posed a clear and present danger to citizens. I don't care that he smoked marihuana. I don't care that he was a bit high. I care that he robbed a store and assaulted a police officer. He got shot for failing to abide by the law. There is nothing unlawful about his death. End of story. I feel bad for his family but end of the day he died due to his own actions.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Apr 23 at 2015 4:51 PM

2015-04-23T16:51:11-04:00

They should be allowed to sue, but they should also be prepared to loose....and if so, they should pay ALL the court related fees....

Response by SPC Rishawn Perreau made Apr 23 at 2015 4:57 PM

2015-04-23T16:57:09-04:00

We talking a man killed in "self defense" but in armed and away given up???? That's your child would you want justice or just let things go so it can happen again????

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 5:01 PM

2015-04-23T17:01:13-04:00

The Grand Jury did not indict Officer Wilson for murder; they did not find that he was not at fault. He clearly was "at fault" since it is beyond dispute that his weapon completed the homicide.

Whatever your thoughts on OJ's guilt or innocence, the fact of the matter is that he was acquitted of murder in criminal court, but found liable in civil court for wrongful death. Michael Brown's parents are at least entitled to the same process, though perhaps not the same outcome. So, what's love got to do with it?

Maybe there will be "standing" issue if his mother really did sever ties with him; maybe only his grandmother is entitled to bring a civil suit.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 5:10 PM

2015-04-23T17:10:33-04:00

Yes he died by the hands of the law enforcement officer, NO it was not a mistake. What happened in that city is the horrible thing, not the fact that a violent criminal was taken off the streets permanantly.
i dont want to soiund like a bigot, but really?- we are still talking about this tired subject...? i dont see any benefit to society from any of the discourse and recourse the public took from this event.- hell i truely feel things have gotten worse.

i probably shouldnt vote this but its my honest opinoin and here goes.....

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 6:28 PM

2015-04-23T18:28:12-04:00

If prisoners can use our tax dollars to sue, then anyone should be able to sue (not necessarily with our tax dollars though). Do I think they should win? Only if the the city of Ferguson wins a counter suit for all of the chaos, vandalism, and criminal activities directly related to the case!

Response by LCDR Halinganji Kanani made Apr 23 at 2015 6:42 PM

2015-04-23T18:42:32-04:00

Wrongful death is a civil suit, and has different rules of evidence and different standard of proof than a criminal case. Just because the grand jury decided not to bring a criminal case against the police officer does not automatically mean there isn't enough evidence to sue him in civil court.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 6:52 PM

2015-04-23T18:52:58-04:00

The difference between Criminal Cases and Civil Cases are ridiculously stupid.

Unfortunately, the City of Ferguson will settle for a stupid amount of money which isn't necessary for parents who did not have parental responsibility of Mr. Brown and further a fiscal deficit to a City which has been destroyed, at least twice.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Apr 23 at 2015 6:55 PM

2015-04-23T18:55:23-04:00

Of course they have the right to sue. It would likely be a "Wrongful Death" case wherein the "preponderance" of evidence would have to show it was a wrongful death. That's one step lower than "beyond reasonable doubt" used in criminal cases. Preponderance has a variation of definition depending upon jurisdiction as does rules of evidence. I have next to no knowledge of the case but a majority of the evidence would already be available to the plaintiffs.

The OJ Simpson criminal case failed in a combination of ways including the judge allowing stuff in that many judges might not, prosecution botching some key presentation, potential of witness misconduct (earns money on TV ever since). The subsequent civil case was competently presented albeit with a lower standard of proof required and the rest is history.

I won't follow this case but will be interested in the hot wash to get an idea whether it was brought forward by attention seeking attorneys, a calculated ploy to strive for settlement, etc. The City and/or insurance carrier (if there is one) for the city may very well want to throw some money at a settlement as a lower expense than dragging out a trial and all the secondary costs with PR that goes with it. That's a business decision.

In my small town some current and former police employees have been piling on with hostile workplace suits, one after another. Some merit was found in an earlier case. Not knowing what's valid or not, small jurisdictions can get tied up in knots because they may not have the resources to fight well in the ring with shadow funded opponents.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Apr 23 at 2015 7:07 PM

2015-04-23T19:07:53-04:00

It is not a question of whether Michael Brown's parent should be able to sue the city of Ferguson, MO for the death of their son, it is whether are not a judge will approve of the law suit. Anyone can sue for anything. Their case may never reach a court for it would be expensive just to go to court. The city would just settle.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Apr 23 at 2015 7:11 PM

2015-04-23T19:11:36-04:00

No matter how correct or legal an individual or company was, anyone can sue that company and get some money out of them by settling the case. Going to court is expensive. The preponderance of evidence is much lower also in a civil tort case than a criminal case as well.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Apr 23 at 2015 8:39 PM

2015-04-23T20:39:50-04:00

Although I voted No this is a civil suit matter similar to what happened in the OJ Simpson trial. OJ as we all know was innocent and Nicole Brown's family sued OJ in civil court and won, I don't recall how many millions but OJ was ordered to pay and had he not been dumber than he already was he would not have tried to rob some collector in Las Vegas and end up in prison anyway.
Michael Browns family will most likely win a wrongful death suit because I doubt any jury is going to want to deny it for fear of more destruction in Ferguson if they vote not to pay off a "grieving family". In the end I doubt though that a few million dollars is going to change anything about that tragic day.

Response by SPC Michael Frugoli made Apr 23 at 2015 9:16 PM

2015-04-23T21:16:08-04:00

If he was not found at fault it is no ones fault but their own. They are just looking for a way to collect money they don't deserve. Grandma, maybe.

Response by SSG Daniel Deiler made Apr 23 at 2015 11:16 PM

2015-04-23T23:16:05-04:00

What happened to him wasn't horrible at all. If he'd have simply complied with the officers commands and LAWFUL orders NONE of this would have happened. Instead he CHOSE to take the route of a criminal and ultimately paid the price for his CHOICE in his way of life. His death was not wrongful nor were the actions of Officer Wilson. In fact Wilson should be able to sue Brown's parents. People forget that due to the choices of their knuckleheaded son, Wilson had to quit the force and is now probably struggling to find work. Struggling to blend in. In effect that Brown also killed Wilson figuratively. He killed his lifestyle. He killed his career. He killed everything that Officer Wilson knew aside from his family and friends. And he has to go to bed every single night knowing that he killed another human being.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Apr 23 at 2015 11:46 PM

2015-04-23T23:46:45-04:00

I have an issue with these civil suits because "justice" becomes "payout" and not "guilt". The person who was or wasn't found criminally liable, now becomes financially liable with less proof required visa vie the OJ Simpson debacle. They are trying to pull this with the Aaron Hernandez conviction. He was found guilty - isn't this justice served - but the victim's family wants to go for the payout by suing in civil court.

Response by SFC Collin McMillion made Apr 24 at 2015 1:42 AM

2015-04-24T01:42:30-04:00

I agree with you completely how and why should a second trial be held, but if you remember, O.J. Simpson was found totally innocent of murder, but the ex-wife's family filed a wrongful death suite against him and took everything he had and ever will have. Just because one is criminal and one is civil this is allowed because the standards of proof are far less in a civil trial than a criminal trial. My belief is that if you are found innocent, regardless if it is the right verdict or not, that should be the end of it

Response by SGT James Elphick made Apr 24 at 2015 11:12 AM

2015-04-24T11:12:53-04:00

There is a difference between criminal and civil trials. Just like OJ got away with murder he still had to pay in a civil suit

Response by PO1 Timothy Brown made Apr 24 at 2015 12:16 PM

2015-04-24T12:16:59-04:00

The Officer that was involved in this had done nothing wrong. Moments before this young man had just stole from a store and pushed the employee around. Once confronted by Officer Wilson, things started to escalate. To make a long story short, Officer Wilson drew his weapon in self defense since moments before Michael Brown had tried to take Officer Wilson's Gun. Michael Brown was a bully and a thug. It is very unfortunate that anybody had lost their life. If I would have been in the same situation, I am very sure that I would have done the same thing.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 24 at 2015 12:24 PM

2015-04-24T12:24:31-04:00

Like it or not the standard of proof in criminal court and civil court are different. The standard in criminal court is beyond reasonable doubt. You could theoretically quantify that as 99%. The standard in civil court is prop inference of the evidence. Defined as more likely than not and theoretically quantified as 51% sure. These concepts are part of the system we of government we are sworn to uphold. I approve of their right to the civil justice system and a judge and jury can make a decision.

Response by SPC Rishawn Perreau made Apr 25 at 2015 6:37 PM

2015-04-25T18:37:17-04:00

Enough said