• 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!

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

Lutherf

Lutherf

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
49,541
Reaction score
55,176
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
https://www.newsweek.com/us-capitol-police-sued-10-million-killing-unarmed-rioter-1587449

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million, their attorney said.

The civil suit will follow a decision by federal prosecutors not to seek criminal charges against a plainclothes police lieutenant whose single shot killed Babbitt, who was unarmed.
Click to expand...
I'm going to guess that there will be a substantial settlement in this case and no trial. The last thing the Capitol Police or anyone in DC politics wants is for this trial to go public. If Ashli's family asked for a billion dollars they'd be likely to get it just so that the current administration could avoid the trial.
 
They didn't even press charges against the officer who shot her.

That usually means a settlement will be difficult. The courts have already done the defense's work.



.
 
Quandary time for the idiot left.

We hate cops and cops kill unarmed black people!

Yay! We hate conservatives so its a GOOD THING that the cops killed an unarmed protester...they should have killed MORE of them!
 
swing_voter said:
They didn't even press charges against the officer who shot her.

That usually means a settlement will be difficult. The courts have already done the defense's work.



.
Click to expand...
Who was going to press charges? The Biden DoJ? Seriously? Did you really think they'd do that?
 
Lutherf said:
https://www.newsweek.com/us-capitol-police-sued-10-million-killing-unarmed-rioter-1587449


I'm going to guess that there will be a substantial settlement in this case and no trial. The last thing the Capitol Police or anyone in DC politics wants is for this trial to go public. If Ashli's family asked for a billion dollars they'd be likely to get it just so that the current administration could avoid the trial.
Click to expand...
What should the capital police have done in that situation?
 
Welcome to the United States of Litigation. Where lawyers are your best friend.
Wonder what the family lawyer fee or commission is?

Reading the article and the family lawyer statement you would think it was a simple trespass case and the number of people trying to break in doesn't matter.
Nor does the number of Congressional people inside who may have been in harms way.

I am actually amazed that more protesters were not shot that day.
 
Indlib said:
What should the capital police have done in that situation?
Click to expand...
About 100 Capitol police officers DIDN'T shoot anyone on January 6th even though many of them were in closer proximity to the protesters than this guy was. Three Capitol police officers were standing in front of the very doors Babbit climbed through mere seconds before she got shot and they simply walked away. The crowd didn't beat them or kill them. The crowd didn't kill anyone and while there were several assaults there wasn't one single death attributed to those assaults, including Brian Sicknick.

The cop that shot Babbitt had all kinds of options that didn't involve murder. He could have let her pass as other cops had let the mob pass earlier on. He could have grabbed her and cuffed her. He could have called for reinforcements including the AT LEAST two other cops in the hall behind him. He could have maced her or hit her with a baton. He could have turned and walked away. He didn't choose any of those options. He chose to shoot her, point blank, even though the worst crime she'd committed up to that point was trespassing.
 
Lutherf said:
About 100 Capitol police officers DIDN'T shoot anyone on January 6th even though many of them were in closer proximity to the protesters than this guy was.
Click to expand...
It wasn't proximity of the police to the rioters that mattered, it was the rioters' proximity to the politicians.

If rioters stormed the White House and made it to the door to the Oval Office with Trump inside you can bet there'd be shooting.

The last resort to protect senior political leaders is deadly force and she triggered the appropriate response.
 
Lutherf said:
https://www.newsweek.com/us-capitol-police-sued-10-million-killing-unarmed-rioter-1587449


I'm going to guess that there will be a substantial settlement in this case and no trial. The last thing the Capitol Police or anyone in DC politics wants is for this trial to go public. If Ashli's family asked for a billion dollars they'd be likely to get it just so that the current administration could avoid the trial.
Click to expand...
Babbitt's family has plenty of precedence to say that lethal force was not warranted, nor was it routine in mob situations, based on many, many violent riots and direct threats to police and gov't workers' lives.
The Summer of Rage comes back to bite them in the ass.
 
Allan said:
It wasn't proximity of the police to the rioters that mattered, it was the rioters' proximity to the politicians.

If rioters stormed the White House and made it to the door to the Oval Office with Trump inside you can bet there'd be shooting.

The last resort to protect senior political leaders is deadly force and she triggered the appropriate response.
Click to expand...
Deadly force is not authorized just because someone rushes a politician. Deadly force is justified when there is an IMMINENT threat of DEATH OR GRAVE BODILY HARM. That rule doesn't change just because the protectee is an elected official. If that were the case then the cops should have been blowing people away as soon as they broke through the barricades.
 
Lutherf said:
About 100 Capitol police officers DIDN'T shoot anyone on January 6th even though many of them were in closer proximity to the protesters than this guy was. Three Capitol police officers were standing in front of the very doors Babbit climbed through mere seconds before she got shot and they simply walked away. The crowd didn't beat them or kill them. The crowd didn't kill anyone and while there were several assaults there wasn't one single death attributed to those assaults, including Brian Sicknick.

The cop that shot Babbitt had all kinds of options that didn't involve murder. He could have let her pass as other cops had let the mob pass earlier on. He could have grabbed her and cuffed her. He could have called for reinforcements including the AT LEAST two other cops in the hall behind him. He could have maced her or hit her with a baton. He could have turned and walked away. He didn't choose any of those options. He chose to shoot her, point blank, even though the worst crime she'd committed up to that point was trespassing.
Click to expand...

The fact that she was shot and the insurrectionists still forced their way in indicates to me that your options would have likely been less effective and caused more cops being injured.

I don't know. Maybe it is just me but when a mob approaches the capital biulding during an election certification screaming they want to kill Pelosi, AOC and Pence, I think the police should get a little leeway in use of firearms.

I am honestly surprised more people didn't get shot.

What do you think the mob would have done with any of those 3 had they been lucky enough to find them?
 
Lutherf said:
Deadly force is not authorized just because someone rushes a politician. Deadly force is justified when there is an IMMINENT threat of DEATH OR GRAVE BODILY HARM. That rule doesn't change just because the protectee is an elected official. If that were the case then the cops should have been blowing people away as soon as they broke through the barricades.
Click to expand...
The heavily-armed Capital Police officers standing right behind Babbitt didn't seem to be in imminent danger.
 
VanceMack said:
Quandary time for the idiot left.

We hate cops and cops kill unarmed black people!

Yay! We hate conservatives so its a GOOD THING that the cops killed an unarmed protester...they should have killed MORE of them!
Click to expand...
When black people invade the Capitol Building in an attempt to lynch government officials and stage a coup, then your comparison will be accurate.
 
Questerr said:
When black people invade the Capitol Building in an attempt to lynch government officials and stage a coup, then your comparison will be accurate.
Click to expand...
What about when black people are attempting to stab a mother****er? Or when they are reaching for knives?
 
Questerr said:
When black people invade the Capitol Building in an attempt to lynch government officials and stage a coup, then your comparison will be accurate.
Click to expand...
You realize black BLM were there, right?
 
swing_voter said:
They didn't even press charges against the officer who shot her.

That usually means a settlement will be difficult. The courts have already done the defense's work.



.
Click to expand...
They will pay! 🇺🇲
Don't want to be in court. You know a thing called discovery...
 
Lutherf said:
Deadly force is not authorized just because someone rushes a politician. Deadly force is justified when there is an IMMINENT threat of DEATH OR GRAVE BODILY HARM. That rule doesn't change just because the protectee is an elected official. If that were the case then the cops should have been blowing people away as soon as they broke through the barricades.
Click to expand...
Babbitt was part of a mob chanting “Hang Pence”, but yeah there were no threats of bodily harm...
 
VanceMack said:
What about when black people are attempting to stab a mother****er? Or when they are reaching for knives?
Click to expand...
Stabbing people in the Capitol Building while staging a coup?
 
Questerr said:
Babbitt was part of a mob chanting “Hang Pence”, but yeah there were no threats of bodily harm...
Click to expand...
Link to Babbitt chanting anything, most of all, this.
 
Acadia said:
Link to Babbitt chanting anything, most of all, this.
Click to expand...
Where did I claim she was? The crowd she was part of was chanting it. She was busy trying to break through a barricade to carry out the action the crowd was calling for.
 
Lutherf said:
https://www.newsweek.com/us-capitol-police-sued-10-million-killing-unarmed-rioter-1587449


I'm going to guess that there will be a substantial settlement in this case and no trial. The last thing the Capitol Police or anyone in DC politics wants is for this trial to go public. If Ashli's family asked for a billion dollars they'd be likely to get it just so that the current administration could avoid the trial.
Click to expand...
The bigger risk is the repercussions if they lost in court. I think they settle just to avoid a ruling going against them.

Accutually either way they rule can be detrimental.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Don't want to be in court. You know a thing called discovery...
Click to expand...

This is the most common refrain I hear from people who don't understand how our legal system works.

No one at the Capitol is worried about discovery in a civil suit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom