NYPD Settles Case In Which It Arrested Guy For Recording Stop And Frisk, Pays $125,000

from the finishing-all-the-city's-business dept

Wed, Aug 20th 2014 8:02am — Mike Masnick

In yet another case in which police illegal arrested someone for filming the police, the police have been forced to pay up. Unlike the big Simon Glik case, it appears that the NYPD (under new management!) decided to do its best to settle the case and get it off the books. They're paying $125,000 to Dick George, who recorded police doing one of its infamous stop-and-frisks. According to George's lawsuit, not only did the police arrest George and delete the photos from his camera (after he told the kids who were stopped and frisked to get the cops' badge numbers next time), the police flat out knew what they were doing was illegal -- telling George to sue the police:

“Now we’re going to give you what you deserve for meddling in our business and when we finish with you, you can sue the city for $5 million and get rich, we don’t care,” Lt. Dennis Ferber said, according to the suit filed in Brooklyn Federal Court.

Not surprisingly, the new mayor and new police chief didn't want this case to go very far, and got George to agree to a $125,000 settlement. Will victories like this get police to stop these kinds of things? Doubtful, but it's still good to see.

93dda122 f91a 4392 b4bb bde40e766568 (PDF)93dda122 f91a 4392 b4bb bde40e766568 (Text)

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: dick george, nypd, police, recording, settlement, simon glik

39 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

That One Guy (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 6:46am

Not surprisingly, the new mayor and new police chief didn't want this case to go very far, and got George to agree to a $125,000 settlement. Will victories like this get police to stop these kinds of things? Doubtful, but it's still good to see.

Is so much as a penny of that settlement coming out of the pay of the officer in question? Will his pay be docked to pay for the settlement amount? His pension? Will the precinct he's from be paying any of that amount such that it will require budget cuts elsewhere as they suddenly find themselves $125K short? Will his union be paying out?

If 'no' to the above, then such settlements aren't going to do squat to get police to stop harassing people that record them, because why should they care, the public is the one footing the bill in the end.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 7:46am

If the cops were using cameras themselves...

Also, if the involved cops were actually punished for misconduct...

Utopia?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Glen, 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:13am

If the cop was responsible for that amount, I would think cops would start to back off. Too bad that will never happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:18am

Not Their Money
"... you can sue the city for $5 million and get rich, we don’t care..."

Of course they don't care, it's not their money. In fact, they're part of the force that will be used to take the money from others.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Baron von Robber, 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:30am

"“Now we’re going to give you what you deserve for meddling in our business and when we finish with you, you can sue the city for $5 million and get rich, we don’t care,” Lt. Dennis Ferber said, according to the suit filed in Brooklyn Federal Court."

That should, in the very least, now be former Lt. Dennis Ferber, if the was any justice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:37am

No, no it won't
Will victories like this get police to stop these kinds of things? Doubtful, but it's still good to see.

It is taxpayer money being payed, it is not coming out of the offending cop's pockets. Now fire the cops and thing will change.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RailRuler (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:41am

Such naivete
This has been going on for years. Rights are violated, lawsuit is filed, the city settles it for peanuts, and nothing changes. Some members of the city council publicly grumble about how much is being paid out in settlements, but they don't have any power. The mayor supposedly appoints the police commissioner, but the choices are limited.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:41am

Re:
Well, that is according to the suit. We don't really know if that is what was said.

It's almost a little sad that the case doesn't go further so we could actually know, but $150k of taxpayer money rather than several million is certainly not the worst decision they could make.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AnonCow, 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:42am

Pay the settlement out to the NYPD pension fund and these abuses will stop immediately.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:45am

Re: Re:
Well, that is according to the suit. We don't really know if that is what was said.

If only there was some recording of the exchange...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Padpaw (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 8:58am

The money might be nice, but now he is in for a lifetime of police intimidation and harassment. Since he dared to make them pay for their illegal actions, and they don't like that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 9:02am

Police-abuse lawsuits are so common that many cities have a budget and/or insurance for it -- paid for by taxpayers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 9:08am

125k?
Seems odd, when the police officer himself said it was worth 5 mil.

One thing to keep harping on is how much cheaper body and dash cams are than these settlements.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 9:19am

it won't stop until cops start losing their jobs, and they have the union to help them with that... maybe people should start suing the UNION for allowing these cops to stay on the force, and THEN sue for money. Some people have their priorities....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 9:50am

$125,000? Why that's less than a single infringement of Hollywood's copyright.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 20 Aug 2014 @ 9:54am

Re: Re: Re:
We don't need one, the officer's account of the incident is more reliable anyway...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 9:59am

Re:
I disagree. Cops will think twice because he is the kind of citizen that will follow through with legal action.
-
I'd have that judgment taped to the back window of my car... give the piggies a little reading material before they approach me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 10:47am

Of course the cops don't care it's the citizens who are paying this settlement out with their tax dollars.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 10:50am

Re:
But they do is the settlement has to be paid out of their budget.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 11:00am

Re:
I don't think the cop should be responsible for the amount; this could lead to all sorts of nasty situations.

However, his precinct should be on the hook for that amount. Doing things at this level would get the problem cleaned up in short order. Of course, it would also provide incentive for the entire precinct to cover up incidents like this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 11:03am

Re: Not Their Money
Still legit though. The People paying the taxes are JUST AS RESPONSIBLE! They voted them in and do nothing to advance candidates that will change this crap!

I hate this "not their money" BS when it comes to the state having to pay out settlements.

If YOU citizens are tired of having your taxes pay for this stupidity get on off your damn duff and run against the assholes doing it, until then, STFU or support someone who will!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 11:11am

Re: Re: Not Their Money
I literally could not agree more.

In the end, we, the citizens, are responsible. That the settlements hurt the taxpayers isn't a bug, it's a feature.

To paraphrase an old quote, find the amount of oppression that people will tolerate and you've found the amount of oppression they will have.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Crazy Canuck, 20 Aug 2014 @ 12:21pm

Looks like the Mayor may have found a way to stimulate job growth. Now a bunch of people can start walking around with cameras filming police. When they are harassed or assaulted by police, these people can sue/settle for money. What a way to lower unemployment! =P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Crazy Canuck, 20 Aug 2014 @ 12:22pm

Re: Re:
To which they reply "Terrorism! 9/11!" and get their budgets increased...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 12:27pm

Re: Re: Re:
And that's where we, the public, gets some blame. This probably varies from state to state, but where I live, police departments have to go to the voters to get their budgets increased.

Interestingly enough, police departments have been having an increasingly difficult time getting voters to approve their funding proposals.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ECA (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 12:52pm

Re: Re:
Dear AC,
so you think that Every tax payer should pay for the idiots?

I still say that there is a concerted effort to bankrupt most cities and towns.
Other wise the only reason for these persons to be hired... Is because they like IDIOTS..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Everett Edwards, 20 Aug 2014 @ 3:45pm

What kind of 'reporting' is this? The NYPD didn't "settle" ** shit **.

It's the Corporation Counsel of NYC that handles the lawsuits.

This is an important distinction for all sorts of reasons that should be obvious.

If you're going to write about the law and judgements etc, whatever the issue, perhaps ya'll should understand the PROCESS.

The Corporation Counsel operates under the direction of the Mayor-- thus their freqeunt scumbag behavior under Giuliani and Bloomberg-- but NYPD...

Didn't "settle" anything!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2014 @ 5:37pm

This amount will add up after time , then maybe layoffs are in order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 9:41pm

Re: Re: Not Their Money
Yes, because obviously people running for public office make sure to tell the public what their real stances on topics are, rather than what they think the public want to hear, and so when public officials and/or police do stuff like this it's completely the fault of the public for not having known it sooner. /s

I've asked this before, and I still have yet to get a satisfactory answer, but why exactly do some people have a complete and utter aversion to public officials being held personally accountable for their actions? It's always 'it's the fault of the taxpayers for not knowing better/doing something, lets punish them', never 'lets punish the one who actually committed the crime'.

If someone assaulted another person, and was ordered to pay the medical fees and a punitive fine, they would be the ones on the hook for paying that money out, because they are the one responsible. And yet suddenly when a public official does something wrong/illegal all that responsibility is re-directed to the public, and they get off without having to pay a cent? How does that make sense?

In fact, I'll even give you this: I agree that the public shares some blame for the rotten system we've got.

When they re-elect people who have shown themselves to be corrupt or self-serving, at best it was because the other choice was worse, in which case the public's responsibility is decreased somewhat, because their hand was forced, but more often it's due to apathy and disillusionment, where people simply don't think they can do anything to fix the problem and so don't even try. In that case, the public gets what they give. They don't bother to try and fix the problem, so it remains broken.

Now, even given all of the above, why should a public official, whether political or police, not be made to pay, personally, for their actions? At most, the blame is shared, where the public is guilty of apathy or indifference to a corrupt system and don't care enough to fix it, but the official/officer is still responsible for what they've done.

In that case, split the payment, half using taxpayer dollars, and half paid directly by the responsible person/party. Insisting that the public pay all of it is ridiculous, as it means the one who actually committed the crime gets away without any punishment at all, and provides absolutely no incentive for them not to do the same wrong/illegal actions again in the future.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Coyne Tibbets (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 10:03pm

Re:
It never ceases to amaze me that we citizens continue to be willing to pay for the cops to violate our rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Coyne Tibbets (profile), 20 Aug 2014 @ 10:09pm

Re: Re:
I agree with Glen. I think the law should make the officer responsible for violations of rights; perhaps not the whole amount but, say, limited to 1% or $10,000, whichever is less.

As it is, it's just good fun for the cop to watch the taxpayers get punished for his abuse.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Aug 2014 @ 12:08am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Of course, then the cops can just slack off even more when responding to real crimes. As soon as one bad incident conveniently gets mentioned in the press, they simply blame the taxpayers for underfunding them.

It's a no-win situation: we get blamed for our failure to rein in the police, or we get blamed for preventing them from fighting crime. (Similar to politicians being afraid restraining the NSA because of the risk of getting blamed for the next terrorist attack...)

As an example, I don't think the people of Ferguson had much choice about who was patrolling their streets. Lack of money, sway in the greater StL MSA's politics, and even basic hope left them with only one choice. Wait for a trigger event, and create something that the media simply couldn't ignore.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 21 Aug 2014 @ 5:00am

Re: Re: Re:
How about 'whichever is more' instead, the whole point of those fines is punishment and deterrents, they're supposed to hurt, not be something that can be easily shrugged off.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WysiWyg (profile), 21 Aug 2014 @ 6:32am

Re: Re: Re: Not Their Money
Haven't "the public" already been punished though? Isn't the behavior of the police enough?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 21 Aug 2014 @ 8:08am

Re: Re: Re: Not Their Money
"why exactly do some people have a complete and utter aversion to public officials being held personally accountable for their actions?"

I don't see anyone here who has such an aversion.

Public officials who act illegally absolutely should be held accountable for their actions. They should be prosecuted and if found guilty be punished.

These fines aren't that, though. The fines are to hold the police department itself accountable. Therefore, the department should feel that pain.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Austin (profile), 21 Aug 2014 @ 12:00pm

Wanna stop this?
Then make the verdict come out of the officer's own salaries. The city should not be paying for the mistake of 1 or 2 cops, especially when their "mistake" isn't even in line with internal department guidelines, much less the law the rest of us have to follow.

So divert 50% of the officers' salaries towards paying this verdict. As soon as it costs the officers more than a light slap on the wrist when they pull stunts like this, it will stop immediately.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zonker, 21 Aug 2014 @ 4:13pm

Re:
Why is it that the states have no problem taking $18 million out of pensions to pay Disney to film "Oz The Great And Powerful" in their state, but when it comes to lawsuits against their police departments they can't use police pensions to cover a $125,000 (much less than the $5 million they don't care about) settlement?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
k, 21 Aug 2014 @ 4:36pm

Re: NYPD responsibility
Your absolutly right! It won't do squat unless it comes to individual responsibility is upheld to the officers! It should not come out of the city's pocket!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 21 Aug 2014 @ 8:31pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Their Money
More often than not though the only punishment is the fine, and while some jail time would be nice for those that abuse their positions for personal gain or enjoyment, until that enters the equation I see nothing wrong with the one who commits the crime paying out of their own pocket as punishment.

If the fine is meant to punish the department, then split it, say 25/75 between officer and department, don't just dump all of it on the department.
[ link to this | view in thread ]