Police Abuse

Tamir Rice's Family Alleges Excessive Force, Negligence, Emotional Distress, False Imprisonment, Denial of Due Process

Those who want justice for Rice might have little faith in a grand jury's ability to make the right call.

|

Tamir Rice
Cleveland

The family of Tamir Rice—the 12-year-old Cleveland kid killed by cops for possessing a fake gun last November—has updated its lawsuits against the police to include new allegations. The revised lawsuit now claims excessive force, negligence, infliction of emotional distress, and due process violations. It also alleges that officers falsely imprisoned Rice's sister when they handcuffed her and placed her in a squad car while her brother bled to death, according to The Huffington Post:

In the amended lawsuit, the family questions whether the rookie officer who fired at Tamir had first sufficiently ordered him to raise his hands and drop the weapon. The surveillance video doesn't clarify that issue because it doesn't include audio.

The Cuyahoga County sheriff's department is investigating the shooting. A prosecutor has promised that a grand jury will consider whether criminal charges are merited.

Those who want justice for Rice might have little faith in a grand jury's ability to make the right call, given the Michael Brown and Eric Garner decisions. But the Rice case has something the other two did not: a clear history of incompetence on the part of the cop who committed the shooting. Officer Timothy Loehmann was deemed "unfit for duty," incompetent with firearms, and kicked off a previous police force before Cleveland hired him.

Related: "Police Union Boss Defends Killing of Tamir Rice: 'When We Tell You To Do Something, Do It.'

NEXT: Don't Expect Foreign Policy Restraint from Scott Walker

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You have got to admit that is some pretty crazy stuff dude.

    http://www.AnonVPN.ga

  2. Sometimes you jsut have to play along with the rules.

    http://www.AnonVPN.ga

  3. We haven’t seen Tamir’s Facebook pictures yet. Until that happens, we can only assume he was a thug that got what he deserved.

    1. The idiot downthread didn’t play that card, but there were some equally stupid comments (including the “parent was a criminal, clearly a good shoot” one)

  4. I bet that had there been audio from inside the cruiser, it would have recorded the officers planning to kill the person no matter the circumstances. For any non-cop that would be premeditated, no?

  5. they handcuffed her and placed her in a squad car while her brother bled to death

    Huh? That’s just following procedure.

    1. If it wasn’t for his interfering sister, they could have rushed him to the emergency room. And he died the next day in the hospital, so he obviously wasn’t bleeding to death on the ground.

      /paraphrases of real comments on the Cleveland Plain Dealer website after the shooting

      1. I can’t bring myself to wade into comments sections on articles about police shootings. Reading them generally makes me want to smash my monitor with someone’s face.

          1. We’d shred them, and deservedly so.

          2. Let me guess: out resident obsessive cunt?

    2. Cuff and stuff the relatives is first and only step in their first aid procedures.

  6. Procedures were followed.

    Weapons discharged.

    Officer Safety was maintained.

    Good shoot, BOOYAH

    hth

  7. I can see the Prosecution arguing that bringing up the officer’s history would unduly prejudice the jury.

    I seem to remember something like “you’re not allowed to bring up that the defendant has been arrested for burglary 13 times, convicted 5 times, and gone to jail twice” in a trial for burglary.

    Won’t the prosecutors lean pretty heavily on this?

    Or is the cop’s previous employment history on the table because it’s not a criminal record?

    1. Maybe in a criminal case- likely depends on the particular rules of evidence in that jurisdiction. But in the civil case, the city is likely to be a defendant, and one element to prove the city’s liability will be negligent hiring, negligent training, or somesuch. The previous employment history will be spot on relevant for that.

    2. “I can see the Prosecution arguing that bringing up the officer’s history would unduly prejudice the jury.”

      A bunch of cops in the courtroom glaring at the jurors will probably be the strongest influence on the jury.

  8. Those who want justice for Rice might have little faith in a grand jury’s ability to make the right call, given the Michael Brown and Eric Garner decisions.

    I have every faith that the Grand Jury’s strange and enormous ham sandwich indictment power will suddenly be weakened to kitten-like strength, by the introduction of Coptonyte.

    1. A grand jury can indict a ham sandwich, but not a pig.

    2. I actually think this turd will be indicted and convicted. He’s the perfect goat to lay all the sins of institutionalized cop violence on. “He wasn’t really one of us. This bad apple has been tossed away. Go back to sleep.”

      1. Mebbe so. They need to do something periodically so they can claim “See, the system works! Cops are totally accountable for their crimes!”

      2. I wish.

        No one fuck’s with the King’s Men!

  9. “Those who want justice for Rice might have little faith in a grand jury’s ability to make the right call, given the Michael Brown and Eric Garner decisions.”

    I don’t think the Brown case was quite as egregious as the Garner case or the Rice case.

    There were witnesses – with no pro-cop bias that I know of (in fact, their bias would have gone the other way) – who said Brown attacked the cop and that’s how he got himself shot. Maybe all these witnesses were wrong, maybe they risked their standing in the community just for kicks, but there’s certainly a good case to be made on the cop’s behalf.

    In the Garner case, I first thought that the blame was on the legislature for making cheap cigarettes illegal, and that the NY cops would have to respond to complaints of illegal cigarette-selling, but now that the cops have made a point of not enforcing these kinds of laws, I realize that enforcement of petty laws was optional for them, and they simply *chose* to go after Garner.

    For Rice, it really looks bad for the cop, especially given his history. Even if it turns out the cop was pure as the driven snow, there’s still the problem that *someone* didn’t convey the point that the gun could be fake.

    1. I don’t think the Brown case was quite as egregious as the Garner case or the Rice case.

      Hard to know. We do know that the prosecutor violated basic legal ethics by putting people on the stand who he knew were going to commit perjury.

      We know that basic investigative protocol was thrown out the window for this cop.

      We know the cop changed his story and lied on the stand after he got a chance to lawyer up.

      We know that the cops story is highly unlikely in some key details, based on the physical evidence.

      Could’ve been a good shoot. But the investigation and grand jury were so utterly fucked up we will never know.

    2. To say we should have faith in grand juries because they made the right decision in the Brown case is weird to me.

      The voted to not charge the cop. They pretty much *always* vote to not charge the cop.

      If they made the correct decision, then this is more a case of ‘a broken clock is right twice a day’ than evidence that the GJ system is *working*.

    3. The Gardner case, look at the facts. Several businesses called police to move him from the area. A black police Sgt was present when the arrest was made. People refuse to look at all evidence, and rather to put the blame on someone else. It’s easier to do that than blame oneself!!

      1. What the fuck is this idiocy?

        1. No-on in this thread says anything about whether or not the shoot is good/bad.

        2. Why the hell should I blame myself? *I* had nothing to do with the shooting.

        If you’re going to spam, you should at least read your comments for coherency.

      2. “Several businesses called police to move him from the area. A black police Sgt was present when the arrest was made.”

        Well that settles it then. Killing a black guy is ok as long as businesses tell police to move him and there’s a black officer present.

  10. “A prosecutor has promised that a grand jury will consider whether criminal charges are merited not under any circumstances be presented with evidence that the hero in blue was incompentent.”

    Fixed.

  11. OK, help me out here – don’t cop cars have loudspeakers, so the cop, without getting out of the car, can shout “drop your weapon!”

    1. What, and give the perp time to dispose of the evidence?

    2. LEOs are responding to a weapons call, why get on a loud speaker and announce ones presents?? TR was reported to be pointing a weapon at people. Police have a second to choose between life and death.. What would you do if TR broke into your home, pointed a weapon at you and demanded things?? What would you do??

      1. What would you do if TR broke into your home, pointed a weapon at you and demanded things?? What would you do??

        Shoot him, of course.

        But that’s not what he did, that’s not the situation.

        Police got a *report* – reports can (and are) frequently mistaken.

        Before *I* shoot, I had best make damn sure that the situation justifies it. Why don’t the police have this duty?

  12. “Excessive Force, Negligence, Emotional Distress, False Imprisonment, Denial of Due Process”

    My mind = a plaintiff throwing a bowl of spaghetti against a wall

    1. The family, their attorney are looking for a lottery pay day. No justice, just a payday. If the family and attorney were concerned, where were they that moment TR was confronted by police?? Answer that question, TR family?!

      1. Are you saying that a 12 year old should never be left unattended by an adult?

        Because you sound more and more like a freak every post you make.

      2. Well, would you expect ‘justice’ in any scenario?

        They have every right not just to a ‘payday’ but to strip the city of everything they’ve got for letting this mungo carry a gun.

        Your comment here and below is idiotic in the extreme.

        there is zero relevance to whether the parents were “good people” or fucking drug addled criminals.

  13. Why doesn’t the mother past criminal history matter in this case?? Was she a role model to her many sons??

    1. Why would it matter?

      1. The kid not commit a crime,

      2. Since when are other people’s crimes held against you in this country?

      3. The police wouldn’t have known of her past history at the moment the decision to shoot was made.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.