Associated Press – February 7, 2006
:

A California county will pay nearly $1 million to settle a lawsuit brought by the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club after police shot and killed three guard dogs during raids of the group’s headquarters and suspected members’ homes.

Lower court judges ruled that actions of the deputies and San Jose police officers during the January 1998 were unreasonable, most of the evidence obtained was unnecessary and the officers did nothing to avoid killing the animals.

Ninety officers raided the club’s San Jose headquarters and nine homes of suspected members to gather evidence against suspected member Steve Tausan who was being held on murder charges in connection with an August 1997 killing at a strip club. Tausan was acquitted of all counts in 1999 after arguing the killing was in self-defense.



  1. Pat says:

    The lawyer baiters are going to love this one.

    The lawyers get $530,000 and the plaintiffs get $460,000. Other Police Departments settled for less then $50,000 years ago. The courts felt that because the raids were unnecessary and the actions vindictive, they were liable.

    The case may not be over yet. The Police Department may still take their chances still and go to trial.

    In today’s world of Bush Justice, I was very surprised that the Supreme Court decided not to take the case and rule for the Police. As it is, this means that the Fourth Amendment might mean something after all.

  2. gquaglia says:

    Hey Pat get a clue, the Hells Angels are an outlaw biker gang. They deal in meth, kill for fun and have no problems killing police, you or anyone else. The dogs, I’m sure, were trained to do the same thing. As a police officer I’m not taking any chances when I’m raiding a known outlaw compound. And by the way, this story has nothing to do with Bush, so why include him. Maybe to show everyone how liberal you are? Which is obvious since you are siding with the scumbags.

  3. donald says:

    In today’s world of Bush Justice? Why can’t people post something intelligent without using a Bush fashion pun?

  4. Improbus says:

    Because Bush and his crew are the poster children for fascism, that’s why.

  5. BL says:

    I do not remember when it was decided animals became so valuable. If police shot my attack goldfish, would I receive U$D500,000 too? Do the heirs of dead US Soldiers receive this much?

    I wonder why the Hells Angles are not considered terrorists? If I were to check out the wrong book from a library, I’d expect to be under closer scrutiny than the members of the Hells Angles.

  6. Pat says:

    gquaglia & donald

    Because, like it or not, EVERYONE is innocent until proved guilty. In this case it was shown the Police had the “misstated” evidence for the warrants and purposely trashed the homes and clubhouses. They withheld property from the plaintiffs even after being ordered to return it.

    The fact that you believe their guilt WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE OR A TRIAL shows the state this country has come to. You want to throw out the Constitution and its protections for a fleeting sense of protection. This shows that some Judges still believe in Law, Order, and the Constitution and not a Police State.

    Over the past few years several Judges have soundly criticized the Bush Administration for overzealous prosecution and persecution of “terrorists”. Right after 9/11 over a thousand mostly Muslim men were detained on Material Witness Warrants. No evidence, just hold them as long as they can. The charges didn’t stick, except for a few immigration violations, most caused by their incarceration.

    Even now, Bush wants to wiretap Americans simply because he says so. No warrants. No legal justification. No oversight. Just too bad everybody because we are going to do it.

    I could go on and on about what the Bush administration has done to thwart the Constitution. For brevity, I’ll stop here and repeat my earlier post.

    In today’s world of Bush Justice, I was very surprised that the Supreme Court decided not to take the case and rule for the Police. As it is, this means that the Fourth Amendment might mean something after all.

    gquaglia,
    The Fourth Amendment deals with Unreasonable Search and Seizure. I didn’t think you would know that one.

  7. gquaglia says:

    As I said above, the Hells Angels are an outlaw biker gang. Their whole premis is lawlessness. They are not inocent however repugnant that sounds to your hippie liberal teachings.

  8. BOB G says:

    Pat is there any problem in the world Bush did not cause?

  9. Pat says:

    Bob

    I have been thinking about your question for a while now. I’ll have to get back with you on that

  10. Jetfire says:

    Pat,
    To judge a person before hand is called PREJUDICE and DISCRIMINATION. Wrong, It can be called common sense too. If a known group is known to act a certain way then you can expect a person in that group to act that way. Especially, if you have to join that group.

    The 4th amendment was not totally violated. It sounds like from the article they had warrants. But the may have been ruff in there enforcement of the warrant. It also sounded like they collect stuff for evidence they didn’t need too. Since this is subjective and the article doesn’t go into detail I let that stand.

    As for the main point of the story about the killing of the dogs, it doesn’t go into detail there either. This is another thing that is subjective. Doesn’t tell you how the dogs acted were they where or how they were controlled.

    But I take it from your tone Pat, that you are also against Bill Clinton and Janet Renoe because of Waco and Ruby Ridge.

  11. gquaglia says:

    Pat the court also throw out convictions of killers who were 100% responsible for the murder due to technicalities, do you think that is right? I believe the ends justify the means and going after the outlaw Hells Angels in no way a police state, its called getting scum off the streets. That is the problem with you and your liberal hippie douche types, you think we live in utopia where everyone is good and that the government and the police are what is evil. I was watching a report on Al Gore (your poster child) who was spouting off on how Bush profiles arabs in his war on terror, hello, the terorrist are arabs. If a few have their rights trampled on to keep me and my family safe then so be it. I’m sure after reading this you will feel so upset that you will have to stoke up a joint and grab your favorite 60’s 8 album and dream of better days gone by.

  12. gquaglia says:

    “But I take it from your tone Pat, that you are also against Bill Clinton and Janet Renoe because of Waco and Ruby Ridge.”

    Oh, well that’s different, Clinton and his whole administration were perfect. They made no mistakes.

  13. Pat says:

    gquaglia

    What Technicalities? Would a technicality be something like a forced confession? Would a technicality be something like fabricated evidence? Would a technicality be something like encouraging “cell block witnesses” to lie for a reduced sentence? Would a technicality be something like planting evidence on the accused? Would a technicality be something like beating the accused until says something incriminating? Would a technicality be something like refusing to allow the accused to talk with a lawyer and continuing with the interrogation?

    I am really sorry to hear that you don’t like the Constitution of the United States of America. I am really sorry to hear that it is an inconvenience to to the Police state you envision. I am really sorry to know that you didn’t mean it when you swore to uphold the Constitution.

    …Bush profiles arabs in his war on terror, hello, the terorrist are arabs.

    Lets me think about this, the Irish Republican Army is Arab run, and David Koresh or was it Timothy McVey was an Arab, and the Sandinista were Arabs, oh ya, can’t forget Castro is an Arab, the Front du la Liberation du Quebec were all Arabs, and the Chechnyas are Arabs, and the Serbs are Arabs, the Tamil Tigers are Arabs, and all of Mozambique are Arabs, not to mention Liberia and the Ivory Coast.

    Pat the court also throw out convictions of killers who were 100% responsible for the murder due to technicalities, do you think that is right? I believe the ends justify the means…
    Comment by gquaglia — 2/13/2006 @ 7:56 am

    From the AP article
    Tausan was acquitted of all counts in 1999 after arguing the killing was in self-defense.

    So where are the technicalities?

    I read somewhere else that several of the search warrants were thrown out because the affidavits were falsified.

  14. Manuel Cardenas says:

    Let’s see, if your pet dog escapes, if caught by the dog catcher, and not picked up on time, it can be killed if not “adopted” out. Yet the owner of the dog is entitled to nothing. But if a police officer shoots a dog, even if he has a reasonable expectation that it is vicious, it entitles the owner to almost a million dollars? That’s just crap, no matter how you look at it.
    And this “police state” that we live in? Get serious. With over 250 million people in this country, I really doubt that they would find time to eavesdrop on me unless I gave them good reason. I’m just not worried about it. The combined resources of the entire government aren’t enough to monitor the conversations and actions of “innocent” people. Even with electronic screening processes, there just aren’t enough people to process the information.
    But if I was a criminal, or had something to hide? Yup, then I would be concerned. But then I’m glad that’s the way it is.

  15. dog food says:

    The children were adorable, very small and well behaved. They looked like they really wanted to cut loose and run and play, but that was not to be.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 6729 access attempts in the last 7 days.