Chicago Set To Create Reparation Fund For Victims Of Police Torture

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

Note how little time the bad cop actually got.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/05/06/404545064/chicago-set-to-create-reparation-fund-for-victims-of-police-torture

The city of Chicago will take a big step today toward closing what Mayor Rahm Emanuel has called one of the darkest chapters in city history, as the city council is expected to approve a $5.5 million dollar reparations fund for victims of police torture.

The fund will compensate victims tortured by notorious former Chicago Police Lt. Jon Burge, and the detectives under his command, between the early 1970s and the early 1990s.

During many of those years, Burge was commander of Chicago's Police Area 2 headquarters on the city's South Side.
Jon Burge, ex-Chicago police commander, has become synonymous with police brutality and abuse of power in Chicago.
Code Switch
Even If Chicago 'Black Site' Story Is A Stretch, It Stirred Up Bad Memories
Chicago Plans Reparations Fund For Victims Of Police Torture In '70s, '80s

For decades, hundreds of mostly black men said that, when taken into questioning about crimes in Area 2, they'd been stripped, punched, beaten, shocked with cattle prods and other electric devices, suffocated with plastic typewriter covers and abused in other ways.

Anthony Holmes, who served 13 years in prison for a murder he says he did not commit, claimed at a recent city council committee hearing that he was one of Burge's first victims, as reported by NPR's Cheryl Corley:

"In 1973, he (Burge) came to my house, kicked the doors in, threw me on the floor, put a shotgun to my head, knee in my neck. He said [expletive] I'm going to kill you if you don't be still."

Holmes says he was shocked and electrocuted, and thought three or four times that he was dead.

Another victim, Darrell Cannon, was emotional as he testified, Corley reported. Cannon was arrested in 1983 and served 24 years in prison for murder, and was freed after a review board determined the evidence used to convict him was tainted. Cannon says that when he was arrested, three of Burge's officers placed a shotgun at his head and played a sort of one-target Russian roulette as they questioned him.

"The third time that I heard that click, the hair on the back of my head stood straight up because I honestly thought he had blew my brains out. When that didn't work, they tried to hang me by my handcuffs, which was cuffed behind my back."

The city already has paid about $100 million in lawsuit settlements to Burge victims. The $5.5 million dollar fund will provide up to $100,000 each to those with credible torture claims who have not received settlements, and provide them with education, psychological counseling and job training.

The Chicago City Council also will issue a formal apology to torture victims.

The mayor says it's time for "the city to own up to its dark past" and provide victims with closure.

"This is a stain on the history of the city and its reputation, and I thought it was essential to finally move forward," Emanuel said when the ordinance was introduced in April.
Former Chicago police Cmdr. Jon Burge walks into the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse in Chicago in June 2010. That day he was convicted on all counts of an indictment charging him with perjury and obstruction of justice.
i

Former Chicago police Cmdr. Jon Burge walks into the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse in Chicago in June 2010. That day he was convicted on all counts of an indictment charging him with perjury and obstruction of justice.
Alex Garcia/MCT/Landov

A Chicago Police board investigation found evidence of torture under Burge and fired him in 1993, but no criminal charges were filed for the acts of torture. A special prosecutor appointed in 2002 spent four years investigating and found overwhelming evidence of torture by Burge and his "Midnight Crew," but concluded the statute of limitations had run out.

Finally in 2010, then-U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald filed federal perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Burge, alleging he lied about torture under oath in civil lawsuit proceedings. Burge was convicted and sentenced to four-and-a-half years in prison.

He was released from a halfway house in February. He lives in Florida — and continues to collect a Chicago police pension.

**Orlanth**

$5.5M wouldnt even cover a single case of compo if the victims had access to the sort of lawyers others do.

**Frazzled**

Agreed. A good PI attorney could add some "0s" to that without difficulty.

**Steve steveson**

Statute of limitations really needs reviewing in light of modern evidence and evidence storage. It may have been valuable when most evidence was oral or on paper stored in poor environments, but putting an arbitrary number on how long someone can be convicted of a crime for now, especially a crime like this, is just stupid.

**nkelsch**

Orlanth wrote:
$5.5M wouldnt even cover a single case of compo if the victims had access to the sort of lawyers others do.

Some of these types of claims have caps when the target is the government... And 5.5mil is better than 'nothing'.

**Orlanth**

nkelsch wrote:
Orlanth wrote:
$5.5M wouldnt even cover a single case of compo if the victims had access to the sort of lawyers others do.

Some of these types of claims have caps when the target is the government... And 5.5mil is better than 'nothing'.

I am not sure, once people complain that 'I only got five figure payout for being beat up by the police, while people get seven figure payout for far less.'
And topical high profile cases will be used as the benchmark. If someone can get $135K for being refused a cake, how much more should someone get for being tortured by part suffocation with a typewriter cover by the cops.
This is a payout discrimination cause grenade and Chicago city government just pulled the pin.

**Dreadclaw69**

This is an attempt to save the city some money. Lawsuits for police brutality spanning two decades could eat through that $5.5 million by the second case

**Orlanth**

It's fairly obvious that is what the city authorities intend, but lawyers of the plaintiffs will appear against the arbitrary limits.

**Jihadin**

To play Devil Advocate.

Prove brutality towards suspects committed by LEA.
Key word "Prove"

**sebster**

Orlanth wrote:
This is a payout discrimination cause grenade and Chicago city government just pulled the pin.

Wha? People have been suing and receiving settlements from the city for about two decades now. It's even in the article in the OP;
"The city already has paid about $100 million in lawsuit settlements to Burge victims. The $5.5 million dollar fund will provide up to $100,000 each to those with credible torture claims who have not received settlements"

This is a fund set up for people who want to go through arbitration, rather than taking on the city through the courts. Often the amount of the payout isn't the issue, what people want is to have their story heard, and receive recognition for what was done to them. The payout is a gesture in part of the recognition, as much as anything, and so whether its $100k or $10m isn't actually the point. So having their case heard, not actively opposed by a the city, will likely be preferred by many people.

For those who don't like that process, well they can sue the city, as has been happening for more than two decades now.

**Dreadwinter**

I find it a little odd that the city has to continue paying out all of these settlements, and rightly so, but we can't send him to prison for the crime because it was too long ago. Seems like a reasonable system.

**Breotan**

Given how corrupt Chicago is, I'm surprised that more aren't getting time in the greybar hotel.

**Dreadwinter**

Breotan wrote:
Given how corrupt Chicago is, I'm surprised that more aren't getting time in the greybar hotel.

4 out of 5 of the last Governors isn't bad though, right? Illinois is a paradise.

**dogma**

Dreadwinter wrote:

4 out of 5 of the last Governors isn't bad though, right? Illinois is a paradise.

The Illinois Governor has relatively little to do with what goes on in the Chicago metro, and even less say regarding what goes on in Chicago; its practically a city-state. That's what happens when you have ~75% and ~25%, respectively, of the state's population. Actually it has been widely argued in academic circles that the reason Illinois Governors are so often corrupt is that most of the state's population simply doesn't give a gak about them.

**whembly**

dogma wrote:
Dreadwinter wrote:

4 out of 5 of the last Governors isn't bad though, right? Illinois is a paradise.

The Illinois Governor has relatively little to do with what goes on in the Chicago metro, and even less say regarding what goes on in Chicago; its practically a city-state. That's what happens when you have ~75% and ~25%, respectively, of the state's population. Actually it has been widely argued in academic circles that the reason Illinois Governors are so often corrupt is that most of the state's population simply doesn't give a gak about them.

Yup. Hence the calls to split the northern vs. southern areas into two states.

Will never, ever happen though.

**daedalus**

whembly wrote:

Yup. Hence the calls to split the northern vs. southern areas into two states.

Will never, ever happen though.

Man, updating THAT MANY American flags would probably be a huge logistical nightmare for China.

**Dreadwinter**

dogma wrote:
Dreadwinter wrote:

4 out of 5 of the last Governors isn't bad though, right? Illinois is a paradise.

The Illinois Governor has relatively little to do with what goes on in the Chicago metro, and even less say regarding what goes on in Chicago; its practically a city-state. That's what happens when you have ~75% and ~25%, respectively, of the state's population. Actually it has been widely argued in academic circles that the reason Illinois Governors are so often corrupt is that most of the state's population simply doesn't give a gak about them.

It was a comment on the general state of Illinois Politics, not really a shot at Chicago. I realize that Springfield and Chicago are two different monsters. Though the Governor does usually keep an office in Chicago.

I am from Southern Illinois, currently living in Carbondale to be exact. So I know the states pains. Trust me. The complaining about Rauner down here is just unbelievable.

**Dreadclaw69**

daedalus wrote:
whembly wrote:

Yup. Hence the calls to split the northern vs. southern areas into two states.

Will never, ever happen though.

Man, updating THAT MANY American flags would probably be a huge logistical nightmare for China.

It's OK. We can let Cali become it's own independent country and that way the number if stars won't change

**dogma**

Dreadwinter wrote:

It was a comment on the general state of Illinois Politics, not really a shot at Chicago. I realize that Springfield and Chicago are two different monsters. Though the Governor does usually keep an office in Chicago.

Chicago isn't even especially corrupt, it certainly was but it really isn't any worse than [insert large city] now. Most of the corruption noise is due to the city's reputation, as opposed to reality.

Dreadwinter wrote:

I am from Southern Illinois, currently living in Carbondale to be exact. So I know the states pains. Trust me. The complaining about Rauner down here is just unbelievable.

I mean, he's a Chicago guy, so that's a given. Also, he's an donkey-cave, as the whole McKinney scandal showed.

**SilverMK2**

Something about people having guns to prevent exactly this kind of tyrannical action by the police/government from happening

**dogma**

whembly wrote:

Yup. Hence the calls to split the northern vs. southern areas into two states.

Will never, ever happen though.

It would be economic suicide for the southern portion of the state. Have fun paying for all those state services without tax money from the Chicago metro.

Not to mention the fact it would have to pass the state legislature, the Governor, Congress, and the President.

**Dreadclaw69**

SilverMK2 wrote:
Something about people having guns to prevent exactly this kind of tyrannical action by the police/government from happening

That comment is far from helpful. The actions of a small number of police officers abusing their position of authority does not justify civil insurrection.

**SilverMK2**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
SilverMK2 wrote:
Something about people having guns to prevent exactly this kind of tyrannical action by the police/government from happening

That comment is far from helpful. The actions of a small number of police officers abusing their position of authority does not justify civil insurrection.

Is there a set level of tyranny where guns start protecting you? Where on the scale of "some guy just parked in my spot" to "my barcode tattoo is the envy of all the other citizens in mega camp one; Whoops! Time for my turn on the mass burial detail for all the citizens who starved to death last night" do they start to come into play?

**Hordini**

SilverMK2 wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
SilverMK2 wrote:
Something about people having guns to prevent exactly this kind of tyrannical action by the police/government from happening

That comment is far from helpful. The actions of a small number of police officers abusing their position of authority does not justify civil insurrection.

Is there a set level of tyranny where guns start protecting you? Where on the scale of "some guy just parked in my spot" to "my barcode tattoo is the envy of all the other citizens in mega camp one; Whoops! Time for my turn on the mass burial detail for all the citizens who starved to death last night" do they start to come into play?

Sorry, you can only know that if you're American. If we had discussed that with the Brits in the 1700s, we might've lost the war.

**SilverMK2**

Hordini wrote:
Sorry, you can only know that if you're American. If we had discussed that with the Brits in the 1700s, we might've lost the war.

Ah, I see... So as long as you are represented in government while paying your taxes guns are ineffective? Do they become useful again as soon as a boat load of tea is thrown into a harbour or will any large scale disposal of foodstuffs into a body of water do?

**NuggzTheNinja**

SilverMK2 wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Sorry, you can only know that if you're American. If we had discussed that with the Brits in the 1700s, we might've lost the war.

Ah, I see... So as long as you are represented in government while paying your taxes guns are ineffective? Do they become useful again as soon as a boat load of tea is thrown into a harbour or will any large scale disposal of foodstuffs into a body of water do?

Your posts in this thread clearly constitute trolling. They have absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter at hand.

As for the OP, this sentence is a travesty. Chicago doesn't need to throw money at the problem, they need to hold their LEOs accountable. We wouldn't be seeing these absurd no-knock warrants, that turn into state-sponsored murders, if everyone including the judge who signed the warrant was prosecuted without any legal protections.

**dogma**

NuggzTheNinja wrote:

As for the OP, this sentence is a travesty. Chicago doesn't need to throw money at the problem, they need to hold their LEOs accountable. We wouldn't be seeing these absurd no-knock warrants, that turn into state-sponsored murders, if everyone including the judge who signed the warrant was prosecuted without any legal protections.

They need to do both, really, because no police force is perfect and you're going to end up paying out civil settlements eventually. In this particular case the people that will be getting a piece of that 5.5 million USD likely cannot file civil suit due to a statute of limitations as most of the really serious incidents happened in the early-mid 80's.

**SilverMK2**

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Your posts in this thread clearly constitute trolling. They have absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter at hand.

One of the main points constantly raised by people who are pro guns is that they protect the people against exactly the kinds of actions highlighted in the OP. Except when that kind of situation rears its head; government officials exploiting their position of power to abuse and oppress a population, apparently guns are not the answer?

Regardless, I hope the people responsible are handed extremely long jail terms for this and the victims get mahoosive payouts to encourage the state to be more vigilent in protecting the people from corrupt officials.

**dogma**

SilverMK2 wrote:

Regardless, I hope the people responsible are handed extremely long jail terms for this and the victims get mahoosive payouts to encourage the state to be more vigilent in protecting the people from corrupt officials.

Read the article. Burge, the man who presided over the torture, got 4.5 years....and still collects a CPD pension. The article doesn't touch on this, but I doubt the victims can file civil suit.

**Dreadclaw69**

SilverMK2 wrote:
One of the main points constantly raised by people who are pro guns is that they protect the people against exactly the kinds of actions highlighted in the OP. Except when that kind of situation rears its head; government officials exploiting their position of power to abuse and oppress a population, apparently guns are not the answer?

Regardless, I hope the people responsible are handed extremely long jail terms for this and the victims get mahoosive payouts to encourage the state to be more vigilent in protecting the people from corrupt officials.

Given the facts in the OP that this took place in a city renowned for its gun control laws, that these abuses took place when individuals were in police custody, and that the abuses were carried out by a small number of officers when do you think that a citizen would have been justified in using force?

You are desperately trying to shoehorn in a topic that bears little to no relevance to the discussion at hand. As stated above the acts of a small number of individuals with very limited power are not representative of the government as a whole. It is precisely this kind of comment that ends up getting threads about firearms locked. If you would like to have an actual discussion about firearms I am happy to accommodate you. But trotting out puerile comments is not the way to start any meaningful discussion.