Settlement doesn’t admit guilt, but it implies it
A settlement by city officials regarding a police excessive force claim may not constitute guilt but a $175,000 payout says a lot.
It’s sort of like the O.J. Simpson not guilty verdict despite just about everybody and their mother knowing otherwise.
Resident Lael Queen got paid after a Fourth of July 2014 incident when Trenton police pummeled him then unleashed a K-9 attack.
All the while, police shouted the get out of trouble free card expression “Stop resisting.” Queen had alleged that a confrontation ensued after he recorded police being verbally abusive toward a young African American female.
Police officers confronted Queen, took his cellphone and arrested him for interference of their investigation.
Queen had just exited a laundromat on Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard when the incident occurred.
His suit alleged that police called the woman a b-word and c-word.
Shortly after the incident, police Director Ernest Parrey, Jr. delivered a directive that cops could not interfere with citizens recording police actions as long as they were not in close proximity or interfered with police actions.
City attorneys made clear that the Queen settlement did not define liability but reality tethered a likely unfavorable court decision for city police officers.
The financial resolution of this incident represents an embarrassment for our city’s police department.
Even the arrest of the
young African American woman, apparently laced with obscenities, represents behaviors that extend well beyond accepted behavior.
Despicable actions such as these strain relations between police and communities, especially when law enforcement inflict verbal and physical assaults on alleged suspects.
Nobody would want their mother, sister, wife, daughter or any other female acquaintance referenced by such vulgar terminology while being manhandled.
The introduction of the K-9 attack dog represented an unnecessary action when one considers Queen held a load of laundry and his cellphone.
Trentonian reporter David Foster accompanied me to find Queen a day after the attack.
We witnessed first-hand Queen’s facial injuries and where the canine’s teeth chomped his thigh.
The public has a right to know specific protocol regarding police dogs.
Trenton police Sgt. Anthony Manzo once noted that he used dogs during burglary situations when a suspected perp might be hiding inside a house or business.
Video footage of the Queen arrest showed him down on the ground and seemingly under control by several police.
While police recently claimed they use every legal methodology to remove guns fromcitystreets,useofthepolice canine against Queen constituted an illegal action.
EvenQueen’sarreststrayed beyond the realm of good police work.
In fact, good police, those who use force when needed and good judgment when necessary, should have no issues with being recorded.
Finally, the public deserves an explanation and insights about officers involved in this incident.
The public should know whether police involved in this incident and others received reprimands and training to better handle street situations.
Saying that police policy allows no discussion about personnel matters represents a real cop out.