Local Colorado officials have reached an $8.5 million settlement with a woman who was hospitalized in 2022 after being left handcuffed in a police SUV that was then hit by a train.

The city of Fort Lupton and town of Platteville, Colorado, agreed on the settlement with the victim, Yareni Rios-Gonzalez, according to a release from the Fort Lupton Police Department. The settlement amount will be split equally between the town and city and paid by their insurers, according to attorney Eric M. Ziporin, whose office represents the city.

Rios, who was a suspect in a road rage case, survived the September 2022 collision but suffered nine broken ribs, a broken arm and other injuries.

  • Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s awesome we are finally holding the police financially liable for their actions. My bad, it’s the taxpayers again.

    You want change? Demand police accountability.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Police aren’t civilians and they aren’t workers. Abolish their “union” as well as Qualified Immunity. They can earn the right to not be prosecuted while doing their job…

      • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Police are supposed to be civilians. The whole idea of America avoiding mitary dictatorship was vested in the Army being under the control of the Commander in Chief (a civilian chosen by civilians), In conjunction with the police force being comprised of civilians, otherwise that force is just a military with a different name. You can make the argument they’re above civilians in current times but this is by no mean integral to american policing, and is in fact antithetical to the American idea of police.

        Don’t get me wrong I still think they’re problematic even in the theoretical best case scenario, but they’re definitely civilians. Know you enemy, know them well.

        • Wrench@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m not an expert on the origins of police in the US, but I thought their origin story was basically to oppress the civilian population to protect corporate property.

          Like, their entire purpose and why they were given authority was so that they could beat down civilians in the name of corporate profits. Which is the opposite of what you’re claiming.

          • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            How are those contradictory? Can a civilian force not shakedown people to protect property?

            Or are you asking me why they made a theoretical safety on the idea of policing instead of just telling everyone ‘Hey these are going to be our new chosen opressors, have fun!’

        • Empricorn@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Oxford Languages definition:

          civilian:

          noun

          a person not in the armed services or the police force.

          I’m obviously using the term in a non-military context as the topic is policing, not military or international conflict.

          • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            Where’s Oxford again? American policing is based on the fact that a civilian force polices a civilian body. Its part of the tools to avoid military dictatorship, the same way the President is a civilian chosen by the people to be the Commander in Chief of the military.

      • Thassodar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        So many people are anti-union but when it comes to the police union they’re oddly silent…

      • thejml@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        30 months of probation?! That’s basically a slap on the wrist. That’s not accountability, that’s doing the absolute minimum to make it LOOK like “see, we’re accountable!”. Dude handcuffed a person in a car on railroad tracks.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          And 100 hours of public service… you mean like his job?

          Take some overtime and sleep in a cruiser, he’ll have it done in two weeks anyway.

      • Mr. Camel999@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Did you read the post you replied to? They said financially liable. Read through the quote you responded with and tell us where they are held financially liable. They are (rightfully) mad that it’s the taxpayers that are effectively paying out the settlement instead of the police force.

      • Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        The settlement amount will be split equally between the town and city and paid by their insurers, according to attorney Eric M. Ziporin, whose office represents the city.

        Perhaps you should read it.

        • bazus1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          paid by their insurers

          Oh, whew, at least it’s not the tax payers! You really got 'im with your crafty reading of the article.

          Edit: naw, I fucked up. My apologies. Carry on.

      • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I guess that’s technically accountability. Doesn’t sound like much of a punishment.

        And this is damn near a unicorn. (and likely would have been swept under the rug without cam footage - just like every other case where cops see justice) Just like one black president didn’t signal the end of racism, a small percentage of cases where someone OTHER THAN taxpayers are on the hook for police misbehavior doesn’t signal the end of a need for reform, it signals a nearly imperceptible change to the status quo. I’m grateful for the change, but it’s barely a start.

  • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    7 months ago

    The weird thing is this cop didn’t put the suspect in her own car, but another officer’s car who had parked on the tracks.

    First off, what kind of fucking moron parks their car on fucking train tracks? Holy shit, that guy should have been punished as much as the officer who put the suspect in the car just for being so goddamn stupid.

    Secondly, the cop should have noticed that the car she put the suspect in was on the tracks. She probably assumed the car was a safe place to put a person, since you would think nobody would be so stupid as to park on the tracks.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      First off, what kind of fucking moron parks their car on fucking train tracks?

      A cop that wants to execute someone via train.

      • skuzz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        7 months ago

        Oh, no. They were just idiots in this case. If they want to really hurt you, they’ll, just force an EMT to administer a lethal dose of ketamine, or break an old woman’s arm over a petty theft from a walmart and then leave her wounded and untreated in jail for hours, or shoot an unarmed kid that called 911 because he was tripping on too many drugs and needed help. (All things that have happened in the area in the last few years.)

        • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          so what ? there being more than one cop means that there was multiple cops that should have been smarter.

          multiple cops being there makes it look more like an attempt to kill the woman.

          • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            7 months ago

            Look, I hate cops as much as the next rational person, but this does not at all look like an attempt to kill the woman. That’s disingenuous at best. This is stupid incompetence and not paying attention, being extremely careless with a person in their care.

            If a parent leaves a gun unattended in their bedroom during a party, and a kid goes and shoots themselves or someone else with it, is that parent or the adults at that party attempting to kill the kid or the other person? No, they are just criminally negligent.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              If a parent leaves a gun unattended in their bedroom during a party

              It is nowhere near as negligent and actively harmful as parking a car on train tracks and then handcuffing a person into the back seat of that car.

              • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Maybe you missed the point where I explicitly said this was criminal negligence. I was arguing it wasn’t intentional homicide, like the guy I replied to said it was.

                • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Right. I’m saying that parking a car on the tracks and then handcuffing someone into it is far more negligent, to the point of crossing over into predictably horrible outcome, not just opening the door to bad outcomes like normal negligence does.

                  Tying someone to the railroad tracks isn’t what drunk idiots do in old westerns; it’s what the bad guys do.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        But one of the top things you might do if you were an immoral bully who was immune from criminal prosecution.

        • ripcord@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Or just really stupid or careless or both, which is more likely to be the cause here. For both of the cops involved. While also being a bully.

    • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      To be fair, the former cop who did this isn’t the one who parked the car there. She just placed the suspect into the closest cop car, which happened to be on the tracks. I still think she should be liable for putting someone in that situation, but it’s not as bad as her parking on the tracks and then putting a person in a car she knew was on the tracks. Yeah, she should have noticed the car was on the tracks, but she didn’t park it there and might have assumed nobody would be so fucking stupid as to park on the tracks.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        Not sure why her level of assumption abojt whether cars would be on tracks would matter, if the tracks aren’t visually obscured or something.

        One might assume there’d never be a volcano in Idaho, but when you toss a baby into the volcano you found in Idaho it doesn’t really matter what you would have assumed.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    I think all of you claiming this was intentional need to remember Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

    Are cops evil bastards? Yes. But they also don’t need to come up with something this convoluted to kill someone they want dead. On the other hand, there are demonstrably a ton of very stupid cops.