Hah. That's a funny take on my post, though that's not what I had intended.
Usually, LA County farms out its PI/civil rights work to insurance defense lawyers. These lawyers are good enough when defending cops, because any lawyer with a pulse can represent a police officer being sued for a rights violation, since judges don't like those cases going to tria; and when they do go to trial, don't like finding them liable.
But when it's a PD being sued, the bias in favor of the government goes down the tubes. Thus, the County needed to hire actual trial lawyers, instead of the usual civil litigators.
1 comment:
Hah. That's a funny take on my post, though that's not what I had intended.
Usually, LA County farms out its PI/civil rights work to insurance defense lawyers. These lawyers are good enough when defending cops, because any lawyer with a pulse can represent a police officer being sued for a rights violation, since judges don't like those cases going to tria; and when they do go to trial, don't like finding them liable.
But when it's a PD being sued, the bias in favor of the government goes down the tubes. Thus, the County needed to hire actual trial lawyers, instead of the usual civil litigators.
I see the reason for the mix-up, though.
Post a Comment