Family of 11-year-old shot by Mississippi cop files federal lawsuit — and analysts think they'll win
A federal lawsuit was filed on Tuesday by the family of 11-year-old Aderrien Murry, who was shot by police after he called for 911 asking for help for his mother. The young man, with arms raised, followed his mother around a hallway corner when police arrived and was shot immediately in the chest, according to reports.
Lawyer Carlos Moore said the lawsuit names the City of Indianola, Mississippi, and Officer Greg Capers.
"The lawsuit alleges negligence, excessive force, and violation of the boy's constitutional rights," a release from the law firm said.
Over the weekend Moore explained, "I think they shot first and asked questions second. He doesn’t appear to be a man or anything. He’s a 4-foot-10 little boy."
"With living in the South, Mississippi, especially, sometimes you feel that you can trust the police a little more when they [are] your own color, your own race," Moore said, speaking to Good Morning America. "But now this man, this young boy, would never trust law enforcement again."
Murry survived the shooting with a collapsed his lung and a cut liver, ABC News reported.
Speaking about the case to MSNBC's Chris Jansing, Danny Cevallos said that what will be the most important part of the case isn't in the lawsuit.
"It is what will happen afterward," he explained. "And that's why this case will almost certainly not go to trial because that would require in this, which is a standard Section 1983 claim, a federal law creates a remedy or a right of law to bring a lawsuit for violations of constitutional or federal statutory rights.
"This complaint alleges very standard claims when it comes to excessive force, usually covered by the Fourth Amendment. Now, do the police defendants here want to go to trial or do they want to try to actually assert qualified immunity? Yes, qualified immunity protects many officers from actions like this, but practically speaking. Optics: do you want to be arguing that the actions of this officer were objectively reasonable in court when you have a plaintiff like this, like this child?"
Jansing cut in to say that it is overwhelmingly clear that Aderrien was a child.
"Exactly right," agreed Cevallos. "All of those facts and especially to the extent they are born out, say by a body-worn camera, or other witness testimony, which we don't know completely yet. The case would have to go through discovery. But if I was advising the city defendants here and the municipalities, I would say this is not a case you take to trial. This is a case you settle."
"Even if you think that you can win on qualified immunity. And I have to tell you, I handle these cases, and qualified immunity is remarkably easy for police defendants to make out. In essence, the test is, would a police officer in his or her right mind have thought that this was the right thing to do? In other words, you have to prove that it was not just unreasonable to this officer but unreasonable to every officer everywhere that this action was the wrong thing to do. That's a hard thing to prove."
See the analysis from Cevallos below or at the link here.
Leave a Comment
Related Post