Wrongful Conviction Lawsuit Defense Blog : Wrongful Conviction Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Andrew M. Hale Law Firm

 The law firm of Andrew M. Hale & Associates continues to rack up the trial wins, with the latest coming today when a federal court jury deliberated for little over an hour before finding in favor of three Chicago police officers accused of beating plaintiff Ricky Stevenson in the lock-up after he was arrested for burglary. The officers were represented by attorneys Shneur Nathan, Jonathan Boulahanis and Joan Ahn, who were able to show that two of the three officers were not even present in the police station at the time of the alleged beating. Our attorneys were also able to show, via plaintiff's mugshot and the testimony of the ER doctor, that plaintiff Stevenson did not suffer any injuries, let alone the significant injuries that he claimed. In addition to seeking compensatory damages, plaintiff had asked the jury to impose $30,000 in punitive damages against each of the officers. The jury rejected all of plaintiff's claims. Plaintiff was represented by attorney David Clark. The case was heard before Magistrate Judge Susan E. Cox. This is the eighth police trial victory this year for the trial attorneys at Andrew M. Hale & Associates. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 After deliberating little more than an hour, a federal jury found in favor of Chicago police officers Kenneth Taylor and Carlie Young in a lawsuit brought by plaintiff Ricky Scott. The Officers, who were working school patrol, received information from a Calumet High School security guard that there was a man with a bandana driving a dark car near the school and scaring students. Shortly after receiving this report, the Officers spotted Scott driving by Calumet High School in a dark colored car wearing a bandana. The Officers pulled Scott over and wound up handcuffing Scott temporarily due to safety reasons when Scott refused to keep his hands on the trunk of his car as the Officers ran his name and plates. Since the Officers could not prove that Scott was the perpetrator, they filled out a contact card and told Scott to leave the area. Scott claimed that the Officers handcuffed him in such a violent manner as to separate both his shoulders. The defense submitted evidence showing that Scott had incurred shoulder injuries from work-related incidents and that Scott had denied having any prior shoulder injuries when questioned during the pendency of the case. The jury rejected Scott's claims of excessive force and battery. The Officers were represented by attorneys Andrew Hale, Avi Kamionski and Helena Wright of the firm of Andrew M. Hale & Associates. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 Today's headline from the SunTimes lead story:

"Mom Doesn't Believe Son, 13, Had Gun Before He Was Shot By Police."

Read the story HERE.

Once again, the Chicago media spinning a police shooting as an intentional murder. ("The police told him to freeze so he stopped and put his hands up, but a police officer ran up on him and shot him from only a couple of feet away.")

What's interesting is that the victim's mother claims he did not have a gun, but the article notes she did not witness the incident. Not sure then why she should be quoted in the headline as saying her son did not have a gun.

Let's see how the case plays out and if the Sun Times does any follow-up story. More to follow. . . 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link