Attached are the four responses questions I need answered and a Journal Article information I need help with. Please feel free to ask me any questions.
D'Ante Nichols
Top of Form
Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961) ruled that a party does not need to seek a state remedy before seeking a federal remedy under 42 U.S.C. 1983, since these remedies are supplemental. According to Vaughn and Coomes (1995, p. 409), officers act under color of law when one or more of the following seven conditions are satisfied:
1. (1) they identify themselves as officers;
2. (2) they perform criminal investigations;
3. (3) they file official police documents;
4. (4) they make arrests;
5. (5) they invoke police powers in or outside their jurisdiction;
6. (6) they settle personal vendettas with police power; or
7. (7) they display weapons or police equipment.
The Supreme Court has stated that color of law is satisfied when the defendant “may fairly be said to be a state actor” (Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 1982). Plaintiffs cannot sue private individuals for “nonstate‐related activities unless they conspire with state officers” (Barrineau, 1994, p. 28). The Supreme Court has further stated that “… a state normally can be held responsible for a private decision only when it has exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the state” (Blum v. Yaretsky, 1982). Daniels v. Williams (1986, p. 330), states that in any given Section 1983 suit, the plaintiff must still prove a violation of the underlying constitutional right”. The court must determine “… whether there was … a deprivation as measured by the standard of the particular constitutional provision” (Simons v. Marin County, 1987, p. 1469).
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 1982 the Court determines what type of immunity would be appropriate, based on these criteria:
1. (1) the interests of citizens in vindicating violations of constitutional rights by governmental officials; and
2. (2) society’s interests in efficient and effective government, which would be hampered by allowing lawsuits to proceed unfettered against governmental officials making discretionary decisions.
Barrineau, H.E. (1994), Civil Liability in Criminal Justice, 2nd ed., Anderson, Cincinnati, OH.
Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 US 1004 (1982).
Daniels v. Williams, 474 US 327 (1986).
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 US 800 (1982).
Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 937 (1982).
Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961)
Simons v. Marin County, 682 F. Supp. 1463 (N.D. Cal. 1987).
Vaughn, M.S. and Coomes, L.F. (1995), “Police civil liability under Section 1983: when do police officers act under color of law?”, Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 23, pp. 395‐415.
Kenneth Jackson
Top of Form
Good evening class. I hope that everyone is doing well. Police officers have a lot of civil liability while on the job. This is one of many reasons officers must insure they do their job correctly and professionally every day. With civil laws the way they are, an officer can be protected legally and still be liable in civil court. This fact of officers having a lot of civil liability on them truly started to come to light in 1961 with the court decision of Monroe v. Pape.
In this case, the court had to decide if individuals had the right to sue the city and its officers for a violation of their civil rights. In this case, 12 City of Chicago police officers woke up a family in the middle of the night and made them stand naked with their children while the officers searched the house and tore their mattresses (Monroe, 1961). They did all this without a search or arrest warrant. Mr. Monroe was taken to the station and questioned for hours (Monroe, 1961). He was denied a phone call and was not allowed an attorney (Monroe, 1961). He was finally released and never charged.
While in today’s time it seems easy to understand that the officers and city was successfully sued; however, at the time legislation that said persons could be sued had not been clarified to include cities and its employees. In fact, this case held only the officers liable (Monroe, 1961). It was not until later that it was changed to include cities. The major question that this case asked was the color of the law. The color of law reference to what Congress intended the law to mean (Deriband, 2015). This is important because as time changes and languages change what was meant by the law can be lost. This is one of the many things that this court case brought to light about civil liability; however, it does not strictly apply to civil liability it should be applied to all aspects of law.
Repercussions of psychological effect on law enforcement after this case can be a huge problem. Psychological effect at something has on a human’s mind (Psychological, 2018). In this case officers can become so worried that they will be civilly liable that it places a lot of stress on them. This is a problem for many reasons. One reason is it can cause health problems to the officer because of the increase of stress. Secondly, it can reduce the effectiveness of the officer because he/she is afraid to do their job due to fear of being sued. It is important as police officers to know their policy, laws and do everything in good faith. Officers still must do their job, but it is important that they go about it the right way.
The Bible teaches us the lesson of doing everything we do in good faith. Titus 2:7 KJV says “In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity and sincerity.” The Bible is a valuable resource and one in which we would all do well in studying.
Reference:
Deriband, E. S. (2015, August 06). Deprivation of rights under color of law. Retrieved November 11, 2018, from https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law.
Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961). (n.d.). Retrieved November 11, 2018, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/365/167/.
Psychological. (n.d.). Retrieved November 11, 2018, from https://www.dictionary.com/browse/psychological.Bottom of Form Bottom of Form
