Woman called 'crook' by Lincoln police wins $259,217 in damages

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Alissa Skelton

The Lincoln Police Department slandered and libeled a woman when it called her a crook on its Crime Stoppers website, Facebook page and on a TV news broadcast, a Lincoln judge ruled Wednesday.

Lancaster County District Judge Steven Burns ordered the City of Lincoln to pay Shayla Funk $259,217 for damaging her reputation.

Not only did Funk lose her job as an occupational therapist as a result of the posting, she suffered embarrassment and humiliation, Burns wrote in a strongly worded ruling issued Wednesday.

“The damage is not limited to her career,” Burns said. “Even two years later, Ms. Funk is met in her hometown with snide remarks and humiliating comments which go to the heart of her integrity and reputation for honesty.”

FULL story at link.

Read more: http://www.omaha.com/news/crime/woman-called-crook-by-lincoln-police-wins-in-damages/article_5c335088-4dae-5712-aa12-60cc098f8861.html

[rurallib]

1. looks to me like the police got off cheaply

for the damage thay did to her reputation and the recklessness with which they handled the whole situation.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

2. Cheaply? The police got off free.

It's the taxpayers of Lincoln who'll pay the award.

The cops didn't lose as much as a doughnut.

[christx30]

7. And this kind of crap will continue to happen

as long as the police face no personal stakes in getting it right.
Change the law, and state, "As of October 15th (random date), police will be held personally and finantially liable for mistakes they make."
Anyone that is still around on October 16th is there for the right reasons.

[yellowcanine]

3. The police got off completely because they will not pay the judgment.

Ultimately taxpayers will pay the judgment. Individual police can argue they were doing their job so they cannot be sued as individuals.

[cynzke]

9. Not Exactly.....

The City/PD extend liability coverage/protection on their insurance to officers doing they duty, but there usually are exemptions to this protection if officers knowingly violates certain ethical and/or professional standards of conduct. If the officer knew what he was lying the City/PD has no obligation to extend liability coverage to him. Don't see why the plaintiff couldn't name/sue the officer in the complaint for separate damages..

[Stargazer09]

4. That's simply horrible

There's no excuse for the way they treated her.

[HassleCat]

5. Brilliant detectives

Too bad we cannot have police forces populated with the brilliant, tolerant, fair minded officers we see on TV. Most cops just leap to a conclusion, then look for evidence that supports the conclusion. Basically, anybody who is not a cop is a crook, or potential crook.

[asiliveandbreathe]

6. I remember a story not long ago - ah, here it is..

www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/05/01/too_smart_to_be_a_cop.html

May 01, 2013 · Via Nick Gillespie, here's a story of a guy who got rejected as a candidate to be a cop in New London, Connecticut on the grounds that his score on an IQ test was too high!

[jwirr]

8. The court should have gone one step further. The police should have to post their apology on all

those sites for a designated period of time. Stating why they were wrong and how much they were fined. At least then it would not just be the taxpayers who have to pay.