Ex-Playboy playmate gets $1.2 million payout after suing the cops for manhandling her

[G_j]

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ex-playboy-playmate-stephanie-adams-wins-1-2m-excessive-force-judgment-nypd-2006-arrest-article-1.1026507

Jamie McCarthy/WireImage

An ex-Playboy playmate stripped the city of a $1.2 million payout Tuesday after suing the cops for manhandling her.



A Manhattan jury of four women and two men took 81/2 hours deliberating before tossing fistfuls of money at Miss November 1992, Stephanie Adams, 41, for the injuries she suffered in a 2006 scuffle with police.

The former Bunny’s tale was so compelling that jurors doled awarded her $385,000 more than her lawyer asked for.

Adams, the first openly lesbian Playmate, said cops threw her to the ground at gunpoint after a bizarre confrontation with a cabbie who falsely told them she “flashed vampire teeth” and was going to shoot him.

---
“I was praying for justice and waited six years to speak my truth in court and I’m very grateful for the closure and the healing,” Adams said, holding her son, Vincent, on her hip.

---
“This jury verdict demonstrates that there is a serious problem in this city regarding excessive use of force of our police against ordinary citizens. This must be addressed by the appropriate city officials,” said Adams’

[Enrique]

1. Playmates are like Marines

there's no such thing as an "ex" Playmate.

[joeybee12]

2. Fromt he headline i first assumed they had done something sexual...

Since they pointed out she was an ex-playmate...anyway, glad she's getting lots of cash.

[Zalatix]

16. Well, she did something sexual.

She put her foot up their ass to the tune of $1.2 large.

[xchrom]

3. Good for the jury & good for her. Nt

[AnotherMcIntosh]

4. What are the odds that Bloomberg or anyone else has disciplined these officers?

$1.2 million is not enough.

It is not enough for them to get the message and change their ways.

The payout, or most of it, will be covered by insurance. Such insurance was probably sold to New York City by a crony. The insurance company will sell even more insurance. More insurance commissions will be made. And nothing will happen to the cops.

[maximusveritas]

7. Acutally, this is paid for by the taxpayers

Most cities, including NYC, don't pay for insurance, because it often would be more than they pay already. So every time someone claims they were unfairly mistreated and suffered permanent injury because an officer used physical force, it's you and I who pay. And in most cases, the officer doesn't face criminal charges or discipline, because they were following standard protocol.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

8. Actually, I'm skeptical about your expertise in this area.

You say, "Most cities, including NYC, don't pay for insurance, because it often would be more than they pay already."

In contrast, at the NYC.gov web site, a search can be made for budget items for insurance to cover New York City and its governmental employees.
http://search1.nyc.gov/search?output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&client=default_frontend&submit222=Go&ie=UTF-8&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&entqr=3&entsp=a&oe=UTF-8&ud=1&site=default_collection&q=budget+liability+insurance&btnG=Google+Search

You will find that the City of New York has repeatedly and regularly purchased insurance for a variety of purposes.

You are also wrong when you say, "So every time someone claims they were unfairly mistreated and suffered permanent injury because an officer used physical force, it's you and I who pay." This is wrong because I live in a community which does not have police officers that violate the civil rights of its citizens. I don't pay anything.

And, fyi, the reason why "in most cases, an officer doesn't face criminal charges or discipline" is because the police investigate, cover-up, and excuse their own.

[maximusveritas]

13. I meant liability insurance for police officers

I know they pay for insurance for other individuals and purposes, but not police officers. Usually when you go above a certain population and crime rate, the risk is too much for most insurance companies to take such that the city could afford it. I don't believe there's any sizeable community in the world where police officers aren't at least accused of violating the rights of its citizens. If you've found this place, please tell me where this utopia is.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

15. It doesn't make sense to me but police departments DO in fact have access to insurance...

.... for brutality claims.

And as the other poster mentioned, I bet the premiums aren't any great deal for the tax payers. Including crony payments as hinted above.

We all know insuarnce underwriters are, for the most part, not stupid. My guess is the premiums are close to or more than the city would expect to pay out in brutality/misconduct claims. The insurance companies make their skim/spread by negotiating and investigating with rutheless tactics and proceedures a municipality doesn't have the time or stomach to deal with.


See:
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/9/4/132716/4344

Insurers Will Pick Up Tab For Police Brutality in St. Paul

By TChris, Section Misconduct
Posted on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:37:00 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This igg!


This is an interesting policy question: Should cities be allowed to insure themselves against claims of police brutality? The City of St. Paul agreed to host the Republican National Convention on the condition that Republican Party arranged "to buy insurance covering up to $10 million in damages and unlimited legal costs for law enforcement officials accused of brutality, violating civil rights and other misconduct." Private donations were used to purchase the insurance.

The plus side of the agreement is obvious: taxpayers won't have to pay damages resulting from police misconduct. But the downside, while less obvious, is troubling: [more...]




snip...


Taxpayers stuck with a huge bill have some incentive to hold public officials accountable for police brutality at the next election. Insurers don't have that power.

Of course, some municipalities routinely insure themselves against police misconduct. Should such insurance agreements be prohibited as a matter of public policy?

[noiretextatique]

5. good for her

and shame on the cops.

[HopeHoops]

6. It was her own fault for posing nude.

That's the way FOX will spin it.

[Logical]

9. Cops are ego filled jerks a lot of the time. Very seldom punished. They love to rough...

people up!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

10. "before tossing fistfuls of money"

really?

i hate this sort of writing. They gave her money because they sympathized with her. Its such a flippant way to treat someone who was obviously a victim

[Courtesy Flush]

11. We need to occupy the jury box

The occupy movement needs to extend to the jury system. I see that there's a website for "Occupy Jury", but it's aimed at drug offenses only. We need to get the word out that large settlements will equalize where society fails.

Jurors may be the only regular citizens who can shake some money from the greedy (or in this case, the brutal), and put it in the hands of the people.

There was a time when I felt just the opposite, as I've seen people blow large amounts of money foolishly after receiving a settlement. but at least the money is back in circulation. Don't worry, the money will trickle back up, but at least it will be spread around for a while.

[Jim Lane]

12. The headline is misleading. She hasn’t yet gotten a “payout” of so much as one thin dime.

As the linked article notes, the City can ask the trial judge to reduce the judgment as excessive. The City can also appeal on that ground, asking the appellate court to reduce the judgment if the trial judge doesn’t (or even to reduce it further if the trial judge does reduce it). The City can also ask the appellate court to throw the verdict out entirely and order a new trial, based on whatever grievances the City can come up with about rulings made during the trial.

During this process, the City can also pressure her to settle for a lesser amount, to get the money immediately and to avoid the vicissitudes of the appellate process.

The impression I have from the article is that she’s made a good recovery. Without doing the research to see how similar cases have been handled in the court that would hear this appeal, my semi-educated guess (as a lawyer who represents personal injury plaintiffs in the New York City area) is that she’ll end up collecting something in six figures, not seven.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

14. "STRIPPING the city"; "throwing fistfulls of money". HARdee fucking HAR

Daily News.

It is funny to mock women.

If women cooperate with the image of women as sex objects, they deserve to be manhandled, and don't deserve justice.

It is worse that justice/the system gave restitution after cop assault, than that cops assaulted her.

Be angry at her, gentle readers of the Daily News. Be very very angry at that slutty woman.

[G_j]

17. the wording is terrible

not sure if I agree they are wanting the reader to hate this woman, or just trying to be clever. I thought the story of her fight for justice was worth noting, especially her statement about how ordinarily citizens are treated by the NYPD.