r/TikTokCringe • u/New_Libran • 26d ago

Discussion The easiest $30k this guy ever made

On October 26, 2022, the judge ruled that Walden's contact with Land should have ended when it became clear that Land was not sleeping in the park or in need of assistance, and that the city was not responsible for Walden's actions.

On November 22, 2022, the city settled the lawsuit for $30,000.

45.5k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

136

u/holdmyspot123 26d ago

Well you can, that's why he got 30k. Had no reason to arrest him. Now there's a precedent if this exact situation happens again.

149

u/mikende51 26d ago

He gets 30k of taxpayers money and the cop gets a finger wag. Let justice prevail.

48

u/The_Deku_Nut 26d ago

I'd rather this dude get my tax dollars than the cops get to buy more guns. Homie just wanted to look at the sky.

38

u/El_Tormentito 26d ago

Right, but that's not the exchange. He got your tax money AND the cops bought more guns.

2

u/angelbelle 26d ago

Well, in theory, the mayor or whoever has jurisdiction pays a political price.

If the voter base is happy with the way whoever is running things then maybe paying that 30k isn't a big problem.

6

u/PeachPassionBrute 26d ago

The sheriff in the county I’m from committed blatant fraud using his office but has popular support because he’s against gun regulation and is vehemently racist. So he’s been voted into office time and time again.

15

u/GameLovinPlayinFool 26d ago

They just allot more of our taxes to the police to cover both expenses.

2

u/MrBenzedrine 26d ago

Yeah, I bet their gun budget increased because they're making all these extra arrests.

6

u/Robbie_notta_bot 26d ago

It's not an either-or. The city will pay for the polices mistake, the police will continue to be funded fully.

2

u/GBPackers0480 26d ago

Lol this doesn't lower the police budget if anything it gives them reason to argue for more cause they ended up spending so much. And they'll use this arrest in their total arrest stats despite it costing them $30k

1

u/Phyllis_Tine 26d ago

This department will still count the call-out as a statistic, and then claim the numbers of call-outs to ask (and get) more money next budget.

1

u/ChiefTacoObrien 26d ago

Fun Fact, the cop still gets to buy more guns.

1

u/Adventurous_Ad3534 26d ago

The 30k doesn't come out of the police budget.

1

u/woodpony 26d ago

Your real tax money is going to that state killing babies in self-defense.

1

u/usefulbuns 23d ago

The local police get all kinds of federal funding for military weapons. Read "Rise of the Warrior Cop" if you want to really learn how we got where we are today.

The cops get all their toys and the citizens of the city get to pay for the mistakes of the cop who gets zero accountability.

8

u/sarahsocks 26d ago

Well the lawyer gets fed first

2

u/Boring-Tomatillo-209 26d ago

Cop gets the finger at the same time by victim and finger waved by boss, this makes for angry frustrated cop so he then beats wife

2

u/Still_Code_5198 26d ago

dont forget the lawyers cut....most likely 1/3 so 20k ish....

3

u/eoz 26d ago

Well, maybe next time the city will think it's cheaper to train their officers properly after all

9

u/Confident-Pepper-562 26d ago

Why? The city didnt pay, the people did.

2

u/Rynetx 26d ago

Who elects the city council?

1

u/Confident-Pepper-562 26d ago

Explain the relevance of your question

2

u/Rynetx 26d ago

The tax paying citizens elect them, if they don’t want to pay for these things they should elect people who will prevent them.

1

u/Confident-Pepper-562 26d ago

Thats the thing about people who are elected, they lie to get elected.

2

u/Rynetx 26d ago

Then elect someone different who will actually do it. I’m tired of people complaining about tax payers paying stuff being used as an excuse why these people don’t deserve compensation for our government’s shitty actions.

0

u/Confident-Pepper-562 26d ago

Im not giving excuses, im telling you the way things work. I never said the people dont deserve compensation, I was very clearly talking about how that compensation does not lead to change because the people its impacting are not the ones doing the bad dead.

It doesnt matter who you elect, they all tell you what you want to hear but do whatever they want to do.

0

u/eoz 26d ago

Individually? 

6

u/Confident-Pepper-562 26d ago

yea, its called taxes.

1

u/eoz 26d ago

oh, I get it. And the money from those taxes is different from the money they use for police?

1

u/Confident-Pepper-562 26d ago

Yes and no.  Same taxes, but the more the police cost the higher taxes go to cover it.

1

u/eoz 26d ago

ah, so money for the fines imposed for the police misconduct and the money used to pay for police comes from the same budget, but it's not possible for legal payouts to affect the police budget?

1

u/Confident-Pepper-562 26d ago

Sure its possible, but thats not how it ever works. Budgets tend to be set by the previous years costs. So whatever the cost was last year, they increase the budget to meet or exceed.

40

u/SomethingIWontRegret 26d ago

Precedents existed already for this, going back decades if not centuries. Didn't stop the cop from arresting him. Bet that cop still has a job and is still illegally harassing people.

3

u/AeroRanchero 26d ago edited 26d ago

There's an easy solution which is tying consequences to screwing up. e.g tie settlements to pension funds, or require officers or departments to carry malpractice insurance for negligent violations. The problem would sort itself out very quickly but nobody is willing to push that political grenade to the unions. Legislatures can do this, it's how checks and balances are supposed to work. In an ideal world...

46

u/Important-Agent2584 26d ago

Unfortunately 99.9% of cases where ones rights are infringed they get away with it. The victim does not know their rights or can't afford a lawyer.

2

u/Any-Seaworthiness531 26d ago

I’m always fascinated watching American crime shows how they always seem to be interviewed on their own.
In the UK, getting a solicitor is pre programmed by everyone, especially before an interview

1

u/bryanlade 26d ago

Yea; in the US it's guilty untill proven innocent. Oh and getting an attorney "makes you look guilt" in the eyes of law enforcement.

2

u/Any-Seaworthiness531 26d ago

I hear that and can imagine that being what’s said to the plaintiff.
Here, you’d just be regarded as stupid and even the police would likely keep asking if you’re suuuuuuuure you don’t want a duty solicitor as well as making a point of notifying tape that you specifically turned one down multiple times.

Lawyer up and speak only to say your name and no comment.
Let the law do the work

1

u/LinuxIsFree 26d ago

Working in a police department (not as an officer), that sounds wild. Innocent until proven guilty and getting a lawyer is a very normal thing. Sure they don't encourage it so they can get as much information as possible, but it's not seen as a sign of guilt.

0

u/DesignerKoala3177 26d ago

you obviously don't see what goes on in the room. they say that shit all the time. unless you work for a unicorn police department with marshmallow guns and gum drop batons, loF'nl. ACAB

2

u/LinuxIsFree 26d ago

Didn't realize you know my department better than I do, lol. And I work on the interview recording system so I've seen enough to know.

Experiencing some cops and deciding that's how they all are is some wild extrapolation. I'm likely privileged to work around good cops, but I pay very close attention and all but two towns I can think of have consistently shown care for due process and respect.

0

u/DesignerKoala3177 26d ago

so you work at the Candyland police department. congrats. the rest of us still have to deal with the real world

2

u/HungryArticle5 26d ago

Attorneys are probably working cases like this on contingency, meaning the client does not pay a cent upfront, but rather gives a percentage of their settlement to the attorney only if they win one.

3

u/HonestDishonestWork 26d ago

WorksCitedCrackpipe.jpeg

2

u/Fastballz69 26d ago

There's been precedent for this for decades. Still happens daily.

Cops are horribly trained and know little to nothing about rights

1

u/cortesoft 26d ago

No, he got 30k because he wasn’t sleeping when the officers arrived. If he had been sleeping, they could have arrested him.

1

u/soulsnoober 26d ago

There's zero need for precedent, it's plainly illegal. The plain language of the law lays out that what happened was a violation of his rights.

1

u/Donkey__Balls 26d ago

If you’re lucky enough for it to be captured on camera, and if you’re lucky enough to get access to the footage, and if you’re lucky enough that they don’t “lose” it when you file the records request. Makes you wonder how many cases are just bullshit made up on the spot because no one can disprove it.

1

u/GruesomeWedgie2 23d ago

$17,500 after layers fee thereabouts is all he would’ve gotten.

-2

u/PhDinDildos_Fedoras 26d ago

I'm not American so I have no idea how the law in the US works, but I can understand that it's not legal to arrest someone for not showing ID. But why didn't the cop tell him to gtfo and then if he refused to leave arrest him for disobeying a legal order to leave?

Not that any of that makes any sense and harrassing random people in a park is insane, but that seems like a more reasonable and legal way of getting the guy to jail, if that was the goal.

8

u/InfiniteTree 26d ago

Ordering then to leave the area for absolutely no reason isn't a "legal order"

6

u/Optimal-Tune-2589 26d ago

Why would the cop have the ability to issue a “legal order” to tell somebody to leave a public space? 

1

u/Neonvaporeon 26d ago

Depends on state laws, some have stronger ID laws. Likewise with sleeping outside, some states have stronger protections for that. I imagine this park has ordinances in place prohibiting sleeping, which is very common, in which case waking someone up and asking them to leave would be a lawful order. This guy was awake, so that doesn't work. All they can do in that case is warn him not to sleep there.

This guy was detained without cause, meaning he was detained without a valid suspicion of criminal activity. He was then arrested without cause. He wasn't behaving disorderly or anything that could get him in trouble, he did a good job. Glad he got a settlement, hopefully the cop was retrained.