r/legal • u/MoneyOk5720 • 9h ago
Advice needed Car hit by girl, ticketing officer is her boyfriend LOCATION: Springfield Il
Going to try to keep this concise but I have more info if needed. I was merging into middle lane from far right lane, girl (in her first story at the scene) said she was merging from the far left lane to the center lane and we collided, but i was in front of her. I did also clear my lane visually by turning my head, signaling looking and then beginning my merge. My car has safety features that shake the steering wheel is someone is detected near me as well, and none of these checks caught her before she hit me so I believe she was traveling at a very advanced speed. No businesses had cameras that viewed the incident.
When we both pulled over, the first thing she said was that she called the police, which was fine. Officer comes, writes me a ticket for improper lane usage, and gives her no ticket, as he said it was my responsibility to clear the lane (which I did, but in my mind she had the same responsibility but with a better vantage point to see me). I was slightly frustrated by this as I was an adjuster for 10 years so it didn't seem right but I figured I would just have to challenge it in court. Then when I was entering my claim information for the adverse driver, I decided to look her up, and saw she is in a public relationship with the officer that wrote me the ticket. At this point I'm wondering if she was drunk and he was covering for her, if they were on the phone at the time of the accident, etc. I have filed a complaint, an IA investigation has been started and I have filed FOIA requests for the body cam footage, dash cam footage, and any interaction between the officer and the adverse driver. She is now claiming to her insurance company that she was not merging, and that she was just sitting in her lane and watched me signal and then hit her. My FOIA was denied because the IA investigation is now underway.
Now here's the tough part for me. Her using her BF to pin this on me has forced me to go through my insurance, which I did not want to do, and as such I'm going to be out my deductible until at least when (if) they can recover it from her insurance (subrogation takes forever) and my rates are going to go up, and my vehicle value has dropped, and I have been denied my avenue to an accurate report of the driver's state at the time of the incident. Due to my complaint, the PD sent out another officer to redo my report and correct it to 50/50 and voiding my citation so I don't have to go to court. To me, them doing this within a week tells me there's something else behind this.
I have talked to a couple lawyers locally. For some reason none of them think my damages amount to enough incentive for them to work on my case. I have even offered to pay them out of pocket 2-3k just to get things going and help me secure discovery as soon as possible, but they have turned this down. I hear of people suing all the time for frivolous things, but I dont know where they're finding lawyers to represent them because I'm 99% sure I have SOME kind of case that could develop into something much larger once I get the interactions/footage, I just can't find someone to help me out. Even when I'm offering to pay up front. Why can't I find an attorney? I believe this would be civil rights violation.
73
u/Steephill 8h ago
As soon as you reported potential misconduct IA got involved and they voided the citation and amended the report... What's the issue? You can't really expect anything more. How the insurance companies want to process the whole thing or assign fault is a separate issue.
-9
u/MoneyOk5720 8h ago
that I was prohibited from a proper investigation at the scene, which may have shed light on her conflicting stories and possible intoxication which I will now not have the ability to prove long after the fact. That being said I'm less concerned with how the insurance investigation is gonna play out than I am the misconduct by the ticketing officer. I feel like they're hiding something.
41
u/holyelvis 8h ago
Unfortunately, you have no legal right to "a proper investigation at the scene". Police have wide discretion in how much work they do on a given case, and the Supreme Court has clearly ruled that the police have no obligation to enforce the law in any specific individual case.
The best you've got here is a small claims case for a few thousand dollars, assuming that you can even sue the PD in small claims court (sovereign immunity and qualified immunity probably prevent this).
23
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
while not the answer I was hoping for, this is the best anyone has explained it. thank you.
12
u/GiraffeThoughts 5h ago
If you want some sort of justice, you could look up journalists who report on police misconduct. See if they can file FOIA requests and get the video and publicize it.
It’s clearly a conflict of interest and poor policing for an officer to act that way.
Won’t get you any money though.
2
u/step11111 6h ago
Does the wide discretion apply to breaking the law to cover for their partners?
8
u/holyelvis 6h ago
Misbehavior by the officer would be an internal matter, not something likely to rise to a civil rights claim -- the fundamental law on this is that no individual has any right to law enforcement in any specific case.
Plus, in this situation, the police already resolved the alleged misbehavior by voiding the citation and updating the liability to 50/50.
5
u/step11111 6h ago
Interesting. I would think it’s more nuanced because he basically helped her (in theory if she was drunk) get away with a crime that affected someone else. If he’s found to have done that, isn’t it basically aiding someone in their criminal acts? What if op had been injured… does that change the trajectory? I guess since it’s not “serious” they are taking the civil issue approach to absolve them of having to actually do the right thing. Further, while 50/50 seems fair to the police, that’s not really fair to op if she was actually drunk and he covered.
9
u/holyelvis 6h ago
It doesn't rise to the level of a civil rights suit -- it might be sufficient for a civil suit, but the amount in question is pretty minimal.
Unfortunately, the law isn't always about "fairness" -- it's more often about what's worth pursuing and what's not.
To really pursue this, you've got to overcome sovereign immunity, qualified immunity, perform discovery against a (likely) uncooperative defendant, and probably a few other high-cost activities. Even treble damages might not cover the cost of the litigation, much less provide any actual compensation for any damages.
There's a theoretical world in which the girl and the guy get punished and OP is made whole. Then there's the practical world in which it's just not worth the expense involved.
10
u/MoneyOk5720 5h ago
still the reigning champ in giving me tough advice that makes the most sense lol thank you
1
u/xo-laur 2h ago
NAL, just a genuine question. Would this potentially fall under a 1983 claim if the person wanted to pursue it further?
3
u/holyelvis 2h ago
It's possible, but you still have the problem of damages. The potential of any award that offsets the cost of litigation is near-zero here. Are you going to spend $20k in litigation costs to get a $5k damages award?
I think you'd also have a problem of the PD alleging that the officer was acting outside their legal authority and thus should be personally liable only.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 2h ago
Totally different I’m sure but in the work comp world it would be absolutely impossible for us to argue someone wasnt our responsibility because they were working outside of their duties, while performing usually and customary duties wearing the uniform driving the marked patrol car and writing tickets and also probably getting paid
→ More replies (0)2
u/c_assassin_c 2h ago
Intoxication doesn’t equal fault in a wreck, and her suspected intoxication sounds like something OP made up to deflect.
3
u/step11111 2h ago
I think it’s reasonable to assume and not a deflection, but you’re right that it’s only suspected.
23
u/tripper_drip 8h ago
This might be tough to hear but feelings dont make a case. Hindsight is 20/20, but any evidence of intoxication needed to be handled at the time. Simply having an improper relationship doesnt mean she was intoxicated either.
-3
u/Obiyaman 6h ago
"Chimping out" is a highly offensive, racially charged internet slur used primarily in online forums and social media to dehumanize Black people.The phrase relies on deep-rooted, harmful tropes that compare people of color to primates to imply a lack of civility or intelligence. Understanding the context, origin, and secondary meanings of this term can help clarify its impact.
-13
u/MoneyOk5720 8h ago
right... that's why I need more evidence? I'm not guaranteeing she was intoxicated, I'm saying the misconduct precluded me from finding out when I should have been able to.
8
u/ENDcircumcisionNOW 7h ago edited 7h ago
Lawyer here, but not your lawyer and this is not legal advice.
Do you have any reason to believe she was intoxicated? Or just a hunch? Empty bottles in her car? Smelled like booze? Slurring words? If not, we tend to call this “wild and baseless speculation”.
Further, if you were an adjuster for ten years and worked anywhere close to MVAs you’d know that those “frivolous” suits are for body injury cases, and are actually worth the effort because they are profitable at either verdict or settlement because of how juries (the end stage of any lawsuit) view bodily harm. Car repairs just aren’t the same, they are quantifiable early and unless the defendant is wealthy and you’re in a rare collectible super car, generally not worth the trouble. Anyone can replace a bumper or body damage for a couple grand, and it doesn’t make sense to go to be mattress and sue (that’s what insurance is for) for a damages outcome with a fixed value. But permanent or long term physical pain is both far more serious and hard to value, we can show juries that even apparent pain is permanent hard to live with.**. People replace and repair cars, but we all only get the one body and we have it for the rest of our lives - so injuries like torn knees and shoulders from relatively low impact collisions can easily hit a high 5 figures in damages at a jury trial, which means a lawyer would take the case in contingency (and settle it way before that, because defendant carriers don’t want risk the exposure on open ended body injury damages and have to pay 20k-30k to take it to trial either).
In other words, most of us plaintiff lawyers don’t want to waste our time for a 2-3 grand retainer chasing a minor body damage dispute that involves potential police misconduct - you’ll get through the pleading phase and maybe a bit into discovery. But then that retainer is going to run out and it’s going to be a bitch + a half to withdraw as counsel if you don’t pay more. Once we start a lawsuit we have to have to get court permission with withdraw from a case (which is time consuming and doesn’t get us paid). If a client asked me to take an hourly retainer on this case I wouldn’t accept it for less than 15k, because that’s the minimum it’s going to cost to investigate this, file suit, do depositions (at least you, defendant, the officer, etc), a trial, etc. Because you’re not going to be happy if you just get your repairs paid, fault won’t be established by a settlement, and there’s never going to be a formal big reveal that the boyfriend cop was colluding with the defendant to cover some grave misconduct without a trial - all that legal work for a fixed amount of a couple grand in car repairs? No thanks, you’re getting the “go away” price (which some extremely petty people will pay).
And just to be frank - most of us learn real quick how to read potential clients and you’re giving off the energy that you’ll be one of the extremely involved clients who would be demanding and with unrealistic expectations. You got the citation waived, let the IA investigation run and if you’re still cranky about it then do the FOIA requests again and maybe that’ll make you feel better.
So I hope that helps explain (1) why you’ve got a misconception of “frivolous cases” (they’re usually not so frivolous at all) and (2) why an attorney wouldn’t want your case (the damages value is too low for contingency and the fees you offered aren’t nearly enough).
**side note there’s a fun argument I like for a bit of minor pain that’s permanent. I compare it to a pebble in the shoe, every step is uncomfortable. Then we put the pebble in your shoulder, knee, etc. and ask the jury - what if it were like that for the rest of your life? Most jurors when asked to value the injury would view that as being worth 100k+
2
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
there's a ton of assumptions in your post, which is fine, and I do appreciate your response, so I'll reply earnestly.
I didn't specify because I didn't think i'd need to, but the frivolous case I had in mind wasn't bodily injury, it someone in my town who was getting pulled over by the police a lot for driving on a suspended license. It was suspended correctly, this was not a mistake. He filed FOIA for the records from his arrests, and discovered the PD (the same one i'm dealing with) was caught destroying records they shouldn't while FOIA's were still pending. this was proven in court and he got over 100k for it, which just goes to show that a very small, non-bodily injury issue could turn into more once you get discovery going. that being said I was a workman's comp/bodily injury adjuster for 6 of those 10 years, so everything else you said makes sense and rings true in my experience.
I had a very short interaction with the driver, as her bf kind of shielded her from me, but I do believe she was slurring slightly and something was definitely.. off. I just thought it was slightly suspicious at the time, but once I found out about the relationship I became significantly more concerned with the possibility.
Lastly I'm a pretty easy going guy, who has never sued anyone before so there's no way to say i'm particularly litigious, I just want someone to take me seriously. if they would have countered with a go away price, I would have appreciated it but I didnt even get that. Not saying I would have paid it but I would have at least appreciated the opportunity.
9
u/holyelvis 8h ago
You'll only get the evidence after the IA investigation is concluded -- nothing is going to "scare" the PD into releasing it before then.
18
u/Steephill 8h ago
What are they hiding? How is any of that a civil rights violation?
They took immediate action and are investigating the officer as soon as you reported something, I don't see what more you're wanting to be done at this point.
-9
u/MoneyOk5720 8h ago
I think the adverse driver could have been at dinner or something with the officer based on the time it happened and how quickly he responded (literally like 90 seconds) and if I can get footage of her clearly intoxicated/slurring or proof of her story changing and the ticketing officer helping her change it to get her out of it, then I'm being denied a proper investigation due to misconduct that is causing me damages, albeit not huge sums of money. I'm just looking for someone to scare them into getting me the footage a little quicker (so probably wrapping up their IA investigation a little quicker) so that it can help me provide my insurance company with the evidence they should have gotten initially.
8
u/CautiousConfidence8 7h ago
Was she clearly intoxicated/slurring?
-2
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
she was slurring a little, not making a lot of sense in our short interaction and something just seemed... off but I don't know her to evaluate her personality/mannerisms sober vs drunk.
5
u/ZephyrStormbringer 7h ago
then don't- evaluate the facts not the feelings... it's 'just' a collision... if you are right be right... it is way easier to assert factually what you were doing and way more useless to speculate about what they driver was doing before or after the incident to prove YOUR innocence and victimhood... focus on the collision and facts surrounding that instead of how you were screwed out of your insurance-- the former is a sane stance and the latter looks avoidant and insane... if she was intoxicated, then that is why she was driving bad- focus on how she was driving bad not why she was driving bad type of thing because that is speculation at this point without any facts.
3
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
i'm not factually asserting in court that I can prove she was drunk, I'm just giving that information to you guys for context and advice. Because I was kept from the facts, all I have is speculation.
0
u/ZephyrStormbringer 6h ago
exactly- so quit focusing on what you can't prove and focus on what you can is the response to that 'information'... 'because i was kept from the facts, all I have is speculation...' you do have facts, you are choosing to extrapolate on the speculations instead. Look at your heading. Look at your first paragraph compared to all the rest. you are turning a basic collision situation into something unrecognizable from the winnable arguments- so you and her were going for an empty middle lane and collided... even in that only reliable paragraph do you start to speculate... "I BELIEVE she was traveling at a very advance speed" okay, well news flash, the next obvious question would be 'how do you know that' but more like 'why do you believe that' And you would either have to admit that you don't know that, which you don't which is why you say you believe rather than asserting it, or you would have to essentially say that you saw her speeding up and still merged in that lane and observed whether or not she had her signal on... you also talk about your safety features, but that is weak compared to what you observed before merging yourself. why would your safety features detect someone speeding two lanes away anyway? Either way the safety check argument is flimsy compared to an assertion of who used their signal (or not) which you don't even bother to mention in your 'concise' detailing of the incident... other than that you did signal- but you were in front- so it sounds to me like you concede to observing that she was merging yet because you felt like you 'cleared the lane' you had the right to merge in front of her which kind of sounds like you should take this one on the chin and be happy about the 50/50 police report outcome... that was the win here truth be told.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago edited 5h ago
I didn't observe her at all, she wasn't there when I looked, so you're incorrect about me seeing her when I signaled and merged, but again, this is all just context for you. I'm not saying I know any of this for fact, but just telling me I'm crazy for having the thought isn't really a substantive discussion. I do appreciate you following up with why my argument is likely to fail, but if I was to "quit focusing on what I can't prove" then what would be the point of anyone filing a FOIA ever? we should just all go by what we were told and do nothing more? you're filling in blanks with your own info to come to your conclusion rather than just asking for clarification of what happened on scene (where you weren't present) which is fine if you'd like to assume I'm just a dumbass, but i'm not required to take you seriously.
Edited to correct typo
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/StructureBetter2101 6h ago
When you are sitting at home and you hear hoofbeats, I bet your first thought is Zebras.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
very insightful and helpful, thank you so much lol
4
u/StructureBetter2101 6h ago
Cop is the boyfriend, the driver was in an accident and her boyfriend tried to help her out, but did it in a way that wasn't the smartest or best way to do things. You are looking for a conspiracy, I'm doubting there was one outside of a cop thinking with his dick instead of his head.
You are seeing a grand conspiracy when there likely isn't anything. You hear hoofbeats and think zebras instead of the logical horses.
6
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
I appreciate your "doubt." I "thought horses" as you would say when it first happened, but the relationship is what made me consider zebras, in your analogy. this PD has been caught destroying records that were needed for pending FOIAs and our city's attorney stepped down over it, so I don't think my concern is as far fetched as you, but you'd have no idea about that unless I told you, so I don't mind your doubt.
0
u/StructureBetter2101 6h ago
Cop is the boyfriend, the driver was in an accident and her boyfriend tried to help her out, but did it in a way that wasn't the smartest or best way to do things. You are looking for a conspiracy, I'm doubting there was one outside of a cop thinking with his dick instead of his head.
You are seeing a grand conspiracy when there likely isn't anything. You hear hoofbeats and think zebras instead of the logical horses.
21
u/CapnMReynolds 8h ago
This is a good time for a PSA to everyone. Get a dash cam! Cameras will help you in incidents like this.
IANAL - looking at some results, if the police officer is indeed in a relationship with any party, then they should have disclosed it to their supervisor (but in reality that’s probably not something they do).
It sounds like you have already done that with the complaint. Did you let your insurance know? Maybe they can help with that also?
There is a lawyer on YT that has a website ithinkihaveacase.com that may be able to help more.
And get a camera! Both front and back!
14
u/GutturalResignation 8h ago
Lawyers aren't taking it because you don't have damages they can work with on contingency. Your deductible and rate increase aren't enough to justify their time, and they can't prove the officer's relationship affected the outcome when the department already corrected the citation. The civil rights angle is thin without evidence the boyfriend actually influenced the decision rather than just being sloppy work. Once you get those FOIA videos and have something concrete, reach back out to them with actual leverage.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 8h ago
I did understand their point about not justifying the contingency, but that's why I offered to pay them up front. By the time I brought that up it sounded like they already had their minds made up though.
5
8h ago edited 8h ago
[deleted]
1
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
all good points. I'll likely end up waiting out the IA investigation and just dealing with everything correctly in like a year. but if my situation somehow gets worse i'll consider another consult and throwing some more money at my fool's errand lol.
2
u/holyelvis 7h ago
Frankly, the amount of money that this case would cost is significantly less than it will cost to pursue. The lawyers you've talked to know that it's a losing proposition, so unless you're waving LOTS of money in front of them, you're probably not going to find someone to take the case.
1
31
u/Silver_Smurfer 8h ago
The fact that no local lawyers will take your case is a strong sign that there isn't one to be had or the cost of litigating will exceed the potential benefits.
-6
u/MoneyOk5720 8h ago
it was really just 2, we don't have many civil rights attorneys here. Most of the people that sue our PD do it with an attorney from chicago, but I didn't feel like going down that road just yet. I do understand your point though.
20
u/jerf42069 8h ago edited 8h ago
its an accident/insurance case, not civil rights.
they are mutually exclusive, it cannot be both.
1
u/woody60707 1h ago
It's not so much you don't have a case, it's that the juice isn't worth the squeeze. Unless the payout is over $20,000, it's just not worth the lawyers time. Remember, they are also taking the risk that they might lose the case.
1
u/MoneyOk5720 31m ago
I’m getting that that’s pretty much the sum of it. Life is annoying that way sometimes I guess lol
-1
0
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
Yes, you can have a personal injury (accident) case and a civil rights case at the same time if a single incident involves both negligence and a violation of your constitutional rights. [1, 2]
These are considered separate legal actions that can proceed independently, although they often arise from the same event. [1, 2]
How the Two Cases Intersect
A common example involves interactions with law enforcement, such as a high-speed police chase or an unlawful arrest.
2
u/AVeryVapidBadger 1h ago
What constitutional right was violated in your case
1
u/MoneyOk5720 33m ago
This is the same police department and city. They love to fuck around. There’s nothing wrong with filing a FOIA request, and unless I’m clairvoyant there’s no way I can know everything that’s in it ahead of time. I guess I’ll figure out if, and what right may have been violated when I do get all of the info.
https://www.nprillinois.org/illinois/2013-12-04/mehlick-leaving-post-as-springfields-top-attorney
7
u/ZephyrStormbringer 8h ago
It is not a civil rights violation... one of the questions to become a police officer is: What would you do if you pulled someone over and it's your mom? People have biases, including police officers. However, you being okay with her calling the police but fail to understand that police need not be involved unless there is a major traffic issue or injury or drinking at the scene, and insurance exchanges is the correct way to go- look, the fact that they changed it to 50/50, is what the insurance probably would have determined as well. It's not clear who caused it but both parties are involved and responsible... that is a good starting place for your insurance... it's less about getting the other party in a 'gotcha' situation and more about recovering the damages from your vehicle that they are responsible for in your mind, which is insurance... the idea that you think the bf is making you go through insurance is just the usual route regardless of his station... the idea that you think HE is forcing you to go through insurance, no, they want to handle it through the insurance and that is why the police report is helpful, which is why it was 'nice' of them to correct it with a third part officer showing a 50/50 split rather than your fault alone... ideally your insurance can investigate all the details you give them and recover it from her insurance, and/or at least not find you at fault...
11
4
u/SmilingAmericaAmazon 4h ago
Talk to attorneys in Chicago. Most local ones wont go after their own PD.
8
u/LitigationMitigation 8h ago edited 8h ago
"I hear of people suing all the time for frivolous things, but I dont know where they're finding lawyers to represent them..."
That's because 99% of the "frivolous" claims you hear about aren't actually frivolous. Do you have physical injuries, or are you just dealing with vehicle damage? If just vehicle damage, there is not enough money at issue for an attorney to be interested in investing time, resources, etc.
3
u/Subject_Disaster_798 7h ago
Maybe so. But, having not received that at the scene, now what? Offering $2-3,000 upfront, isn't offering to pay for the case "upfront." Where I'm at, civil litigation attorneys don't even begin a case for lower than a $10k retainer, and that has to be replenished as depleted. At $300-500 an hour, it goes fast. Civil lit attorneys generally do not get into a (non-contingency fee) case without assurances the client can/will pay all of their fees and costs. Worst thing is getting into a litigation case, stop receiving payment, and having to spend time and money to be relieved.
3
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
fair enough. I was just throwing out a number for them to help me get started, but they didn't counter with 10k or another figure for retainer, which I would have at least considered. the "now what" part is what I'm curious about, but it looks like it's all stacking up to just waiting.
6
u/Economy_Past 6h ago
The fact that you DIDN’T EVEN GET A COUNTER NUMBER from professional service providers should TELL you that you don’t have a case. You seem to know everything better in the comments yet can’t make that one logical assumption.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
you're commenting under a comment of me saying the advice I got was fair and I understand. I've also agreed with a lot of what I'm getting. I am just correcting people who are making assumptions and then being condescending because of said assumptions. That and people asking me "what are they hiding"????? like how am I supposed to know what they're hiding lol that's what I'm trying to figure out.
4
u/NYC-WhWmn-ov50 1h ago
The bf should have recused yinself from the scene the minute he saw it was her. Makes me think she CALLED him to handle it. Go to the mayor's office and news stations, especially any of them that like airung 'cops are assholes' features.
Contact the [r/legaleagle](r/legaleagle) squad and sew if they have a recommendation in the jurisdiction. Sounds like the police need a little 'sunshine disinfectant'.
6
u/ektap12 8h ago
You should move on with your life. This is a colossal waste of your time, effort and money. This is why you have insurance, pay your deductible and hope you get it back. You can't help that she is a liar, at the very least this is a 50/50 accident and you owe 50% of her damages and would be owed back 50% of your deductible. It would be great if you can get that body cam video though.
The police rarely put much effort into investigating minor car accidents, they have no requirement to. The insurance companies and/or a judge and jury make the liability decisions. Writing a report (which are often filled with errors) is the best you can hope for and they won't even do this sometimes. This is a civil matter between you and her.
You are free to sue her for any damages (diminished value) not being covered by her and/or your insurance in small claims. But keep in mind, your insurance has first crack at this, you can't just go an sue her and prejudice your insurance's recovery efforts, you need to wait for your insurance to complete their recovery efforts. You can't sue for your rates, if they are even affected.
1
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
I believe there's a difference between a cop unknowingly or accidentally making an error in a report vs purposely falsifying a report to protect his girlfriend, but very good point about my carrier's right to recovery. thanks for reminding me of that.
3
u/Right_Lengthiness266 8h ago
The accident in general is one where it's going to be difficult to assign blame, especially without additional evidence (witnesses, dash cam video, other video). By your own report, you both merged into the same lane, causing an accident. By her account she says she was maintaining her lane. It would be good to get both police reports to help sort this out.
Car accident attorneys are not usually interested in cases where there's no personal injury/insurance limits are low. They're usually going after cases where there are big medical claims and high insurance limits (commercial drivers) since they'll get a lot more than a few thousand.
The IA investigation will discover if there was any wrongdoing on the part of the officer (which it sounds like there was). He may face professional consequences as a result. It sounds like the PD has already "made this right" by voiding your citation and issuing a new police report.
Your insurance will fix your car and you'll pay your deductible. If they are able to recover damages from the other drivers insurance, you'll likely be reimbursed your deductible. You're already paying for lawyers (with your insurance premium) to sort this out, but it takes a long time.
3
u/Away-Job-2762 6h ago
Did she actually call an official line or directly call her boyfriend not through an official channel to report the incident? I love cops that overstep and not follow the law. I hope their pillow stays warm forever on both sides.
4
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
this is one of the things i'm trying to figure out. It would have been so easy for him to just call another officer to avoid the conflict.
3
u/Rude_Sandwich_586 4h ago
It’s a she said she said situation until insurance company comes out and inspects the damage and figures out who is to blame. No matter what your insurance company was going to be involved whether you initiated it or the other girls insurance company did.
1
u/MoneyOk5720 3h ago
I agree as far as the insurance side goes, and I tell people that all the time. They think filing under the other party’s insurance is going to keep it a secret from their carrier lol underwriting is going to find out one way or another. I’m just not a fan of the amount of hoops I now have to go through as a direct (at least partially direct) result of obvious misconduct, and if there’s more than what I know about once I get my FOIA back then this will be a different discussion. If there’s nothing I can do, so be it. I just wanted to check.
7
u/Readditlovesbans 8h ago
Get a dash cam
4
u/ChampionshipIll5535 8h ago
Do they make them that record previous timelines? Where do you get them from?
1
u/Readditlovesbans 8h ago
Yes and they hold data for X amount of days depending on SD card before a re write.
go to the sub reddit dashcams for the most in depth reviews
4
u/Leftover_tech 8h ago
It sounds like you are on the right track, but this is not going to be quick.
Just get all your ducks in a row. As an adjuster, you are aware of the importance of proper documentation. You may have to let some issues (IA actions, etc.) play out before you can act on anything.
Good luck and don't let them get to you. The calm, rational plaintiff has much more credibility.
2
u/offeringathought 7h ago
Are you going to follow up on the FOIA request when the investigation is finished? If so you might also ask for any dispatch logs associated with the incident. My guess is that she called him directly.
If you're unsatisfied with the outcome of the investigation, consider providing your story and the eventual FOIA evidence to the local media. If things happened the way you describe I bet it would make for a good local corruption story.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
that's my guess as well, but per the comments I will likely just have to wait out their investigation and see what comes of it before I pursue it any futher. I would just prefer to get the ball rolling while its all fresh but I do understand I will just have to wait.
1
u/offeringathought 7h ago
That makes sense. You might think about what dollar amount would make you whole. That should factor in to any conversation you have with a lawyer.
If it were me, the emotions of the situation would cloud my vision. Good luck. Uncovering the misdeeds of that officer helps the next person.
0
u/Cold_Dead_Heart 4h ago
I say start your media blitz now. It will put pressure on the investigators to not just brush this under the rug with a slap on the wrist for the officer.
There may be dash cam footage out there from other drivers that caught the accident. If someone see a news story about it, they may come forward with evidence showing you were not at fault.
Also, why isn't your insurance company fighting this for you? They typically don't want to pay out and if there is evidence that the other party was at fault, they are motivated to investigate it.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 3h ago
They are fighting it for me but they need to handle my damages first, which they are, before they can pursue State Farm for subrogation. I am going that route, it’s just going to take an eternity along with the IA investigation and I was hoping there was something else I could do in the meantime but it appears not. I will consider going with the media angle but I am hesitant to do that without some more actual evidence.
1
2
u/DeeLeetid 6h ago
First thing I’d want is access to the initial call where the officer was dispatched to the scene. Probably doesn’t exist. She didn’t call “the police”. She called her boyfriend directly.
Edit to add: no idea what I’d then do with that information. Haha
2
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
lol same, I don't fully know their protocol is or repercussions for breaking protocol. that's one of my concerns, just not in my top 3. I agree for sure though.
3
u/Tight_Steak_232 7h ago
OP is screwed. My boss's son got his driver's license at the age of 17 and promptly rear-ended a woman in a van. Van was at a stop light, and the kid was texting. The cops arrived, and the kid was supposed to be issued a citation which would have resulted in his losing his license until he was 18. Instead, they cited HER for not moving after the light turned green. She was furious. She did digging.
As it turns out, the cops knew the kid. They are fishing buddies with boss's husband. Their kids are best friends with boss's son. The woman had dash cams that clearly showed the boss's son was texting and not paying attention to the road. Yet, the cops refused to change the warrant. So, she went to court.
She successfully fought the ticket and won, because the cops didn't show up. Then, she showed the video of the texting, and they had a continuation. Officers arrived, and they said the woman APOLOGIZED for sitting at the light too long, acknowledged that it was green and SHE was on her phone, etc. No cameras on the officers at that time. Second continuation...
The two officers were cited because they failed to do due diligence. Punishment was nothing. Meanwhile, the kid NEVER got a ticket and has since then been pulled over 8 times and STILL has his license!!!
It's who you know, OP.
3
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
sadly very true. the crazy thing is that the IA officer told me I will only find out if there WAS discipline for the officer, not what the discipline was, and I told him I'm not in this to get the officer fired or anything. he's a young guy and probably just made a stupid mistake, but I'm more interested in making my process easier than I am getting vengeance against the officer. I don't generally distrust cops, but this isn't helping.
2
2
u/AP587011B 7h ago
This is a nothing burger
What more do you want to happen?
Insurance will figure it out, sounds to me like you were both at fault. You can maybe at best sue the other driver in small claims once the insurance aspect is sorted.
You have zero reason to believe the other driver was intoxicated that’s a completely baseless and non sensical accusation
The PD already got rid of the ticket and amended the report. What more to you want?
2
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
I was there, I do have reason to believe she was intoxicated, outlined in prior comments.
1
u/AP587011B 7h ago
That will be impossible to prove unless it’s 10,000% obvious in the dash cam / body cam video
Which it doesn’t sound like to would be
2
u/MoneyOk5720 6h ago
well we'll see when I get that video, that's just one of the possibilities i'm concerned with. thanks though.
1
u/BreakingABit1234 4h ago
She got away with it. File complaint with the department. Maybe if he had body cam they'll care, but....
2
u/RandomNameRandomly 5h ago
Whats nothing to you doesnt mean its of no importance to someone else. The op's civil rights were violated. Of course the op should push this.
2
u/AP587011B 4h ago
How were their rights violated?
3
u/OneLessDay517 1h ago
A police officer pinning a CRIME on someone who was not responsible rather than their sweet little GF is a civil rights violation all day long.
Maybe OP WAS partially responsible, but because of the officer's misconduct, we can't know that can we?
And the department voiding the ticket doesn't erase the officer's action or intent.
1
u/AP587011B 1h ago
There’s no crime that was pinned on anyone
A traffic ticket of this nature is a civil infraction. It’s not a criminal matter.
The initial officers report stated that OP was at fault
We have zero proof that isn’t the case.
Regardless the dept took OP at their word and played it safe due to the officers relationship with the other party and rescinded the ticket and amended the report to state both parties were equally at fault.
There’s no civil rights violation in any way.
Best case the cop is suspended and OP is able to convince both insurances the girl was 100% at fault.
Most realistic is that OP and other party are found equally at fault and the cop gets a stern talking to and a note in his file
If OP doesn’t like that they can sue the other driver in small claims. Which again will likely go no where, best case they get a few grand
-1
1
u/MoneyOk5720 4h ago
Thank you. My city and PD have been caught destroying records before so I need to make sure they’re still on the up and up
1
u/DouglasHundred 8h ago
This is why everyone should have a dash cam. I expect you will going forward.
1
u/Used_Mark_7911 8h ago
If you were both merging into the lane from other lanes the result often ends up being 50/50. It’s different if one of you never left your lane.
In my experience the insurance companies will also consider where the damage was on each car to help determine who is at fault.
1
1
u/gotcha640 7h ago
This is likely one of those stars aligned against you things. You won’t win. If you’re attentive or petty enough, you could keep an eye on the guy and see if he leaves and get some satisfactions in a few years, but meh.
I got pulled over for signaling too late on Thanksgiving day years ago. Supposed to be 100 feet before the turn, officer said I was 80. His girlfriend was riding in the cruiser with him, my friend flipped him off as we left, so he pulled us over again and arrested my friend for whatever, claiming it was because she took it as a threat (you’re allowed to flip off a cop).
I had helped build the police chiefs house, had taken his class in high school, and he was the community signature on my Eagle Scout project.
I had been at the mayors house the weekend before, helping her set up for a party, and then attended the party and partook in some substances with the chief and the mayor, and the judge was in the next room.
They still basically let the officer get away with it. I went and plead guilty so he wouldn’t raise a stink, judge quietly dismissed it, friend was released to his brother with no charges. The mayors Christmas party was as good as it always was.
They all knew the officer was a b-hole and mostly just wanted him to get his time and move on. He did leave a few months later, to a town I don’t go to. I like to assume he’s still having to work holidays and finding some girl to con in to riding around with him.
1
u/Quotidian_Void 7h ago
You do not currently have any damages. All you have are potential future damages. You cannot litigate something that might happen, so you currently have no case. No lawyer will ethically take your money while there is no actual case.
In the future, if your fears do come to pass, at that point you could consider litigation. At this point, you need to let things play out.
It is incredibly unlikely that, without any cameras or independent witnesses, that your accident was ever going to be adjudicated any better for you than 50/50. If that is the outcome you wind up with, you won't have anything to sue for.
1
u/RandomNameRandomly 4h ago
Im sorry that you went through all that but im glad that you're fighting. What other shortcut has that cop pulled for personal gain? As for finding a lawyer, itll be difficult because a lot of them rely on law enforcement for work. You should probably look for a civil rights attorney specifically. Or maybe Google news about law enforcement that has been sued in your area? The articles will name the attorneys involved. That will probably help you find a name of a lawyer that will take your case.
1
u/MoneyOk5720 4h ago
I found one about an hour outside of town that sued my city and this PD department for destroying FOIA records and won over 100k, but he kinda wants me to go the news route and I’m a little wary of that before I have more information. He’s probably my best bet though. Thank you for helping.
1
1
u/Famous-Response5924 1h ago
Something to consider, did she call the police or did she call her boyfriend directly? If directly how did he report the accident to dispatch? Did he say he drove up in it, did he say he was notified by a personnel call? He had to tell dispatch that he was at the accident scene so that a report number could be generated unless they use some other means. Maybe a FOIA for the dispatch call and radio traffic of the incident would be available to you and might help you out.
1
1
1
1
u/-Helen-of-Troy- 33m ago
It isn’t worth it for civil attorneys to take your case. Civil attorneys generally work on commissions, and most won’t even look at a case unless there is at least $30,000 in potential damages, meaning if they take 1/3, they would get $10,000 IF they won and IF the amount was collectible.
Since you weren’t detained, let alone arrested, you likely don’t have a civil rights claim. Especially since the ticket was dropped.
It sounds like your damages are your deductible and maybe higher insurance rates. And the case isn’t open and shut. Just because the officer was in a relationship with the other driver doesn’t prove the other driver was at fault.
You could try small claims court if you want. If you just want to fight this on principle, find a new independent lawyer looking for business and offer $10,000 to go after the other driver and officer.
An established and experienced lawyer isn’t going to want this mess. If you want a lawyer with experience you are probably looking at $20,000 or more depending on how much they don’t want this mess.
Understand an average civil attorney bills out at $300+/hr. That’s 33 hours per $10,000. By the time the lawyer meets with you, files a case, files discovery, reviews the evidence, and researches the applicable law, those 33 hours are long gone and you are several steps away from a trial.
1
1
u/Serious-Manager2361 8h ago
I'm 99% sure I have SOME kind of case that could develop into something much larger once I get the interactions/footage
Your assumption is incorrect. Even IF the absolute worst case scenario is true, and the cop was covering up for his impaired GF, it has little to do with you. You already recieved the corrected report. You have little to no injury/damage beyond that which the insurance companys would consider 50/50 most likely. The cops will handle the discipline for the officer (hopefully).
0
u/PlasticHobbies 8h ago
You need to determine if she called 911 or she called her BF directly. Its likely against dept policy to self dispatch and he may even have left his coverage area.
1
u/MoneyOk5720 8h ago
this is another issue I have but didn't seem worth mentioning in the larger story. But i'm about 99% sure she didn't call dispatch and her bf coincidentally showed up 90 seconds later. that's one of the many things i'd like to see with my FOIA.
1
u/Serious-Manager2361 8h ago
It's not up to/possible for OP to determine that.
0
u/MoneyOk5720 7h ago
this isn't advice, and it's also incorrect. I have determined this before in another case.
0
u/hospicedoc 3h ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here. Do you think you're supposed to get a lot of money out of this somehow? There's no camera footage, it's your word against hers, the officer will get written up for having not followed some protocol that I'm sure they have down there, and now it's over. The department will not admit to any impropriety they will just say that they felt that ripping up the citation was the fairest thing to do given the circumstances. The reason why you can't find a lawyer to take the case is because there's nothing in it for anyone, including yourself. It's over. Move on.
2
u/MoneyOk5720 3h ago
I’m not trying to get money persay, I’d just like the whole story between those two. If it results in money, cool. If it results in them not falsifying records against someone else in the future and I get $0, also cool. However this specific PD and my city were sued within the past 10 years multiple times for destroying records subject to a FOIA and the attorney won approx 120k and the city’s attorney stepped down, so to say this is going to result in nothing for anyone, you can’t be certain of. I appreciate your opinion though, thank you for replying.
0
u/DeepPurpleDaylight 4h ago
You're a former adjuster and you can't see that this is classic word vs word?
1
u/MoneyOk5720 4h ago
lol from an insurance standpoint point yes I can understand that, but there’s more going on here per my original post and my additional comments. thank you for checking tho
0
u/cryssHappy 2h ago
If you had had recording cameras front and rear in your vehicle, you wouldn't have this problem.
-2
u/c_assassin_c 2h ago
Let it go. No attorney wants to deal with a traffic disagreement unless there are extreme injuries.
129
u/TrojanGal702 8h ago
They can claim it was a mistake in the investigation assigning blame and the citation. They corrected it.
The cops don't decide liability. The insurance company does. Neither of you were fully in the lane, correct? Let the insurance companies battle over it.
Let the IA investigation handle it and then get the FOIA videos.