City of Austin to settle with family of Nathaniel Sanders

[CAL]

The City of Austin has agreed to terms on a settlement that would end a federal civil rights lawsuit brought by the family of Nathaniel Sanders II , who was fatally shot in May 2009 by senior police officer Leonardo Quintana.
According to multiple sources, who asked for anonymity because the agreement is not complete, the two sides have been in mediation and agreed to a $750,000 settlement. The City Council would still have to approve the deal.
City spokesman Reyne Telles said the council is scheduled to possibly vote on the settlement at its July 29 meeting. Telles said the city has asked for a delay in the case, which was scheduled to go to trial in less than two weeks. He declined to elaborate, leaving it unclear why the city's lawyers pursued a settlement.
Sgt. Wayne Vincent , president of the Austin police union, said the organization has concerns that a settlement would send "an absolutely wrong message." He said union officials will meet with council members in the coming days to express their concerns.
"I still hold out hope that the city is not going to cave on this," he said. "This thing has been to the grand jury (which declined to indict Quintana); it has been investigated ad nauseam."
Adam Loewy , an attorney representing the Sanders family, said, "We are pleased this case has been resolved."
Quintana's attorney, Robert Icenhauer-Ramirez , declined to comment and referred calls to the city. Police Chief Art Acevedo was unavailable for comment Friday.
Quintana fatally shot Sanders on May 11, 2009 , in an apartment complex parking lot after they struggled for a gun Sanders had at his waist, officials said.
Quintana was suspended for 15 days for not activating his patrol car camera but was not disciplined for his tactics or use of deadly force. But a consultant hired by the Police Department later determined that Quintana had used tactics that were so "reckless" that they may have been criminal.
Acevedo disagreed but later fired Quintana after a drunken driving arrest in January.
The shooting and its aftermath have roiled City Hall. At first the city would release only a version of the consultant's report in which numerous portions were blacked out. Eventually a copy of the report was leaked to the American-Statesman, and critics said the city had blacked out so much of the report that its conclusions had been fundamentally altered.
The city then said it should not have withheld the unredacted version but did so because its legal staff misinterpreted a contract with the police union.
Then-City Attorney David Smith subsequently resigned under pressure from City Manager Marc Ott , and council members complained about the mishandling of the affair.
Sanders' family filed a federal civil rights lawsuit that named both the city government and Quintana individually. U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks dismissed the city from the suit June 27 .
Previously, settlements over officer-involved shootings have been paid for with money from a reserve the city maintains to deal with liabilities.
The amount of the settlement is about $250,000 less than what the city paid in two previous officer-involved shootings. The city paid the family of Kevin Alexander Brown $1 million after he was fatally shot by an officer in 2007. In that case, Sgt. Michael Olsen was fired for his tactics leading up to the shooting outside Chester's Club in East Austin.
A month after the Brown settlement, the city agreed to pay $1 million to the family of Daniel Rocha , who was shot June 9, 2005, by officer Julie Schroeder during a traffic stop.
Attorneys for the city had previously prevailed in court after it was named in lawsuits involving the shooting deaths of Sophia King , a mentally ill woman, in 2002 and Jesse Lee Owens in 2003 .


Link (http://www.statesman.com/news/local/city-reaches-settlement-terms-with-sanders-family-794904.html)

Wow, :WTF:

[Feet]

Yep. Austin pays out every time some crook fucks up and earns an ass whoopin or shooting.
Its disgusting.

[Broke Hoss]

I know a couple of people that work down there.....I just don't see how ya'll do it. I don't stand up for someone not willing to stand up for me.

[CAL]

Austin police union officials have sent Mayor Lee Leffingwell and city council members a strongly worded letter urging them to vote against a proposed $750,000 settlement with the family of a man fatally shot by an officer last year.
Council members are scheduled to vote July 29 on the proposed agreement with the family of Nathaniel Sanders II, who was shot by Senior Police Officer Leonardo Quintana during what officials have described as a struggle for a weapon Sanders had at his waist.
Here is a copy of a letter to city leaders from union president Sgt. Wayne Vincent:
<hr> To: Lee Leffingwell, Mayor Austin City Council - City Hall 301 W. 2nd Street Austin, TX 78701
Dear Mayor,
On behalf of the 1600 men and women who provide law enforcement services to our community, I would like to express deep concerns over the contemplated settlement between the City of Austin and the Sanders family. We were all taken by surprise in learning this surrender was being considered. Before you render a decision in this matter, allow me to address in detail what we believe will be the unintended result of such a settlement.
The moment this ill advised settlement is finalized, there will be a permanent impression that the City of Austin admits this shooting was unjustified and that Officer Quintana alone was responsible for the death of this young man. Nothing could be further from the truth, and any reasonable person knowledgeable about the facts would agree. No amount of clauses within the agreement prohibiting assumptions of guilt is going to change the fact that the community will take from this an admission that the police acted inappropriately. Of course Mr. Loewy will be prohibited from making assertions about police misconduct, but he already did that the day this potential settlement became public. His statement to KXAN on 7/10/10 “we are pleased that the City of Austin and APD finally accepts responsibility for this unjustified shooting” gives you proof positive that this will be the final judgment in the mind of the community. Our officers are accustomed to inaccurate perceptions of their actions from anti-police activists and other critics, but this time it will be at the hands of our City Council. Unless you believe this shooting was unjustified and the District Attorney, the Grand Jury, the Police Monitor and the Austin Police Department got it wrong, then I submit you have a duty to fight this in court.
This settlement completely counters any intention of city government transparency. By appropriating three quarters of a million dollars for this settlement, there will be no trial. There will be no opportunity for the general public to see all of the facts. There will be no public display of all evidence developed from this incident. A case can be made that this is nothing short of hush money. More than once in this case the City and APD have been accused by critics of a cover up. To stop the process now with a payoff is certainly not going to change that perception; in fact, it will only serve to bolster it.
With the City’s history of such settlements after police incidents, we are sending a very dangerous message to those who still believe they have a right to resist and fight our Police Officers. Over the years I think we all can agree APD has changed tactics and technology in a remarkable effort to reduce injuries to suspects during police confrontations. We have been remiss however, in another critical area of police encounters. We seldom talk about the responsibility of our citizens to reduce these injuries. That responsibility is very simple. Don’t fight or resist the police. If this responsibility is fulfilled, the need for Police Officers to use force in the first place will be eliminated. Money contemplated to make this trial disappear would serve a much better purpose in public education about what the role is of the police officer, and how best to interact with the police during traffic- stops or other such contacts. I submit this type of program has a real chance of saving lives. Payoff money to make a trial go away will do no such thing.
I submit you have a responsibility to the taxpayers of Austin to protect their liability, and if that means fighting this lawsuit in court, then so be it. I hope you also agree there is a responsibility to the Police Officers you employ. All of you have publicly announced your support of law enforcement. This is one of those opportunities in which you can demonstrate that support by your willingness to fight this battle in court and resist the urge to take the easy way out. There are some concerns that going to court is a gamble for the city. Our officers still believe in the system and believe we will prevail, as do legal experts I have consulted with. Of course there are no guarantees on the outcome, but in this case, money cannot be the primary concern. The reputation of your Police Officers and the city must also be considered when making this decision. Adam Loewy has had the luxury of making outrageous allegations against us for over a year via the media. Your vote to settle this on the dawn of trial will be taken as a sign you agree with him. I refuse to believe that I will be disappointed when you as a body make this decision.
Thank you so much for your time and attention to this matter.
<hr> Wayne Vincent, President Austin Police Association Office: 512-474-6993
CC: Austin City Council Members Mike Martinez, Chris Riley, Randi Shade, Laura Morrison, Bill Spelman and Sheryl Cole.



Link (http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/cityhall/entries/2010/07/19/austin_police_union_urge_city.html)

[CAL]

Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell said he has "real concerns" about a proposed $750,000 settlement with the family of a man killed by an Austin police officer in May 2009.
Leffingwell, one of several city leaders who publicly expressed reservations about the proposal Monday night, added, "Frankly, I am leaning against it right now."
The seven-member City Council is set to vote on the settlement later this month.
Nathaniel Sanders II was shot by then-senior police officer Leonardo Quintana during what officials have described as a struggle for a weapon Sanders had at his waist.
The Sanders family's federal lawsuit, filed within days of the shooting, alleges civil rights violations. Quintana was fired in May of this year after he was arrested on a drunken driving charge.
Leffingwell said he was troubled by comments the Sanders family's attorney made to the media when the proposed settlement was made public July 8. In a statement, lawyer Adam Loewy said he was pleased that officials were taking responsibility for "this unjustified shooting."
"I think that is basically a slur against the city and Police Department," Leffingwell said.
Council Member Mike Martinez said he would not support the settlement.
"The proposed settlement leaves too many questions unanswered," Martinez said in a written statement. "It serves to close off examination rather than promoting understanding. The question is to get all of the facts in a proper forum and that is what a federal civil trial will do."
Council Member Randi Shade said she questions how much of the money from the settlement Loewy would receive and the nature of conversations between Loewy and city lawyers during negotiations.
Loewy declined to comment Monday night.
The comments from council members come more than a week before they are expected to vote at their July 29 meeting. The matter grows more politically sensitive by the day for city officials.
Austin police union officials immediately rejected the proposal and have since sent a strongly worded letter to Leffingwell and council members urging them to vote against it.
"The moment this ill advised settlement is finalized, there will be a permanent impression that the City of Austin admits this shooting was unjustified and that Officer Quintana alone was responsible for the death of this young man," Sgt. Wayne Vincent, the union president, wrote. "No amount of clauses within the agreement prohibiting assumptions of guilt is going to change the fact that the community will take from this an admission that the police acted inappropriately."
The Rev. Sterling Lands, senior pastor of Greater Calvary Bible Church and a former member of a citizens panel for the police monitor's office, sent a separate letter to Leffingwell on Monday.
Lands wrote that he has no issue with the settlement "other than it appears to be too small."
"The killing of Mr. Sanders was a criminal act and should be treated no different than any other murder or criminal act," Lands wrote. "The City of Austin must admit that this shooting was unjustified and that APD Officer Quintana was responsible for the death of this young man without cause."
Quintana fatally shot Sanders on May 11, 2009, in an apartment complex parking lot, officials said. Quintana was suspended for 15 days for not activating his patrol car camera but was not disciplined for his tactics or use of deadly force.
But a consultant hired by the city determined that Quintana had used tactics that were so reckless they may have been criminal.
Police Chief Art Acevedo disagreed. He later fired Quintana after his DWI arrest.
The civil trial was set to begin Monday , but it was taken off U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks' docket because of the tentative settlement. It was unclear when a trial would begin if council members reject the settlement.
Other council members Monday night said they were not sure how they will vote. Council Member Chris Riley said: "I will tell you I am concerned about it. Beyond that, I am really reluctant to say much more."
Council Member Sheryl Cole said she is talking with community members before making a decision. Council Member Bill Spelman said he has an appointment this week with the city's legal staff to discuss the proposal and declined to comment further until after that meeting.
Council Member Laura Morrison could not be reached Monday night.
Nelson Linder, president of the Austin chapter of the NAACP, said he is not surprised by the hesitancy of some council members.
"I think the community is going to mobilize in every way possible to make sure this is acted upon and that the City Council ensure that this family is taken care of," he said. "How could they not address this family's pain?"


Link (http://www.statesman.com/news/local/sanders-lawsuit-deal-troubles-council-812158.html)