NCSF on Twitter   Subscribe to the NCSF RSS Feed   NCSF Blog

"City now says Eagle raid was 'reasonable, proper, and necessary' — UPDATE"

on Wednesday, 19 October 2011. Posted in Front Page Headline, Media Updates

Creative Loafing

Just in time for Pride: Yesterday, the City filed its response to a lawsuit recently filed by ten men who were present at the Atlanta Eagle the night it was improperly raided by the Atlanta Police Department. See, I say "improperly" because it's been established several times over — in a previous settlement, an outside investigation commissioned by the city, as well as an investigation report prepared by the APD itself — that officers involved in the raid did NOT follow procedure. And certain APD procedures that were followed were later deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge.

In its response to this most recent lawsuit, the City basically says that the raid was not improper. Here's the dumb-or-brilliant part: They've phrased it so they're not necessarily arguing that NO ONE'S rights were violated or that the police didn't act inappropriately toward SOME PEOPLE — just not these particular plaintiffs.

Here are some highlights from the response (just to clarify, "City Defendants" includes the officers who conducted the raid, several of whom have already been fired for their role in the raid and the subsequent coverup): ...

Attorney Dan Grossman told CL today that he expected the City would argue damages — yeah, we were wrong, but how much is that hour spent lying on a filthy barroom floor really worth? — but didn't expect they'd argue the raid itself was acceptable.

In an emailed statement he said, "These statements directly contradict the conclusions of the city's two formal investigation reports, which found widespread violations of the patrons' constitutional rights."

Grossman describes the argument as "frivolous," and says bringing it before a judge could expose the City to sanctions — and paying the plaintiff's legal fees.

UPDATE: City spokesperson Sonji Dade acknowledges that the city's answer to the new lawsuit may sound incongruous with the court settlements it has previously made, but says it reflects standard legal practice.

"There are plaintiffs named in this new suit that the city hasn't yet confirmed were present in the Eagle that night," she says. "The legal strategy at this point has to be to deny the allegations and go from there."

If that sounds to you like the city will eventually settle most of these cases, too, we'd agree.

 

Social Bookmarks

Comments (0)

Leave a comment

You are commenting as guest. Optional login below.

Cancel Submitting comment...

Latest Reader Comments

  • Where's the rest of the article? It just ends worth "no longer qualifies..."

    Heather Vandegrift

    18. February, 2015 |

  • Your paragraph contrasting poly and swinging contains what I consider to be a fallacy that causes a lot of needless controversy....

    John Ullman

    10. February, 2015 |

  • Oh Shit. didn't know I was responding nation wide. LOL and laughing at self! Nothing is private these days!

    faunta

    04. February, 2015 |

  • I'm not understanding why you would send me a link to an article announcing the 50 kinkiest cities, yet when I click the link, the only...

    faunta

    04. February, 2015 |

  • I have to wonder about the people who made the film and what did they actually think that it was some off kilter game??? To many of...

    Wryter

    07. January, 2015 |

  • I didn't think much of the books and doubted if they could do better on screen. So, I will have zero reasons to pay good money to see it....

    Gillian Boardman

    07. January, 2015 |