The myriad of problems with claiming police framed Avery because of his lawsuit

[scipio_usmc]

The 4 different allegations are:

1) police were personally on the hook for wrongdoing and had to make the lawsuit go away to avoid personal legal liability from a judgment issued against them

2) that the police engaged in wrongdoing and lawsuit would have revealed their wrongdoing had it continued so they would have been fired

3) the county would be bankrupted and the entire police force would be fired so they had to act to save their jobs

4) the police force had animosity towards Avery and just did it because they hated him

Here are why each fails miserably.

Allegation 1
The lawsuit was against former officials and the county not any current country workers let alone police officers. If a judgment were obtained it would not have been against any current police officers. In any event police are covered by qualified immunity and the government would indemnify them.

Allegation 2
The lawsuit was not against any current police. In fact none of the current police were even involved with the rape investigation thus none of them had anything to worry about in terms of any argument they engaged in wrongdoing. Colborn and Lenk were hired as police subsequent to Steven Avery's rape conviction.

Allegation 3

The lawsuit was against the county. Under Supreme Court precedent the county could not be sued for punitive damages thus the county was only being sued for $18 million in compensatory damages. Avery had no hope in hell of establishing anywhere near $18 million in compensatory damages at the time the largest judgment was around $5 million. County insurance would cover any judgment but Avery had no hope of even establishing his constitutional rights were violated. His case was garbage and was being handled by someone who had no understanding of such lawsuits he never filed one before. The allegations were woefully insufficient.

Allegation 4

Few police knew who Steven Avery was until after he was released from prison. Most were hired while he was in jail. Their main contact with him was after he was released when they responded to domestic violence calls. They hated him so much that even though he was a felon and not supposed to possess a firearm they didn't do anything to him when they responded to such calls and saw the rifle in his bedroom. When challenged to prove who hated him and why they just talk about police who were no longer on the force who back in 1985 knew he committed several offenses. Based on him committing offences and thus always being suspicious of him they claim that is bias against him that would warrant planting. But these people were not involved in the Halbach case anyway.

The truth is that the rape victim made an innocent mistake when she misidentified Avery from the photo array and lineup. The police had the right to believe the victim ad did the DA and jury. The jury believed her and and convicted but as happens sometimes the victim was wrong and DNA evidence proved she was wrong. Steven Avery was not framed the victim simply made a mistake thus there was no basis for a judgment at all.

 

[proudfootz]

It would be a good idea to have a lawyer with some experience with overturning wrongful convictions review this hypothesis.

 

[scipio_usmc]

It would be a good idea to have a lawyer with some experience with overturning wrongful convictions review this hypothesis.

I am a civil attorney and the lawsuit was a civil lawsuit not a criminal case where they were trying to overturn a verdict.

The lawsuit had no merit it was simply worth nuisance value to settle and that is why it was settled. The thrust of the suit was that they were negligent in not figuring out who the real rapist was but that is not a valid basis for a federal action. Arguing that it was an equal protection violation by not suspecting all ex-convicts in the area, not having all ex-convicts in the lineup and thus not having the actual rapist in the lineup as well is frankly stupid. No court has ever validated such a theory of liability.

 

[proudfootz]

The rush to make a settlement would seem to indicate the insurance company feared a much larger payout should the case have gone to trial. Of course, we'll never know if the case was 'without merit' since the matter never went to trial. Depositions were still in the process of being taken, and it will never be known what new evidence would come to light.

 

[scipio_usmc]

The rush to make a settlement would seem to indicate the insurance company feared a much larger payout should the case have gone to trial. Of course, we'll never know if the case was 'without merit' since the matter never went to trial. Depositions were still in the process of being taken, and it will never be known what new evidence would come to light.

You have things backwards. There was no rush on the part of the insurance company. The insurance company made a standard nuisance settlement offer because the cost of litigation would cost more than to settle. It was Steven Avery who was in a rush to settle. The only discovery left was to depose the individual defendants. It is standard practice to do that last after you develop information to use at their deposition from other depositions and discovery.

His lawyers didn't find anything useful to question them about from the other deponents and had no hope of getting any damaging admissions out of them though so after they were deposed and it would have been clear that Steven Avery had no case. The defendants would have made motions for summary judgment. At that point the settlement value would go down even more, so they took the offer without completing the 2 final depositions. In addition the deposition would have cost them more money and eat into their profit from any settlement. So instead of rescheduling the depositions they recommended taking the latest $400,000 settlement offer.

If Steven Avery actually had a case worth a great deal his lawyers who were working on a contingency fee would have held out for much more and if they could not get the large settlement they desired then would have wanted to go to trial. $400,000 on a suit demanding up to $18 million is a pittance. The settlement offer was actually higher before discovery (a million dollars) started and I am sure his lawyers kicked themselves for not taking it.

In any event the excuse the plaintiff lawyers give for settling it was that Steven Avery did not want to use a public defender and needed money for his criminal defense. The reality though is that he could have borrowed money against his prospective judgment if he had a good case and solid prospect of getting millions. He didn't though and his lawyers knew it so were unwilling to loan him money against a judgment and failed to recommend any of the myriad of companies that do such. They wanted their money for the time they put in so wanted to settle ASAP. They had to front the money for discovery themselves since it was a contingency agreement. That is why more expenses would have eaten into their cut.

 

[chutoi]

I find it interesting to listen to other hypothesis.

<modsnip>