Remembering Scott Norberg

[byu71]

No, I didn't. I'm not saying "he deserved death." What I'm saying is that there are certain people who are better off passing from this life than staying here and suffering.

Lest you think I'm completely nuts, I feel this very way about my father. His life has been 65 years of hell, and sometimes I just wish he could find his way out and rest (and he's my very best friend).

Although the statement seems harsh, if you strongly believe in a just hereafter it isn't such a harsh statement.

I hear people saying "they're better off dieing" when talking about old people.

[whoneedscorners?]

WTH is wrong with you? Did you torture small animals as a child?

No kidding...

[SeattleUte]

I'm not sure that cleaning up blood after a fight is obstruction of evidence. It's probably just cleaning up.

Good grief. There may be a principled cop-side argument here but you're not making it. Even TV junkies know what cleaning up blood after you kill someone is.

[SeattleUte]

Yes, Sherriff Joe is still Sherriff. As you well know, settling a suit is not an admission of guilt. Was it mishandled? Certainly.

I won't apologize for my last paragraph. The text of his letter to his father shows that he was a tortured soul, and hopefully he found some measure of peace in the hereafter.

That's what they always say. Common sense tells you they paid this because their lawyers told them they would be annihilated at trial. $9 million is an astronomical sum to pay in 1999 for a wrongful death of a near 40 year old guy with minimal income potential.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

That's what they always say. Common sense tells you they paid this because their lawyers told them they would be annihilated at trial. $9 million is an astronomical sum to pay in 1999 for a wrongful death of a near 40 year old guy with minimal income potential.

Right around the time the insurance company read about one of the sheriffs stretching the towel across Norberg's face and neck and then read the testimony from one of the other sheriffs where she said something like "he's turning purple, you might be killing him" to which the sheriff brandishing the towel said "I don't give a f***," the insurance company immediately thought "settle."

Here's why none of the sheriffs were prosecuted:

1. The crime scene evidence and a significant portion of the evidence that could be obtained from the body was destroyed and/or tainted because the sheriff department (surprise!) took some control over how the autopsy was performed.

2. The tape is largely inconclusive.

3. The sheriffs, except for at least one, circled the wagons and they weren't about to rat on their own.

4. The testimony from the prisoner witnesses would not likely add up to much.

All in all, a criminal conviction was probably going to be downright impossible. In addition, the GOP will never do anything about this and the Democrats increasingly abandon going after corrupt law enforcement because they don't want to be seen as going soft on crime. This was never a high priority for the Justice Department/FBI.

[KillerDog]

I've read that before. I have had the unfortunate experience of interacting with police and prison guards in the capacity of a person with a warrant out for his arrest. In regular environments the cops and prison guards are overly aggressive. They respond to everything with too much violence. They are petty and out of control. In my experience, they project their own personalities on the arrested person. Luckily for me, I was hauled in on a warrant in Orem, Utah so I was only beaten up on State street in Orem instead of killed in the County lock-up in Arizona at the hands of the criminals employed by Joe Arpaio. My experience taught me a great lesson. Those arresting and holding our societies criminals are cut from the same cloth as the worst of the criminals. The only differences I can tell are (1) one group has a badge to hide behind, (2) one gang is better organized, (3) one group appeals to the general populace that never interacts with them, and (4) one group has a direct line to the prosecutors who believe them.

That story makes me ill every time. Fuckin' Joe Arpaio.

[Surfah]

I've read that before. I have had the unfortunate experience of interacting with police and prison guards in the capacity of a person with a warrant out for his arrest. In regular environments the cops and prison guards are overly aggressive. They respond to everything with too much violence. They are petty and out of control. In my experience, they project their own personalities on the arrested person. Luckily for me, I was hauled in on a warrant in Orem, Utah so I was only beaten up on State street in Orem instead of killed in the County lock-up in Arizona at the hands of the criminals employed by Joe Arpaio. My experience taught me a great lesson. Those arresting and holding our societies criminals are cut from the same cloth as the worst of the criminals. The only differences I can tell are (1) one group has a badge to hide behind, (2) one gang is better organized, (3) one group appeals to the general populace that never interacts with them, and (4) one group has a direct line to the prosecutors who believe them.

That story makes me ill every time. Fuckin' Joe Arpaio.

That's a big blanket you're casting about there.

[byu71]

My kids a cop. Those of you who say they are cut from the same cloth as the bad guys can go F yourselves and I am not kidding!!!

[SeattleUte]

My kids a cop. Those of you who say they are cut from the same cloth as the bad guys can go F yourselves and I am not kidding!!!

I agree K-Dog is casting a big blanket, but it's a healthy mindset for society to be wary of police and their excesses and in their laws and policies err on the side of measures that curb and punish such excesses. There's a reason we call places like Stalin's USSR or today's North Korea a "police state." It seems to me Arizona is a very F-ed up place.

[Green Monstah]

That's what they always say. Common sense tells you they paid this because their lawyers told them they would be annihilated at trial. $9 million is an astronomical sum to pay in 1999 for a wrongful death of a near 40 year old guy with minimal income potential.

$9MM is a drop in the bucket compared to legal fees and the risk of having a jury decide.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

$9MM is a drop in the bucket compared to legal fees and the risk of having a jury decide.

The settlement was supposedly the largest in Arizona history for a wrongful death case up to that point. Insurance companies aren't in the business of handing out $9 million settlements. They did a risk analysis and knew that they were likely going to get killed in court. They don't pay out $9 million settlements if the evidence is sketchy.

Wrongful death suits have a significantly different damages structure than personal injury (negligence, product liability). In a personal injury suit, the person who suffered the injury is still alive and can claim pain and suffering type damages. You can't do that in a wrongful death suit.

[Green Monstah]

The settlement was supposedly the largest in Arizona history for a wrongful death case up to that point. Insurance companies aren't in the business of handing out $9 million settlements. They did a risk analysis and knew that they were likely going to get killed in court. They don't pay out $9 million settlements if the evidence is sketchy.

Wrongful death suits have a significantly different damages structure than personal injury (negligence, product liability). In a personal injury suit, the person who suffered the injury is still alive and can claim pain and suffering type damages. You can't do that in a wrongful death suit.

It depends on the jurisdiction (I'm not sure with AZ), but I've read cases where the decedent's survivors were actually awarded damages for the decendent's pain and suffering in wrongful death suits. Furthermore, the legal fees alone would likely be in the millions as well. Cost-benefit analysis leads to a settlement.

[SeattleUte]

$9MM is a drop in the bucket compared to legal fees and the risk of having a jury decide.

That's my point. You make a true statement for a case where a gang of cops viciously beat to death an unarmed man in a jail cell and then spoliated the evidence.

If he were killed by a drunk driver the case might be worth less than $1 million. For wrongful death it's usually an economic calculation, unless there were extenuating, particularly heinous circumstances as there were here. Nearly $9 million for a single wrongful death occurring eleven years ago. Wow. That payment was mostly for punitive damages.

Also, the perpetrators probably didn't want to give depositions and incriminate themselves. I assume there was at least an investigation by the prosecutor's office or an independent prosecutor.

[SeattleUte]

The settlement was supposedly the largest in Arizona history for a wrongful death case up to that point. Insurance companies aren't in the business of handing out $9 million settlements. They did a risk analysis and knew that they were likely going to get killed in court. They don't pay out $9 million settlements if the evidence is sketchy.

Wrongful death suits have a significantly different damages structure than personal injury (negligence, product liability). In a personal injury suit, the person who suffered the injury is still alive and can claim pain and suffering type damages. You can't do that in a wrongful death suit.

The biggest cases are where the person is alive and severly disabled and need long term care (again, an economic calculatin, mostly, with a kicker for pain and suffering, if it's a settlement figure). Wrongful death is a drop in the bucket compared to those. This settlement would have not been remarkable had he been brain damaged and not killed.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

It depends on the jurisdiction (I'm not sure with AZ), but I've read cases where the decedent's survivors were actually awarded damages for the decendent's pain and suffering in wrongful death suits. Furthermore, the legal fees alone would likely be in the millions as well. Cost-benefit analysis leads to a settlement.

Your comment about $9 million being a drop in the bucket is laughable. It was the largest wrongful death settlement in AZ history up to that point. As SU pointed out, a majority of the damages in a wrongful death suit are economically based (as in, what would my husband have earned for our family during the remainder of his life had he not died). Given Norberg's status as a perpetual drug user, I highly doubt the case would have yielded much in the way of economic damages.

That leaves punitive damages and those are only awarded in extreme, heinous cases. And Arizona, if anything, is likely a conservative jurisdiction in this regard. $9 million is most definitely not a drop in the bucket. The insurance company knew they had a shitstorm coming their way and it was going to be worse given the circumstances of the case.