Slain student's family to sue for $100 million
Michael McKinney, a 21-year-old Ball State student, was shot and killed by a campus police officer who was responding to a burglary call.
-----------------------
The family of slain Ball State student Michael McKinney will file a $100 million civil rights lawsuit in federal court Tuesday against the university and the officer who shot and killed him.

The 21-year-old McKinney was unarmed when first-year Ball State police officer Robert Duplain shot him four times Nov. 8. The 24-year-old Duplain responded to a burglary call at 3:30 a.m. that day and found McKinney banging on the back door of a residence.

Police say McKinney was asked to stop and that he lunged at the officer which resulted in the shooting.

McKinney was later found to have a blood alcohol level of 0.34, more than four times the legal standard for drunken driving. The student's family has maintained he was knocking at the door of the wrong house when Duplain shot him.

The incident caused outrage throughout the school's campus in Muncie and resulted in the university changing its police training policy in December.

The family's attorney is Geoffrey Fieger, a nationally known lawyer who successfully defended Dr. Jack Kevorkian on three murder charges for assisted suicide. He also won a $25 million lawsuit against the Jenny Jones Show in connection with the death of one of the show's guests. Fieger, whose office is based in Southfield, Mich., also was the Democratic Party nominee for governor in 1998.

"The facts in this case are egregious," Fieger said in a release issued today. "Not only was the defendant Duplain poorly trained and inexperienced, but he used lethal force in gunning down an unarmed man who had not threatened anyone in any way."

-----------------------------------

I know there are more facts than you folks know, but what are your thoughts?

When I was a teenager, my dad told me that when a cop says shit, you say "Yesir, how many piles".....or words to that effect....Who is right or wrong makes little difference when a cop has his gun out. Darwinism at work, me thinks....egregious(a lawyer wurd) or not.

I passed that bit of wisdom on to my kids. Another one I came up with & told them. It's easier to learn life's hard lessons from someone who loves you.

Actually, it would be difficult to "pick" sides in this case. The liability concerns inherent when carrying a badge and gun can be overwhelming to say the least. The fact that the university changed its "training policy" would lead one to think that they will ultimately face the burden of liability, alleviating the impact on the officer; they must have realized that their previous policy/training was inadequate and thus was responsible, in part or whole, for the student's death. Attorneys also look at the financial aspects of the case and always go for the "deep pockets", which in this case means the school. The bottom line is if the officer felt in fear of his life...the shooting can be considered "justifiable homicide". As long as the shooting falls within the department's policy, assuming they had one in place, the officer should not be held liable and the department should foot the entire bill!

The student was unarmed but how could the officer know this? It's dark, a crazed person is trying to force entry into a residence. When confronted he attacks. I'd shoot too. He could'a had a knife, or a gun. You expect the officer to subject himself to a possibly life threatening situation in order to give this POS kid the "benefit of the doubt"? It's an unfortunate tragedy, but I feel the most sympathy for the officer because he has to live with it. It's too bad about the kid, but frankly he chose to get so drunk that he lost all sense of good judgement. Flame on if that's your perogative.

-Ben M.

J P

Actually, egregious comes from the Latin and means, literally, "away" or "apart" from the flock. Is my Catholic schooling apparent?

The general public has a responsibilty to act in a manner that will not cause the police to have to react or overeact to an action caused by the general public. In other words cops are people to and if you scare one they might possibly do something you will regret.

Since I've been on the wrong end of a handgun a few times (one by a San Jose cop, the other time by some lowlife I kicked out of our resturant many, many years ago),

I have to side with the cop on this one.....when told to freeze, i froze.......

The cop didn't know if I was packing heat or not, I'm guessing the same thing here...the kid lunged at the cop, what is he supposed to do, wrestle with the guy and search him at the same time???

If the kid had gotten the upper hand on the fight, he could or would have been armed with the cops gun, but nobody will every know that now.

Heh,heh, me too. But my 2 years of Latin were...ah...shit...40some years ago.

All lawyers speak Latin or tongues so "normal" people haven't a clue as to WTF they're talking about.

Tough one. I can see why the cop pulls his gun first. He has to mitigate the risk that somone is going to pull one on him.

The kid was clearly being a dick, but people do that every day - doesn't mean they should be shot.

Think about if you have ever been a dick, or done something stupid while drunk. Then think about if you had died for it. Then think about if you really need that constitutional right to own a firearm. That is why the officer drew his.

neither ...

$100 mio.??? guys, your legal system is FUCKED UP.


what i don't understand, why didn't the cop just shoot him in the legs?

Andy

Cops only shoot to kill. If you shoot a criminal's leg he can still shoot back.

It's an unfortunate trajedy for everybody. The kid did a stupid thing by getting so drunk and then put the cop in a situation I'm sure he didn't want to be in. Giving the family $100M helps nobody.

I too, hate the way attorneys talk but for a different reason. They always speak as if they were present when an incident occurred! Where is this guy getting his info from...from the deceased student? How can we believe what this liar, er...lawyer, is telling us about how this situation went down? If you've ever observed a trial, or been on jury duty, did you notice that the attorneys are never sworn in yet they always try to tell the story of how something "actually" happened! The officer shot the student because, in his mind if nowhere else, the student WAS a threat and as far as the law is concerned, the perceived threat is all the officer needed to justify his act!

The perperator should never be given the benefit of the doubt. As far as I'm concerned, as soon as he lunged at the cop, he was a dead man. Suicide by cop.

I don't think that officers are taught to "shoot to kill" as much as they are trained to shoot to "stop the threat" they are facing; if that means emptying your gun, then so be it! If I remember correctly, research indicates that most shoot-outs take place in distances of less than 12 feet! From that distance and in fear for you life, you will basically not have time to do much aiming; you draw and fire from the hip, time is of the essence! When you are in a situation like that, you resort to training, not thinking...and certainly not aiming. You shoot at the largest part of the target, "the center of mass", the torso, 'cause if you go for anything else and miss...or even if you hit an extremty, chances are the threat will continue. I have never had to shoot at someone, but I did draw my weapon a number of times and believe me, the rush of adrenalin is difficult to overcome. More than once, I've seen stupid, sober, people do things that should have got them shot!!! Remember...HINDSIGHT is always 20:20!

The gubberment paying out that kind of sash isn't going to help anyone.

I agree with what has been said by Rgreen914. Sounds like he knows the business of law enforcement. Police officers never shoot to kill, they shoot to stop the threat. They are supposed to use only the force necessary to overcome resistance. This one is tough. We dont know how the officer was feeling at the time of the incident (I'm sure he was pretty damned scared). Were there any other options the officer could have used, i.e. OC spray, baton etc., other than deadly force. Only the officer knows that one. I can pretty much guaranty that the family will win the civil lawsuit though. But I side with the officer, but then again, I consider myself biased.

exactly my point. this was not Joe Schmoe from milwaukee (sorry joe, no offense) but a guy who is supposedly trained for this type of situation on a daily basis.

the guy didn't have any weapons in his hands and he's taking a swing at you. if he was 12 feet away, the cop had all the time in the world to aim for his legs.
anyone who has ever done any shooting (hunting or target-practice) will agree that it's really hard to MISS a pair of legs from 12 feet away. especially if you're TRAINED to use that gun.

and even if the guy had a gun in his pocket (which he didn't),
this is not hollywood ... after being shot in the leg from 12 feet away, you don't just frown a bit and grab for that gun.
you'll be in shock and you won't be moving anything ...


Andy

Since I started this I should comment.

The officer did what he did to ensure his own safety, which I assume all of us would probably have done in his situation. I hope I'm never in his shoes. The family needs to move on with their lives and understand that their boy fucked up. People, nowadays especially, are always looking for something or someone to blame. There are consenquences to everything we do in life, some are positive some are negative. It's up to us to take the consenquences or not do those things that bring about negative consenquences.

I'll get off my soapbox in a second here.
My next door neighbor was totally drunk last year and ended up wrecking his uninsured truck into 10-15 parked cars on his way home from the bar. He passed out and played bumper cars with them until he hit one straight on enough to stop his car. He got out after he came too and tried to walk away. The police showed up minutes later and arrested him, he was bloody and it was obvious he was driving the truck. He went to court several times and finally ended last month. He got 2 days in jail and a year of probation. IMHO, that is too easy. BUT, his attorney says that no one saw him driving so they are going to appeal and he thinks they will win. DUMBASS! (he's drunk every day) He doesn't understand what I'm saying when I tell him that he needs to take responsibility for what he's done. He will have to declare bankruptcy because he is being sued by about half of the cars' owners since he didn't have insurance.

Anyway, it's all the same thing in my opinion, people do things and don't think about what could happen and something does and they want to blame someone else.

Go Officer Go! Good Luck buddy!

in the dark and with the "perp" running at him, the chances of missing his moving legs is greatly increased, (hitting an innoccent bystander directly or by bouncing off the pavement )

the upper torso is the best "target"..period

if he did get shot in the legs, the cop would still be sued I'm sure by the parents
(Jonny's dead, but driving around in this new 'benz sure eases the pain...)

i can just hear all the campus groups screaming "injustice!" and "police brutality!" jesus.... as a more-or-less liberal myself with far-right libertarian tendencies (figure that out), i am always baffled how sophmoric leftists defend the craziest shit (though the same could be said about a lot of conservatives).

yes, it's a shame that the cop didn't spray or stun the dude (instead of shoot him). maybe the officer's training needs reviewed. but it's a BIGGER shame that some young man got so f--ked up that he attacked a police officer. the student made a series of bad decisions that night, and probably bares the ultimate responsibility, IMHO.

but this doesn't make it less sad or less of a tragedy.

First year Ball State police officer. Drunk college student. A recipe for disaster. How much training did this first year officer get? Was he a rentacop for the college? A municipal cop? Did the kid lunge at him or stumble as drunks sometimes do. Did he call for back up for this possible break in? Was he trained to assume that a burglar will be armed and he should fear for his life when confronting one therefore should always call for help? Did he drive a Porsche? I'm always reluctant to take sides in a case like this, not knowing all the facts. And lets face it that lawyer may say he is interested in making this world a better place but 30% of 100 Mil is very attractive and I think we know were his interests lie. A very tragic incident for everyone involved that usually boils down to a lack of intelligence and training.
Cheers, Elliot

I think there is a feeling underneith these comments that the officer was scared by the situation and reacted to that. I agree that he probably was and that was probably what motivated the shooting.

Everyone is human, and all that, and everyone makes mistakes, but frankly anyone who is freaked out by a drunk guy 12 feet away should not be holding a gun, and should not be holding a badge. I don't think this guy has the balls to be out on-call. I assume he was by himself and the incident occoured at night?

A more appropriate response would have been to push the guy over (I was nearly attacked by a drunk guy outside a night-club in england. I pushed him out the way. He spent so much time trying to balance again that I was able to get clear. I am, btw, a big wuss.)

if you're running straight towards me, i promise you i won't have any problems hitting your legs from 100 or even 200 feet!

I don't think I have ever seen a drunk run. I tried to run once when I was drunk. It wasn't pretty.
Cheers, Elliot

Im sueing you for $400 million for saying that. It hurt my feelings

Yeah - you stand aside and stick your foot out.

One of the other things research about "shoot-outs" teaches us, is that in these situations, accuracy falls dramatically! I personally know of an experienced officer who emptied two guns at a moving suspect, at a distance of much less than 12 feet, and did not hit him once! And remember, the report indicates that this shooting happened at about 3:30 in the morning. Shooting at night with minimal lighting also decreases accuracy considerably; this I know from having experienced many "night shoots" on a departmental range. Assuming this officer was responding to the call with at least minimal information, and at night, he most likely had a flashlight in one hand. Even with street lighting, it would have been a less than ideal situation for "target acquisition". Factor in the flashlight in one hand, minimal overhead lighting, and the sudden lunging of the student; now how would you have responded if you had been that officer? On top of that, chances are that the univeristy police force may have a minimal ongoing training schedule/budget; I would guess that their officers go through some regional academy or maybe "piggyback" a larger agency's academy class with their few, new hired officers. I seriously doubt this first year officer ever envisioned this scenario on the campus and was simply overwhelmed by the circumstances.

Rgreen914, which department you from?

I can't vote on this because I don't have all the facts. The only people that can give a fair opinion are members of a jury. I have been a cop for 25 years and have learned that there are 2 sides to every story and the facts are somewhere in between.

415PB

I retired from the California Department of Corrections, Parole Division; last 14 years spent as a field Parole Agent, before that, six years spent behind "walls", very high, armed-coverage walls!

huh?

So you were the one relocating those damn parolees to Desert Hot Springs PM on the way.....

Why is it as of late, we expect more of the police than we do of our politicians.?

Ya sure. The event could have been avoided but, now we should throw him in Jail for doing his Job?. I'm sure the officer feels bad enough already. I never would want to be a cop. Make one bad mistake and you are dead or your carrer is runied.

Pat

415PB

Had to send them somewhere...I got into trouble 'cause I used to send too many to "the gray-bar hotel"!

415PB

Actually, I think they go to the desert for their health...or maybe it's for their lab experiments...meth labs!

Well we have too many out here as it is. Most of them end up goin back anyhow.

Rod

Yep, Riverside County and San Bernardino County....Meth capitols of the world..

You have a drunk guy running at you. The easiest way to hit him is to stand slightly aside and stick your foot out. Gravity takes care of the rest.

I'm not saying that's what the officer should have done, btw.

We let our politicians get away with FAR too much. (Clinton's bj aside). Lately, I've felt we need a 4th branch of government JUST to handle the independent investigations.

From the facts as presented:

It was dark and the officer was responding to a call where the home owner stated someone was breaking in. The kid lunged at the officer after being told to freeze.

Sorry, natural selection at it's finest. The officer had no time to react to determine the kid was drunk or even a kid at the time or a student. All he would have had time to determine was that someone was breaking the law by the attempted break-in and he used deadly force to stop that person attacking himself.

They might win the lawsuit.

Life isn't TV or a cartoon. If someone points a gun at you, expect that they might use it.

Several years ago I went to a gun range with a buddy that had bought a .357 magnum (ala Dirty Harry). He loaded it and placed it on the counter. Ran a standard 9.5" X 11" target out 15' on the wire. Then told me to pick the gun up and shoot all 6 as fast as I can. I hit the wire and the very edge of the paper. The rest of the shots went into the buts and a ceiling light. I can hit a running target at 400+ yds, but for close range I prefer 12 gage semiauto with SSG's

BTW on last nights LA news they busted a meth lab in Beverly Hills.

Police work is a dangerous job.

My Pop gave me the "Do what the Cop tells you cause he/she has a Gun, and is under paid, and is compensating for years of High School abuse, and is more likely than any other profession to get a divorce, and is under-trained for the job he/she does"

I consider getting pulled over the second most dangerous thing that happens to me.

Either way, The kid was stupid. I agree with the suicide by cop part. On the other hand, I don't get emotional when a cop buys a farm. I think its assumed risk, and if you don't want to play the game, get some other job.

Having been on the wrong side of a cop a number of times - I used to work for the cable company as an engineer. I'd have to go to hub sites to do fiber planning and such. They'd change the alarm code on me and by the time I got through to dispatch to get the right code the cop would be there pointing a gun at me every time.

Do what the cop says. Hands at 10 and 2, only do what he asks you to do and when you want to reach for somehting - ask him first. Anything else is a threat you don't need to make. Do 'em a favor and don't do anything. they'll be a lot nicer to you in the long run.

This guy didn't really have it coming - it's just a tragic thing. 100M isn't going to bring him back. There is currently legislation against the medical system that would limit payouts on malpractice suits - maybe we should have something like that here.

On dateline last night I think I saw that an Iraqi father was killed mistakenly and his family only got $2000 US. In Iraq that's probably a lot...but...whatever...

Here in L.A. even the traffic cops have nervous trigger fingers -- and I can't blame 'em one bit. I have a ton of respect for (most of) the folks in law enforcement, and my ears perk up when I am spoken to. Being drunk or stoned or whatever does not change that...it's basic survival instinct.

It sounds basically like a terrible accident to me. The only question in my mind is whether use of lethal force was really justified/necessary as opposed to a "disabling" shot; but it was apparently dark so the officer could not verify whether the kid was armed, and/or may not have been able to aim precisely enough for a non-lethal shot.

Another thing....the department said they couldn't afford to train their officers on how to use chemicals (pepper spray and the like) . That's one of the changes to the training proceedures I think. I don't know if he had a batton or not. I think its absolutely absurd that a university trains their officers to use guns, but not pepper spray.

From what I remember of the inquest last year, the officer acted as trained and was cleared of criminal charges. I agree with that.

---

I HATE the "I was drunk and didn't know what I was doing." excuse!

Everybody knows that when you drink alcohol, especially enough to get you blood alcohol level up to 4 times legal driving limit, you get drunk. And I'm pretty sure that it hasn't escaped anyone's notice that drunk people do stupid shit. I don't care if you're drunk or not, you should be held accountable for your actions. If I lunge at a cop who's pointing a gun at me, whether I'm drunk or not, I should be shot.

Really sorry about the kid. Maybe a real nice guy. But he's dead b/c he threatened an armed officer of the law (sobriety should make no difference).

[/rant]

Ideal circumstances....officer pulled pepper spray or a tazer(sp?) instead of the gun and Porsche's are rust proof, but we all know things very rarely happen idealy.

a moving leg attached to a wobbling drunk is pretty hard to hit in the dark andy. .34?the cop did him a favor sparing him from a hangover . if he was banging on my door i'd let him in and give him a couple of new exclimation marks also.

kevin

I agree about the $100M not bringing the kid back.

But I also strongly disagree with legislation on damage caps.

Such legislation won't take into consideration, cases where, say the kid was paralyzed or severely brain damaged. His medical bills for the rest of his life would be in the tens of millions. Just to vegetate in a hospital bed for the next 30 years. I don't think that such expensive burdens should just be thrust on his parents like that, when the cop could just have used tear gas or a taser.

In that regard - the kid was VERY lucky.

I know it's a very popular concept in this nation that greedy trial lawyers have driven up the cost of medical care due to malpractice suits. But the real issue here is that these suits, despite their multi million dollar payouts, don't actually punish the guilty parties. If a doctor is sued for malpractice, his insurance company pays, and he keeps right on doing what he was doing, and his patience pay for the increased insurance rate. The only real winner is the insurance company, and often, the lawyer.
Worse still - the cost of medical treatment alone - without malpractice factored in, is similary skewed by major abuse of our patent system.
I'm all for capitalism and free enterprise - and making a buck. But these companies are obviously VERY profitable, even with their skanky accounting practices hiding the money so they look like they're not. When marketing budgets are 5 times R&D budgets, and their CEO's make 4000 times what their scientists and engineers make, you know there's no real profitability problem going on. A company making life-saving drugs or equipment should not need marketing. Life saving just doesn't need to be pushed. I'm not saying we should get rid of drug patents, I'm saying that the extensions and wrangling that goes on to prevent competitors from producing low-cost generic alternatives has gone way too far.

Sorry this is straying so far off topic. I just feel quite strongly about this issue - that the main reason why medical care in this country is so unaffordable, is because of the situation with the industry lobbyists writing laws that make competition in the drug industry impossible. Remeber that what makes Capitalism great, is FREE enterprise, Competition breeds excellence. A Patent, is, at it's root, a government-sanctioned Monopoly. The Constitution says "Limited" and ". . . to promote the useful arts and sciences" - NOT to guarantee a certain profit margin, etc.

The whole point of this is: the argument that malpractice suits are why medical care costs too much is a lie. And the rationale for lawsuit caps is crap.

That's not to say that some of these lawsuits haven't gotten way out of hand.
The woman who recently was awarded $1,600,000,000 (that's 1.6 with a capital B-billion dollars) for being defrauded $4800 on a $25,000 life insurance policy. . . well those jurors should just be shot (and the fraudulent insurance salesman should just go to jail, period - the fine here, is pure crap).

And if this kid's dead - maybe a few hundred thou - a reasonable, nomal, average life-insurance policy. But $100 Million? Absurd - he's dead. There's no expensive medical care required here. Just some sad parents who, unfortunately, are going to have to learn to go on after a tragic accident.

Well said.

Someone's parents won't end up paying that kind of bill unless they already have big money and can afford the best private care and doctors. We, the taxpayers pay the bill. Someone like that goes on state disability and receives medicare.

Extremely drunk....out on the town....pounding on the wrong door....lunge at a cop....how many holes do YOU want?

He's lucky he wasn't pounding on MY door, I woulda filled him so full a holes they woulda needed corks......

interesting thread.
all in all, it ends up being just one less bad drunk.
aiming a handgun, at 0330, under pressure, in strange surroundings, with more unknown variables that i can list quickly, is a bad situation, regardless of training; the security officer now has to live with the realization that he took a life. the parents have to live with the realization that their son displayed poor judgement, to the extent of threatening others. they should all have compassion for each other, and hope it doesn't happen to anyone else they know. oh, and they should not try to enrich an ambulance chaser in the process.