Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Anne Frank and her family were also denied entry as refugees to the U.S.



Portrait of Anne Frank at age 12, sitting at her desk at the Montessori school in Amsterdam. (Courtesy Anne Frank House, Amsterdam)
Many have noted the historical parallels between the current debate over Syrians seeking refuge in the United States and the plight of European Jews fleeing German-occupied territories on the eve of World War II.

Among the many who tried — and failed — to escape Nazi persecution: Otto Frank and his family, which included wife, Edith, and his daughters, Margot and Anne. And while the story of the family's desperate attempts ending in futility may seem remarkable today, it's emblematic of what a number of other Jews fleeing German-occupied territories experienced, American University history professor Richard Breitman wrote in 2007 upon the discovery of documents chronicling the Franks' struggle to get U.S. visas.

"Otto Frank’s efforts to get his family to the United States ran afoul of restrictive American immigration policies designed to protect national security and guard against an influx of foreigners during time of war," Breitman wrote. The historian told NPR in 2007 that the documents suggest "Anne Frank could be a 77-year-old woman living in Boston today – a writer."  Instead, she died at the age of 15 at Bergen-Belsen concentration camp in Germany.
Otto Frank tried relatively late to obtain visas to the United States, a convoluted and ultimately doomed process laid bare in the nearly 80 pages of documents unearthed by the the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research. Even Frank's high-level connections within American business and political circles weren't enough to secure safe passage for his family.

"The story seems to unfold in slow motion as the painstaking exchange of letters journey across continents and from state to state, their information often outdated by the time they arrive," the New York Times wrote after reviewing the YIVO documents. "Each page adds a layer of sorrow as the tortuous process for gaining entry to the United States — involving sponsors, large sums of money, affidavits and proof of how their entry would benefit America — is laid out. The moment the Franks and their American supporters overcame one administrative or logistical obstacle, another arose."
Trying to get out
 
By 1941, the Frank family had already relocated from Germany to the Netherlands where, just a few years earlier, Otto Frank applied for visas to the United States — applications that were eventually destroyed, Frank wrote in a letter to his old college friend in the United States, Nathan Straus Jr.

"I am forced to look out for emigration and as far as I can see U.S.A. is the only country we could go to," Frank wrote on April 30, 1941. "Perhaps you remember that we have two girls. It is for the sake of the children mainly that we have to care for. Our own fate is of less importance."

Frank asked his friend to potentially put up $5,000 to cover a deposit for the visas. "You are the only person I know that I can ask," Frank writes.

A photograph of Otto Frank, with his daughters Anne, center, and Margot, is displayed alongside yellow stars worn by Dutch Jews at an exhibit of letters and documents in New York. (Mary Altaffer/AP)
Straus was a connected man — the son of a Macy's co-owner, the head of the U.S. Housing Authority and, according to the Times, a friend of Eleanor Roosevelt's. The YIVO documents show that Straus and his wife, Helen, became involved in the saga, appealing to the State Department and the Migration Department at the National Refugee Service.

Edith Frank's brothers stepped in to help; they had already come to the United States and were willing to supply affidavits of support. Otto Frank was worried that his wife's brothers, "as ordinary workmen around Boston," wouldn't have sufficient money to convince American immigration officials that they could support the Franks. Eventually, the brothers' employer submitted affidavits in support of the family.

Otto Frank may have been successful had he tried to leave sooner, but, as New York University professor of Holocaust studies David Engel wrote, "understanding the situation of Jews in the Netherlands under Nazi occupation, like understanding any aspect of the Holocaust, requires suspension of hindsight."

Prior to April 1941, Otto Frank's work was going well; his family was comfortable and some of the most restrictive moves made against Jews in the Netherlands hadn't yet been enacted. "Hence he preferred what seemed to him like the nuisances that encumbered an otherwise comfortable life under Nazi occupation in the Netherlands to the insecurity of life as a double refugee in a new country, even if a new country could be found," Engel wrote.  It appears that a Nazi sympathizer's attempt to blackmail Otto Frank triggered his efforts anew to secure visas for his family.

Shifting rules and attitudes
 
But as the Frank family filed paperwork, immigration rules were changing — and attitudes in the United States toward immigrants from Europe were becoming increasingly suspicious, Breitman wrote. The American government was making it harder for foreigners to get into the country — and the Nazis were making it difficult to leave.

By early 1939, more than 300,000 names were on the waiting list to receive an immigration visa to the United States, Breitman wrote. American consulates changed their protocol and weren't granting visas unless transportation to the United States had been booked. By June 1941, most U.S. consulates in German-occupied territories had shuttered or were closing — meaning Otto Frank would have to have gone to Spain or Portugal, legally, to apply at consulates there. In July 1941, a new division within the U.S. State Department took over visa pre-screening, meaning those in the United States would need to fill out new affidavits on behalf of potential immigrants.

On June 17, 1939, German Jewish refugees return to Antwerp, Belgium, after they had been denied entrance to Cuba and the United States. (AP)
Also, new U.S. immigration regulations meant the Franks couldn't get visas if they had any remaining close relatives in Germany, a restriction meant to counter the belief at the time that German authorities would use remaining relatives to pressure refugees into spying in the United States. By this time, Breitman wrote, American anxieties over foreigners from German-invaded countries had increased, particularly the belief in a "Fifth Column" — disloyal elements in European territories that made German takeover easier.

"It is a fact that some of the Germans and Italians who left their countries in recent years because of persecution by their governments have, nevertheless, become in our country strong defendants of their native governments and the practices of their present governments," American Ambassador to Cuba George S. Messersmith wrote in May 1940. "Among the so-called refugees in our country is a fair number who can be depended upon to act as agents of their government and who will violate in any way the hospitality which they are enjoying among us."
 
The Frank family fate

Such restrictions meant the "entire Frank family would have to get U.S. visas simultaneously, or none could qualify," Breitman wrote. "By the time Nathan Straus accumulated some of this information, Otto Frank had already concluded that the prospect of getting into the U.S. directly was dim. So he turned to Cuba as a possible refuge."

While some European Jews managed to get into Cuba, where they awaited American visas, the United States tightened its visa procedures — and by July 1941, the American ambassador told Cuba that refugees on tourist visas may not be eligible for American visas. That triggered Cuban anxiety that European refugees could be stuck on the island nation, and officials signaled the need to tighten Cuban immigration policies, Breitman wrote.

Both Straus and one of Edith Frank's brothers had explored Cuba as an option for the family, the documents show.

“The only way to get to a neutral country are visas of others States such as Cuba … and many of my acquaintances got visas for Cuba," Frank wrote to Straus on Sept. 8, 1941.

This is an undated photo of AnneFrank from the AnneFrank Center, USA. (AP Photo)
An undated photo of Anne Frank from the Anne Frank Center. (AP)
Despite the considerable hardships and expense — it usually cost about $2,500 per person to obtain a visa — Otto Frank managed to get a Cuban visa for himself on Dec. 1, 1941. Ten days later, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States, and Frank's visa was canceled.

The Frank family went into hiding in 1942, a day after Margot Frank received a Nazi order to go east to a labor camp and a month after Anne Frank received a diary for her 13th birthday. They were eventually discovered and sent to concentration camps, where Anne Frank and her sister, Margot, died of typhus and their mother died of starvation.

On Jan. 31, 1946, the YIVO documents show, the National Refugee Service responded to an inquiry from Edith Frank's brother as to the whereabouts of his family: Otto Frank was alive in Amsterdam, five years after he began his desperate attempt to get his family to the United States.

"It’s difficult in times like these: ideals, dreams and cherished hopes rise within us, only to be crushed by grim reality," Anne Frank wrote in 1944 in her diary, which helped personalize the tragedies experienced by millions of Jews. "It's a wonder I haven’t abandoned all my ideals, they seem so absurd and impractical. Yet I cling to them because I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart."

Wednesday, November 18, 2015




Maryland Family Warns of Fatal Flaw 

Inside Millions of Cars



After a well-known Montgomery County educator was poisoned inside his home, his family is joining others across the country to warn others and force carmakers to make a change.
A new class action lawsuit potentially affecting millions of drivers across the country is linked to the death of one of Montgomery County’s most well-known educators – and his children want you to make sure what happened to their father doesn’t happen to you.
Dr. Harry Pitt spent his life trying to teach important lessons. “His whole thing would be the lesson, learn the lesson,” his son Joel Pitt told us. “Don’t let this happen again.”
For almost 40 years, Dr. Pitt worked as a teacher, principal and ultimately one of Montgomery County’s most well-respected school superintendents. “I mean, everybody just loved him,” his son Jeff Pitt said.
His sons said even though their father retired in 1991, he was still full of energy – golfing, traveling, even entering weightlifting competitions at 80 years old. “He looked young, acted young, he felt young,” Joel Pitt said.
Until the night he taught us all a lesson no one ever wanted to learn.
In December 2011, Dr. Pitt went home, parked in his garage and accidentally left the car running – all night long.
“He went to bed and he didn’t wake up,” Jeff Pitt said.
Dr. Pitt died from accidental carbon monoxide poisoning. Odorless, colorless toxic fumes rose from the garage in his town home to the bedroom two floors above.
A New Class Action Lawsuit
He drove a car with a keyless ignition and attorney Martis Alex has now filed a class action lawsuit against ten automakers who build keyless ignition vehicles. “They represented that the cars were safe,” she said. “The cars are not safe.”
She’s accusing them of false advertising and deceptive practices.
Long-time safety advocate Sean Kane consulted on the suit and said, “What we’re seeing here is really an inherent design flaw.”
Kane explained manufacturers fail to take human behavior into account. With an old fashioned key, when you pull it out, the engine turns off.
But if you never have to pull a key out, Kane said, you can forget to push the button, especially now that so many vehicles have very quiet engines. “They have made it very easy for you to inadvertently leave the car running and not know it,” he said.
The lawsuit demands carmakers install an “auto off” feature to kill the engine if it idles for an extended period. “If they can put auto-off on your interior lights to save you inconvenience, why can’t we put auto-off on the engine to save your life?” Alex asked. “It is a simple software fix.”
14 Deaths So Far
Kane pointed out, “The driver absolutely has a responsibility” to turn the car off but said, “when you look at a design, and you see people continuing to make an error, you have a problem with your design.”
The lawsuit cites 13 deaths nationwide. In the weeks since she filed the lawsuit, Alex said she’s learned of another fatality, prompting her to ask, “How many more deaths are we waiting for?”
The News4 I-Team reached out to all the carmakers named in the lawsuit and their responses varied from not making a comment because of the litigation to what Fiat Chrylser wrote in a statement, saying its “U.S. vehicles meet or exceed all applicable federal and safety standards.”
In a separate statement, Ford said, “The keyless ignition system has proven to be a safe and reliable innovation” and their vehicles “alert drivers when the driver’s door is opened and the engine’s running.”
Finding Their Own Fixes
The Pitt brothers said they don’t think a beeping noise is enough because many people are hard of hearing and many can become easily distracted by cellphones, kids or even getting the groceries when they exit their car.
As a result, the brothers created their own “work-arounds” to feel safe. Jeff Pitt keeps his radio on all the time. It’s his way of knowing if the engine is running. Joel Pitt paid extra for a Mercedes solely because it allows you to swap out the keyless feature for an actual key.
They both installed carbon monoxide detectors in their homes and strongly urge everyone to do the same. But Joel Pitt told us that’s not the ultimate solution.
Instead, the brothers said they know what the superintendent in their father would tell them. “He would be very upset about this because it’s something that was fixable and avoidable,” Joel Pitt explained. He said they also know the teacher in their father would demand they spread the word to “prevent somebody else’s family from having this kind of loss because it’s unnecessary. It’s just unnecessary.”

Statements From Carmakers

BMW
It is not possible for us to comment once a matter is in litigation. 
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA)
Customers are urged to heed the shutoff instructions in their owners' manuals. (See below.) Every FCA US LLC vehicle is engineered to exacting standards following rigorous testing. FCA US vehicles meet or exceed all applicable federal safety standards.
Ford
Ford takes the safety of our customers very seriously; the keyless ignition system has proven to be a safe and reliable innovative feature that has been well-received by customers. Ford vehicles equipped with keyless ignition alert drivers when the driver’s door is opened and the vehicle’s engine is running.
GM
GM is deferring comment to Wade Newton at the Alliance of Automotive Manufacturers
Auto Alliance, Wade Newton
Auto safety is our top priority, so the industry continues working with a standards-setting body to further develop best practices. Current keyless ignition system designs generally follow the recommended practices of the Society of Automotive Engineers, which includes recommendations that deal with operating logic, indication of vehicle ignition/control status and the physical control characteristics of keyless ignitions systems. The recommendations also address uniform labeling – all of this so consumers can have an even better understanding of keyless systems functions.
Honda
No response
Mercedes Benz
Our vehicles contain the latest in safety features. In fact, unlike many of the other keyless start systems on the market, ours can be operated as a normal keyed ignition system simply by removing the Stop/Start button or using the standard ignition switch (depending on the model). So customers can essentially choose how they wish to operate the system.
Nissan
Nissan cannot comment on the subject of current litigation, so we respectfully decline comment on the topic at this time.
Hyundai
We are cooperating with NHTSA on their research.
Kia
No response.
Toyota
We have no statement or comment to share at this time.
Volkswagen/Bentley
Volkswagen Group of America and its brands consider the safety and satisfaction of its consumers and passengers as a top priority. All brands within the Volkswagen Group are engineered to meet or exceed all government regulations. We are unable to comment on specific litigation.
Blogger's Note:  Please tell everyone you know about this.

Friday, November 13, 2015

Time for GOP panic? Establishment worried Carson or Trump might win



Less than three months before the kickoff Iowa caucuses, there is growing anxiety bordering on panic among Republican elites about the dominance and durability of Donald Trump and Ben Carson and widespread bewilderment over how to defeat them.

Party leaders and donors fear that nominating either man would have negative ramifications for the GOP ticket up and down the ballot, virtually ensuring a Hillary Rodham Clinton presidency and increasing the odds that the Senate falls into Democratic hands.


In normal times, the way forward would be obvious. The wannabes would launch concerted campaigns, including television attack ads, against the ­front-runners. But even if the other candidates had a sense of what might work this year, it is unclear whether it would ultimately accrue to their benefit. Trump’s counterpunches have been withering, while Carson’s appeal to the base is spiritual, not merely political. If someone was able to do significant damage to them, there’s no telling to whom their supporters would turn, if anyone.



Trump goes off on 'pathological' Carson at Iowa rally"How stupid are the people of Iowa?" asked Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump when speaking of rival Ben Carson's popularity in the GOP race. (AP)

 
The rest of the field is still wishing upon a star that Trump and Carson are going to ­self-destruct,” said Eric Fehrnstrom, a former adviser to 2012 nominee Mitt Romney. But, he said, “they have to be made to self-destruct. . . . Nothing has happened at this point to dislodge Trump or Carson.”
 
Fehrnstrom pointed out that the fourth debate passed this week without any candidate landing a blow against Trump or Carson. “We’re about to step into the holiday time accelerator,” he said. “You have Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year’s, then Iowa and a week later, New Hampshire, and it’s going to be over in the blink of an eye.”
 
According to other Republicans, some in the party establishment are so desperate to change the dynamic that they are talking anew about drafting Romney — despite his insistence that he will not run again. Friends have mapped out a strategy for a late entry to pick up delegates and vie for the nomination in a convention fight, according to the Republicans who were briefed on the talks, though Romney has shown no indication of reviving his interest. 
 
For months, the GOP professional class assumed Trump and Carson would fizzle with time. Voters would get serious, the thinking went, after seeing the outsiders share a stage with more experienced politicians at the first debate. Or when summer turned to fall, kids went back to school and parents had time to assess the candidates. Or after the second, third or fourth debates, certainly.
 
None of that happened, of course, leaving establishment figures disoriented. Consider Thomas H. Kean Sr., a former New Jersey governor who for most of his 80 years has been a pillar of his party. His phone is ringing daily, bringing a stream of exasperation and confusion from fellow GOP power brokers.
 
“People usually start off in the same way: Pollyanna-ish,” Kean said. “They assure me that Trump and Carson will eventually fade. Then we’ll talk some more, and I give them a reality check. I’ll say, ‘The guy in the grocery store likes Trump. So does the guy who cuts my hair. They’re probably going to stick with him. Who knows if this ends?’ ”
 
South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, herself an outsider who rode the tea party wave into office five years ago, explained the phenomenon.

“You have a lot of people who were told that if we got a majority in the House and a majority in the Senate, then life was gonna be great,” she said in an interview Thursday. “What you’re seeing is that people are angry. Where’s the change? Why aren’t there bills on the president’s desk every day for him to veto? They’re saying, ‘Look, what you said would happen didn’t happen, so we’re going to go with anyone who hasn’t been elected.’ ”

Before Tuesday’s debate in Milwaukee, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker had a reception at the Pfister Hotel with party leaders, donors and operatives. There was little appetite for putting a political knife in the back of either Trump or Carson, according to one person there. Rather, attendees simply hoped both outsiders would go away.
There are similar concerns about Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who is gaining steam and is loathed by party elites, but they are more muted, at least for now.

Charlie Black, who has advised presidential campaigns since the 1970s, said he believes the 2016 contest “will eventually fall into the normal pattern of one outsider and one insider, and historically the insider always wins.”

Black said he was briefed on the findings of two recent private focus groups of Trump supporters in Iowa and New Hampshire that showed these voters knew little about his policy views beyond immigration. “Things like universal health care and other more liberal positions he’s taken in the past will all get out before people vote in New Hampshire,” he said. Black said the focus groups were commissioned by two rival campaigns, but he was not authorized to identify them.

One well-funded outside group, the Club for Growth, has aired ads attacking Trump in Iowa and more recently came out against Carson as well. “Donald Trump and Doctor Ben Carson are in over their heads,” said Club for Growth President David McIntosh, labeling both candidates as “pretenders.”

Still, the party establishment’s greatest weapon — big money — is partly on the shelf. Kenneth G. Langone, a founder of Home Depot and a billionaire supporter of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, said he is troubled that many associates in the New York financial community have so far refused to invest in a campaign due to the race’s volatility.
“Some of them are in, but too many are still saying, ‘I’ll wait to see how this all breaks,’ ” Langone said. “People don’t want to write checks unless they think the candidate has a chance of winning.” He said that his job as a ­mega-donor “is to figure out how we get people on the edge of their chairs so they start to give money.”

Many of Romney’s 2012 National Finance Committee members have sat out the race so far, including Peter A. Wish, a Florida doctor whom several 2016 candidates have courted.
“I’m not a happy camper,” Wish said. “Hopefully, somebody will emerge who will be able to do the job,” but, he added, “I’m very worried that the Republican-base voter is more motivated by anger, distrust of D.C. and politicians and will throw away the opportunity to nominate a candidate with proven experience that can win.”

The apprehension among some party elites goes beyond electability, according to one Republican strategist who spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk candidly about the worries.

“We’re potentially careening down this road of nominating somebody who frankly isn’t fit to be president in terms of the basic ability and temperament to do the job,” this strategist said. “It’s not just that it could be somebody Hillary could destroy electorally, but what if Hillary hits a banana peel and this person becomes president?”

Angst about Trump intensified this week after he made two comments that could prove damaging in a general election. First, he explained his opposition to raising the minimum wage by saying “wages are too high.” Second, he said he would create a federal “deportation force” to remove the more than 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

“To have a leading candidate propose a new federal police force that is going to flush out illegal immigrants across the nation? That’s very disturbing and concerning to me about where that leads Republicans,” said Dick Wadhams, a former GOP chairman in Colorado, a swing state where Republicans are trying to pick up a Senate seat next year.

Said Austin Barbour, a veteran operative and fundraiser now advising former Florida governor Jeb Bush: “If we don’t have the right [nominee], we could lose the Senate, and we could face losses in the House. Those are very, very real concerns. If we’re not careful and we nominate Trump, we’re looking at a race like Barry Goldwater in 1964 or George McGovern in 1972, getting beat up across the board because of our nominee.” 

George Voinovich, a retired career politician who rose from county auditor to mayor of Cleveland to governor of Ohio to U.S. senator, said this cycle has been vexing.

“This business has turned into show business,” said Voinovich, who is backing Ohio Gov. John Kasich. “We can’t afford to have somebody sitting in the White House who doesn’t have governing experience and the gravitas to move this country ahead.”

BLOGGER'S NOTE:  I was really enjoying this article, right up to the point where it talked about Trump creating a federal police force to deport people in the country illegally.  This anchor baby himself, wants to recreate the Stasi, or the SS in the United States?  It's good that we've been supportive of Israel all these years, because if this guy gets elected, we may need their help - to get rid of the Nazis.


Wednesday, November 4, 2015

 Uneven justice

Society is loath to convict cops who kill, so civil court is often the best place for victims’ families to get results. But there, some get millions, and some get nothing.

Published on November 3, 2015
 
Two bad shootings, two guilty cops. One family sues and gets a million dollars; the other sues and collects not a penny.

Joseph Erin Hamley, 21, was wandering lost and alone on an isolated stretch of Highway 412 near the Ozark National Forest, fumbling with the toy balls he kept in his pockets. Born with cerebral palsy, Hamley had shaved his head in solidarity with his brother, who was about to go to Iraq with the Arkansas National Guard.

The haircut gave Hamley an unfortunate resemblance to a young man who had just escaped from a prison boot camp. A passing motorist alerted the Arkansas State Police. Trooper Larry Norman raced to the scene at speeds over 100 mph, jumped out of his cruiser, aimed his shotgun at Hamley and ordered him to the ground.

About this story: As part of a year-long investigation of fatal shootings by police, The Washington Post identified and examined the cases of 59 officers who were charged over the past decade for fatally shooting someone while on duty. In criminal court, 11 of the officers were convicted and served time. But when 46 families of those shot and killed by police sought justice in the civil system, 32 received monetary awards, The Post found. Above: Janie Lee West, 70, (right) and her sister, Chester Mae Tucker, 72, stand on the rural property that was offered to them as compensation for the death of their brother, Harold Phillips, who was shot five times by an officer who had been on the job for less than two months. (William Widmer for The Washington Post)

Confused, Hamley lay on his back. The trooper ordered him to roll over, and Hamley raised his arm to turn. Norman saw the motion as evidence that Hamley was armed, and he opened fire, killing Hamley. Norman had been on the scene for less than a minute, records show.
Hamley’s mother sued the state, which settled the civil lawsuit for $1 million.

A year later, the trooper pleaded guilty to negligent homicide, a misdemeanor in Arkansas. Norman, who apologized to the family at his sentencing, served 54 days in jail.

“Nothing in this world will bring my son back,” Mary Hamley said last month, nine years after her son’s death. “It was never about the money. It was the injustice of it all.”

A thousand miles away and four years after the Hamley shooting, Elvira Fernandez called Phoenix police. Her son Danny Rodriguez was high on meth and threatening her. She wanted the police to calm him down.

Officer Richard Chrisman confronted Rodriguez in his mother’s trailer. The young man’s pit bull reacted aggressively, so Chrisman shot the dog. Then he held his handgun to Rodriguez’s head, pepper-sprayed him and zapped him with a stun gun, records show. When Rodriguez, 28 and unarmed, picked up his bicycle — to escape, his mother contends — Chrisman shot him twice in the chest.

Chrisman pleaded guilty to manslaughter and is serving seven years in prison.
Rodriguez’s parents sued, but a judge dismissed their case against the city, finding no evidence that the police department should have known that the officer had a propensity to use excessive force. Chrisman was ordered to pay Rodriguez’s parents $8.5 million, but he has virtually no assets.

“We got nothing,” Rodriguez’s mother said. “All I have is my hate — I hate myself for calling the police. I never hated anybody like I hate myself.”


Elvira Fernandez, 65, says she regrets calling the police on her son, Daniel Rodriguez, 29, after they had a fight. When the police arrived, Officer Richard Chrisman shot and killed Rodriguez and his dog. Chrisman was convicted and sent to prison. A civil suit against the city was dismissed; an $8.5 million judgment against Chrisman will probably never be collected. (Caitlin O'Hara for The Washington Post) 

Though the spread of smartphone cameras has turned police-civilian confrontations into fodder for popular analysis, society remains reluctant to send police officers to prison for killing people. For the grieving families of the victims, civil lawsuits have proven far more likely to produce results.

But the system dispenses uneven justice. As part of a year-long investigation of fatal shootings by police, The Washington Post examined the cases of 59 officers who were charged over the past decade for fatally shooting someone while on duty, allegedly crossing the line between enforcing the law and breaking it.

[See The Post’s database of fatal police shootings in 2015.]
In criminal court, 11 of the officers were convicted and served time. But when 46 families of those shot and killed by police sought justice in the civil system, 32 received monetary awards, The Post found. Settlements ranged from $7,500 to $8.5 million. The median settlement was $1.2 million. Seven families have not filed suit.

When officers were criminally convicted, families won settlements in all but one case, The Post found. But when the officers were acquitted or had criminal charges dismissed, families were just as likely to win civil settlements.

The review also found that families collected more money if they settled before the criminal cases were resolved. When families accepted settlements before criminal charges were resolved, they received a median award of $2.2 million. When the settlement came after criminal proceedings ended, the families received $500,000.

Civil settlements and awards in police shootings

Many families who sue over a wrongful fatal police shooting win awards, with a median value of $1.2 million.

Most of the settlements are between families and the officers’ employer. Going after the officer rarely pays off. Many lawyers don’t bother to sue the officer who pulled the trigger. As civil servants, they tend to have few assets. And if you don’t sue them, “you prevent the officer and the officer’s wife from making an emotional appeal to the jury,” said Michael Napier, a lawyer in Phoenix who for four decades has represented police officers, including Chrisman in the Rodriguez case.

Instead, suits are typically filed against the city or county or state that employed the officer, usually under a federal civil rights statute first enacted in 1871 to combat the Ku Klux Klan. But winning such lawsuits is difficult. The laws strongly favor police, requiring families to prove that officers acted “unreasonably” or that their departments acted with “deliberate indifference.”

“If you don’t have a good case, you’re doing people more harm than good,” said Michael Avery, founder and director of the National Police Accountability Project, a network of civil rights lawyers who handle police abuse cases. Every lawsuit is “a mine field. There are a hundred mines in the field, and we have to get across without tripping any one of them. If we trip one, we lose.”

Even when families collect settlements, victory can feel hollow. Tarika Wilson, a 26-year-old Ohio woman, was unarmed and holding her 14-month-old boy when she was killed during a SWAT raid on her home in 2008. The sergeant in the case was acquitted of homicide and assault charges; the city of Lima settled with the family for $2.5 million.

“It’s very hard on the families,” said Cheryl R. Washington, an attorney who represented Wilson’s family. “The settlements are based on the monetary value of that person’s life. What did that person do? What would they have done if they weren’t killed? . . . Her children lost their mother, and the amount of money in a case like this is never enough.”

‘Their negligence’

When police kill someone, the odds that their family will receive compensation can seem as random as the spin of a roulette wheel. Harold Phillips’s family still wonders if the wheel will ever stop spinning.

In July 2009, Phillips, 54, had just arrived home after a 90-day stint in prison for shoplifting. He was outside the house in Colfax, La., roughhousing joyfully with his sister, when Officer Stephen Merchant happened by and saw what looked like a domestic assault.

Merchant, then 28 and on the job for less than two months, ordered Phillips to stop. Fearful of going back to jail, Phillips ran. Merchant followed, the two fought and the officer pulled out his gun. Five bullets struck the unarmed man in the back as he tried again to get away.

Eddie Phillips, 57, stands in his driveway in Colfax, La., where the altercation between his brother, Harold Phillips, and Colfax Police Officer Stephen Merchant began. 

Harold Phillips, 54, who was unarmed, was shot five times in the back by Merchant, who was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to five years in prison. The family's civil lawsuit against the town and the officer was dismissed after their lawyer failed to respond to court orders and file the proper papers. (William Widmer for The Washington Post) 

Merchant pleaded guilty to manslaughter and was sentenced to five years at hard labor. Leaders in the little town of 1,500 agreed that the shooting was wrong. “Everyone wanted to do right by the family,” said town attorney Numa Metoyer III.

The mayor and council members attended the funeral. “You bury him and bring us the bill,” they said, according to Janie Lee West, 70, one of Phillips’s seven siblings. But when West took the $10,000 funeral bill to the sheriff’s office, she was told there was no such deal.

Instead, a local radio station appealed for donations to a bank account to help with the family’s burial costs. “But when we went to the bank,” West said, “they said nobody brought no money.”
The family would have to settle the debt on its own.

For six years, West made payments of $25 or $50 every few weeks from her retirement checks. Another sister, Chester Mae Tucker, paid $3,000. A few months ago, they finally paid off the Boyce Community Funeral Home.

“The city didn’t give them a penny,” said the funeral director, the Rev. Herbert Green.“The city doesn’t have millions, but they could at least be fair. This was their negligence.”

Metoyer said the town indeed offered to pay for Phillips’s burial but that the offer was valid only if the family agreed to forgo a lawsuit. The family wouldn’t make that promise, so the town rescinded the offer.

Even then, the town wanted to help, Metoyer said. But Colfax is not wealthy; sometimes it can’t even pay its employees on time. So instead of cash, the town offered a couple acres of land — “a little rural piece with a little timber on it,” Metoyer said.

“The town was nervous about a lawsuit because it has no assets to speak of and no insurance,” he said. “The only thing that the town had of any value was some land, and that wasn’t worth much, either.”

West and Tucker went out to look at the property. “It was a big mud hole with rocks in it, big old rocks they dug off the road,” West said. “People saw that, and they were just laughing at us.”
The family turned down the land.

Green, the funeral director, urged the family to contact a lawyer, Darrell Hickman. On behalf of Phillips’s siblings, Hickman filed a federal suit in 2010 against the town and Merchant, who by then had been fired. (Merchant served only a few months of his five-year prison sentence, according to lawyers in the case. He did not respond to calls and letters.)

Two years later, after repeated pleas for Hickman to respond to court orders and file the proper papers, the judge dismissed the case. By that time, the Phillips siblings had fired the attorney, who has since been suspended twice in Louisiana and Texas for violating ethics rules and failing to communicate with a client.

Hickman said the Phillips case was dismissed “because the town had no money and the officer had no assets.” Court orders cite only the lack of response from Hickman and the family’s failure to hire a new lawyer.

“None of us got nothing,” West said. “We got letters and letters, papers and papers, but we never got no kind of answers, no kind of nothing.”

In Colfax, some people talk about the Phillips case as the kind of racially combustible confrontation that might have caused a national stir if it had happened in a larger community. Phillips was black, and the officer is white. But attorneys on both sides say race was not at play. The town’s mayor, a majority of its council members and Metoyer are all black, as is Hickman.

“This had nothing to do with race,” Metoyer said. “It’s just a tragic situation. You feel for the family, but we offered everything we had.”

Janie Lee West, 70, and her sister, Chester Mae Tucker, 72, walk down a gravel road in front of the rural property that was offered to them as compensation for the death of their brother, Harold Phillips. They declined. 'It was a big mud hole with rocks in it,' West said. (William Widmer for The Washington Post)

A racial divide

Even when a family wins a substantial cash settlement, a different outcome in criminal court can make justice seem elusive.

Jonathan Ferrell, 24, a former college football star who was soon to be married and working two jobs, had just dropped off a friend early on the morning of Sept. 14, 2013. As he drove out of the suburban Charlotte neighborhood known as Bradfield Farms, Ferrell lost control of his Toyota Camry on a curve, skidded and crashed into a stand of trees.

The car was totaled. Ferrell couldn’t open the doors. He crawled out the broken rear windshield and went looking for help. Bleeding, he knocked on the door of Sarah McCartney, then 32. It was close to 2:30 in the morning.

McCartney opened the door, expecting to see her husband, a nurse, returning from the late shift. Instead, she saw Ferrell. She slammed the door, dialed 911 and activated the house alarm system,. The front lawn was bathed in floodlights.

Jonathan Ferrell was shot 10 times by Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Officer Randall “Wes” Kerrick.

“There’s a guy breaking in my front door,” McCartney told the 911 dispatcher, saying she was alone with her baby boy.
“Have you seen this person?” the dispatcher asked.
“Yes, he’s a black man.”
“You say he’s a black male?”
“Yes. Oh, my God,” McCartney said. “Please hurry.”

Eleven minutes later, three officers from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department arrived. Two were African American, and one was white: Randall “Wes” Kerrick, a former animal control officer on the force for 23 months.

A police cruiser dash cam shows Ferrell walking toward the cruiser at 2:47 a.m. One officer fired his Taser but missed. Ferrell started to run into the darkness, toward Kerrick, the only officer who had pulled his firearm. Ferrell’s hands were visible and empty before leaving the frame of the dash cam. The recorder picked up the voice of an officer, yelling: “Get on the ground!”

Twelve shots ring out, the final round fired 19 seconds after Ferrell first appeared on camera. Ten struck Ferrell, most hitting him in his chest. Ferrell, the designated driver for his friends that night, was not drunk, toxicology tests later showed. He died at the scene, his hands cuffed behind his back.
After then-Police Chief Rodney Monroe viewed the footage and read officers’ statements, he ordered Kerrick arrested, saying his officer “did not have a lawful right to discharge his weapon during the encounter.” A grand jury indicted Kerrick on felony manslaughter charges.

It was another case of a white officer shooting an unarmed black man. The Ferrell family sued, and the city of Charlotte quickly decided to settle. The city might wind up paying far more in civil penalties if Kerrick went to trial and was convicted.

“The city realized that once a jury heard about Jonathan and his mother and his brother, they would be impressed,” said Charles G. Monnett III, a Charlotte lawyer who filed the wrongful death suit. “Jonathan was a quality person, and he came from a quality family.”

Ferrell grew up in Tallahassee in an accomplished family with a strong focus on law enforcement. His sister is a sergeant for the Leon County (Fla.) Sheriff’s Office. His cousin ran for Leon County sheriff. His stepfather is a customs officer in Miami. Another cousin, Morris A. Young, is sheriff in Gadsden County, Fla.

Young knows the dangers young black men face when they encounter police officers. “All his life, he was on the right track,” Young said. Ferrell “was looking for help, and the next thing you know, law enforcement comes and they see a young black male at night in that neighborhood. And sometimes people react to that.”

With Kerrick’s criminal trial looming, Charlotte officials announced they would settle with the Ferrell family for $2.25 million. Part of the money went to an educational foundation in Ferrell’s name, but his mother said the money doesn’t matter.

 
Lead prosecutor Adren Harris, left, and Chartlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department investigator Rachel Clark examine a door during her testimony during day four of officer Randall Kerrick's trial at the Mecklenburg County Courthouse. Kerrick and his wife, Carrie, exit the courtroom after a mistrial was declared. 
 
“It could have been $20 million. That will not give me my child back,” Georgia Ferrell said. “Jonathan is not coming back, and I will do whatever I can to make sure this never happens to another family.”

Three months later, the criminal case went to trial. Kerrick testified that he fired in self-defense after Ferrell ran toward him, disobeyed orders to get on the ground and then went for his gun.

Kerrick’s attorneys portrayed Ferrell as a young man looking for trouble, said Moses E. Wilson, one of three African Americans on the jury that heard the case. Wilson, 67, a retired constable from Boston, said the panel voted five times, largely along racial lines, without reaching a verdict. The judge declared a mistrial.

In August, Attorney General Roy Cooper (D), who is running for governor, announced he would not retry the case.

And last month, Charlotte officials announced another settlement, this one with Kerrick. Placed on leave without pay since the shooting, the officer asked for back pay and help with his legal expenses. The city agreed to give Kerrick nearly $180,000.

Kerrick also agreed to resign from the police force; he declined through his attorneys to comment. His resignation gave Georgia Ferrell some solace.

“He should not work as a police officer ever again, anywhere,” she said.

Jonathan Ferrell's mother, Georgia, right, and brother, Will Ferrell, visit Jonathan's grave. Georgia Ferrell holds Jonathan's childhood Winnie-the-Pooh bear. (Mark Wallheiser for The Washington Post)

‘Above the law’

Families who win million-dollar judgments often say the money does little to salve their pain. But it is proof that actions have consequences, they say, that there’s a price to pay for excessive use of force.

That’s the message that should have been delivered by the $8.5 million judgment that Danny Rodriguez’s parents won against Phoenix Police Officer Richard Chrisman. But the police department was protected: In Arizona, local governments are immune from responsibility for an officer’s behavior unless they had evidence the officer was a rogue cop and did nothing about it.
Chrisman remains in prison; he is scheduled to get out in 2019. The family’s case against the city is under appeal. But Rodriguez’s mother, Elvira Fernandez, said she never expects to see a dime.

“It’s like trying to take a million dollars out of me,” she said. “With the officer, there’s nothing there. And with the city, there’s just the feeling that they’re above the law.”

The family could collect if they could prove that Phoenix trained Chrisman improperly or knew he had a tendency to abuse his authority. A surveillance camera once captured Chrisman planting drug paraphernalia on a mentally ill woman, and he was suspended without pay for 10 hours. But a judge concluded the planted-evidence case was too dissimilar from the shooting to serve as a warning to Chrisman’s superiors.

Last month, Rodriguez’s mother moved back into the trailer where her son was killed. For five years, it remained locked, Danny’s blood still streaked across the floor and walls. After staying with relatives and living in her car, Fernandez, 65, decided she had to face the scene.

“I can’t leave it like a haunted house,” she said. For weeks, she unlocked the door each day and spent as much time as she could tolerate scrubbing away the blood.

“Who’s responsible?” she asked. “That officer is in prison, but what does that do? The city should pay for the damages caused by somebody who worked for them. But the city doesn’t have to pay.
“Who’s responsible? Me, for calling the police. I just wanted to scare him, that’s all. My guilt and my conscience every day damages my soul. Nobody wants to be around me because I cry all the time. I miss my boy so much. I miss happiness, every day for five years. Every day.”

Elvira Fernandez said she never expects to see a dime from a civil lawsuit against Phoenix, where her son, Danny Rodriguez, was killed by a police officer. In Arizona, local governments are immune from responsibility for an officer’s behavior unless they had evidence the officer was a rogue cop and did nothing about it.