Why is Cleveland charging $500 to family of Tamir Rice?

Meanwhile, a Chicago police officer who shot and killed a black teenager two years ago, is suing the victim's estate.

Eduardo Munoz/ Reuters
Marchers in New York City on December 28 protest a grand jury's decision not to indict two Cleveland police officers in the killing of Tamir Rice, age 12, who was shot in November 2014. Rice had been holding a toy gun. The prosecutor said that his death, while tragic, was not criminal.

It’s a new low for the city of Cleveland, says the family of the late Tamir Rice.

Just months after a grand jury declined to indict two white police officers for fatally shooting the black 12-year-old as he wielded a toy gun in a public park, claiming it was the boy’s own fault, Cleveland is trying to force his estate to pay $500 for the ambulance ride and medical services he received after being shot.

“The callousness, insensitivity and poor judgment required for the city to send a bill ... is breathtaking," said Subodh Chandra, the Rice family’s attorney, in a statement. "This adds insult to homicide," he said.

Chandra said Samaria Rice, Tamir’s mother, feels the city is taunting the family, reports CNN. They city filed a creditor's claim for the $500 Wednesday in probate court, though Mayor Frank Jackson later apologized, saying the claim was routine, but should have been flagged and not allowed to be filed.

But news of the move had already circulated far and wide, even dismaying the president of the Cleveland police union, which has vehemently defended the police in this shooting case.

"Subodh Chandra and I have never agreed on anything until now," union president Steve Loomis told Fox News. "It is unconscionable that the city of Cleveland would send that bill to the Rice family. Truly disappointing but unfortunately not surprising,” he said.

The Cleveland bill for Tamir's family comes as several major police departments – including those in Cleveland, Los Angeles, Seattle, and New Orleans – are undertaking reforms as part of settlements with the US Department of Justice. It also comes the day after Ferguson, Mo. city council pushed back on a similar federal consent decree to reform its police force.  

And another case of pushback emerged in Chicago this week. A white police officer – who fatally shot a black 19-year-old, Quintonio LeGrier, and an unarmed bystander in December – is suing the teen’s estate for $10 million for "permanent" emotional distress and personal injuries. Mr. LeGrier's estate had already filed a wrongful death civil lawsuit against the city.

While it is common for a counterclaim to be filed in response to a civil lawsuit, it is rare for a police officer to sue the person he killed, acknowledges the officer’s own lawyer, Joel A. Brodsky.

But officer Robert Rialmo is entitled to do so, according to Mr. Brodsky.

“There is no question that he suffered very extreme emotional trauma and stress as a result of what Quintonio LeGrier did,” Brodsky told The New York Times. Mr. Rialmo claims that LeGrier threatened him with a baseball bat; the neighbor whom Rialmo also shot in the kerfuffle, 55-year-old Bettie Jones, was an innocent bystander.

The shooting – one of many that has incited outrage and pitted the Chicago Police Department against the city’s black residents – is under investigation. So is the entire police department, which is undergoing a long-term, civil rights investigation by the US Justice Department.

“It’s a new low for the Chicago Police Department,” Basileios J. Foutris, a lawyer for Mr. LeGrier’s estate, told the Times. “First you shoot them, then you sue them. It’s outrageous. I can’t believe that this police officer has the temerity to turn around and sue the estate of the person who he killed,” he said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.