You Get What You Pay For?: Police Misconduct and the Racial Implications of Indemnification

• In Event: Over-Policing Communities of Color

Abstract

In cases of police misconduct, it’s often only through civil sanctions that officers are held culpable and victims granted redress. The incidence and cost of these cases has recently surged nationally, yet cities and their taxpayers are typically held liable for the payouts incurred by police misconduct. Thus, these sanctions do not presently serve as an effective deterrent or incentive for police reform due to the widespread practice of indemnifying the settlements and judgments awarded in misconduct cases. After analyzing the current practice of indemnification in police misconduct cases, this article connects the implications of these policies to current policing and civil litigation strategies via a discursive analysis of the case file presented before the grand jury in the shooting of Tamir Rice. It argues that a system of indemnification that provides for officer impunity and departmental inaction is especially harmful for communities of color, as these individuals are most likely to have their rights violated and face increased obstacles to receiving redress. Thus, the current practice of indemnifying civil judgments has implications that manifest in various forms of social inequity. Accordingly, policies for civil damage indemnification must be considered along with other reforms meant to address police misconduct.

Author

• Karina Bull, Tulane University