Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Ohio cops who raided home

Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by ceejayoz on Thursday March 19, 2026 @01:01PM (#47442509)

> Most of the big payouts have to come from the cities.

In other words, from the victimized populace.

I think a cop who steals seized evidence should be personally liable to the person they stole from.

(…and I'd note "v. City of Wichita" is clearly responsive to your question.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by saynay on Thursday March 19, 2026 @04:36PM (#47445669)

I would probably say that both the city and the cop should, independently, be liable. Given the position of authority the city provides, it is ultimately responsible to hire and properly train people who will use that authority well, while the individual is also responsible for their own actions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by giantg2 on Thursday March 19, 2026 @10:31PM (#47449718)

If the cop is following procedure, the city and others who set the procedure should be liable. If the cop is breaking procedure, then they should be liable. If there is no clear procedure, then they should both be liable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by ceejayoz on Thursday March 19, 2026 @04:46PM (#47445826)

Both is good with me, yes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Afroman found not liable in defamation case brought by Oh... by giantg2 on Thursday March 19, 2026 @10:24PM (#47449661)

"In other words, from the victimized populace."

Sadly, yes. They're also the populace that voted for that leadership. There are many leaders of major cities that continually push policies that are highly probably to result in legal action due to their conflict with existing law and case law. I don't like it, but its true.

[ Parent | on HN ]