Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit upheld a jury’s verdict that ordered the City and County of Denver to pay 12 George Floyd protesters $14 million for “unconstitutional” use of force during 2020 rallies.
The three-judge panel explained their decisions in a pair of rulings published on April 21.
The court agreed that the Colorado city was liable for the unconstitutional force that officers used against the 12 protesters between May 28 and June 2.
Court documents showed the Denver Police Department “exhausted its supply of 30,000 pepper balls and had to restock” after the first day of protests and did not require officers to activate their body cameras.
The Denver Police Department defended its officers, suggesting they “acted reasonably in response to the unprecedented circumstances they encountered” by “violent and destructive” crowds.
“We reject Denver’s arguments and uphold the jury’s verdict,” the judges ruled.
“We do so based specifically on the jury’s finding that Denver inadequately trained its officers.”
The Denver Police Department declined to comment on Tuesday’s decisions by the Colorado-based appeals court.
The department has since implemented a series of changes, based on what it learned from being one of the cities that was involved in the high-profile police brutality protests that spread across the nation.
The department’s changes include how it documents the use-of-force during protests, how it tracks “less-than-lethal munitions,” and how body cameras and officer identification is used.
In a separate, but related, decision, the court rejected an appeal by Denver Police Department officer Jonathan Christian who argued he should not have been found liable for violating the Fourth Amendment right of plaintiff Elisabeth Epps at the height of the police brutality protests.
Christian shot her with a pepperball in the leg as she was peacefully protesting in Denver on May, 29 2020.
Christian’s lawyers argued the officer was entitled to qualified immunity, which is meant to shield government officials from being sued for doing their duties, according to Cornell Law School.
The judges agreed with the jury, finding that Christian did use “using unreasonable force” against Epps when he shot her, “without warning, with a pepperball as she walked by herself [and not in a group], unarmed and non-threatening, across the street toward the capitol.”
Court documents added that any crime she was committing, such as jaywalking, was minor and did not warrant his actions to shoot a pepperball at her.
The judges found that Christian did act with an “evil motive or intent” or with “reckless or callous indifference” to her “federally protected rights.”