NYC to pay RNC protesters

[inav8r]

The title of the article should be "NYC to pay RNC protesters Attorneys".

NEW YORK — The city agreed Friday to pay $150 each to 108 demonstrators who were arrested during last summer's Republican National Convention and kept locked up even after a judge ordered their release. In addition to the $16,200, the city will also pay legal costs and attorneys' fees of about $215,000.

Full Article.

This is ridiculous! As usual the attorneys get more than the people who get sacked.

 

[wsuffa]

The title of the article should be "NYC to pay RNC protesters Attorneys".

Full Article.

This is ridiculous! As usual the attorneys get more than the people who get sacked.

Agree.

Gotta find a way to protect the rights of people to redress their grievances without creating economic incentive for unscrupulous attorneys to churn business.

 

[Brian Austin]

Gotta find a way to protect the rights of people to redress their grievances without creating economic incentive for unscrupulous attorneys to churn business.

I guess it would depend on the situation, though.

If the protestors went to the lawyers and said "we want you to sue the city for us", knowing the expenses involved (is that in disclosure?), then all is fair. The attorney's didn't "churn business" and, in my book, weren't really unscrupulous. They just protected their client's best interests (although not particularly well at only $150 a head).

If the lawyers went to the protestors, though, that's a different story. Then I'd agree with you.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

So who pays for this? The city leaders that directed that the law be violated? The police that enforced something that shouldn't have been enforced? Or the tax payers of the city?

City leaders generally have immunity. It's one of my biggest gripes. Leaders should generally be protected, but they sometimes take actions their own legal counsel advises against. Then guess who pays when the City get sued.

Best,

Dave

 

[corjulo]

I worked at both Conventions. For the life of me I don't know why any City would want the things. Boston was actually worse from a disruption stand point. Lots of fun for delegates and media folks but a complete disaster for the City. In the end the federal government picks up most of the security tab.