Ouity

Ouity t1_ir29ay2 wrote

Reply to comment by drpvn in NYPD is Illegally Sending People to Rikers Without Ever Seeing a Judge, Lawsuit Claims by psychothumbs

A motion to dismiss happens when a case is legally invalid. Like, when you are making a claim that has no legal remedy, or which does not point to an actual law, or is a misreading of a law, you can just file to dismiss the case. Since there are multiple claimants filing under a lawyer who are pointing to specific circumstances which would, if true, be violations of this law, I do not think their case is going to be dismissed on procedural grounds. And if the NYPD tries to argue their claims are meritless and invalid, I will love to read that. It's definitely not what I guessed, so that would be cool for you.

I did not assume you were talking about a motion to dismiss because from where I'm sitting, a judge would rule against a motion to dismiss this case and allow it to enter discovery, since discovery of evidence is the only way to actually ascertain whether the claims presented are factual. The claims presented are definitely in violation of the law.

8

Ouity t1_ir1rxnl wrote

Reply to comment by drpvn in NYPD is Illegally Sending People to Rikers Without Ever Seeing a Judge, Lawsuit Claims by psychothumbs

I have a pretty good idea that they are not going to go out and admit in a public statement that they violated state law and peoples' civil rights. I'd say it doesn't take much of a brain to figure out why. They lose in court automatically if they do that. So instead, they will opt to release a nothing-burger that will basically say "we work tirelessly to respect/defend peoples' civil rights etc etc etc NYPD is troubled by the complaints (MAYBE) but we will follow due process and defend our officers conduct blah blah blah." Think I missed anything?

19