In August 2004, a security guard at a Pittsburgh restaurant roughed up Deven Werling, a patron who had insulted him. So Mr. Werling sued the restaurant, the security guard, and, of course… the city of Pittsburgh. It turns out that the security guard was actually a Pittsburgh police officer — an off-duty police officer — which made this assault a federal case. Now the city is paying $200,000 as part of a settlement the defendants reached with Werling just before trial (Post-Gazette; WTAE). Apparently,even though the officer was off-duty, he was working security in his official police uniform, and that may have been sufficient to put taxpayers on the hook.
Before you start feeling too much sympathy for the innocent city that was dragged into this suit, though, check out this nugget:
The city’s Office of Municipal Investigations found that Sgt. Eggleton contradicted himself under oath, and he was fired.
In October, the dismissal was reduced to a five-day suspension by then-Operations Director Dennis Regan. Mr. Eggleton continues to work as a sergeant.
So excessive force and lying under oath = five-day suspension. That will be red meat for the next plaintiff’s lawyer who sues the city over police brutality.
One Comment
“Off Duty” Officers are never off duty. They are valued as Security Guards precisely because, as certified police officers, they retain their authority and power of arrest while working the private gig, have an undisputed right to carry a sidearm, and often carry the department radio with them and are able to summon official response much quicker than a civilian calling 911. This makes their services command premium pay, and is a valuable second and third income for the working officer. The responsibility of proper conduct does not go off duty, either.