We know on the face of it this doesn’t sound promising, but we have to trust the experts–Chris’ attorneys–and know they are doing everything they can to defend him.

Other things to note are that Chris’ trial date is expected to be delayed for a couple weeks (to the end of April) and that the presiding judge has cleared her calendar through August for Chris’ case.

A recent news article regarding this decision is below:

Originally Posted on www.star-advertiser.com Mar 11, 2013

http://www.staradvertiser.com/s?action=login&f=y&id=196811441

Deedy ends his bid for charge’s dismissal in fatal shooting case
By Ken Kobayashi

U.S. State Department special agent Christopher Deedy will withdraw his request for dismissal of his murder charge that was based on his contention that he was acting as a federal law enforcement officer when he fatally shot a Kailua man at a Waikiki restaurant in 2011.

Deedy’s attorney, Brook Hart, filed the dismissal request in May last year, but recently notified Circuit Judge Karen Ahn during a private status conference that he would be withdrawing the motion, according to the court file.

The reason was not listed in the court minutes of the meeting. Hart has declined to comment.

Deputy Prosecutor Janice Futa also declined comment on the latest development.

The withdrawal clears the way for the start of what is expected to be a lengthy jury selection and murder trial. Jury selection had been scheduled to start April 1, but has been delayed until later in the month.

The withdrawal also means there will be no pretrial hearing on the motion, which might have turned into a minitrial that would parallel evidence presented at trial.

Deedy would have had a chance to testify for the first time about the shooting to bolster his defense that he was acting as a law enforcement officer.

The hearing might also have included the release of a surveillance video recording of the shooting.

Withdrawal of the motion would mean that Deedy and Hart will be giving up the defense under the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, barring state prosecutions of federal law enforcement officers acting in the scope of their duties.

Deedy’s defense at trial is expected to be that he was acting to protect himself.

Deedy, 28, a Virginia resident here to provide security for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference, is charged with murder and a related firearms offense.

He is accused of shooting Kollin Elderts, 23, in the chest at about 2:45 a.m. Nov. 5 at the McDonald’s restaurant on Kuhio Avenue with his service weapon.

In pretrial documents, city prosecutors say Deedy appeared “intoxicated” after a night of drinking and bar hopping and became the aggressor who started an altercation.

According to prosecutors, Deedy kicked Elderts and repeatedly told him he was going to shoot him “in the face.”

The defense’s position outlined in court documents contends it was Elderts who was the aggressor. Hart’s filings said an intoxicated Elderts called Deedy a “f—— haole” and challenged him to a fight.

Hart said Deedy identified himself as a law enforcement officer, but Elderts attacked Deedy, who felt compelled to fire in self-defense.

Hart’s motion last year sparked a controversy when he filed an exhibit of the McDonald’s surveillance video recording.

Court filings are open to the public, but Ahn granted a request by city prosecutors to seal the video despite objections by Hart and the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, its television partner, Hawaii News Now, and online news site Hawaii Reporter.

The hearing and trial have been repeatedly postponed. One reason was Hart sought to transfer the case to federal court. Later, Ahn asked the lawyers to submit legal arguments on whether she or a jury should decide on the motion.

Both the defense and prosecution said the judge should decide.

Another issue was whether the prosecution could use Deedy’s testimony at the pretrial hearing at the trial.

Hart said in a court filing Deedy would testify in the pretrial hearing about his thoughts, intentions and beliefs before, during and after the shooting. He would also testify about what he heard, which is “crucial” because the surveillance video does not have sound, Hart said.

A new date for the start of jury selection has not been set, according to the electronic court file on Friday, but is expected to be sometime in the middle of the month. Jury selection could span weeks to ensure jurors can be fair because of extensive news coverage of the case.

Lawyers involved in other criminal cases say Ahn has notified them that she will be clearing her calendar through August for the case.

Deedy, who posted $250,000 bail, returned to his Arlington, Va., home and work at a desk job at the State Department.

The post Chris’ Case Won’t Be Dismissed appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

We would like to thank the 109 individuals who contributed to our campaign to help Chris with his legal battle. We talked with him yesterday and he let us know how grateful he is for all of your support. He said the trial is currently scheduled to start on April 2nd, but with the amount of preparation that needs to be done by both sides, it’s improbable that it will start on time. This means Chris will most likely be in Hawaii longer than expected, which means the $12,737 we raised will be vital to offsetting his cost of living in Honolulu.

He’s going to burn up what little leave he has and will have to go on leave without pay (LWOP) until the trial is over. Since he won’t be working, he won’t have any income and he’ll need all the help we can give him.

We are happy to report that his professional liability insurance company, Admiral (which is the AFSA insurance plan) decided to pay his claim. His coverage, however, was only enough to cover half his bills and he will still have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars out of pocket.

We understand that our fundraiser time from was very short, since we were trying to get the money to Chris in time for his trip to Hawaii. That said, if you weren’t able to donate over the last 30 days but still want to help Chris out, we’ve changed the “donate” links over to a direct PayPal donation.

Please check back often and subscribe for updates, as our work to support Chris Deedy isn’t over. He still has a long road ahead of him and we want to keep you all informed about his progress.

The post Fundraiser Campaign Stats appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

A few months ago, a small group was sitting around at lunch time, having the usual “follow car talk.” A couple of us who are friends with Chris were telling the others about a motion that Chris has lost and how he couldn’t afford to pay for an appeal of the ruling.

Those who didn’t know Chris were floored. They hadn’t heard anything about him since his arrest hit the news (and the rumor mill) almost a year prior. They had no idea what his status was, that he was actually going to trial and that the support he was receiving was not at the level they expected. As a result we decided to put Chris’ story out there where people could read about it and have a better understanding of what happens after a lethal-force situation.

Even though the fundraising campaign will end in very soon, we will continue to provide a place for updates as Chris’s trial approaches and while it is in session. With any luck, our hopes and prayers will be answered and we won’t have any more work to do when it’s over!

We have already touched on some important topics like professional liability insurance and Simmons Protection, and we have some other topics in the queue to present, but we’d like to turn the discussion over to you:

What else would you like us to post about?

The post How This Started and Where We’re Going appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

Please take a look at the article below so you can have a good idea of some of the controversy surrounding Chris’ case.

Originally posted 6/19/2012
Honolulu Civil Beat

Can a White Federal Agent Who Killed a Hawaii Local Get a Fair Trial?

by Nick Grube

Racial tension has played an important role in Hawaii’s history ever since Capt. James Cook first stepped foot on the Sandwich Isles.

From the imprisonment of Queen Liliuokalani and the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in the 1890s to “Kill Haole Day” and the stagnation of the Akaka bill in Congress, it’s been an underlying part of the daily discourse here.

Now a Honolulu attorney representing U.S. special agent Christopher Deedy, who shot a local man in a Waikiki McDonald’s, wants to make sure these long-simmering feelings won’t keep his client — who is charged with murder — from getting a fair trial.

Immediately after, protesters took to the streets decrying Elderts’ death and blaming APEC.

There was also speculation about the circumstances leading up to the shooting. Was Elderts bullying Deedy and his friends, using racial epithets to rile the visiting federal agent? Or was it Deedy who was the aggressor, asking Elderts if he wanted to get shot and escalating a verbal argument into one that ended in tragedy.

While part of this response was due to the highly charged atmosphere created by APEC, Deedy’s attorney, Brook Hart, argues in court documents that much of it can also be attributed to increased media scrutiny and underlying socioeconomic and cultural issues facing the people of Hawaii.

In a recent phone interview, he also noted that “some pretty strong anti-mainland, anti-haole sentiment” has arisen since the shooting.

“The case involves many aspects and they go well beyond the particular incident in McDonald’s,” Hart said. “We have a strong and vibrant community of local folks who have very negative feelings about actions that the federal government have taken over the years and those might well be translated in animosity toward an agent of the federal government.”

Michael Green, the attorney representing Elderts’ family in a civil suit against Deedy, disagrees with Hart’s assertion, and says race hasn’t become a legitimate factor in the case.

“He’s trying to create any type of an issue that the thinks might help him at trial,” Green said. “He’s doing his job as a lawyer.”

Hart didn’t want to delve into details, saying that he wants to save his comments for the courtroom. He added that he hasn’t made a decision yet on whether to ask for a change of venue. Trial has been set for September.

But in his May 14 court filing that asks for permission to more thoroughly question jurors about their potential bias, Hart describes some of the outside influences on the case and how those were latched onto by groups, such as Moana Nui, (De)Occupy Honolulu and the Hawaiian sovereignty movement.

“This case became a symbol of the federal government wrongfully exercising jurisdiction over the Hawaiian Kingdom; it became a sign of the 1% oppressing the 99%; it became an example of a mainland ‘haole’ allegedly expressing malice and prejudice towards a local Hawaiian,” Hart said in his motion.

“It further sparked discussions on handguns and concealed carry, as well as on the roles that alcohol, drugs, and ‘clubbing’ play in our society. Through in-depth media coverage, Special Agent Deedy’s case raised deep-seated social, psychological, and philosophical issues, especially those particular to Hawaii, such as oppression, sovereignty, and racism.”

The large media contingent in Honolulu for APEC exacerbated the details of the shooting, Hart said. It also allowed people upset over APEC and Elderts’ killing to take to online message boards and comment sections to further decry the shooting of a “native son” by a federal agent from the mainland.

As evidence of this Hart submitted more than 600 pages of articles from local, regional and national news organizations as well as information from blog posts and YouTube.

It should also be noted that the same day Hart filed his motion to for more extensive juror questioning, he submitted another motion to have the case dismissed, saying Deedy was was immune from prosecution because he was acting in self-defense and in his official capacity as a law enforcement officer. Both motions have yet to be heard by a judge.

Unusual Legal Tactic May Be ‘Valid’

Hart’s head-on discussion about race, ethnicity and locals-versus-haoles appears to be uncommon.

Some have made comparisons between the upcoming Deedy trial and the 1930s Massie case, which Hart describes as “infamous.” To many, the Massie case highlights the history of tense race relations on Hawaii.

Thalia Massie, the young wife of a Navy officer, reported she was abducted and raped by five non-whites after she left a Honolulu party. The five men, whose ethnicities ranged from native Hawaiian to Japanese to Chinese-Hawaiian, were put on trial and later released.

Massie’s husband, Thomas, then conspired with his mother-in-law to kidnap and kill one of the five suspects, Joseph Kahahawai. Thomas Massie, his mother-in-law and two accomplices were tried and convicted of manslaughter, although their sentences were quickly commuted.

The fallout made national headlines, bringing the word “honor killing” into homes across the country. It even incited calls for justice against an island believed to be overrun with savages.

The Deedy case has in no way reached such a fervor, but even mentioning Massie underscores that racial tension is still just below the surface in Hawaii.

University of Hawaii ethnic studies professor Jonathan Okamura specializes in race and ethnicity in Hawaii. He’s also spoken with his students specifically about the Deedy case and the racial encounters they’ve had.

Okamura says the “anti-haole” question is valid because the sentiment is there. He does consider some of Hart’s claims about the symbolism of the case to be hyperbole.

“It’s not a secret to local people who live here,” Okamura said. “It’s a secret that the Hawaii tourist bureaus want to downplay, especially when this (type of) incident takes place in Waikiki.”

He said there’s historical and continual “blame-pinning against haoles” that comes from the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, and the perception that the current political and economic structure is dominated by whites.

This is despite the fact that there are other ethnic groups that hold enough power and influence to also be oppressive here, he said. Hawaii is, after all, a melting pot with many varied cultures and ethnicities.

Waikiki is a place where many conflicts can arise between people of differing ethnicities, Okamura said.

It’s “an interracial contact zone” where tourists interact with locals, whether on the beach and sidewalks or in the shops and restaurants. He said tense racial undercurrents can also be strengthened by alcohol and result in an eruption of violence.

“In Hawaii, for the most part, face-to-face relations can be very positive,” Okamura said. “That doesn’t mean every interaction is positive, but it does result in obscuring the ways that we don’t get along.”

To many outsiders, these underlying tensions are concealed by Aloha, a friendly hello and goodbye that can hold deeper meanings of compassion and love.

But similar to the multiple interpretations of Aloha, events here can take on larger more complex meanings due to the historical context in which Hawaii became a U.S. territory.

“The issue of Hawaii history, I think that’s kind of a lingering cloud over the present,” said Kyle Kajihiro, of Hawaii Peace & Justice, a nonprofit group dedicated to demilitarization and social equality. “The fact that Hawaii was an independent nation and that it was overthrown by the unlawful military intentions of the U.S., that has never been resolved. There’s never been rectification for that.”

Kajihiro was involved in some of the protests during APEC, including the one that was put together after Elderts’ death. At that time, he said, the shooting symbolized the ramifications of APEC’s policies around the world.

Now, nearly eight months after the killing in Waikiki, Kajihiro says he still understands why Elderts’ death can represent more than just a tragedy. This resonates more when considering Deedy was an armed federal agent who was here as part of a larger, more visible police presence.

And while he admits there’s a significant amount of cultural and ethnic friction in Hawaii, he believes it can be acknowledged and set aside when putting a man on trial, even if he’s a haole from from the mainland.

“I think there can be a fair trial, and I think it’s offensive to assume that people are unable to be fair just because we have to consider all these historical and cultural factors,” Kajihiro said. “If you tried to purge all of that history and the context from this case and say you can only look at it on these terms and you have a jury that’s clueless about the situation, I don’t think that’s fair. That all colors and creates a more real complex picture of what happened and why.”

Okamura, on the other hand, was a little more blunt with his assessment of the case. He said Deedy’s attorney is “racializing” it, and perhaps even setting up his defense strategy. He also wouldn’t be surprised if Hart gets criticized as a result.

As to whether race was actually involved in the violence between Deedy and Elderts, Okamura said we’ll have to wait and see.

“We don’t know if there was any reference to race in that conflict,” he said. “It could just be two young males that got into an argument that escalated into a killing.”

The post Racism in Hawaii – How it Could Affect Chris Deedy’s Trial appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

^{Photo courtesy of istockphoto.com/boric}

We’ve been looking for a good reference that speaks about the “articulable fact” that a subject trying to take away an officer’s gun does “rise to a probable cause that the subject poses an immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm.”

This is contrary to one gun forum poster who believed that a badguy trying to take his gun was “stealing his property,” and you can’t shoot someone just to protect your property.

Well, on February 7th, 2013, a police officer in St. Louis was faced with this scenario. He told a suspect to get out of a car. The suspect attacked the officer and tried to take the officer’s gun away. The officer was able to maintain control of his firearm and he shot the suspect once in the chest. The suspect died at the hospital.

Captain Michael Sack from the St. Louis Police Department was interviewed afterward, and he said: “Trying to take the officer’s weapon, it’s a very dangerous situation. You may have heard a lot of the studies report that officers are, with some regularity, killed by their own firearms that are taken from them, so when someone goes for an officer’s weapon, it immediately escalates it to a lethal force encounter.”

You can read a news article and see a video of the interview here.

According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, in 2011, three law enforcement officers were killed with their own gun.²

A subject trying to take and officer’s gun isn’t stealing it so he can pawn it for lunch money. It’s probable that the subject is going to shoot the officer with that gun and the use of deadly force by the officer should be reasonable. The last thing we want is people to see the situation Chris is in and think twice about using force when it is appropriate.

^{1. FLETC Legal Division Podcast – Part III: Deadly Force – Tenn v. Garner}

^{2. FBI UCR Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed 2011}

The post Lethal Force in the News appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

^{Photo Copyright istockphoto.com}

Chris’ attorneys believe the Supremacy Clause should apply because in his case there are federal laws that are in conflict with state laws. As a result, there is a hearing scheduled before the trial where Chris’ team will argue their point. In order for their argument to be effective, Chris may have to testify on his own behalf. Here’s where the Simmons Protection comes in.

In 1968, the Supreme Court decided in Simmons v. United States “that when a defendant testifies in support of a motion to suppress evidence on Fourth Amendment grounds, his testimony may not thereafter be admitted against him at trial on the issue of guilt unless he makes no objection.”¹

Chris’ attorneys want to know if any testimony Chris makes during the Supremacy Clause hearing can be used to impeach him–that is, make him out to be a liar–during his actual trial.

The issue would be if during the Supremacy Clause hearing Chris testified that he was wearing blue socks at the time of the incident, but then during the criminal trial he said he was wearing black socks, the jury may not believe the rest of his testimony. If Chris were to be granted Simmons Protection, the jury wouldn’t be allowed to know what he said at the Supremacy Clause hearing. This way if there were any inconsistencies between the two testimonies, it couldn’t be used against him.

^{1.Graham, Morgan G. (1984) “The Use of Suppression Hearing Testimony to Impeach,” Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 59: Iss. 2, Article 5. Available at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol59/iss2/5}

The post Simmons Protection for Chris Deedy appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

Photo copyright istockphoto.com/ferrantraite

Unfortunately, even though he was able to leave Hawaii, the court added different restrictions on him. Chris cannot travel more than 100 miles from his home without prior court approval, he is subject to drug and alcohol testing. Chris has been allowed to attend a wedding in Virginia, visit his family in Massachusetts and fly to Florida to see his grandmother, but he has to be selective about his requests. Simple things like a snowboarding trip are out of the question, not only because of the process involved to allow him to get to a mountain, but because he has been putting every cent he has into his defense.

Chris is also prohibited by the court from handling firearms, so he is not eligible to fill a law enforcement position. As a result, he cannot receive Law Enforcement Availability Pay (LEAP), which takes away 25% of his salary, and he can’t work investigation or protection overtime hours.

Preparing his defense has become a second full-time job for Chris. Along with working regular duty at DS headquarters, Chris puts in 30-40 hours per week collaborating with his legal team. He participates in meetings, on phone calls, doing research, and working on reports. This includes a regular three hour conference call and two regular three-plus hour meetings with attorneys, along with plenty of unscheduled calls and research/written work. As the de-facto subject matter expert (he is a law enforcement officer and knows his training and experience better than anyone else on the team), his group has him acting almost like a paralegal. He does research and helps write all of the legal motions, as well as prepares and analyzes the 3000+ pages of evidentiary discovery.

Chris is working hard and we need to work hard for him, too. Please check out the progress of our Support Christopher Deedy fundraising campaign at www.indiegogo.com/deedysupport, consider making a donation and don’t forget to share our site and posts with others!

The post What’s happened to Chris since the incident? appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

Convicted in the Media

A federal agent is on trial for murder in Hawaii, and it may not be a fair trial.

August 22, 2012 by Jon Adler

On Nov. 5, Diplomatic Security Services Special Agent Chris Deedy, 28, was charged with second-degree murder in Hawaii. Initial news accounts of the incident quoted the civil attorney representing the family of the deceased and claimed that a drunken rogue agent followed the unarmed “victim,” Kollin Elderts, 23, out of a Waikiki nightclub after exchanging words and summarily shot him in front of a McDonald’s. Headlines were quick to characterize Deedy as a killer and a murderer.

To further stack the jury pool deck against Deedy, the prosecutor’s spokesman said surveillance video coverage of the incident was conclusive by stating, “This is a killing caught on camera.”

Deedy was part of a detail that was in Hawaii on assignment for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. On the night of the incident he was on personal time, hanging out with a college friend and the friend’s girlfriend.

According to his attorney, Deedy consumed a small amount of alcohol earlier in the evening, but was not intoxicated when the incident occurred. The defense also says that contrary to initial headlines and attorney statements, Deedy did not exchange words with Elderts in the night club and Deedy did not follow Elderts out of the club and then shoot him in front of McDonald’s.

Witness statements and surveillance footage from the security cameras in the McDonald’s reportedly reveal that Deedy was actually seated inside the restaurant with his friends when Elderts came through the door with another man. Witness accounts say Elderts and his counterpart were verbally abusive and belligerent toward customers. Video and witness accounts also indicate that Elderts and the other man were allegedly poised to physically strike a male customer right before Deedy confronted them.

The defense says Deedy approached Elderts and displayed his badge and credentials. Witness accounts add that Deedy asked Elderts to calm down and cease what was characterized as aggressive behavior. The defense says that video and witness accounts will show that Elderts responded to Deedy’s request by attacking the agent and knocking him to the ground. Elderts, who had a 30-pound weight advantage over Deedy, allegedly also struck Deedy in the face several times.

Contrary to the initial news account, Deedy did not fire his weapon once into Elderts’ chest. Instead, he fired three rounds from his weapon.

So how did Deedy miss twice? The video reportedly shows that Deedy drew his weapon, but did not immediately discharge it. Elderts then allegedly lunged at Deedy and grabbed the barrel of the agent’s weapon. Two shots were fired during the struggle, but neither party was struck.

Deedy was knocked to the ground, the video shows. Then Elderts allegedly lunged at the dazed agent, who then fired his weapon and struck Elderts in the chest. The medical examiner’s report showed that Elderts had a high level of alcohol in his system, as well as drugs.

Deedy rendered first aid to the mortally wounded Elderts. That is not disputed by either side. Elderts’ counterpart, who was allegedly beating on Deedy’s friend, fled the scene before the police arrived. Deedy continued to render CPR after the police arrived, then he was subsequently taken to the hospital to treat his injuries.

At the hospital Deedy was arrested and now awaits trial. Given the harmful impact the initial headlines and attorney statements could have on a prospective jury pool, Deedy’s attorney has asked that the prosecutor release the McDonald’s video so it could be used for Deedy’s defense. The prosecutor’s office argues that release of the video will taint the jury pool, and it should only be shown in court once the trial begins.

The net effect is that Deedy’s attorney now has to overcome accusatory news media reports and somehow hope he can get an impartial jury. He will have to overcome the prejudicial misperception that a rogue law enforcement officer shot an innocent unarmed man. Incidentally, Elderts had two prior arrests: disorderly conduct and driving under the influence.

Setting aside the hype, the jury will have to determine if Deedy was justified in discharging his firearm. Use-of-force expert witnesses will likely be called to testify and provide context for the actions taken by the accused. The prosecution will likely attempt to minimize the level of threat posed by Elderts by repeatedly describing him as “unarmed.” Hopefully, the facts of the case will show that the level of force was justifiable and that Elderts did pose a lethal threat to Deedy.

The post Christopher Deedy: Convicted in the Media appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

Photo copyright istockphoto.com/veronwiley

Chris needs every bit we can give him. Almost 1200 people have viewed our site to date and have read about Chris and his story, but only 42 have stepped up to help. We’re already 40% of the way through our campaign, but have only reached 10% of our target. There are approximately 2000 DS agents. If each one gave $25, we’d make our goal.

Chris will be heading to Hawaii in less than two weeks to start the fight not just of his life, but for it. He has a lot ahead of him and a lot of expenses to bear. They say money can’t buy you happiness, but it can buy you attorneys and expert witnesses to testify on your behalf. These are things that will keep a law enforcement officer, who defended himself and his friend, from going to prison.

There are only a couple weeks left to make a contribution toward Chris Deedy’s defense. What’s stopping you from helping?

The post Deedy Fundraiser Update – 2/2/2013 appeared first on DeedySupport.com.

Despite having insurance to cover law enforcement action, Chris and his family have had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars out of pocket to cover all of his expenses. He’s had to hire five separate lawyers to handle the wide variety of issues resulting from the incident. In addition to his criminal charges, the deceased’s family brought a civil suit against him for wrongful death, his insurance company sued him for filing a claim on his policy, and he’s had to retain defense and appeals lawyers in both Hawaii and Virginia. Plus, he’s had to pay for numerous flights and housing in both locations for extended periods of time–expensive items that aren’t necessarily covered by insurance.

Let’s take a few minutes to talk about insurance, lawsuits, and professional associations. Many of you in the law enforcement community may be thinking “that sucks for him, but that’s why I have liability insurance.” Well, it’s not quite that simple. Chris had professional liability insurance and was covered under his renter’s insurance for negligence/wrongful death, and they are actually costing him more money.

When the civil suit was brought against Chris for wrongful death, he filed a claim under his renter’s insurance policy to cover the expense of hiring a civil attorney. The insurance company didn’t want to pay, so they turned around and sued Chris, and he had to hire yet another attorney to fight his own insurance company! His lawyer won that suit, so the insurance company is forced to cover Chris for the wrongful death suit in Hawaii, but this policy is very limited financially. Luckily that case has been stayed and will not proceed until the criminal case is over, but the future costs of the lawsuit are still pending, and the policy will likely not be enough to cover all the expenses.

Professional liability insurance is designed to protect officers from being held personally liable for acting within the scope of their employment. It is recommended for all law enforcement officers due the nature of the job and our overly-litigious society. Over a year after the incident, Chris’ attorneys are still fighting with his professional liability insurance policy to provide coverage. At this point, they have neither declined nor agreed, but even if they do end up covering, the coverage limit of his particular policy will only reimburse up to half of what has already been invoiced by his attorneys. The limit has long been passed, and no future costs will be covered.

This is not to say that you should not have professional liability or any other type of insurance to cover you. If and when Chris’ insurance pays his claim, it’s going to help him out quite a lot–but it still won’t be nearly enough since his case is so complex. Everyone should be insured! Just make sure you’re protected to the fullest extent, know your coverages/exceptions and keep in mind the insurance company may not automatically pay your bills just because you pay theirs.

The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA) is the largest federal law enforcement professional association. At the time, Chris wasn’t a member of FLEOA, but he became one after the incident. We can’t say enough about what a difference FLEOA has made for Chris–they have supported him throughout the process, providing legal advice even before he became a member, meeting with his attorneys, writing articles about his case, using it as an example to support the Officer Safety Act of 2012, and they are continuing to lobby on Chris’ behalf. If you’re a federal law enforcement officer, it is in your best interest to join FLEOA.

That’s it for today’s lessons to be learned. We believe these are the kind of things that every officer should be aware of, and unfortunately it took our friend Chris learning the hard way to really hit it home for us. Please donate to help him keep fighting the system so that his case doesn’t set a terrible precedent for the future.

Friend us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and tell everyone you know. Personally, we’re sending an email to every cop we know. We need to spread the word about what’s actually going on just as much as we need to raise money. Every little bit helps, so please pass it on.

The post The Down and Dirty: What Every Officer Should Know About Insurance and Professional Associations appeared first on DeedySupport.com.