Jackson-police.jpg

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson congratulates police cadets just before their graduation from the Police Academy in January. The city of Cleveland has had a rough week defending itself against two lawsuits that allege police used excessive force.

(Plain Dealer file photo)

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Legally, the city of Cleveland had a bad week.

Its attempts to dismiss two high-profile civil-rights lawsuits that accuse city police of using excessive force while in the line of duty -- one of which resulted in the death of a 27-year-old -- were smacked down by federal judges.

The city also settled another case a judge refused to toss.

And its woes may continue, as county prosecutors have asked a judge to allow them to treat a slew of police officers expected to testify in the manslaughter trial of Cleveland police officer Michael Brelo as hostile witnesses.

These decisions create a microcosm, of sorts, of the larger problems the U.S. Department of Justice illustrated in its 58-page report that outlined Cleveland police officers' excessive use of force and the city's overall lack of training, experts say.

It also continues a trend of settling lawsuits while not admitting any wrongdoing. But experts also say that judges are starting to take notice. Not only with what is going on with police and excessive force allegations in Cleveland, but nationwide.

Cleveland civil-rights attorney Terry Gilbert said that case law regarding excessive force claims has evolved over the past few years, and it has made it harder for police to argue that they are immune because something happened while in the line of duty.

There are a lot of factors that play into any judge's decision, but he said "no longer are the police given a free pass because they're police."

"In years past, the judges did seem more favorable to the police and would give the benefit of the doubt to the police," Gilbert said. "They would never admit it and I would never accuse them, but subconsciously they weren't so quick to allow these claims to go forward."

David Rudovsky, a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and a civil-rights law expert, agreed, saying that courts do pay attention to public perception and what goes on in a community when making a decision.

"Once you start getting that, as a community or jurisdiction, a serious investigation, I'm not surprised that courts in that area would start taking those allegations more seriously," Rudovsky said.

But, he asked, "does that mean they would have ruled the same way two years ago? I don't know."

And while there have been multiple decisions in the past few months that highlight excessive force claims -- including one where Rodney Brown died after a New Year's Eve traffic stop in 2010 when he was handcuffed and put in the back of a squad car -- the past week saw a few big cases.

On March 26

U.S. District Chief Judge Solomon Oliver Jr. on Tuesday rejected the city's attempt to dismiss a lawsuit filed after officer Matthew Craska shot Dan Ficker, 27, during a struggle outside of Ficker's girlfriend's home in Parma.

The city also settled Tuesday with the family of Richard Kollin Jr., who had a stroke right before being pulled over on suspicion of drunken driving by police Sgt. Brian Carney. Carney and other officers waited for a long period of time to call an ambulance and Kollin died at the hospital two months later. The terms of the settlement have not yet been made public. City spokesman Dan Ball said Thursday that the terms are still being finalized.

Steve Loomis, president of the Cleveland Police Patrolman's Association, was quick to point out that claims made in civil cases only need to be found to have happened by a "preponderance of the evidence," or more likely than not. This is different than in criminal cases, where a judge or jury has to say something happened "beyond a reasonable doubt," or very likely.

He also pointed out that settling a case is often a business decision, since defending a lawsuit at trial can end up being costly.

"It definitely doesn't have to do with right and wrong," Loomis said.

And the city has not been completely unsuccessful when it comes to defending the use of force.

In February, U.S. District Judge Christopher Boyko threw out a lawsuit filed against the city by the family of Danny Withers Jr., an unarmed bank robbery suspect. In his ruling, Boyko wrote that Detective Daniel Zola did not violate Withers' constitutional rights because he was serving a valid arrest warrant when he shot Withers, who was killed while hiding in his grandmother's basement.

But Gilbert, who represents Ficker's mother and girlfriend in the lawsuit against the city, said the decisions -- especially in the case involving Brown -- point to the judges recognizing the problems the Justice Department says the police have.

"If you read between the lines, it is a validation of the recognition of some of these cases in the DOJ report," Gilbert said "Now, the courts are basically saying there's something to it."