> "The family of a police lieutenant who committed suicide last year is
> suing the city, claiming that police officials drove him to kill
> himself. The suit maintains that the officials vilified the officer,
> Lt. Michael W. Pigott, after a confrontation in Brooklyn in which the
> lieutenant’s order to shoot an emotionally disturbed man with a Taser
> gun led to the man’s death."

> http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/family-of-officer-who-co...

> ___________________________________
> These events were certainly a tragedy for both families, however …

> “Police officials told Lieutenant Pigott later that he might be
> criminally prosecuted …”

> If so, the decision to prosecute was in the hands of Charles Hynes,
> the Brooklyn District Attorney; and likely, the NYPD administration
> had the responsibility of communicating this to Lt. Piggot, as a
> matter of informing him of his right to to remain silent, etc.

> “… and that the city would not defend him if he was sued by Mr.
> Morales’s family… ”

> As for civil suits, is this a standard protocol for any government
> official, or more specifically, officers on duty?

> ” …according to the lawsuit. Mr. Pigott was also ashamed by the
> department’s assertions that he had “screwed up,” the lawsuit says.”

> I do not recall reading that NYPD Police Commissiner Kelly said the
> Lt. screwed up; I do recall a proper admission by NYPD that this was
> improper use of a taser; I congratulate the NYPD on having such a
> regulation for taser-use and recognizing in this instance that
> regulations had not been followed in this death.

> As for taking away his badge and gun, and reasigning the Lt. to desk
> duty, this was highly proper: The Lt. was indeed in deep distress; he
> should not have have a gun; nothing is wrong with that procedure.

> What were the options of keeping the Lt alive? Lock him up in Belleuve
> psych ward, against his will, and tie him down, shoot him with Haldol?