In an unusually expeditious move, the St. Paul City Council is scheduled to meet behind closed doors Wednesday afternoon to discuss \u201cthreatened litigation\u201d for last month\u2019s K-9 attack on an innocent bystander.<\/a><\/p>\n The meeting comes despite the fact that Glenn Slaughter\u2019s attorneys haven\u2019t filed a claim or suit seeking damages. Nor is city Attorney Lyndsey Olson aware of a \u201cdemand letter\u201d from them, an even lower stakes entry point to compel settlement discussions. Slaughter\u2019s attorney, Andrew Noel, said they\u2019re still gathering medical information and awaiting police reports and footage before a lawsuit will be filed.<\/p>\n Slaughter, 33, was leaving for work July 6 when police were looking for a man who was walking in the street and allegedly pointing a gun at homes in the area. Police K-9 Suttree was assisting in the search when his collar snapped and he attacked Slaughter for nearly 30 seconds. The attack led to immediate reforms and a six-month audit of the unit<\/a>.<\/p>\n The city\u2019s movement on Slaughter\u2019s case could be a reaction to several high-profile dog bite cases in recent years<\/a>, said Thomas Heffelfinger, an attorney for Kong Kue, another bystander who was attacked by a St. Paul K-9 and dragged by his face down an alley in May 2012. Kue needed extensive medical care, including reconstructive surgery.<\/p>\n \u201cNow \u2026 they\u2019ve got a K-9 department that\u2019s costing them money,\u201d Heffelfinger said. \u201cIf they were to litigate [the Slaughter case], it\u2019s going to be more expensive for them.\u201d<\/p>\n The city\u2019s responses to claims and lawsuits filed by victims of police K-9 bites between 2012 and early 2018 show strong pushback by the city, a penchant for quibbling over semantics and a practice of blaming victims for their own injuries. Claims are filed with the city\u2019s human resources department and are a cheaper and less demanding route to recovering damages before filing a lawsuit.<\/p>\n While injuries to people regularly took a year or more to settle, the city paid a St. Paul man and a foot clinic within two and eight months, respectively, for damage caused by K-9 Gabe, who attacked an armchair and two exam chairs during unrelated building searches.<\/p>\n Kue\u2019s experience is more typical.<\/p>\n \u201cMr. Kue was intoxicated\u2026,\u201d St. Paul\u2019s claims manager, Sandra Bodensteiner, wrote in response to his claim. \u201c\u2026your client placed himself in the situation \u2026 My investigation indicates that there is no liability on the part of the City of Saint Paul.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s a really, really shallow argument,\u201d Heffelfinger said of the city\u2019s stance. \u201cMy client was badly mauled, and his intoxication was no cause for him being mauled.\u201d<\/p>\n Olson and Andrea Turner, director of St. Paul\u2019s Human Resources office, which oversees claims, said the city wants to resolve claims fairly while being mindful of the cost to taxpayers.<\/p>\n A \u201crespectful pushback\u201d is to be expected, Olson said. \u201cIt\u2019s about the totality of the circumstances \u2026 Of course we\u2019re not just paying whatever people are demanding.\u201d<\/p>\n For Kue, who still bears scars from the bite and experiences numbness in the area daily, it was a slap in the face.<\/p>\n \u201cIt made me feel little, like you were nobody to them,\u201d said Kue, who took anti-depressants for a year to cope with the attack and ensuing stress.<\/p>\n Records show that both sides agreed in August 2014 to a settlement of $65,000, with the city continuing to deny all allegations and asserting that \u201call of the officers\u2019 actions were lawful.\u201d<\/p>\n Others have had it harder. Attorney Terry Duggins filed a lawsuit in September 2013 on behalf of a man who was arrested after police found him in an unoccupied business in 2007.<\/p>\n Duggins\u2019 lawsuit said his client was compliant and handcuffed when a K-9 \u201cproceeded to attack without provocation,\u201d causing permanent damage to the man\u2019s arm. Duggins\u2019 client sought a reward of more than $100,000, but ended up settling with the city a year later for $425.<\/p>\n By contrast, the city paid Family Foot Clinic $5,097.54 for damages to two exam chairs, and a St. Paul man $346.99 for damages to an armchair caused by the same K-9 that later attacked bystander Desiree Collins in 2017<\/a>. Collins is suing the city in federal court.<\/p>\n \u201cThey just wore the client down,\u201d Duggins said of his case.<\/p>\n In responding to a February 2015 claim by a woman who was attacked by a K-9 while smoking outside, Bodensteiner argued that the woman had a \u201cmark\u201d and not a \u201cscar\u201d from the bite. She offered the woman $3,200 in response to her attorney\u2019s demand for $30,000.<\/p>\n \u201cYour client has several tattoes [sic] on her body \u2014 including her left arm, so your statement that she is self-conscious about showing her arm does not match with the image of the woman who was photographed by Saint Paul Police \u2026\u201d Bodensteiner wrote in another response.<\/p>\n \u201cMy client considers her tattoos a form of art, something she carefully considered and then made the voluntary decision to receive,\u201d wrote the woman\u2019s attorney, Jessica Servais. \u201cThis is in stark contrast to the scars from the puncture wounds, something she did not ask for \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n The woman settled with the city in June 2016 for $7,500.<\/p>\n In her response to a February 2015 claim by a Comcast employee who was bitten while installing cable at an officer\u2019s home, Bodensteiner used quotation marks around \u201cdog bite\u201d and said it was \u201ca very minor injury.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe wound was more of a scrape,\u201d she wrote.<\/p>\n The city paid out $860.47 in a workers\u2019 compensation claim and awarded the man $3,500 for his injuries.<\/p>\n Reached by phone at her home while out of the office for a few days, Bodensteiner said she did not feel comfortable addressing specific cases without the documentation before her.<\/p>\n \u201cThey are investigated based on the merits of each claim,\u201d she said. \u201cI take every claim seriously \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n Turner, who took her post this year, said she\u2019s \u201ctaking a closer look\u201d at how the city responds to claims and how they are resolved.<\/p>\n Wednesay\u2019s council session was prompted by the \u201chigh-profile nature\u201d of the attack on Slaughter, Olson said, and would be an \u201cinformation session.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s amazing,\u201d Duggins said of the speed in which the council planned to meet. \u201cThat type of attitude did not exist before.\u201d<\/p>\n Council members have largely been quiet on the issue of K-9 bites. Asked for comment by the Star Tribune earlier this year for a story reviewing six years\u2019 worth of dog bite reports<\/a>, only Council Chair Amy Brendmoen commented, saying she was \u201cpleased\u201d that the department had made changes to its K-9 use policy in April.<\/p>\n She also forwarded a Star Tribune e-mail to police Chief Todd Axtell and Mayor Melvin Carter\u2019s office. Many of her colleagues immediately deferred to Axtell on how to respond to media inquiries.<\/p>\n \u201cI wanted to make sure you were aware of this,\u201d Council Member Rebecca Noecker wrote in a May 16 e-mail in which she forwarded a Star Tribune e-mail to Axtell. \u201cI\u2019m not planning to respond.\u201d<\/p>\n Council member Jane Prince also forwarded the Star Tribune\u2019s e-mail to Axtell.<\/p>\n \u201cI have no particular need to respond to this, given that I am not well-informed,\u201d Prince wrote. \u201cAt the same time, I am willing to respond with answers that would be helpful to our [St. Paul police department].\u201d<\/p>\n Staff from Council Members Dan Bostrom and Chris Tolbert\u2019s office also forwarded a Star Tribune interview request to Axtell.<\/p>\n Council Member Dai Thao\u2019s office crafted a response to the media expressing some concerns about K-9s, but never sent it.<\/p>\n The chief e-mailed the council, the mayor\u2019s office and colleagues at the police department on May 16 defending his K-9 unit and offering \u201cto provide some facts and context that you may find useful should you decide to be part of the story.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cAs you know numbers don\u2019t always tell the ENTIRE story,\u201d Axtell wrote. \u201cThey DON\u2019T talk about the times K-9s have saved officers\u2019 lives.\u201d<\/p>\n There was no mention in the chief\u2019s e-mail that at 11:13 a.m. the day before, K-9 Jaeger was giving a demonstration to a group of children and parents at the city\u2019s Rice and Arlington Sports Complex when he turned around and bit a 10-year-old boy in the <\/a>stomach, leaving behind what the handler, officer Christopher Hetland, described as a \u201cred scratch\u201d that later bled.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/dominiclevent.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/litigation-300x225.jpg\")
<\/a>