Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Politics
Boot camp video used in legislative hearing
Parents of the boy who died at camp are suing the state for $5-million.
By ALEX LEARY
Published April 7, 2007
TALLAHASSEE - Video monitors replayed the scene throughout the day: a half dozen guards surrounding the limp teenager, punching his arms, kneeing his back. In the end, Martin Lee Anderson lay unconscious in the dirt. By now the surveillance tape made at the Bay County boot camp is well known. But lawyers for Anderson's parents let it serve as a stark reminder during a legislative hearing on a $5-million claims bill for the boy's death. "Everyone it seemed had to get in on it, and once that happens, that's intentional. There's no question it's intentional," William T. Gaut, a law enforcement expert, said of the guards who now face criminal charges. "It was unlawful, it was unreasonable, it was excessive and it directly contributed to the death of Mr. Anderson," Gaut asserted. The daylong hearing was much like a court hearing, though the Department of Juvenile Justice offered little rebuttal or cross examination. Deputy Secretary Richard Davison said the agency supports the claims bill, which was first proposed by Gov. Charlie Crist. Two lawyers appointed by the House and Senate will hear the testimony and later offer a recommendation whether the Legislature should pay the $5-million. The legislature must sign off on any award against the state greater than $200,000 by approving a claims bill. Senate lawyer Jason Vail asked particularly pointed questions trying to establish whether the Department of Juvenile Justice had direct authority over the actions in Panama City. Anderson, 14, died in January 2006, but it was not until the video surfaced a month later that the case exploded into national news. In the outrage that followed, the state closed all boot camps and the family filed a $40-million lawsuit against the Bay County Sheriff's Office and the state. Last week, the family agreed to a $2.4-million settlement from the Sheriff's Office, based on the assumption the state will provide an additional $5-million. There were no surprises Friday but a former department inspector, who claims he was fired for disagreeing about the handling of the case, said sheriff's officials described the manhandling as routine. "There was no shock, there was no alarm, there was no surprise," Steve Meredith said. "It was like this is how you bake a cake ... It was so clinical." Attorney Benjamin Crump left nothing to chance, bringing out poster-sized pictures from the video, and a picture of Anderson in an open casket. He also played audio of former Gov. Jeb Bush condemning the events. The cause of death is a matter of dispute. A Bay County medical examiner contended Anderson died of sickle cell trait, a common blood disorder. But other experts said he was suffocated due to the rough handling by guards. Anderson's parents spoke only briefly. "We can't describe what we're going through," Robert Anderson said. He turned away, putting a hand to his head. "Martin is gone," Gina Jones added. "What happened to him was wrong. You all think it's right. You know that's not right at all." Rep. Frank Peterman, D-St. Petersburg, watched the hearing and said there is only one outcome. "It's my belief and great hope that every legislator who believes in justice will vote this claims bill up. Anything short is unacceptable."
[Last modified April 6, 2007, 22:22:51]
Share your thoughts on this story
Comments on this article
|
by johnfix
|
04/07/07 04:23 PM
|
|
cont) As our (taxpayer rep) you are supposed to look out for the whole district's needs, not just one single constituent. Your priorities are skewed. The 2.4 million settlement is already more than reasonable. i will not vote for you again.
|
|
by johnfix
|
04/07/07 04:12 PM
|
|
To Rep. Peterman, Justice for Martin rests in the courts, convictions and prison terms of all those responsible for his death. Making his parents multi-millionaires at taxpayer's expense is not justice. We did not harm martin why are we paying comp ?
|
|
by jack s
|
04/07/07 03:45 PM
|
|
No question the state is responsible for Martin's death. My question is this. Why is 2.4 mil or 5 mil not acceptable but 7.4 mil is acceptable. By what reasoning was this specific amount of monetary compensation arrived at ?
|
|