Pantagraph.com | News | Pantgraph asks judge to unseal Ruch settlement records

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

To Could you Please Get it Straight wrote on Oct 21, 2006 8:43 AM:

" It was investigated that way because the only person still alive to give testimony was the officer. It's easy to say Nathan drove straight at you when you are the only person alive to say it. "

To Could you please get it straight wrote on Oct 21, 2006 5:41 AM:

" How do you know that Nathan drove his vehicle at a police officer? Were you there? The insurance company would not have paid $750,000 if the police were not at fault in some way. "

Could you please get it straigt wrote on Oct 19, 2006 3:42 PM:

" Nathan was not shot because he hit a median or because he didn't pull over in 90 seconds. He was shot because AFTER driving his vehicle between 2 houses and he drove his vehicle at a police officer. That is what was investigated and decided. Please stop saying it was because he didn't stop for police and making it seem like you will get shot if you don't stop in 90 seconds. That is bogus and you know it. YOu make your case for the whole thing look bad. You obviously don't want to admit the truth. The truth is he was shot because the officer perceived his life to be in danger when the vehicle was turned toward him. "

Don't be so fast... wrote on Oct 19, 2006 1:15 PM:

" You can't state that no one would have died had the officer stopped chasing him. That is a guess, not a fact. Please stop saying no one would have died...you don't know that "

To Officer wrote on Oct 18, 2006 3:59 PM:

" So are you backing your fellow officer Merica and his decision to violate pusuit procedures as well? That is a scary thought coming from another police officer! I am just saying that if the PROCEDURES WERE FOLLOWED that evening, no one would have been killed and no lawsuit would have to be filed! "

I'm with ya 2 wrote on Oct 18, 2006 3:35 PM:

" Merica needs to be investigated further!!! Mayor Koos needs to find somewhere else to work and the City of Normal needs to wake up. "

bn wrote on Oct 18, 2006 3:11 PM:

" to "maiden england", It is quite amusing listening to you advise people who don't share your view to "get over it". However your statement that anyone who does not share your view as contributing to the crime is moronic. You have been asked a very simple question by two seperate posters on at least two different threads and yet you refuse to answer, instead spouting off some idiotic analogy that you think supports your view. I have not read a single post excusing what Ruch did that night. What he did was wrong but it hardly warranted four rifled slugs into his head and torso. You cite Ruch's past legal troubles and yet totally dismiss Merica's prior actions/statements and the fact that under NPD policy Merica never should have been chasing him in the first place. You refuse to see, or even attempt to see both sides of the incident. Another thing. If complaining about Merica does nothing other than keep him out of a squad car on patrol all these posts are well worth it. Get over yourself. "

Maiden England wrote on Oct 18, 2006 3:07 PM:

" I believe YOUR head is in the sand "ME" because your vision along with your way of thinking is obstructed. Swimming in spirits perhaps ? I bet you commented previously about "not feeling safe" with this officer still working for the P.D.huh ? I presume in your eyes the Police should just "lie down" and let the criminal element in central IL run its course, as long as you're not directly effected, who cares right ? Yeah, lets launch a BIG investigation over the "conspiracy theory" that N.P.D. and the Mayor and the town council are guilty of a "cover up," over a shooting that was JUSTIFIED. Go back to watching re-runs of Law & Order. Your excuses are still weak. "

ME wrote on Oct 18, 2006 2:24 PM:

" I was saying, what if that person driving doesn't pull over in 90 seconds? Will you put your head in the sand when that person gets shot, too? Regardless of settlements, I think that the NPD needs to be investigated. We have judges and juries to proclaim our death sentences. "

bn wrote on Oct 18, 2006 1:28 PM:

" to officer: if Merica and Ruch are the only people that know what went on how do you know Merica was just "doing his job"? "

To: ME? wrote on Oct 18, 2006 1:23 PM:

" Yeah, he did all of that plus drive through a yard, around a house, all while trying to evade the police. You got your settlement amount, are you relieved now? By the way, what lights did he not notice ? Oh, the squad car lights you say. Well, I guess that explains why when they lit up he tried to evade officer Merica. Gimme a break, anyone else with COMMON SENSE would have pulled over, be it a teenager, housewife, or dear old grammy. Your excuse is weak. -----Maiden England "

to: Bob B Brown wrote on Oct 18, 2006 12:11 PM:

" you were only about 2 million off... nice try though. "

Officer wrote on Oct 18, 2006 12:07 PM:

" No matter what your opinion of this situation is, the only people who knew what went on that night are Merica and Ruch. Unitl some of you armchair quarterbacks serve your community by protecting it from the criminal element and know and have been involved in dangerous situations, then your opinions are just that: opinions. Nothing based on any sort of experience. Merica was doing his job. Ruch put himself in the situation. "

ME? wrote on Oct 18, 2006 12:05 PM:

" I don't support Nathan's defiance. I support knowing all the facts of this case to make sure that this doesn't happen again--to a nervous 16 year old, to a surburban housewife, to an 80-year-old grandmother. What happens when they hit a median, don't notice the lights, and miss pulling over. Will they be shot, too? The consequences of a traffic stop should not be a giant head wound. "

Maiden England wrote on Oct 18, 2006 10:51 AM:

" Get over it, this can be debated untill you're all blue in the face. Officer Merica was justified in the shooting. Your complaining about his handling of this situation will change nothing. How about the way Mr. Ruch handled it ? All of you in support of MR. Ruch's defiance also make yourselves a part of the crime. "

Once more time: wrote on Oct 18, 2006 10:19 AM:

" Officer Merica should have went by the book and ended the pursuit as required by the Normal police deptartments policy! No one would be dead, no one would be recieving a huge settlement, and things would be fine! Officer Merica" broke the rules of pursuit" and look what happened!! He had the license number of the vehicle and could have used it to track him down at home later, or even had another officer help to track him down and initiate a traffic stop on the suspect! Instead he tracked and hunted him down and it ended in a senseless fatality! "

Interested wrote on Oct 18, 2006 9:40 AM:

" I would be interested in seeing what the judge saw. All of it. From depositions to findings to when the Ruch's turned over evidence and when the city turned over theirs. Something just doesn't seem right. "

too much t.v. and movies wrote on Oct 18, 2006 9:32 AM:

" it only works that way in movies, get out from behind the t.v. and look at the real world. "

apparently wrote on Oct 18, 2006 9:31 AM:

" the street being a dead-end didn't stop Nathan, in cased you missed it, he drove between two houses to get away. "

Don't cover up wrote on Oct 18, 2006 9:04 AM:

" Merica knew that was a dead end street why didn't he just wait at the entrance to the street and get some backup? u Unless he wanted to move in for the kill. The only whay the Ruch's could get the town's attention was to file a suit against them because no one was giving them answers to their question.If the police and state police had been forthright and disclosed the truth about the officer the suit would have never been filed, but now that they did and the truth is out why are you going after the Ruch's. Why not the town and state officals that tried to cover up. "

normal reader wrote on Oct 18, 2006 6:43 AM:

" The town is just like ISU.They cover things up and sweep it under the rug. "

What's truth? Yeah, right wrote on Oct 18, 2006 5:05 AM:

" You can't base this incident on how other officers would have handled it any more than you can base any other incident on how other officers handled that one. Many officers probably would have handled the incident where Merica would have "dumped the kid" differently than it was handled. Let's have the truth about that one come out. You all are diluded if you think all of the truth is out and anyway, EVERYONE's perception of the truth is different. "

It is people like you wrote on Oct 18, 2006 4:45 AM:

" That make the police not want to police. Wow! I would rather have a reactive police force than a proactive one. The attitude that Merica should have just looked the other way when a drunk driver was one the road and later DROVE BETWEEN TWO HOUSES is sickening. Thank you for boycotting our town and I call for people like you to leave our town because you think that kind of behavior is okay. Take your kids with you because they obviously aren't been taught to respect any kind of authority and I, for one, would prefer your type to stay away. "

To I'm with You and No Thanks wrote on Oct 18, 2006 4:42 AM:

" If you were hung for every comment you ever made. Those comments were taken out of context. You don't know the entire conversation and you are going off of some other person's perception of that officer. What about the credibility of the person who perceived the comments made by Merica. You remind me of an old-fashioned witch-hunt. AND maybe I am a friend of Merica's and maybe I am not but I certainly am not going to burn a man for trying to get a drunk driver who ran from him, that later almost ran him over off the road, whether Nathan meant to hit him or not, he was still drover between two houses and almost hit the Merica. If it would have been a kid, you guys would have been applauding his efforts. "

Bob B Brown wrote on Oct 18, 2006 1:44 AM:

" I have already told you 2.8 million. You will see. "

person of interest wrote on Oct 17, 2006 10:28 PM:

" Nathan knew if he got stopped, he was probably not going to get off again, with the just ice he had gotten multiple times before. He knew he was going to go to prison & meet bubba. He decided he wouldn't be taken alive, and he got his wish. Sorry, he got his wish. "

Settlement wrote on Oct 17, 2006 10:22 PM:

" The dollars are coming from the insurance company, which helps to decide if there will be a settlement. That decision is based on the costs of a trial and the probability of losing the case. There is a "nuisance" value for which a settlement can be made just to avoid the costs of a trial. Once we know the amount of the settlement, we can tell if was settled as a nuisance, or if there was a real concern that the town would be found liable. The town has some degree of immunity, so a larger settlement would indicate that the town actually believed that there was a gross violation of Mr. Ruch's rights, and that would call into question Officer Merica's fitness to continue to serve. That said, I don't believe that an officer who makes a split-second decision under this factual situation should be judged too harshly. I'm more concerned about his attitude, as police departments should screen out applicants (or terminate existing officers) who are in the job for the wrong reasons, such as a desire for power. Finally, Normal will bear some cost, because the town's insurance premiums are likely to be raised after this incident. "

To Obvious wrote on Oct 17, 2006 10:10 PM:

" Are you a close personal friend of Officer Mericas? "

To Obvious wrote on Oct 17, 2006 10:04 PM:

" That is your opinion, Officer Merica. "

Obvious wrote on Oct 17, 2006 7:59 PM:

" There is only one person responsibile for the tragic events of that night and that person was Nathan Ruch. It is obvious that Nathan made a choice to escape at any cost - he lost. "

unreal wrote on Oct 17, 2006 7:37 PM:

" the only party to do wrong in this whole case was the driver that was shot. why didnt the town of normal sue his family for wrong doing and causing such an up roar, "

Not Alone wrote on Oct 17, 2006 6:10 PM:

" I also think the office should no longer be on the force. One of the shots he fired entered the room where a child was sleeping. From the information I have read, I do not feel the police officer was in danger from Mr. Ruch. "

settlement wrote on Oct 17, 2006 5:59 PM:

" there is a simple reason the city settled. The cost of a lenghty trial was probably more than the settlement. it's always cheaper to settle. I love all you people that think there is something being covered up if someone settles out of court. Its not always right or wrong, usually its just about money. "

I have been told wrote on Oct 17, 2006 5:26 PM:

" There is a freedom of information act. Any settlement involving a public body or the courts is public information and needs to be disclosed! Then the truth about Merica and his alleged statements to other officers may also be disclosed as well! What is the town of Normal and the courts trying to hide anyway?? "

Stormin' Norman wrote on Oct 17, 2006 5:21 PM:

" I think everyone would be surprised at how much money "jackpot justice" lawsuits are settled for these days. Don't expect your property tax bills to decrease next year. All parties involved here, except the taxpayer, will make out like a bandit. And you thought crime didn't pay. "

Yep wrote on Oct 17, 2006 5:11 PM:

" Those officers deserve our support. They work hard to rid these towns of crime and filth, now stand up and stand behind them. Trying to buck the system will get you nowhere. "

Be careful Brain wrote on Oct 17, 2006 4:50 PM:

" If you voice your concernsto loudly, a cetain someone might get aggrivated and decide to "Dump" you. "

Use your brain wrote on Oct 17, 2006 4:15 PM:

" You justify the shooting because the kid "violated a few laws"? Violation of law does not warrant being shot. This officer's actions were wrong. IF THEY WERE'NT WRONG, THEN WHY DID THE CITY PREMATURELY SETTLE A WRONGFUL DEATH CASE? And to the other person who said I can picket and talk and nothing will change, you disgust me. If you don't voice your views, you are just taking up space. Another piece of scafolding for the building of a bigger machine. I will keep pursuing action, as this issue stinks. "

Puppets? wrote on Oct 17, 2006 4:13 PM:

" Who's playing who here? First the family wanted the settlement amount sealed, now they want it unsealed. Is it because the Pantagraph (which in my opinion needs to keep their noses out of it), has nothing else to report and loathes the chance to keep that "police vs. citizens" mentality going? I truly wonder, does the Pantagraph want the settlement out in the open for the good of the public (snicker, snicker), or are they just trying to boost their sales? "

To 'Yep' wrote on Oct 17, 2006 4:08 PM:

" Yep, you must long for the 'good ole' days of yore. The days when a cop could violate ones civil rights based on color, religion, sexual preference, etc and walk away unscathed. At least here in Normal, we violate civil rights on an equal opportunity basis. "

jimmy wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:51 PM:

" first the family insists the settlement be a secret, now they insist it be released as public information? think they got a little backlash on this? let's just wait and see what happens when the dollar figure is released. in any event, the family should have to pay all court costs for this next round in the courtroom for wasting everyone's time and money trying to keep it secret to begin with. all taxpayers in normal have a right to know how much this serial malcontempt's life was worth. "

Re No thanks wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:51 PM:

" When are you going to recognize that this kid broke not just one law but many laws!!! He was a danger to society and he paid the ultimate price. If more people thought that this might be the result of their actions maybe they would think twice about endangering others. "

In agreement w/No Thanks wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:50 PM:

" I spent 8 years working for a major Insurance Company in Hartford, CT settling liability cases similar to this one. I can tell you with the utmost certainity that for a settlement to be made this early, the evidence against the NPD has to be absolutely indisputable. Normally, the insurer makes the decision to settle, and the attourney abides. This was too soon for the evidence to be even remotely disputable. With all that in mind, I have to agree that this incident should not be closed, but rather re-examined. This Officer should be held responsible for his actions. "

I'm in wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:47 PM:

" I want better policies and procedures in place. I want the NPD to look hard at the members of its force. Why did it take 4 years to uncover all of this information??? "

Citizens Unite wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:39 PM:

" Please, get a job, unite all you want, you will change nothing, picket, you will change nothing, yell, you will change nothing. Also, do you believe everyhting you hear? "

Jeff wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:34 PM:

" Don't really see as it's the Pantagraphs, or anyone else's business. The decedant's family wanted it quiet, so show some respect. "

Respect wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:33 PM:

" The shooting was ruled justifiable by every investigation. The police officer bears no guilt. He was reprimanded for not cutting short a chase that covered 3 blocks. This sounds like an attempt to appease the fanatics without punishing a officer doing his job.. As to his attitude. Regardless of his personal beliefs, He followed the rules when using his weapon. That being said, I have seen over-reaction on the part of Normal and Bloomington police. The us versus them mentallity is undeniably there. Bottom line is, they are not the cream of societies intellectuals, and they carry guns. They want to go home healthy at night. Do not press them, or run. "

His Pension??? wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:30 PM:

" I agree that something more should be done here. I feel as if the NPD's handling of this situation was pathetic.....But to take away his pension? Is that enough? That means that we will keep this guy on our city's payroll between now and retirement. I don't want another "x" amount of years with Officer Merica. I don't like that option at all. "

Yep wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:18 PM:

" you are alone "

I'm with you wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:11 PM:

" You are defintiely not alone. I've been appauled at the information that has been made public over the last two weeks. The comments made by officer James Merica are unacceptable. I can't fathom why he still has a job. I agree, something must be done reight here, right now. "

No thanks is right.... wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:06 PM:

" Merica's pension should go towards the settlement for sure. "

I'm with you wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:04 PM:

No thanks, Merica!!! wrote on Oct 17, 2006 3:00 PM:

" I don't care about the figure. I care about a safe town. I want Merica's gun, badge and power stripped. Am I alone? This incident stinks to high heaven. If it didn't, why did the city settle. CITIZENS UNITE!!! Do we need to picket the NPD grounds to get action here. Why is Merica still wearing the blue. All those opposed to having a cop like this in our town, come forward and voice your concerns. Next tmie it may be you or someone you know. We can't wait for a next time. Am I alone? "

No thanks, Merica!!! wrote on Oct 17, 2006 2:57 PM:

to Old Man wrote on Oct 17, 2006 2:55 PM:

" "I am a strong believer of keeping all dealings of city government in the open and above the table." If that's the case, why weren't you saying anything about the fact that the City and the NPD didn't release any information regarding what happened 4 years ago, including the problems they knew existed??? "

To stop screaming wrote on Oct 17, 2006 2:44 PM:

" Haven't you noticed that by not disclosing the ammount of the settlement there has been a much larger public outcry about all of it then if they would have just made it public in the first place??? Of course people would have still complained about it being too big or something, but by not disclosing it, ALL of the attention surrounding this story has been about the settlement agreement. "

wow wrote on Oct 17, 2006 2:38 PM:

" They didn't deserve any money the officer was doing his job. "

Stop Screaming wrote on Oct 17, 2006 1:42 PM:

" Maybe they wanted people to focus on the event and not the money. Will the NPD look into its policies at all if the only talk is supposed "ill gotten gain." Get over it. The town of Normal could have settled for nothing. It is their own fault. "

To Old Man wrote on Oct 17, 2006 1:40 PM:

" The city isn't paying the settlement, the insurance company is. "

Dollars and no sense wrote on Oct 17, 2006 1:37 PM:

" Ill gotten gain ! Do the right thing, donate to MADD or Policemans' Benevolent Assc., Fraternal Order of Police, or treatment center. "

candy wrote on Oct 17, 2006 1:34 PM:

" why wasn't this information shared in the first place? "

Brian wrote on Oct 17, 2006 1:25 PM:

" If it is okay to unseal the documents now, why wasn't it okay to have left them unsealed in the first place? Thank you for wasting more taxpayer dollars. "

Old Man wrote on Oct 17, 2006 1:21 PM:

" Isn't the settlement paid by the city of Normal? Are not "we the people" the city of Normal? Yet we do not have the right to know what it is costing us? All because one man says so? Possibly the city is insured for this payment, however I am a strong believer of keeping all dealings of city government in the open and above the table. Especially large settlements. "

Ads by Yahoo!

New Car Weekly Sales

Online Degrees

See Today's Mortgage Rates