How hard is it to prove police misconduct? Unfortunately, itโs very difficult.
Victims often face legal roadblocks, missing evidence, and systemic bias that make holding officers accountable an uphill battle. Even in cases where misconduct seems obvious, the law often favors the police, making it hard for individuals to seek justice.
If you or a loved one have experienced a form of police misconduct, you may feel frustrated, powerless, and aloneโbut youโre not. Many others share your struggle and are fighting for change.
In this guide, weโll break down the eight biggest challenges that make proving police misconduct tricky.
More importantly, weโll explore practical solutions to help you build a stronger case, access key evidence, and fight back against systemic barriers.
Whether you’re pursuing justice for yourself or advocating for change, understanding these obstacles is the first step toward overcoming them.
Why is it so hard to sue the police?
8 Challenges in Proving Police Misconduct
Here are the key obstacles that make it difficult for individuals to seek justice and file lawsuits against the police for brutality or misconduct:
- Qualified Immunity
- Burden of Proof
- Limited Access to Evidence
- Institutional Bias
- Internal Investigations
- Media Framing
- Perception of Police
- Lack of Witness Cooperation
Here is each barrier to proving police misconduct explained with real-world examples:
1. Qualified Immunity
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that shields officers from liability unless the plaintiff can prove the officer violated “clearly established” constitutional law or individual rights. This can make it challenging to hold officers accountable. Courts often dismiss police misconduct cases if there isnโt a nearly identical precedent, making it harder for novel or less-documented claims to succeed.
Qualified immunity is one of the biggest barriers to justice and the leading reason why most civil lawsuits against police for misconduct fail. However, some states have taken steps to eliminate this protection.
Colorado and New Mexico have abolished qualified immunity, allowing victims to sue officers under state law without needing to prove a “clearly established” precedent.
At the federal level, efforts like the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act aim to limit or remove qualified immunity nationwide, but progress has been slow.
Example: Qualified immunity for Police Misconduct
In Kisela v. Hughes (2018), a police officer shot a woman holding a kitchen knife near her roommate despite no immediate threat. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because there was no prior case with similar facts to establish that his actions violated the Fourth Amendment.
Impact on Victims:
- Dismissed Cases: It can often be dejecting when a lawsuit gets dismissed, even when the misconduct seems apparent. This lack of accountability can leave victims feeling powerless.
- Frustration and Mistrust: The ruling perpetuates a perception that officers operate above the law, eroding public trust in law enforcement.
- Emotional Harm: Victims often endure psychological trauma, and this gets exacerbated by feelings of helplessness and systemic failure.
- Financial Strain: Plaintiffs invest time and resources in legal battles, only to have their cases dismissed early due to qualified immunity.
2. Burden of Proof
The burden of proof is the obligation of a party engaged in a lawsuit or legal dispute to provide evidence that substantiates their claims.
- Civil Cases: Plaintiffs must prove misconduct by a โpreponderance of the evidence,โ meaning it is more likely than not that the misconduct occurred.
- Criminal Cases: Prosecutors must prove misconduct โbeyond a reasonable doubt,โ the highest legal standard, making these cases exceptionally difficult to win.
Police officers often put forth the argument that their actions were necessary at the moment, framing their conduct as lawful under the circumstances.
This makes it hard for the plaintiff to prove otherwise. Courts frequently defer to officersโ judgments, especially in use-of-force cases, where officers claim split-second decision-making was required.
Example: The Burden of Proof Challenge in Police Misconduct Cases
In Graham v. Connor (1989), the U.S. Supreme Court established that the reasonableness of an officer’s use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the scene rather than with hindsight. This standard heavily favors officers, as it allows their perception of a threat to override the plaintiffโs account.
๐ Relevant Reading: Understand the Shopkeepers’ Privilege Law and Your Rights
Impact on Victims:
- Difficulty Proving Misconduct: Victims face immense challenges in gathering sufficient evidence to meet the required standard, especially when officersโ testimonies conflict with their own.
- Re-traumatization: Victims may need to repeatedly recount their experiences, undergo cross-examinations, and confront public scrutiny, deepening emotional distress.
- Legal and Financial Burdens: Prolonged litigation increases expenses for victims, many of whom already face financial hardships due to their injuries or lost income.
3. Limited Access to Evidence
As the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff, it becomes critical to accumulate all evidence and document it carefully to present a strong case. Access to evidence is critical in any lawsuit, but police misconduct cases frequently involve evidence that is restricted or controlled.
Law enforcement agencies often retain control over key materials, such as body camera footage, internal reports, or dispatch recordings, which are vital for substantiating claims.
- Delayed or Withheld Evidence: Departments may deliberately delay releasing footage or reports, using procedural loopholes to weaken the plaintiffโs case.
- โLostโ or Tampered Evidence: In some instances, evidence is reported as lost or becomes unavailable, raising suspicions of intentional tampering. For example, body camera footage may mysteriously malfunction during pivotal moments of an incident.
- Lack of Transparency: Even when evidence is available, agencies often redact or censor portions, citing security concerns or ongoing investigations.
Example: How Limited Access to Evidence Hinders Police Misconduct Cases
In a 2020 case in Louisville, Kentucky, Breonna Taylor was fatally shot. However, no body camera footage exists from the officers directly involved in the shooting, as they were not wearing body cameras.
Eventually, footage from officers who arrived after the incident was released, but the absence of crucial footage and the delay in obtaining available evidence sparked widespread public outrage and complicated legal proceedings.
Impact on Victims
- Without access to critical evidence, victims struggle to prove misconduct, leading to case dismissals or unfavorable outcomes.
- To obtain such evidence, a plaintiff may need to issue what is legally known as a subpoena duces tecumโa court order requiring a party to produce documents or records that may have been intentionally withheld or are otherwise unavailable. While this process can be costly, the evidence obtained can be crucial in building a strong legal case.
- Additionally, plaintiffs might also be forced to hire investigators to get this evidence, creating higher costs.
4. Institutional Bias
It is highly likely that courts of law and enforcement agencies inherently tend to favor police officers in what can be termed as institutional bias and Judicial Favoritism. Institutional bias within the legal system can create an environment where police misconduct is overlooked or minimized. This bias can manifest in various ways, from jury selection to the interpretation of evidence, often favoring law enforcement.
- Judicial Favoritism: Courts often give law enforcement officers the benefit of the doubt, leading to lenient rulings or dismissals even when strong evidence exists.
- Biased Jury Selection: Trials involving police misconduct are sometimes relocated to areas with pro-law enforcement sentiment, reducing the chances of a conviction.
- Evidence Interpretation: Even when clear evidence, such as body camera footage, exists, judges and juries may side with officers’ justifications, making it harder for plaintiffs to prove misconduct.
Example: Institutional Bias in Police Misconduct Cases
A well-documented case highlighting institutional bias is the Rodney King trial (1992). King, an unarmed Black man, was brutally beaten by four Los Angeles police officers in a widely circulated video.
Despite overwhelming video evidence of excessive force, the officers were acquitted by a predominantly white jury in Simi Valley, a community known for strong law enforcement ties.
Impact on Victims and Public Trust:
- Victims may feel that the odds are stacked against them from the outset.
- Plaintiffs face an uphill battle when institutional bias influences decisions, regardless of the evidence presented.
- Erodes public trust in the legal system, reinforcing perceptions that police officers operate above the law.
5. Internal Investigations
Misconduct claims are often investigated by Internal Affairs (IA) divisions within police departments and there is a huge possibility of bias here. The investigations are conducted by the same organization that was accused of wrongdoing.
- Conflicts of Interest: Internal investigators are often colleagues of the accused officers, creating an apparent conflict of interest and increasing the likelihood of tampering and favoritism.
- Focus on Reputation Management: Protecting the image and reputation of the department can take precedence over disciplinary actions and providing justice to the victim in many cases.
- Statistics show that only a small percentage of misconduct complaints result in meaningful consequences for officers. Superficial investigations and inadequate disciplinary measures are common results.
Example: How Internal Investigations Create Barriers to Proving Police Misconduct
A 2021 investigation into the Chicago Police Department revealed that fewer than 5% of complaints against officers resulted in disciplinary action, even when evidence of misconduct existed.
Impact on Victims:
Internal investigations often serve as a bureaucratic hurdle rather than a genuine avenue for justice, leaving victims without recourse.
6. Media Framing
Media framing plays a crucial role in shaping the narrative around police misconduct.
Media coverage can influence public opinion, with conservative platforms like Fox News and OAN often framing incidents in a way that favors law enforcement and progressive platforms, like CNN and MSNBC, shifting their focus on the perceived shortcomings of police officers as a whole.
Hereโs how media framing of alleged police misconduct incidents typically unfolds:
- Sensationalism: Some cases can catch fire and receive widespread attention, with media outlets portraying officers as either heroes or villains.
- Minimization: In total contrast, other cases may be downplayed or ignored, making it difficult for victims to garner public support.
Example: How Media Shapes Public Opinion on Police Misconduct
In the aftermath of George Floydโs death, differing media narratives either condemned or defended police actions, shaping public opinion and legal discourse.
Impact on Society
- Public Scrutiny: Victims may face public scrutiny and skepticism, which can be emotionally taxing.
- Stigmatization: Negative media framing can lead to stigmatization and isolation for victims and a broad assumption that police officers engage in violent misconduct.
- Barriers to Justice: The influence of media on public perception can create additional barriers to achieving justice.
7. Perception of Police
The perception of police within communities can significantly influence the outcomes of misconduct cases. In communities and regions where police are seen as protectors and community members and thus have a strong positive impression, the public naturally sways in favor of law enforcement. This can create challenges for victims seeking justice.
Example: How Public Perception Shapes Police Misconduct Cases
In the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, differing community views on law enforcement shaped reactions, legal proceedings, and the final outcome.
Impact on Police Misconduct Cases:
- Public perception of law enforcement can influence whether an officer is charged or acquitted in a misconduct case.
- In areas where police are highly trusted, officersโ accounts are more likely to be believed over victimsโ testimonies.
- Public Opinion Turns Against Legal Case: If media outlets highlight the negative aspect of the victimโs background instead of the officerโs actions, public support for the lawsuit diminishes.
8. Lack of Witness Cooperation
The โblue wall of silenceโ is an unwritten code among police officers that discourages whistleblowing or testifying against colleagues. Witnesses to police misconduct may be reluctant to come forward due to fear of retaliation or the unspoken code. This lack of cooperation can hinder the ability to gather evidence and build a strong case.
Example: How Lack of Witness Cooperation Weakens Police Misconduct Cases
In a high-profile New York case, officers present during Eric Garnerโs fatal chokehold refused to provide testimony implicating their colleague.
Impact on Victims:
- Weakened Cases: Without witness cooperation, plaintiffs struggle to meet the burden of proof.
- Emotional Distress: Victims feel isolated when no one is willing to stand with them.
How To Overcome These Challenges and Prove Police Misconduct to Get Legal Justice
Victims of police misconduct face numerous roadblocks in seeking justice, but there are strategies and resources available to help overcome these challenges:
Secure Strong Evidence
Victims should meticulously document all interactions, including dates, times, and details of incidents, officer names/badge numbers, and specific actions taken. Photographs, videos, and written accounts can serve as crucial evidence.
Employing technology such as smartphone apps to record incidents can help capture real-time evidence that may be pivotal in legal proceedings.
- Request body-worn camera or dash cam footage through public records requests (FOIA). If law enforcement denies or delays access, appeal the decision through a lawyer. You can also explore surveillance cameras from nearby businesses or street cameras.
- Obtain statements from bystanders as soon as possible while their memories are fresh. Encourage witnesses to provide video recordings if available.
- Avoid altering any recordings, as this could be used against you.
Seek Help From a Civil Rights Attorney
Engaging lawyers who specialize in civil rights and police misconduct cases can provide the expertise needed to navigate complex legal landscapes.
Police misconduct lawsuits are complex, and having the right legal support is critical to overcoming obstacles such as qualified immunity and judicial bias.
Many non-profit organizations offer legal assistance to victims of police misconduct, providing resources and support at little to no cost.
- Look for civil rights attorneys or those experienced in Section 1983 lawsuits (which address constitutional violations).
- If you cannot afford litigation costs, seek pro bono services.
- File the Right Type of Lawsuit: In some cases, state-level claims (e.g., assault, wrongful death) can be more successful than federal civil rights claims. Consult with your attorney to determine whether to pursue a civil or criminal-based case, depending on the circumstances.
File a Complaint with Independent Oversight Bodies
Groups like the ACLU, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, National Police Accountability Project, and local watchdog organizations provide legal assistance and public advocacy. These groups can pressure agencies to release evidence and help amplify your case in the media.
- Many cities have Civilian Review Boards (CRBs) or Police Oversight Commissions that review misconduct complaints.
- File complaints with the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division for federal investigations into systemic abuses.
Overcome the “Blue Wall of Silence”
If a police officer is willing to testify but fears retaliation, encourage them to work with whistleblower protection programs. Report internal corruption to federal agencies like the DOJ if local authorities attempt to suppress testimony.
- Subpoenas may be necessary if witnesses refuse to testify voluntarily.
- Victims can request access to public records, such as police reports and body camera footage, through legal channels.
- When necessary, legal action can be taken to compel the release of evidence that is being withheld by law enforcement agencies.
๐ข Learn How to Report Police Misconduct โ Know Your Legal Options in Our Guide!
Address Judicial Bias and Public Perception
Victims often face institutional bias in the courts, where judges and juries tend to favor police officers. Media framing can also influence public perception.
- Forensic analysts, use-of-force experts, and police procedure specialists can provide professional testimony to counter judicial bias.
- Psychological experts can explain the emotional and mental impact of police misconduct.
- Use social media responsibly to raise awareness and change the narrative through media & public awareness.
Legal Funding for Police Misconduct Cases: How It Helps
Pursuing a police misconduct lawsuit can take years, leaving victims struggling to pay bills while they wait for a fair outcome. Civil rights lawsuits often donโt result in immediate compensationโand financial stress can make it harder to continue fighting.
How Legal Funding Works:
- Pre-settlement funding (also called legal funding) provides cash advances to victims waiting for a lawsuit settlement.
- Unlike personal loans, pre-settlement funding is non-recourse, meaning you only repay if you win your case.
- It helps cover daily expensesโrent, groceries, medical billsโso you donโt feel pressured to settle for less than you deserve.
โ Important Note: Lawsuit funding is not a replacement for legal fees. Many civil rights lawyers work on a contingency basis, so attorney fees are only due if you win. However, legal funding can help plaintiffs stay financially stable while their case moves forward.
Need financial support while fighting a police misconduct case? Apply for pre-settlement funding today.
๐ข Apply for Risk-Free Pre-Settlement Funding Now
Manage the Financial and Emotional Toll of Litigation
Lawsuits against police departments can be lengthy and costly, causing financial strain and emotional distress for victims.
- If legal costs are overwhelming, some organizations provide legal funding for civil rights lawsuits. Certain nonprofits also offer grants for victims of police violence.
- Legal funding companies offer pre-settlement funding, meaning they advance funds upfront in exchange for a portion of the settlement. The non-recourse nature of the funding ensures you only have to pay if you settle or win the lawsuit and is not intended to cover legal costs.
- Many civil rights lawyers work on a contingency basis, meaning they only get paid if the case is successful.
- Victims often experience PTSD, anxiety, or depression due to police misconduct. Seek support from therapists, counseling services, or survivor support groups.
Gain Awareness of the Statutes of Limitations for Police Misconduct
- Federal Civil Rights Lawsuits (Section 1983 claims): Typically 2-3 years from the date of the incident, but it varies by state.
- State-Level Lawsuits: Some states have as little as 6 months to file claims against police departments.
- Wrongful Death Cases: If a person dies due to police misconduct, their family must file a claim within 1-2 years in most states.
Promote Diversity in Legal Processes
Advocating for diverse jury selection and unbiased legal proceedings can help mitigate institutional bias.
Support Policy Reforms
Engaging in policy advocacy to reform laws and practices that contribute to bias can lead to systemic change.
Engage in Voter and Policy Advocacy
Work to elect officials committed to police accountability at the local, state, and federal levels.
Attend city council meetings and push for funding allocation supporting mental health services and incorporating community-based policing alternatives.
Fight Back Against Qualified Immunity
- Some states have their own civil rights statutes that allow lawsuits independent of federal courts. These state laws can provide broader protections or lower legal hurdles compared to federal civil rights claims under statutes like 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983. Utilize them if applicable.
- Find instances of past cases that resemble your lawsuit. The closer it resembles your situation, the better chance you have of overcoming immunity.
- Sue City or Police Departments Instead of Individual Officers; Municipalities donโt have qualified immunity, making it easier to hold them accountable.
Seeking Justice for Police Misconduct? Take Action Today.
Holding law enforcement accountable for misconduct is challengingโbut you donโt have to face it alone.
If you or a loved one have experienced police brutality, wrongful arrest, or civil rights violations, taking the right steps now can make all the difference.
- Consult a Civil Rights Attorney: Many attorneys offer free consultations and work on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay nothing upfront unless you win your case.
- Request and Secure Key Evidence: File FOIA requests, demand body cam footage, and document everything to strengthen your claim.
- Explore Legal Funding Options: If youโre struggling financially while your case is pending, pre-settlement funding can provide support while you wait for justice.
Express Legal Funding: Lawsuit Cash Advances for Police Misconduct Claims
At Express Legal Funding, we understand that pursuing a police misconduct lawsuit can be financially overwhelming. Legal battles often take monthsโor even yearsโbefore victims receive compensation, leaving many struggling to cover everyday expenses.
Our pre-settlement funding solutions provide the financial support plaintiffs need to stay in the fight for justice without the pressure of settling for less than they deserve.
Why Choose Express Legal Funding for Police Misconduct Lawsuit Funding?
- Risk-Free, Non-Recourse Funding: Unlike traditional lawsuit loans, our legal funding is non-recourse, meaning you only repay if you win your case. If you donโt win, you owe nothing.
- Fast and Simple Approval Process: Most clients receive approval within 24 hours (when referred by law firm staff), with same-day funding available.
- No Credit Checks or Employment Verification: Approval is based only on the strength of your case, not your credit history or income status.
- Transparent, Low Rates: Unlike many lawsuit funding companies that charge hidden fees or compounding interest, we provide honest, fair, and upfront pricing with no surprises.
- We Are a Direct Funder, Not a Broker: Many lawsuit funding providers act as middlemen, inflating costs with extra fees. We fund cases directly, giving you better rates and more financial control.
- Support for Civil Rights Cases: Most pre-settlement funding companies focus only on personal injury cases. We proudly support police misconduct and civil rights plaintiffs, ensuring they can hold law enforcement accountable without financial hardship.
How Legal Funding Can Help You
Pre-settlement funding can be used to cover essential expenses while your case is ongoing, including:
- Rent or mortgage payments
- Medical bills and treatment costs
- Groceries and household necessities
- Utility bills and transportation expenses
Take Action: Secure the Financial Support You Need
Fighting a police misconduct case is challenging, but you donโt have to do it alone. If financial stress is making it difficult to continue your lawsuit, Express Legal Funding can help.
๐ Call Us Today or Apply Online โ The application is fast and always risk-free. Secure your pre-settlement funding now, and keep fighting for justice!