ShareThis Page
Frazer’s insurance company pays Mexican workers to settle civil rights lawsuit |

Frazer’s insurance company pays Mexican workers to settle civil rights lawsuit

| Tuesday, September 11, 2012 3:04 p.m

An insurance company for Frazer paid nine Mexican lawn care workers an average of $3,000 each to settle a civil rights lawsuit claiming its police and J.C. Penney employees illegally detained the men, the township said in a news release Tuesday.

The township denies in the settlement that its police did anything wrong during the Oct. 8, 2010 incident according to the release. The American Civil Liberties Union represented the men, who were detained and questioned by police after a store employee claimed that one of them has previously bought items with a counterfeit $100 bill, according to the lawsuit.

The person in the surveillance photo of that transaction didn’t resemble any of the defendants, and none of the men were carrying counterfeit currency, but police still held them for several hours because they knew of a federal investigation into a counterfeiting ring in Washington County that was apparently using Mexican workers, the lawsuit says.

The press release says that J.C. Penney has also made a monetary settlement with the nine men, but doesn’t say how much the settlement was. Lawyers for the company and the ACLU couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.