Who is Vicki Baker? Wiki, Biography, Age, Family, Incident Detail

Vicki Baker Wiki - Vicki Baker Biography

A Texas city was ordered to compensate a lady over $60,000 for damage to her home caused by a SWAT team searching for an armed fugitive holding a 15-year-old girl hostage, but the decision was overturned by a federal appeals court, dealing the woman a legal defeat.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Wednesday that police in McKinney, a suburb of Dallas, levelled a fence with an armoured vehicle, broke down doors, used explosives and threw tear gas grenades through windows of Vicki Baker's house, which was up for sale at the time.

Vicki Baker Age

Vicki Baker is 62 years old.

Vicki Baker Incident Detail

The raid left Baker's house in ruins, causing a potential buyer to back out, and the city refused to compensate her. She consequently brought a case in federal court in March 2021, citing a breach of the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, which prohibits the "taking of private property for public use without just compensation."

And she triumphed. The destruction of Baker's home by the city was deemed a "taking" by a judge, and because the harm was "intentional and foreseeable," the city was ordered to provide "just compensation." But the city made a case. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined on Wednesday that the provision does not call for compensation for lost or destroyed property where it was "objectively necessary for officers to damage or destroy that property in an active emergency to prevent imminent harm to persons."

"Baker has maintained that the officers' actions were precisely that: necessary, in light of an active emergency, to prevent imminent harm to the hostage child, to the officers who responded to the scene, and to others in her residential community," the judgement stated. In light of this, and despite having sympathy for Ms. Baker, who suffered misfortune through no fault of her own, we disagree.

Her lawyer, Jeffrey Redfern, of the nonprofit public interest law firm the Institute for Justice, informed Law&Crime via email that he would submit a petition requesting the 5th Circuit to rehear the case within the next two weeks. He claimed that the panel erred in answering the question and reached its decision without hearing any arguments or receiving a full briefing.

Despite the fact that the city of McKinney's arguments were all rejected by the Fifth Circuit, Vicki Baker was found to be in violation of the law on a ground that was never brought up in court and which we were never given the chance to rebut, the attorney stated. The Supreme Court recently reminded the courts of appeal that their job is to decide the arguments that the parties actually make, not to develop arguments that the parties should have stated.

The good news for Vicki Baker, however, is that she also won under the Texas Constitution, so that ground is unaffected by this decision. The city of McKinney will have to make restitution in some manner. Redfern claimed that because she won in the trial court in accordance with both the Texas and U.S. constitutions, the city will be required to pay her damages.

The one you want the court to issue judgement under when you win a case in Texas on numerous grounds must be chosen, he explained. "The losing party can appeal only that issue. The city appealed, the panel reversed, but we still have a victory below under the TX Constitution because we chose the U.S. Constitution. The matter will revert to lower court, and the judge will simply enter judgement again in accordance with the TX Constitution if our request for a rehearing (and potential cert petition to the Supreme Court) is granted.

The Texas Supreme Court had previously ruled that intentional destruction by police is a taking under the Anti-Takings Act, therefore he claimed that while the city may appeal that decision, there would be "essentially zero chance of prevailing" He declared, "The Fifth Circuit would be forced to adopt the Texas Supreme Court's interpretation of state law." The city of McKinney expressed its satisfaction with the choice in a message to the media.

The decision supports an established legal precedent that shields McKinney taxpayers from being required to cover property damages resulting from authorised police operations, according to the statement. "The court found that everything the McKinney PD did in the Baker case was proper," On July 25, 2020, while Baker was gone, Baker's adult daughter, who was at the property, reported to the police that a fugitive who had performed handyman work at the house but had been fired was holding a runaway girl hostage in Baker's home.

After the police arrived, there was a standoff. The home's fence was destroyed by officers using an armoured vehicle, who also used tear gas canisters to break windows and bash doors. Police established a perimeter and used an intercom system to participate in "loud hailing". The girl was soon released by the assailant and emerged from the house shortly after.

In addition to "a lot of long guns" and "some pistols," she told authorities that the wanted man was "obviously high on something" and was hiding in the ceiling. cops received a message from the fugitive saying that he "had terminal cancer, wasn't going back to prison, knew he was going to die, and was going to shoot it out with the police." Police employed their weaponry, which included toxic gas grenades, and a flying drone to observe the situation. The fugitive was eventually located by the drone after he "had taken his own life," according to the court filing.

The damage was required to end the situation and the police operation was declared successful, but the blasts permanently blinded and deafened Baker's dog. To remove the hazardous gas from the house, a biohazard cleanup crew had to be contacted, and ceiling fans, plumbing, floors and bricks had to be replaced. According to court records, "basically all of the personal property in the home was destroyed, including an antique doll collection left to Baker by her mother."

Although the damage was required to end the emergency and the police operation was declared successful, Baker's dog was permanently blinded and deaf as a result of the blasts. It was necessary to contact a hazardous cleanup crew to remove the dangerous gas from the house, and new ceiling fans, plumbing, floors and bricks had to be installed. According to court records, "basically every piece of personal property in the house was destroyed, including an antique doll collection Baker's mother had given to her."