Ryan Ferguson, wrongfully convicted in 2001 Missouri killing, awarded over $43M by judge
A Missouri judge has ordered an insurance company to pay more than $43 million to a man who was wrongfully convicted of murder and incarcerated for nearly a decade.
In 2004, Ryan Ferguson was arrested in the 2001 killing of a newspaper sports editor in Columbia, Missouri, and he was convicted the following year. His 2005 conviction was vacated in 2013 after a key witness who had testified against Ferguson said he wasn't involved in the killing. Prosecutors decided against trying Ferguson again.
Ferguson took Columbia and a group of police officers to court in 2014 with a federal civil rights lawsuit, and he was awarded $11 million, according to court documents.
Ryan Ferguson is photographed Dec. 2, 2010, at the Jefferson City Correctional Center, in Jefferson City, Missouri.
Keith Myers/Kansas City Star/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
According to insurance trade publication Insurance Business, Ferguson took legal action against the city's insurer, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, a subsidiary of Travelers insurance company, because the officers could only pay $2.7 million.
Ferguson's fight against the company spent years in state court. The officers also joined the lawsuit, claiming they experienced stress when the insurer wouldn't pay out, according to KMIZ-TV in Columbia.
In November, a jury sided with Ferguson, and Judge Cotton Walker awarded more than $43.8 million to the plaintiffs on Monday, according to court documents.
"He was thrilled," Ferguson's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, told KMIZ-TV about her client's reaction. "It was close, not entirely comparable, to when I got to tell him that, you know, the appellate court had overturned his conviction and he was going to be released. But this is a close second."
The officers will get a percentage of the award, Zellner told the station.
CBS News has reached out to Travelers insurance company for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Analysis: Why does the US want to deport this man?
The Trump administration's immigration crackdown is reaching every American who sees protesters skirmishing with police on the news or video of masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raiding Home Depot parking lots in their social media feeds. On Tuesday, New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander was arrested by federal officers, some wearing masks, as he tried to accompany a migrant after an immigration court hearing. But there are countless stories that will touch Americans in their daily lives. Anyone who takes the time to look will find the immigration crackdown right next to them. That's what I found — at two degrees of separation — when I heard from a friend that her child's special needs aide's father, Arthur Newmark, was detained after being in the US for 10 years while he sought asylum from Russia. Newmark's lawyer says he did everything by the book as he sought asylum, filing paperwork in 2015 while he was in the country legally. It wasn't until last month, days after an asylum hearing with US Citizenship and Information Services, that Newmark was detained. ICE placed him into custody and took jurisdiction of his case from the asylum office. Newmark was detained by ICE agents on May 31 after he went outside his Northern Virginia home with his pet bird, Bernie. The agents told Newmark's wife, Kristina, to collect Bernie the bird, along with her husband's wallet and phone. The agents left with Newmark and took him to a detention facility in rural Virginia. It was only after his detention began that Newmark's family and lawyer learned ICE is now saying that he had overstayed his visa by 10 years. His lawyer vehemently disagrees. The Newmarks say they have legitimate fears for their lives in Russia; their lawyer Elizabeth Krukova showed me what appears to be a posting for Arthur on a registry of wanted persons there and said he came to the US because 'he was exposing corruption in Russia at the highest levels.' The entire family legally changed their names after living for three years in the United States. They argue they have followed the rules while seeking asylum and building their lives in Virginia, but now Newmark could face the possibility of deportation. It's not clear exactly why Arthur Newmark was taken into custody or why, after 10 years, the US government has now determined, days after his long-awaited asylum interview, that he had actually overstayed his visa. It was at that interview that Newmark, over the course of six hours, explained to immigration officials the danger he faces in Russia. I reached out to US Citizenship and Immigration Services to comment on Newmark's case. It declined to comment and referred me to ICE, which has not yet responded. Newmark's lawyer still says he has a strong asylum case, but the family's life has been turned upside down while he spent weeks inside a detention facility. His Russian-born children, one of whom is in college and one of whom just graduated from high school in Virginia, are now wondering if they'll be sent back to Russia, the country their parents fled, or somewhere else. A third child was born in the US. An immigration judge granted Newmark bond this week while his case proceeds, but now his wife and children have also been told to appear before an immigration judge in July, days before his next hearing. The asylum request was made in Newmark's name and the entire family has been living in immigration limbo. I spoke several times with the oldest daughter, Eva, a student at a community college who is studying to be a financial planner. She told me she chose to stay home and start a two-year college because she could pay tuition by the class instead of for a full year. 'If we get deported, I don't have to lose a lot of money,' she said. That's also partly why the family has not purchased a house in the US. 'Who wants a mortgage, if you don't know if you're going to stay in the country again, right?' Eva said in flawless English, as she translated for her mother, who speaks English, but not as fluently. While Arthur abandoned his Russian career as a lawyer when he came to the US — he has worked in trucking and in grocery stores — Kristina has built a business teaching music lessons. Her youngest son, an American citizen born in the US, has been successful in music competitions, she said. Arthur and Kristina initially came to the US in 2015 for her to have a medical procedure, but they were threatened in Moscow before leaving, according to Kristina. Arthur went back to Moscow through the border of another country, according to Eva, and arranged for the two Russian-born children to be flown to the US. They applied for asylum that same year, while in the US legally, and changed their names in 2018 to make it harder for them to be found by Russia. The Newmarks chose to seek asylum in the US believing that it would not deport them back to Russia. 'It was, first, opposite side of the world, and because we knew that this country has more rights and opportunities,' Kristina said. Even though 'this time is a little bit uncertain for the whole country,' Eva said, she still feels that in the US they can fight in court and have a lawyer represent them, which might not be the case in Russia. While the Newmarks' saga has been long and so far unresolved, the decade they have lived in the US without detention is not something more recent Russian asylum-seekers have experienced. The Newmarks came to the US in 2015, after Russia annexed Crimea but long before it invaded Ukraine. Thousands have fled Russia for the US since the invasion of Ukraine, frequently waiting at the border with Mexico for an opportunity to claim asylum. For most of President Joe Biden's administration, those asylees, many of them critics of Russian President Vladimir Putin, were allowed to enter the country, or 'paroled,' while their claims progressed through the system. Then, beginning in 2024, for reasons not entirely known, many ultimately found themselves spending a year or more in detention. A group of detainees sued the Biden administration, arguing that Russian speakers were being discriminated against. The lawyer who brought that suit, Curtis Morrison, told me the issue is essentially moot now since the Trump administration wants to detain anyone seeking asylum rather than let them live in the country as the Newmarks have. 'The Trump administration is taking the view that nobody gets that,' Morrison said. 'So basically, everybody's being subjected to what the Russians were subjected to a year ago.'
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
‘No Kings' rallies are a Trojan Horse for radical, violent Leftists
So, the "No Kings" rallies went off without a hitch from coast to coast — and they were peaceful. Great news, right? That must mean the rioting and violence are over. Think again. This is the same script we saw with the Black Lives Matter movement, and we know exactly how it ends. When I warned in my Fox News op-ed last week that the "No Kings" rallies would provide cover for violent Antifa, anarchists and other thugs, every prediction came true—not hypothetically, but in brutal, tangible form across the Pacific Northwest. Take Seattle, where I live. On June 14, an estimated 70,000 protesters marched peacefully from Capitol Hill to the Seattle Center to decry the Trump administration. Just as expected, the rally was without incident, with little more than minor vandalism and the normal unhinged, angry messaging from the Radical Left complaining about authoritarianism and fascism, two concepts the average activist can even define. Yet once that crowd began to disperse, militants readying their black‑bloc gear—shielded, hooded, masked—stepped forward. They torched property, plastered federal buildings with graffiti, and hurled frozen water bottles at cops. They even concussed a local independent journalist, Cam Higby, for having the audacity to document their crimes. "At one point, they hold me down. I'm in a headlock. They're choking me. And this guy comes up and he punches me in the head twice. He then kicks me in the face. I pull out pepper spray, deploy it in his face, and then he cries like a baby for the next 10 minutes," Higby explained on my Seattle-based talk radio show. Spokane, too, fell victim. Originally billed as peaceful, the rally in the eastern Washington city devolved into disorder and defiance: 11 arrests with local authorities scrambling to contain escalating violence. Again, the crowd was "mostly peaceful"—until the moment it wasn't. In Tukwila, about 15 minutes south of Seattle, while the "No Kings" organizers marched in Seattle, a cadre of masked agitators erected makeshift barricades outside a Department of Homeland Security facility. When independent journalist Brandi Kruse arrived to cover the event, she was almost immediately assaulted with a radical spraying her in the face with wasp killer spray. Tukwila PD reported that pepper spray and "pepper‑balls" were deployed to clear the blockade after obstruction and escalation. Then there's Portland, where organizers boasted of "Portland‑nice" turnout—hundreds of peaceful participants pretending goodwill. A mob lobbed fireworks, smoke grenades and rocks at federal law enforcement protecting an ICE facility, injuring four. They tagged property with threatening messages, including, "Love thy neighbors + shoot ICE agents" and "We buy pig heads! Call: 1 800 DEAD COP." They forcibly entered the ICE facility, but federal agents were able to ultimately maintain control. During the melee, Antifa posted flyers doxxing federal agents. They returned on Sunday, with a total 20 arrests across the multiple protests outside the ICE facility. Portland's history shows that these black‑bloc tactics aren't spontaneous—they're rehearsed and coordinated, waiting for the right opportunity to get violent. Make no mistake: the "No Kings" organizers billed the rallies as democratic and peaceful, knowing that it would provide the perfect cover for violence. Left-wing media would focus on the peaceful rallies, while ignoring or downplaying the extremists enabled to continue assaulting police and sowing chaos on our streets. This was not accidental. It was strategic—radicals leveraging liberal goodwill to infiltrate and destabilize. And they succeeded. So what comes next? Wash, rinse, repeat. It's precisely what happened in 2020, as I write about extensively in my book "What's Killing America: Inside the Radical Left's Tragic Destruction of Our Cities," when I went undercover to infiltrate Antifa. On Tuesday, Portland Antifa again targeted ICE property, with federal agents making several arrests. The armed activists have maintained an around-the-clock "occupation" around the property and we anticipate this will continue throughout the summer. And the causes activists take on will not be relegated to immigration. Transgender radicals and their allies are already planning a June 27th rally and march in Seattle demanding free so-called "gender-affirming" care on demand, which includes reassignment surgeries and puberty blockers for minors. In Washington state, minors do not need parental consent for gender-affirming care. The "No Kings" movement is not the end—it's the beginning. Think Summer of Love 2.0, only with better branding and even more media complicity. Just like BLM, the radicals are banking on America being too distracted, too naïve, or too beaten down to see what's really going on. They show up in force, wrap themselves in words like "justice" and "freedom," then use that shield to justify terrorizing communities under the guise of activism. These are not organic uprisings. They are part of a billion-dollar national strategy. Peaceful protests are the Trojan horse. The radicals inside? They're waiting. And the media is letting them. Legacy outlets ran glowing coverage of the "mostly peaceful" marches while ignoring what came next: fires, assaults, vandalism, and threats. It's 2020 déjà vu. We've seen this before. The script is the same. The only difference is the cast. Don't be fooled, America. The chaos activists unleash is anything but accidental and the next act is already being written.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Candidates' Shift on Crime Turned the Mayor's Race Upside Down
With early voting having begun in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary, the race looks to be between Andrew Cuomo, the freshly de-disgraced former governor, and Zohran Mamdani, the democratic socialist state assemblyman who is running to dispense expensive new entitlements. But it didn't have to be that way. As part of a journalist collective called the New York Editorial Board, I met with every major candidate over the past six months, except Mr. Cuomo, who declined to join us. The candidates who are struggling to capture the attention that Mr. Cuomo and Mr. Mamdani have gotten all expressed thoughtful ideas about the possibilities and limits of city government. (You can read the transcripts of the interviews here.) So it's a shame that the two candidates who could have given Mr. Cuomo and Mr. Mamdani more of a challenge — Comptroller Brad Lander and his predecessor Scott Stringer — put themselves in a no man's land by turning left during Bill de Blasio's mayoralty and the 'defund the police' movement and then following voters' shift to the middle when crime rose. When Mr. Lander and Mr. Stringer undercut their credibility on a vital issue to voters, their other smart proposals, which I get into below, got lost in the campaign. And as has proved true in other municipal elections over the past few years, public safety remains a dominant issue for voters, along with affordability. Though homicides have fallen to pre-2020 record lows, felonies remain 31.2 percent above 2019's level. Voters remain nearly as concerned about safety as they were in 2021, when they overlooked warning signs about ethics and management to elect Eric Adams, a former police captain who ran on restoring order, as mayor. (The still-disgraced Mr. Adams has skipped the primary to run as an independent in the general election.) These days no candidate talks about 'defund the police.' That makes the moves by Mr. Lander and Mr. Stringer from the left to the center on policing seem even more clumsy. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
