Punitive damages may be awarded against a law enforcement officer if they acted with:

Punitive damages are intended to punish a defendant for particularly harmful behavior and to deter similar conduct in the future. In the context of law enforcement officers, the standard for awarding punitive damages is significantly higher than for compensatory damages. This is because punitive damages address actions that go beyond mere negligence or flawed judgment.

When law enforcement officers exhibit "evil motive or intent," it suggests that their actions were not simply the result of a mistake but were carried out with a wrongful purpose, demonstrating a conscious disregard for the rights and safety of others. In cases where an officer intentionally employs excessive force or engages in egregious misconduct, the presence of an evil motive can be a strong indicator that punitive damages are warranted.

Similarly, "reckless or careless indifference" captures situations where an officer acts with a blatant disregard for the consequences of their actions. This reckless behavior indicates a willful neglect for the rights or safety of individuals, which can similarly justify the imposition of punitive damages.

Thus, both conditions highlight severe misconduct that goes beyond ordinary negligence, justifying the awarding of punitive damages in order to deter such behaviors. Therefore, the correct answer encompasses both scenarios, validating the assertion that punitive damages may be imposed if an officer acted with either an evil motive/int