WA: City sued over 2007 killing by lying police
The family of a 23-year-old man shot and killed in 2007 by Vancouver police during an execution of a search warrant has filed a $4.25 million lawsuit against the city, alleging the death was unnecessary and unjustified.
Sean Makarowsky was killed June 16, 2007, when members of a Vancouver police team served a search warrant at Makarowsky’s home at 3010 N.E. 162nd Ave.
Vancouver police officers knocked loudly twice and shouted warnings as they served a search warrant at the home just after midnight, Police Chief Cliff Cook said shortly after the shooting. At that point, Makarowsky came to a window next to the front door, moved aside the miniblinds and was holding a handgun, Cook said.
Vancouver Cpl. Steve Lobdell was positioned near the window and spotted Makarowsky, the chief said. Lobdell yelled “gun!” before firing two shots through the window. One bullet hit Makarowsky in the heart, the other in his shoulder, the lawsuit says. Officers also shot, once, a six-month-old pit bull inside the home.
The suit, filed by Vancouver attorney Beau Harlan, alleges “gross police misconduct and use of excessive force” caused the “untimely and unnecessary death” of Makarowsky.
The lawsuit claims that witnesses contradict Cook’s official statement. Makarowsky’s girlfriend, who was on the phone with him at the time of the shooting, did not hear any warning call identifying the nine officers at his front door, Harlan said. Another witness, Richard Ives, who lived in a trailer behind the house, also said he was awake and did not hear the officers knock or announce their presence. The team was dressed in civilian clothes under tactical vests labeled police.
Makarowsky had no idea what was going on, and by coming to the window with a gun, he “was responding in a reasonable manner to a threat of unknown severity and source. Lobdell’s use of deadly force was without provocation, legal justification, and was objectively unreasonable,” according to the lawsuit.
“If you believe (witness) testimony and you believe what they say, then a police officer shot and killed Makarowsky without any warning when he was inside his own house, holding a gun,” Harlan said.
It seeks $3 million for loss of life, and for Makarowsky’s pain and suffering before he was pronounced dead at 12:45 a.m.; $1 million for “reckless disregard and callous indifference” to Makarowsky’s right to life and due process; and $250,000 for his lost earning capacity.
The lawsuit was filed in June in U.S. District Court in Tacoma on behalf of Makarowsky’s mother, Louise Gast of Eugene, Ore., and his young daughter, Emilee, of Camas. It names the city of Vancouver, Lobdell, former officer Bryan Acee and Vancouver Sgt. Duane McNicholas, who was the supervisor of the unit that served the search warrant.
Lobdell has since left the department and works for the Port of Seattle, and Acee is now employed by the FBI, Assistant City Attorney Dan Lloyd said. A trial is set for Oct. 24, 2011.
Lloyd said that officers were following all proper procedures the night that Makarowsky was shot.
The police unit’s tactical vests clearly labeled them as law enforcement officers. They also clearly announced their presence in loud voices, he said. An investigation by the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney’s office and an internal Vancouver Police Department investigation both cleared Lobdell of any wrongdoing in the shooting.
Makarowsky’s weapon, a .40-caliber handgun, was loaded and the safety was off, Lloyd said. “If Cpl. Lobdell had hesitated, we could easily have lost one or more officers,” he said. “That’s why the law authorizes police officers to use deadly force if they believe either he or she, or another person, is about to be seriously injured or killed.”
Harlan countered that since Makarowsky had no idea who was at his front door, he was within his rights to come to the window with a weapon.
“If I’m in my own home at midnight, and I hear a commotion outside the front of the house and I grab a gun and go to investigate that disturbance, does that give law enforcement license to shoot and kill me when I’m in my own home?” he questioned.
Police were not looking for Makarowsky, who had no criminal record, when they came to his door, both sides acknowledge. They were serving a “high-risk” warrant to find a man named Erik Paulsen, then 38, after Vancouver police were contacted by members of the Portland police gang task force. They had information that Paulsen was being targeted for a home invasion robbery. Members of the Career Criminal Apprehension Team, the Neighborhood Response Team and the SWAT team waited for word that the potential burglars were under arrest before arriving at the home.
Portland police believed Paulsen was being targeted because he had drugs, guns and cash in his home. Paulsen was living in a camper on the property, not in the home, which officers did not know at the time, Lloyd said.
Harlan questioned the use of the career criminal team to go after Paulsen, a man with five misdemeanor warrants. That team, he said, was primarily used to go after felons.
But Paulsen was also arrested that night, and evidence of a “substantial” marijuana grow operation was found in the home occupied by Makarowsky, Lloyd said. “We expect the court to fully vindicate Cpl. Lobdell, his fellow officers and the city,” he said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Friday, October 22, 2010
Four years in jail without trial!
In Australia! Justice delayed is justice denied
A MAN accused over a multi-million dollar cocaine syndicate will finally stand trial almost four years after he was charged, a Supreme Court judge today resoundingly criticising the delays in his case as "significant" and "oppressive".
Justice Stephen Rothman today refused bail for Luke John Sparos, but said there were a number of "troubling" aspects to his decision. One was the delay, he said, and leant his judicial weight to comments by a local court magistrate Geoff Bradd that the case led by the NSW Crime Commission had long been in disarray.
He endorsed the comments made by Magistrate Bradd, who accused the DPP and the Crime Commission of trying to "have it both ways." "(Magistrate Bradd said) you either prosecute this matter or you don’t - to say this is a fishing expedition … well it is just beyond the pale."
Had it not been for the seriousness of the charges and the risk of flight if given his freedom, Justice Rothman said bail would likely have been granted.
"Fatboy" Sparos was allegedly one of two principals to an international cocaine cartel responsible for the importation of around 200kg of cocaine. He was charged in early 2007 with offences relating to alleged proceeds of crime funds, but later charged along with a number of others with a long-running conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of cocaine in July of that year.
Justice Rothman described the Crown case as being strong, but said unacceptable that Sparos had been unable to adequately prepare for his trial due to his lengthy and restrictive situation in custody.
The court even heard how some of the brief provided to Sparos in custody had been "lost" as Department of Corrective Services officials moved him around the prison system.
"It’s inappropriate for a person to be unduly delayed on remand while the Crown get’s its act together," Justice Rothman said. "Of course not all time spent is a delay … but in this case there (have been) significant delays."
Justice Rothman directed the Crown and Corrective Services "to take all steps" necessary to provide Sparos or his legal team with the documents that were originally in his possession.
The District Court registry had notified the Crown prosecutor that Sparos’ trial could begin by the end of February.
Original report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
In Australia! Justice delayed is justice denied
A MAN accused over a multi-million dollar cocaine syndicate will finally stand trial almost four years after he was charged, a Supreme Court judge today resoundingly criticising the delays in his case as "significant" and "oppressive".
Justice Stephen Rothman today refused bail for Luke John Sparos, but said there were a number of "troubling" aspects to his decision. One was the delay, he said, and leant his judicial weight to comments by a local court magistrate Geoff Bradd that the case led by the NSW Crime Commission had long been in disarray.
He endorsed the comments made by Magistrate Bradd, who accused the DPP and the Crime Commission of trying to "have it both ways." "(Magistrate Bradd said) you either prosecute this matter or you don’t - to say this is a fishing expedition … well it is just beyond the pale."
Had it not been for the seriousness of the charges and the risk of flight if given his freedom, Justice Rothman said bail would likely have been granted.
"Fatboy" Sparos was allegedly one of two principals to an international cocaine cartel responsible for the importation of around 200kg of cocaine. He was charged in early 2007 with offences relating to alleged proceeds of crime funds, but later charged along with a number of others with a long-running conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of cocaine in July of that year.
Justice Rothman described the Crown case as being strong, but said unacceptable that Sparos had been unable to adequately prepare for his trial due to his lengthy and restrictive situation in custody.
The court even heard how some of the brief provided to Sparos in custody had been "lost" as Department of Corrective Services officials moved him around the prison system.
"It’s inappropriate for a person to be unduly delayed on remand while the Crown get’s its act together," Justice Rothman said. "Of course not all time spent is a delay … but in this case there (have been) significant delays."
Justice Rothman directed the Crown and Corrective Services "to take all steps" necessary to provide Sparos or his legal team with the documents that were originally in his possession.
The District Court registry had notified the Crown prosecutor that Sparos’ trial could begin by the end of February.
Original report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Thursday, October 21, 2010
CA: Oakland settles suit with family of slain youth
The city of Oakland agreed Tuesday to pay $500,000 to settle a federal civil rights suit filed by the parents of a 15-year-old boy who was shot and killed by three gang-unit officers in 2008.
Jose Luis Buenrostro was killed March 19, 2008, at 79th Avenue and Rudsdale Street in East Oakland. Police have said several gang-unit officers shot Buenrostro when he pulled a sawed-off rifle from his sweatpants and pointed it at them.
But in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Jose and Maria Buenrostro said Sgt. Randy Brandwood and Officers Eric Milina and Robert Roche drove up to their son in an unmarked car, stopped and shot him without cause.
Roche has been involved in at least two other fatal police shootings.
In court documents, city officials said the officers were driving on Rudsdale when they saw the youth walking along the sidewalk and apparently fumbling with something in his pants.
They backed up to where he was standing and fired in self-defense when the youth pulled the rifle from his pant leg and pointed it at the officers, who were clad in blue jeans and raid jackets emblazoned with "Oakland Police" on the back, city officials said.
The family's attorney, John Burris, acknowledged that the youth had a rifle in his possession. But he said the teenager, an aviation-school student, never brandished the weapon at police.
"It's a real tragic case," Burris said Tuesday. "The police overreacted, and although he may have had possession of a (rifle), he did not point the gun at the officers. Witnesses said he was putting his hands up when he was shot."
Within a week of the shooting, police took the unusual step of showing a picture of the rifle that the boy was carrying. They said the youth had ties to a street gang.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
The city of Oakland agreed Tuesday to pay $500,000 to settle a federal civil rights suit filed by the parents of a 15-year-old boy who was shot and killed by three gang-unit officers in 2008.
Jose Luis Buenrostro was killed March 19, 2008, at 79th Avenue and Rudsdale Street in East Oakland. Police have said several gang-unit officers shot Buenrostro when he pulled a sawed-off rifle from his sweatpants and pointed it at them.
But in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Jose and Maria Buenrostro said Sgt. Randy Brandwood and Officers Eric Milina and Robert Roche drove up to their son in an unmarked car, stopped and shot him without cause.
Roche has been involved in at least two other fatal police shootings.
In court documents, city officials said the officers were driving on Rudsdale when they saw the youth walking along the sidewalk and apparently fumbling with something in his pants.
They backed up to where he was standing and fired in self-defense when the youth pulled the rifle from his pant leg and pointed it at the officers, who were clad in blue jeans and raid jackets emblazoned with "Oakland Police" on the back, city officials said.
The family's attorney, John Burris, acknowledged that the youth had a rifle in his possession. But he said the teenager, an aviation-school student, never brandished the weapon at police.
"It's a real tragic case," Burris said Tuesday. "The police overreacted, and although he may have had possession of a (rifle), he did not point the gun at the officers. Witnesses said he was putting his hands up when he was shot."
Within a week of the shooting, police took the unusual step of showing a picture of the rifle that the boy was carrying. They said the youth had ties to a street gang.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Baby snatched for dad's politics back with parents after court tosses ignorant complaint
Reunited! Newborn returned to family where father accused of being 'Oath Keeper'
A tiny baby girl snatched from her parents' custody a week ago when her father was accused of being an "Oath Keeper" was returned to her parents today.
According to WND sources close to the case, the accusations against the father, Johnathon Irish, whose fiancée, Stephanie Taylor, is the mother of Cheyenne, have been dropped.
WND originally reported on the case last weekend when the state took the baby, ordering the father to stand with his hands behind his back and frisking him while social workers took the child. The affidavit supporting the actions cited the father's affiliation with the patriotic organization Oath Keepers.
Irish, reached today by telephone by WND, said New Hampshire state law prevents disclosure of details of family court disputes. But the WND source confirmed that the little girl had been returned to the family and there were no future court dates scheduled in the case.
Officials with the state Family Court system could not be reached by WND.
Just hours earlier a protest was held outside the court where the hearing was going on, and as WND reported, officials with Oath Keepers submitted a demand letter to the state's social services agency to remove the reference in the affidavit in the Irish case.
The organization collects affirmations from soldiers and peace officers that they would refuse orders that violate the U.S. Constitution in light of what they perceive as the advance of socialism in the U.S.
Irish had told WND that an affidavit signed by Child Protective Service worker Dana Bickford seeking government custody of newborn Cheyenne a week ago said the agency "became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers.'"
While officials with Oath Keepers confirmed that there were other issues involved in the case, they were stunned to learn that the court ruling had described their organization as a militia and had referenced participation with them as an accusation.
"This poorly conducted investigation used unsubstantiated and unsupported information regarding our organization. A journey to our website, and a reading of our bylaws, could have easily confirmed what we are and are not," said the Oath Keepers letter, delivered today to state officials.
"We are an association of currently serving and retired police, military, and emergency personnel. We are not a militia. Our goal is simply to educate all current service personnel on their obligations under the law and in particular our Constitution."
WND reported earlier when the dispute erupted, including when Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes wrote on his website that the citation of his organization sends a seriously troubling message.
Details of the resolution of the case were withheld behind the curtain of Family Court restrictions. But Rhodes described it as a "fundamental point" to have government agencies condemning defendants for their political affiliations.
"Talk about chilling speech! If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel [nose] under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare," he continued. "'Don't you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on 'the list' and then child protective services might come take your kids.'"
While Oath Keepers is not a militia, he said, it would make no difference if it was. "A parent associating with a militia is not engaged in child endangerment and is not evidence of child endangerment," he said.
Oath Keepers' members promise not to obey any order "to disarm the American people," conduct warrantless searches, "detain American citizens as 'unlawful enemy combatants,'" work to impose martial law, invade or subjugate any state, blockade American cities, put Americans in detention camps or "make war against our own people."
Rhodes himself was a U.S. Army paratrooper injured in an parachuting accident, a former firearms instructor and a former member of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's Washington staff.
The organization's board of directors includes Army veteran Sgt. Dave Freeman, Army veteran Capt. Chauncey Normandin, Navy veteran Capt. Gregory Gooch, Celia S. Hyde of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, all retired.
Others are Marines, members of the Air Force, local law enforcement and even of the U.S. Army Special Forces.
The demand letter apparently was addressed by the court's action, although Rhodes said he'd been given no direct response to the concerns. It said, "As police officers, we have been called all manner of vile names by criminal suspects, but nothing compares to the offensive assertion that to associate with us and our military counterparts is child endangerment. We respectfully request that any reference to Oath Keepers be removed from your affidavit by whatever mechanism New Hampshire law allows or requires."
The letter continued, "On behalf of all of the active duty and retired police and sheriff personnel within our organization, as well as our military and firefighter brothers and sisters, we demand that you remove the offensive verbiage in the affidavit filed by your investigator, Dana Bickford, which states, 'the Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers …''
"By so listing the political associations of a parent as a reason to take a newborn baby from her mother's arms, the affidavit politicizes child protective services. That politicization was unfortunately furthered by the judge in this case who adopted Bickford’s entire affidavit as the Court's 'findings of fact' setting forth the reasons for issuing the order to take the baby."
The letter explains Oath Keepers members "have seen first-hand the heart-rending abuse that children can suffer at the hands of dysfunctional adults. It is to prevent such abuse that child protective services is given great latitude and power. Politics has no place in this process precisely because of the immense power you wield. All that should matter is the welfare of the children, not the politics of the parents. Such politicization not only hurts the families and children involved, but also chills the speech of other parents who now will worry that their political affiliations will be used as grounds for taking their children."
It was signed by Capt. Chauncey Normandin, retired, from the Lowell, Mass., police department; Sgt. David Freeman, retired, from the Las Vegas police department; Chief Celia S. Hyde, retired, of the Bolton, Mass., police department; retired Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack; and almost half a dozen actively serving law enforcement officers in Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah and others.
According to the original court documents, copies of which were posted by Oath Keepers, "Mr. Irish was court ordered to attend Ending the Violence with Scott Hampton, however, to date, has not completed this program." The court affidavit continued, "The Epsom Police Department stated they were very familiar with Mr. Irish, as they have responded to multiple calls, which involved Mr. Irish and firearms, one of which resulted in a pending charge for possession of a concealed weapon without a permit.
"The division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers,' and had purchase several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and taser," the court documents said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Reunited! Newborn returned to family where father accused of being 'Oath Keeper'
A tiny baby girl snatched from her parents' custody a week ago when her father was accused of being an "Oath Keeper" was returned to her parents today.
According to WND sources close to the case, the accusations against the father, Johnathon Irish, whose fiancée, Stephanie Taylor, is the mother of Cheyenne, have been dropped.
WND originally reported on the case last weekend when the state took the baby, ordering the father to stand with his hands behind his back and frisking him while social workers took the child. The affidavit supporting the actions cited the father's affiliation with the patriotic organization Oath Keepers.
Irish, reached today by telephone by WND, said New Hampshire state law prevents disclosure of details of family court disputes. But the WND source confirmed that the little girl had been returned to the family and there were no future court dates scheduled in the case.
Officials with the state Family Court system could not be reached by WND.
Just hours earlier a protest was held outside the court where the hearing was going on, and as WND reported, officials with Oath Keepers submitted a demand letter to the state's social services agency to remove the reference in the affidavit in the Irish case.
The organization collects affirmations from soldiers and peace officers that they would refuse orders that violate the U.S. Constitution in light of what they perceive as the advance of socialism in the U.S.
Irish had told WND that an affidavit signed by Child Protective Service worker Dana Bickford seeking government custody of newborn Cheyenne a week ago said the agency "became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers.'"
While officials with Oath Keepers confirmed that there were other issues involved in the case, they were stunned to learn that the court ruling had described their organization as a militia and had referenced participation with them as an accusation.
"This poorly conducted investigation used unsubstantiated and unsupported information regarding our organization. A journey to our website, and a reading of our bylaws, could have easily confirmed what we are and are not," said the Oath Keepers letter, delivered today to state officials.
"We are an association of currently serving and retired police, military, and emergency personnel. We are not a militia. Our goal is simply to educate all current service personnel on their obligations under the law and in particular our Constitution."
WND reported earlier when the dispute erupted, including when Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes wrote on his website that the citation of his organization sends a seriously troubling message.
Details of the resolution of the case were withheld behind the curtain of Family Court restrictions. But Rhodes described it as a "fundamental point" to have government agencies condemning defendants for their political affiliations.
"Talk about chilling speech! If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel [nose] under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare," he continued. "'Don't you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on 'the list' and then child protective services might come take your kids.'"
While Oath Keepers is not a militia, he said, it would make no difference if it was. "A parent associating with a militia is not engaged in child endangerment and is not evidence of child endangerment," he said.
Oath Keepers' members promise not to obey any order "to disarm the American people," conduct warrantless searches, "detain American citizens as 'unlawful enemy combatants,'" work to impose martial law, invade or subjugate any state, blockade American cities, put Americans in detention camps or "make war against our own people."
Rhodes himself was a U.S. Army paratrooper injured in an parachuting accident, a former firearms instructor and a former member of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's Washington staff.
The organization's board of directors includes Army veteran Sgt. Dave Freeman, Army veteran Capt. Chauncey Normandin, Navy veteran Capt. Gregory Gooch, Celia S. Hyde of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, all retired.
Others are Marines, members of the Air Force, local law enforcement and even of the U.S. Army Special Forces.
The demand letter apparently was addressed by the court's action, although Rhodes said he'd been given no direct response to the concerns. It said, "As police officers, we have been called all manner of vile names by criminal suspects, but nothing compares to the offensive assertion that to associate with us and our military counterparts is child endangerment. We respectfully request that any reference to Oath Keepers be removed from your affidavit by whatever mechanism New Hampshire law allows or requires."
The letter continued, "On behalf of all of the active duty and retired police and sheriff personnel within our organization, as well as our military and firefighter brothers and sisters, we demand that you remove the offensive verbiage in the affidavit filed by your investigator, Dana Bickford, which states, 'the Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers …''
"By so listing the political associations of a parent as a reason to take a newborn baby from her mother's arms, the affidavit politicizes child protective services. That politicization was unfortunately furthered by the judge in this case who adopted Bickford’s entire affidavit as the Court's 'findings of fact' setting forth the reasons for issuing the order to take the baby."
The letter explains Oath Keepers members "have seen first-hand the heart-rending abuse that children can suffer at the hands of dysfunctional adults. It is to prevent such abuse that child protective services is given great latitude and power. Politics has no place in this process precisely because of the immense power you wield. All that should matter is the welfare of the children, not the politics of the parents. Such politicization not only hurts the families and children involved, but also chills the speech of other parents who now will worry that their political affiliations will be used as grounds for taking their children."
It was signed by Capt. Chauncey Normandin, retired, from the Lowell, Mass., police department; Sgt. David Freeman, retired, from the Las Vegas police department; Chief Celia S. Hyde, retired, of the Bolton, Mass., police department; retired Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack; and almost half a dozen actively serving law enforcement officers in Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah and others.
According to the original court documents, copies of which were posted by Oath Keepers, "Mr. Irish was court ordered to attend Ending the Violence with Scott Hampton, however, to date, has not completed this program." The court affidavit continued, "The Epsom Police Department stated they were very familiar with Mr. Irish, as they have responded to multiple calls, which involved Mr. Irish and firearms, one of which resulted in a pending charge for possession of a concealed weapon without a permit.
"The division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers,' and had purchase several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and taser," the court documents said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Murderous Seattle cop could be in trouble
A preliminary finding by Seattle police is that the Aug. 30 fatal shooting of a homeless woodcarver by an officer isn't justified, The Seattle Times reported.
A source confirmed to seattlepi.com that Ian Birk, the officer who fired the fatal shots, has surrendered his gun and badge.
The department has not made a final determination on the shooting. That will come after a six-person jury holds an inquest on the shooting. Inquests, called by the King County Executive, are routine after fatal officer-involved cases. The inquest hasn't been scheduled.
Tim Ford, attorney for Williams' family, said reports of the preliminary finding would be "gratifying" if true.
Ford said neither he nor Williams' family have been given access to the information gathered by the firearms review board. "We are still very eager to see evidence and what information the police have gathered ourselves," Ford said. "We hope this means they'll be releasing that to us soon."
The city's firearms review board concluded its hearing Oct. 4 and presented preliminary findings to Police Chief John Diaz that week. Those findings are confidential. The Times' story cited people familiar with the case.
"Per department policy and to support the integrity of the upcoming King County inquest the department will not comment on any findings or recommendations," a Police Department spokesman said in an October 5. "The firearms review board will reconvene following the evaluation of criminal liability by the inquest jury and King County prosecutor."
Police say during the Aug. 30 confrontation at Boren Avenue and Howell Street, Williams refused multiple commands to drop a knife from 9 feet away -- a distance that police say can present a lethal threat. Williams also had a decades-long history of gross misdemeanor and misdemeanor offenses, and some violent incidents in his past. Birk, who started with the department two years ago, was placed on administrative leave after the shooting.
Rich O'Neill, president of the Seattle Police Officer's Guild and part of the review board, did not comment Thursday on the preliminary findings. In general, he cautioned people making an assumption when the inquest and work of the firearms review board is not completed.
Critics have said Williams was deaf in one ear and was not presenting a threat to the officer, Ian Birk, who was hired in 2008. Williams' knife had a 3-inch blade -- one that is legal under the Seattle Municipal Code. Hundreds of people protested the shooting last month.
In interviews last month, his two brothers said they didn't know if Williams had headphones on at the time of the shooting, but believe he had difficulty understanding the officer's command.
The day after the shooting, Diaz said any blade that can cause a lethal injury would be considered a deadly weapon, and that the 3-inch knife Williams had was definitely capable of causing a lethal injury.
Birk, who fired FOUR rounds, was not armed with a Taser. Seattle Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer, who is heading the firearms review board for the Williams shooting, said 422 officers -- primarily those on patrol -- will be armed with Tasers by the end of the year.
The firearms review board is an internal Seattle Police Department group that reviews any discharge of a firearm by a Seattle police officer. Its purpose is to determine whether an officer's actions conformed to department policy and regulations, training guidelines, and applicable law, according to city officials.
Based upon its findings, the board, which includes a citizen observer, may recommend to the police chief further action or make referrals for further investigation.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A preliminary finding by Seattle police is that the Aug. 30 fatal shooting of a homeless woodcarver by an officer isn't justified, The Seattle Times reported.
A source confirmed to seattlepi.com that Ian Birk, the officer who fired the fatal shots, has surrendered his gun and badge.
The department has not made a final determination on the shooting. That will come after a six-person jury holds an inquest on the shooting. Inquests, called by the King County Executive, are routine after fatal officer-involved cases. The inquest hasn't been scheduled.
Tim Ford, attorney for Williams' family, said reports of the preliminary finding would be "gratifying" if true.
Ford said neither he nor Williams' family have been given access to the information gathered by the firearms review board. "We are still very eager to see evidence and what information the police have gathered ourselves," Ford said. "We hope this means they'll be releasing that to us soon."
The city's firearms review board concluded its hearing Oct. 4 and presented preliminary findings to Police Chief John Diaz that week. Those findings are confidential. The Times' story cited people familiar with the case.
"Per department policy and to support the integrity of the upcoming King County inquest the department will not comment on any findings or recommendations," a Police Department spokesman said in an October 5. "The firearms review board will reconvene following the evaluation of criminal liability by the inquest jury and King County prosecutor."
Police say during the Aug. 30 confrontation at Boren Avenue and Howell Street, Williams refused multiple commands to drop a knife from 9 feet away -- a distance that police say can present a lethal threat. Williams also had a decades-long history of gross misdemeanor and misdemeanor offenses, and some violent incidents in his past. Birk, who started with the department two years ago, was placed on administrative leave after the shooting.
Rich O'Neill, president of the Seattle Police Officer's Guild and part of the review board, did not comment Thursday on the preliminary findings. In general, he cautioned people making an assumption when the inquest and work of the firearms review board is not completed.
Critics have said Williams was deaf in one ear and was not presenting a threat to the officer, Ian Birk, who was hired in 2008. Williams' knife had a 3-inch blade -- one that is legal under the Seattle Municipal Code. Hundreds of people protested the shooting last month.
In interviews last month, his two brothers said they didn't know if Williams had headphones on at the time of the shooting, but believe he had difficulty understanding the officer's command.
The day after the shooting, Diaz said any blade that can cause a lethal injury would be considered a deadly weapon, and that the 3-inch knife Williams had was definitely capable of causing a lethal injury.
Birk, who fired FOUR rounds, was not armed with a Taser. Seattle Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer, who is heading the firearms review board for the Williams shooting, said 422 officers -- primarily those on patrol -- will be armed with Tasers by the end of the year.
The firearms review board is an internal Seattle Police Department group that reviews any discharge of a firearm by a Seattle police officer. Its purpose is to determine whether an officer's actions conformed to department policy and regulations, training guidelines, and applicable law, according to city officials.
Based upon its findings, the board, which includes a citizen observer, may recommend to the police chief further action or make referrals for further investigation.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Monday, October 18, 2010
Inexcusable failure to prosecute accomplices of thug Australian cop
See previous post here on 14th. There is plenty of precedent for the prosecution of all cops present at the attacks -- e.g. R v Dytham [1979] Q.B. 722
THE Crime and Misconduct Commission has been urged to re-investigate the Airlie Beach police bashings following the release of disturbing video footage of assaults by jailed former officer Benjamin Price.
The videos show other officers watching and in one case assisting Price during his assaults on handcuffed offenders, but the police service has said there is not enough evidence to charge them.
In a letter sent to the CMC, Queensland Council of Civil Liberties vice-president Terry O'Gorman said there were indications the police handling of the case had been "less than rigorous". "It is submitted there are a number of unaddressed issues in relation to the Airlie Beach matter, which bear an unfortunate similarity to the steps engaged in by various police in relation to the cover-up of the Palm Island affair," the letter reads.
Mr O'Gorman said there were "unsatisfactory aspects" to the Price case that warranted a thorough investigation.
"Why have criminal charges not been laid against the other officers who were present when a fire hose was shoved down the complainant's throat?" Mr O'Gorman said. "Why was Mr Price charged with the lesser offence of assault occasioning bodily harm when on the facts publicly known a charge of torture was clearly open?"
He said other senior criminal lawyers were of the opinion that under the law, the other officers who were present during the assaults could be charged. "Presence in something like that is regarded as encouragement," Mr O'Gorman said. "Secondly, the bloke who hands the police officer the hose is an alleged accomplice. That's criminal law 101."
A CMC spokeswoman said the investigation into officers who observed the assaults was "ongoing". "The CMC will be provided with a report from the QPS Ethical Standards Command. This report will outline the action the ESC is recommending against the officers," she said.
The videos posted by Queensland Police on YouTube have now been viewed by almost 200,000 people and have also been uploaded to other websites in India, New Zealand, the UK and the US.
Mr O'Gorman also criticised the "doctoring" of the footage including the lack of audio, but the CMC spokeswoman said the release of the video was a matter for the QPS.
Original report here
Airlie beach abuse sounds the alarm over a rotten Queensland police culture
The violence dealt out by former officer Benjamin Price points to a grand-scale breakdown within our police force: "They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick"
All Queensland police would have been shamed, embarrassed, humiliated and angered by videos showing former officer Benjamin Price strong-arming tiny Renee Toms and water-torturing Timothy Steele. Along with most ofthe 172,000 people who had watched the events on YouTube (as of Friday morning) they would have thought it was one of the lowest, most cowardly and disgusting displays of sadistic power-tripping they had seen.
Well, not of all of them, because the videos seemed to suggest that it was nothing much out of the ordinary at Airlie Beach police station, where officers are seen walking around the violence like you and I might step around a floor cleaner. It was very much business as usual, with a little bit of professional courtesy thrown in as one officer was seen handing Price the fire hose. There didn’t even seem to be the slightest bit of concern - let alone criminal cunning - over the fact that unsavoury events were being captured by video cameras, which they must have known about. They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick.
This is the real problem for the Queensland Police Service as it deals with the backwash of a series of appalling events. That one policeman abused his authority is sad but no great surprise. But the fact that of nine police oticers on the periphery of the events that led to Price’s jailing only one, Constable Bree Sonter, did her duty as an officer and human being is shocking.
Five have quit and three are under investigation. Only Sonter has emerged with any credit, although her future in the force might not be a happy one. Throw in Price, and a failure rate of nine out of l0 is not too flash in any circumstance.
Airlie Beach is not exactly Gotham City, so this represents a failure of discipline, purpose, professionalism, process and moral courage on a grand scale. The force is justly proud of the fact that about a quarter of all complaints against officers are now made by police themselves but that cannot alter the fact that more than 50 per cent of those assigned to Airlie Beach were derelict in their duty.
If you subscribe to the rotten apple theory of policing, this barrel was pretty putrid, leaving a smell that has got right up the noses of most Queenslanders. It's not a question of police bashing. lt’s a question of squandered resources and squandered trust.
Think about it. One rogue cops gets off on brutalising people and, because of sins of omission, we lose five other trained officers and have three more under a very dark cloud. One rogue cop goes ape and all the good deeds, good policing and good reputations of thousands of others are trashed. And probably a million bucks is blown on compo for Price’s victims.
Attorney-General Cameron Dick says he is considering an appeal against the leniency of Price’s sentence because of the community outrage over the security camera footage.
They could throw away the key for all I care, but that’s not really the point. The point is that after an individual meltdown there was a collective breakdown in professionalism and process in a force that has more brass than a South American army, more regions than we have states, more districts than a red-headed kid has freckles, more inspectors and sergeants than there are bouncers at a Valley pub and more cops per capita driving desks than any other force in Australia.
Yet, it still seems to go off course with monotonous regularity, We need to know more, including just what happened to the mid-rampage reports of serious misconduct allegedly made about Price by his station oflicer.
ln a hierarchical institution, authority goes downward and responsibility goes upward. Sometimes, responsibility seems to hit a very low ceiling.
The article above by Terry Sweetman appeared (print only) in the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" on 17 October, 2010
(Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
See previous post here on 14th. There is plenty of precedent for the prosecution of all cops present at the attacks -- e.g. R v Dytham [1979] Q.B. 722
THE Crime and Misconduct Commission has been urged to re-investigate the Airlie Beach police bashings following the release of disturbing video footage of assaults by jailed former officer Benjamin Price.
The videos show other officers watching and in one case assisting Price during his assaults on handcuffed offenders, but the police service has said there is not enough evidence to charge them.
In a letter sent to the CMC, Queensland Council of Civil Liberties vice-president Terry O'Gorman said there were indications the police handling of the case had been "less than rigorous". "It is submitted there are a number of unaddressed issues in relation to the Airlie Beach matter, which bear an unfortunate similarity to the steps engaged in by various police in relation to the cover-up of the Palm Island affair," the letter reads.
Mr O'Gorman said there were "unsatisfactory aspects" to the Price case that warranted a thorough investigation.
"Why have criminal charges not been laid against the other officers who were present when a fire hose was shoved down the complainant's throat?" Mr O'Gorman said. "Why was Mr Price charged with the lesser offence of assault occasioning bodily harm when on the facts publicly known a charge of torture was clearly open?"
He said other senior criminal lawyers were of the opinion that under the law, the other officers who were present during the assaults could be charged. "Presence in something like that is regarded as encouragement," Mr O'Gorman said. "Secondly, the bloke who hands the police officer the hose is an alleged accomplice. That's criminal law 101."
A CMC spokeswoman said the investigation into officers who observed the assaults was "ongoing". "The CMC will be provided with a report from the QPS Ethical Standards Command. This report will outline the action the ESC is recommending against the officers," she said.
The videos posted by Queensland Police on YouTube have now been viewed by almost 200,000 people and have also been uploaded to other websites in India, New Zealand, the UK and the US.
Mr O'Gorman also criticised the "doctoring" of the footage including the lack of audio, but the CMC spokeswoman said the release of the video was a matter for the QPS.
Original report here
Airlie beach abuse sounds the alarm over a rotten Queensland police culture
The violence dealt out by former officer Benjamin Price points to a grand-scale breakdown within our police force: "They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick"
All Queensland police would have been shamed, embarrassed, humiliated and angered by videos showing former officer Benjamin Price strong-arming tiny Renee Toms and water-torturing Timothy Steele. Along with most ofthe 172,000 people who had watched the events on YouTube (as of Friday morning) they would have thought it was one of the lowest, most cowardly and disgusting displays of sadistic power-tripping they had seen.
Well, not of all of them, because the videos seemed to suggest that it was nothing much out of the ordinary at Airlie Beach police station, where officers are seen walking around the violence like you and I might step around a floor cleaner. It was very much business as usual, with a little bit of professional courtesy thrown in as one officer was seen handing Price the fire hose. There didn’t even seem to be the slightest bit of concern - let alone criminal cunning - over the fact that unsavoury events were being captured by video cameras, which they must have known about. They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick.
This is the real problem for the Queensland Police Service as it deals with the backwash of a series of appalling events. That one policeman abused his authority is sad but no great surprise. But the fact that of nine police oticers on the periphery of the events that led to Price’s jailing only one, Constable Bree Sonter, did her duty as an officer and human being is shocking.
Five have quit and three are under investigation. Only Sonter has emerged with any credit, although her future in the force might not be a happy one. Throw in Price, and a failure rate of nine out of l0 is not too flash in any circumstance.
Airlie Beach is not exactly Gotham City, so this represents a failure of discipline, purpose, professionalism, process and moral courage on a grand scale. The force is justly proud of the fact that about a quarter of all complaints against officers are now made by police themselves but that cannot alter the fact that more than 50 per cent of those assigned to Airlie Beach were derelict in their duty.
If you subscribe to the rotten apple theory of policing, this barrel was pretty putrid, leaving a smell that has got right up the noses of most Queenslanders. It's not a question of police bashing. lt’s a question of squandered resources and squandered trust.
Think about it. One rogue cops gets off on brutalising people and, because of sins of omission, we lose five other trained officers and have three more under a very dark cloud. One rogue cop goes ape and all the good deeds, good policing and good reputations of thousands of others are trashed. And probably a million bucks is blown on compo for Price’s victims.
Attorney-General Cameron Dick says he is considering an appeal against the leniency of Price’s sentence because of the community outrage over the security camera footage.
They could throw away the key for all I care, but that’s not really the point. The point is that after an individual meltdown there was a collective breakdown in professionalism and process in a force that has more brass than a South American army, more regions than we have states, more districts than a red-headed kid has freckles, more inspectors and sergeants than there are bouncers at a Valley pub and more cops per capita driving desks than any other force in Australia.
Yet, it still seems to go off course with monotonous regularity, We need to know more, including just what happened to the mid-rampage reports of serious misconduct allegedly made about Price by his station oflicer.
ln a hierarchical institution, authority goes downward and responsibility goes upward. Sometimes, responsibility seems to hit a very low ceiling.
The article above by Terry Sweetman appeared (print only) in the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" on 17 October, 2010
(Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Thuggish AZ cop finally kills an innocent
More information on the past behavior of a Phoenix police officer charged with second-degree murder reveals a video of him playing what he called a "prank" on a homeless woman.
In 2005, Phoenix police Officer Richard Chrisman and his partner were field training fellow officers when a surveillance video caught them pulling the "prank" on a homeless woman who was mentally ill.
The video at first shows Chrisman as he twirls his police baton in front of the woman, eventually leaning toward her.
As two other officer observe the woman, Chrisman and his partner walk to the the trunk of their squad car. The video clearly shows Chrisman slip his partner some drug paraphernalia so she could pretend she found it on the woman.
Chrisman and his partner later admitted they were just messing with the woman to see how she would respond. "I guess me and all my wisdom thought it would be a good idea, funny you know, to play a prank," Chrisman states in a police department internal affairs report.
Chrisman and his partner smile as they leave the car. The female officer approaches the woman from behind to search her. While's she's patting her down, she reaches behind her back and Chrisman hands her the paraphernalia.
The female officer at first looks down the back of the woman's dress. Next, she reaches down the back of the woman's dress as if retrieving something. She pulls out the paraphernalia and shows the woman, pretending that she just found it.
Police arrested the woman on a warrant that day but did not charge her with possession. Chrisman was suspended for one day without pay as a consequence.
Chrisman has found himself in much more serious trouble lately. He was indicted on Friday for second-degree murder in the shooting death of 29-year-old Daniel Rodriguez.
Chrisman is accused of shooting and killing Rodriguez during a domestic disturbance call. According to police reports, Chrisman pulled his handgun, placed it against Rodriguez's head and told him he didn't need a warrant after Rodriguez ordered him out of his Phoenix home Oct. 5.
Chrisman shocked Rodriguez with a stun gun, fatally shot his pit bull, then finally shot and killed Rodriguez, according to a court document. A Maricopa County Superior Court Judge issued a summons for Chrisman.
Chrisman initially faced charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. He was arrested after Officer Sergio Virgillo, who provided backup the day of the shooting, claimed that Chrisman's actions were extreme. Virgillo told investigators that Rodriguez did not have a weapon and did not pose a threat.
Mehrens has said that his client was simply doing his job and drew his weapon in self-defense.
There have been other times Chrisman's actions have come under scrutiny. Harris said Chrisman and another officer had been disciplined and suspended in the past after being accused of playing a "joke" on someone during an arrest.
"I think the community should be outraged and upset. Any of us would be," Harris said. "But the real question is how do we react and what is our response?" "We will do everything humanly possible to make sure this doesn't happen again," Harris said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
More information on the past behavior of a Phoenix police officer charged with second-degree murder reveals a video of him playing what he called a "prank" on a homeless woman.
In 2005, Phoenix police Officer Richard Chrisman and his partner were field training fellow officers when a surveillance video caught them pulling the "prank" on a homeless woman who was mentally ill.
The video at first shows Chrisman as he twirls his police baton in front of the woman, eventually leaning toward her.
As two other officer observe the woman, Chrisman and his partner walk to the the trunk of their squad car. The video clearly shows Chrisman slip his partner some drug paraphernalia so she could pretend she found it on the woman.
Chrisman and his partner later admitted they were just messing with the woman to see how she would respond. "I guess me and all my wisdom thought it would be a good idea, funny you know, to play a prank," Chrisman states in a police department internal affairs report.
Chrisman and his partner smile as they leave the car. The female officer approaches the woman from behind to search her. While's she's patting her down, she reaches behind her back and Chrisman hands her the paraphernalia.
The female officer at first looks down the back of the woman's dress. Next, she reaches down the back of the woman's dress as if retrieving something. She pulls out the paraphernalia and shows the woman, pretending that she just found it.
Police arrested the woman on a warrant that day but did not charge her with possession. Chrisman was suspended for one day without pay as a consequence.
Chrisman has found himself in much more serious trouble lately. He was indicted on Friday for second-degree murder in the shooting death of 29-year-old Daniel Rodriguez.
Chrisman is accused of shooting and killing Rodriguez during a domestic disturbance call. According to police reports, Chrisman pulled his handgun, placed it against Rodriguez's head and told him he didn't need a warrant after Rodriguez ordered him out of his Phoenix home Oct. 5.
Chrisman shocked Rodriguez with a stun gun, fatally shot his pit bull, then finally shot and killed Rodriguez, according to a court document. A Maricopa County Superior Court Judge issued a summons for Chrisman.
Chrisman initially faced charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. He was arrested after Officer Sergio Virgillo, who provided backup the day of the shooting, claimed that Chrisman's actions were extreme. Virgillo told investigators that Rodriguez did not have a weapon and did not pose a threat.
Mehrens has said that his client was simply doing his job and drew his weapon in self-defense.
There have been other times Chrisman's actions have come under scrutiny. Harris said Chrisman and another officer had been disciplined and suspended in the past after being accused of playing a "joke" on someone during an arrest.
"I think the community should be outraged and upset. Any of us would be," Harris said. "But the real question is how do we react and what is our response?" "We will do everything humanly possible to make sure this doesn't happen again," Harris said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Saturday, October 16, 2010
A chance to help Bradford Metcalf, an American political prisoner
Of all the commentaries I’ve written in my 20 years as publisher of Backwoods Home Magazine, the one that still haunts me to this day is titled, “America, land of the free …ha, ha, ha!,” which appeared in Issue No. 104, the March/April 2007 issue. It is about Matt Bandy and Bradford Metcalf, both wrongfully prosecuted by the U.S. Government.
Bradford Metcalf remains in prison these past 12 years on trumped-up charges concerning weapons possession, but the Supreme Court may hear his case. I got the following email this evening from the Metcalf family:
The Supreme Court will confer regarding “10-6452 Metcalf v. US” on Oct. 15, 2010.
Metcalf was convicted in 1998 of Conspiracy to Possess Automatic Weapons and 8 other possession charges (no violence) and sentenced to 40 years (he acted as his own attorney – his jury thought he would get 3 to 5 years…). You can contact the Supreme Court Public Information Office to urge their consideration at this address:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/contact/contact_pio.aspx
Please join me in contacting the Supremes to consider this case. Bradford Metcalf is a political prisoner left over from the Janet Reno/Bill Clinton crackdown on conservative dissidents in the wake of Waco and Ruby Ridge. Unfortunately, he is not the only political prisoner still languishing in federal penitentiaries.
Here is a chance to at least speak up on behalf of one nearly forgotten political prisoner.
Original report here
Background
Metcalf was indicted, tried and convicted for a “conspiracy,” which was created solely in the mind of federal prosecutor, Lloyd K. Meyer. Meyer had political ambitions and needed a “big case” to make a name for himself. So, he created one.
One of the elements of this prosecutor-created conspiracy was “possession of machine-guns.” But Metcalf had no machine-guns and Meyer knew it. Prior to the trial, Meyer furnished Metcalf with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) regulations concerning machine-guns, which plainly stated that the Browning .50 caliber and .30 caliber “machine-guns” in his possession without the right sideplates are not “machine-guns.”
This didn’t stop Meyer. In his closing argument to the jury, Meyer said Metcalf had the right sideplates buried on his property. But no evidence was introduced during the trial to show that Metcalf had the sideplates in his possession.
The jury dutifully convicted Metcalf of all the charges on the indictment. Judge Richard Alan Enslen of the Western District of Michigan then sentenced Metcalf to 40 years in federal prison.
The first count of the Metcalf indictment charged a “conspiracy.” A federal conspiracy charge consists of an agreement to commit an illegal act with an act performed. The agreement to commit the illegal act—the object of the conspiracy—is whatever the prosecutor says it is when he drafts the indictment.
Metcalf and his two co-defendants, Randy Graham and Ken Carter, had a few telephone conversations about the sorry state of the federal government in general and the federal judiciary in particular. Those telephone conversations were secretly wire-tapped and recorded by the government.
Meyer wrote the Metcalf indictment before he submitted it to the grand jury for the usual rubber-stamp approval. The original reason for a grand jury investigation and grand jury secrecy was to keep governmental attorneys out of the criminal investigation and out of the grand jury room.
Metcalf, along with Graham, submitted 15 pre-trial motions that pointed out the defect in their case and the indictment. They received a detailed six-page denial of all their motions on Sept. 23, 1998, signed by Judge Enslen. More than a month later, in open court, Judge Enslen told Metcalf he hadn’t read the indictment and didn’t even know what Metcalf was charged with.
Judge Enslen refused to allow Metcalf an expert witness to testify as to the legality of his weapons. His reason: “Because you didn’t have a lawyer.” Metcalf fought his case pro se because he didn’t trust anyone who was part of the system to fight the system.
More here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Of all the commentaries I’ve written in my 20 years as publisher of Backwoods Home Magazine, the one that still haunts me to this day is titled, “America, land of the free …ha, ha, ha!,” which appeared in Issue No. 104, the March/April 2007 issue. It is about Matt Bandy and Bradford Metcalf, both wrongfully prosecuted by the U.S. Government.
Bradford Metcalf remains in prison these past 12 years on trumped-up charges concerning weapons possession, but the Supreme Court may hear his case. I got the following email this evening from the Metcalf family:
The Supreme Court will confer regarding “10-6452 Metcalf v. US” on Oct. 15, 2010.
Metcalf was convicted in 1998 of Conspiracy to Possess Automatic Weapons and 8 other possession charges (no violence) and sentenced to 40 years (he acted as his own attorney – his jury thought he would get 3 to 5 years…). You can contact the Supreme Court Public Information Office to urge their consideration at this address:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/contact/contact_pio.aspx
Please join me in contacting the Supremes to consider this case. Bradford Metcalf is a political prisoner left over from the Janet Reno/Bill Clinton crackdown on conservative dissidents in the wake of Waco and Ruby Ridge. Unfortunately, he is not the only political prisoner still languishing in federal penitentiaries.
Here is a chance to at least speak up on behalf of one nearly forgotten political prisoner.
Original report here
Background
Metcalf was indicted, tried and convicted for a “conspiracy,” which was created solely in the mind of federal prosecutor, Lloyd K. Meyer. Meyer had political ambitions and needed a “big case” to make a name for himself. So, he created one.
One of the elements of this prosecutor-created conspiracy was “possession of machine-guns.” But Metcalf had no machine-guns and Meyer knew it. Prior to the trial, Meyer furnished Metcalf with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) regulations concerning machine-guns, which plainly stated that the Browning .50 caliber and .30 caliber “machine-guns” in his possession without the right sideplates are not “machine-guns.”
This didn’t stop Meyer. In his closing argument to the jury, Meyer said Metcalf had the right sideplates buried on his property. But no evidence was introduced during the trial to show that Metcalf had the sideplates in his possession.
The jury dutifully convicted Metcalf of all the charges on the indictment. Judge Richard Alan Enslen of the Western District of Michigan then sentenced Metcalf to 40 years in federal prison.
The first count of the Metcalf indictment charged a “conspiracy.” A federal conspiracy charge consists of an agreement to commit an illegal act with an act performed. The agreement to commit the illegal act—the object of the conspiracy—is whatever the prosecutor says it is when he drafts the indictment.
Metcalf and his two co-defendants, Randy Graham and Ken Carter, had a few telephone conversations about the sorry state of the federal government in general and the federal judiciary in particular. Those telephone conversations were secretly wire-tapped and recorded by the government.
Meyer wrote the Metcalf indictment before he submitted it to the grand jury for the usual rubber-stamp approval. The original reason for a grand jury investigation and grand jury secrecy was to keep governmental attorneys out of the criminal investigation and out of the grand jury room.
Metcalf, along with Graham, submitted 15 pre-trial motions that pointed out the defect in their case and the indictment. They received a detailed six-page denial of all their motions on Sept. 23, 1998, signed by Judge Enslen. More than a month later, in open court, Judge Enslen told Metcalf he hadn’t read the indictment and didn’t even know what Metcalf was charged with.
Judge Enslen refused to allow Metcalf an expert witness to testify as to the legality of his weapons. His reason: “Because you didn’t have a lawyer.” Metcalf fought his case pro se because he didn’t trust anyone who was part of the system to fight the system.
More here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Friday, October 15, 2010
Killer Cops in Your Town?
On New Year’s Day, 2009, Bay Area Rapid Transit policeman Johannes Mehserle shot an unarmed black man as he lay face down on an Oakland, California BART station platform. Oscar Grant died the next morning. Like the Rodney King beating, the event was video-recorded by bystanders. As a result, there is absolutely no doubt Oscar Grant was face down, policemen kneeling on him, when Mehserle drew his pistol and shot Grant in the back at point blank range.
When a Los Angeles jury found Mehserle guilty of the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter, instead of voluntary manslaughter or second degree murder, Oakland rioted.
An isolated case? Hardly. If you have a strong stomach, then Google “Police Brutality.” You will be astounded by scenes of unnecessary violence and videos of policemen using clubs and fists to beat women and children, the aged, and other defenseless citizens. The videos include a prone man being kicked in the head, an innocent young man slammed into a wall leaving him in a coma, and a handcuffed woman being beaten in a police station. Other stories include a 15-year old shot and killed while he was playing ‘cops and robbers,’ an 11-year old ‘unruly’ child Tasered at school, a 15-year old Tasered to death, and a citizen beaten by Scott Crawford, a Chicago policeman accused of brutality on seven occasions.
Even worse are policemen using deadly force—their guns—to kill unarmed people. Like the 2009 killing in Oakland, seven New Orleans policemen shot Adolph Grimes fourteen times on New Year’s Day. He was hit twelve times in the back. And now there is the killing of Erik Scott by three policemen of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police.
An army veteran, Erik Scott graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in the class of 1994, earned a Masters Degree from Duke, and was engaged in a career selling medical devices for Boston Scientific. On July 10th, Scott and his girlfriend were shopping in a Las Vegas Costco when an employee noticed he had a gun under his shirt and demanded he leave the store. Scott protested, saying he had a concealed weapon license, but the employee insisted and Scott left. The employee called the Las Vegas police anyway. When Scott reached the parking lot, he was confronted by three policemen with drawn guns. Scott tried to comply with their various demands, but they shot him in the chest and leg.
When Scott fell, the three Las Vegas policemen shot him five more times—in the back.
Testimony at the coroner’s inquest was confused, but Scott family lawyer Ross Goodman has a list of 25 eyewitnesses who will testify Erik Scott did not threaten the three policemen. Goodman did not bring his witnesses to the inquest because he feared that the district attorney’s office, which works closely with police and questions inquest witnesses, would “browbeat” them. After six days of testimony, the coroner’s verdict was the killing of Erik Scott was justified. The family will sue the police.
Is police brutality and police killings increasing? Judging from the number of photographs and videos on the internet, it appears it is rising all across the country—or that Americans are finally outraged by police excesses.
Numbers are difficult to find, since police departments are not cheerfully forthcoming. That is in spite of the Police Accountability Act requiring the Attorney General to compile data on excessive police force. Of course, Congress failed to fund the law. Not only that, there is nothing in the law requiring police to keep records. Nor does the law criminalize excessive force by police as human rights violations. One must assume our diligent police unions had a hidden hand in drafting the toothless legislation.
There is an aspect to the Scott case that applies to your city. The policeman who fired first, William Mosher, had his photograph in the Las Vegas Sun. His face appeared puffy and swollen. Such symptoms may be from use of a legal steroid (Prednisone) for treatment of Crohn’s Disease. A side effect of that steroid is mania and emotional instability. But even if Mosher is not taking Prednisone, the question arises: Is he taking any controlled substance? Drugs? Alcohol? Are the police unions doing anything besides promoting higher pay and benefits?
Police refer to citizens as “civilians,” as if they are an army. But real soldiers are held to a higher standard than citizens because they carry deadly weapons. Real soldiers do not take unauthorized controlled substances when on duty, or they are severely punished. Are police held to that standard?
Do you think police unions champion drug testing and promote the public’s safety from killer cops?
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
On New Year’s Day, 2009, Bay Area Rapid Transit policeman Johannes Mehserle shot an unarmed black man as he lay face down on an Oakland, California BART station platform. Oscar Grant died the next morning. Like the Rodney King beating, the event was video-recorded by bystanders. As a result, there is absolutely no doubt Oscar Grant was face down, policemen kneeling on him, when Mehserle drew his pistol and shot Grant in the back at point blank range.
When a Los Angeles jury found Mehserle guilty of the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter, instead of voluntary manslaughter or second degree murder, Oakland rioted.
An isolated case? Hardly. If you have a strong stomach, then Google “Police Brutality.” You will be astounded by scenes of unnecessary violence and videos of policemen using clubs and fists to beat women and children, the aged, and other defenseless citizens. The videos include a prone man being kicked in the head, an innocent young man slammed into a wall leaving him in a coma, and a handcuffed woman being beaten in a police station. Other stories include a 15-year old shot and killed while he was playing ‘cops and robbers,’ an 11-year old ‘unruly’ child Tasered at school, a 15-year old Tasered to death, and a citizen beaten by Scott Crawford, a Chicago policeman accused of brutality on seven occasions.
Even worse are policemen using deadly force—their guns—to kill unarmed people. Like the 2009 killing in Oakland, seven New Orleans policemen shot Adolph Grimes fourteen times on New Year’s Day. He was hit twelve times in the back. And now there is the killing of Erik Scott by three policemen of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police.
An army veteran, Erik Scott graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in the class of 1994, earned a Masters Degree from Duke, and was engaged in a career selling medical devices for Boston Scientific. On July 10th, Scott and his girlfriend were shopping in a Las Vegas Costco when an employee noticed he had a gun under his shirt and demanded he leave the store. Scott protested, saying he had a concealed weapon license, but the employee insisted and Scott left. The employee called the Las Vegas police anyway. When Scott reached the parking lot, he was confronted by three policemen with drawn guns. Scott tried to comply with their various demands, but they shot him in the chest and leg.
When Scott fell, the three Las Vegas policemen shot him five more times—in the back.
Testimony at the coroner’s inquest was confused, but Scott family lawyer Ross Goodman has a list of 25 eyewitnesses who will testify Erik Scott did not threaten the three policemen. Goodman did not bring his witnesses to the inquest because he feared that the district attorney’s office, which works closely with police and questions inquest witnesses, would “browbeat” them. After six days of testimony, the coroner’s verdict was the killing of Erik Scott was justified. The family will sue the police.
Is police brutality and police killings increasing? Judging from the number of photographs and videos on the internet, it appears it is rising all across the country—or that Americans are finally outraged by police excesses.
Numbers are difficult to find, since police departments are not cheerfully forthcoming. That is in spite of the Police Accountability Act requiring the Attorney General to compile data on excessive police force. Of course, Congress failed to fund the law. Not only that, there is nothing in the law requiring police to keep records. Nor does the law criminalize excessive force by police as human rights violations. One must assume our diligent police unions had a hidden hand in drafting the toothless legislation.
There is an aspect to the Scott case that applies to your city. The policeman who fired first, William Mosher, had his photograph in the Las Vegas Sun. His face appeared puffy and swollen. Such symptoms may be from use of a legal steroid (Prednisone) for treatment of Crohn’s Disease. A side effect of that steroid is mania and emotional instability. But even if Mosher is not taking Prednisone, the question arises: Is he taking any controlled substance? Drugs? Alcohol? Are the police unions doing anything besides promoting higher pay and benefits?
Police refer to citizens as “civilians,” as if they are an army. But real soldiers are held to a higher standard than citizens because they carry deadly weapons. Real soldiers do not take unauthorized controlled substances when on duty, or they are severely punished. Are police held to that standard?
Do you think police unions champion drug testing and promote the public’s safety from killer cops?
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Footage shows Australian cop bashing handcuffed tourists
POLICE have posted disturbing video footage of a Queensland officer's thuggish assaults on alleged offenders at Airlie Beach police station, a day after he was sentenced to jail over the incidents.
The first video shows the then Senior Constable Benjamin Price throwing a slightly built, handcuffed woman to the ground then pulling her up by the hair.
Another officer walks around him while the assault is going on, and does not appear to say anything - although there is no sound in the videos.
In the second, Price is out of screen for part of the video before he drags a handcuffed offender up to a wall.
There is blood over the man’s nose and mouth and another officer then hands Price a fire hose, which he shoves in the victim’s face. The assault goes on for several minutes and is difficult to watch.
Police said the videos had been made publicly available online in recognition of the public interest in the matter. Acting Commissioner Ian Stewart said there was no place for such conduct in the Queensland Police Service.
Price was yesterday sentenced in the Townsville District Court to 27 months jail after pleading guilty to four counts of serious assault. He will be eligible for parole after nine months, in July 2011.
In sentencing, Judge Stuart Durward condemned his actions as “gratuitously violent, callous and contemptible”. “Your actions were grossly excessive. You abused your authority.”
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
POLICE have posted disturbing video footage of a Queensland officer's thuggish assaults on alleged offenders at Airlie Beach police station, a day after he was sentenced to jail over the incidents.
The first video shows the then Senior Constable Benjamin Price throwing a slightly built, handcuffed woman to the ground then pulling her up by the hair.
Another officer walks around him while the assault is going on, and does not appear to say anything - although there is no sound in the videos.
In the second, Price is out of screen for part of the video before he drags a handcuffed offender up to a wall.
There is blood over the man’s nose and mouth and another officer then hands Price a fire hose, which he shoves in the victim’s face. The assault goes on for several minutes and is difficult to watch.
Police said the videos had been made publicly available online in recognition of the public interest in the matter. Acting Commissioner Ian Stewart said there was no place for such conduct in the Queensland Police Service.
Price was yesterday sentenced in the Townsville District Court to 27 months jail after pleading guilty to four counts of serious assault. He will be eligible for parole after nine months, in July 2011.
In sentencing, Judge Stuart Durward condemned his actions as “gratuitously violent, callous and contemptible”. “Your actions were grossly excessive. You abused your authority.”
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
New Orleans DA's office trying to dodge penalty for deliberate wrongful comviction
The Supreme Court back went back into session Monday, and one case that will watched closely in New Orleans is set for oral arguments Wednesday.
In the case of Thompson vs. Connick, former death row inmate John Thompson was awarded $14 million to compensate for his wrongful conviction for murder. Thompson was 22 years old when he was convicted of killing hotel executive Ray Liuzza during a robbery.
He was weeks away from execution when his attorneys showed that prosecutors under former District Attorney Harry Connick intentionally withheld a crime lab report that helped prove his innocence. Thompson served 18 years in prison – 14 on death row – before he was retried in 2003.
At that second trial, a jury came back with a not guilty verdict after deliberating for only 35 minutes.
At issue before the high court is whether district attorneys can be forced to pay damages for failing to properly train prosecutors on how to handle evidence favorable to defendants. Lower courts upheld Thompson’s civil court judgment, putting the district attorney’s office on the defensive to overturn a judgment it says will bankrupt the office.
Assistant Attorney General Kyle Duncan will argue on behalf of the district attorneys office, while a team of out-of-state attorneys will represent Thompson. Several local attorneys are flying to Washington to hear the oral arguments first-hand, including Emily Maw, director of Innocence Project New Orleans.
“For prosecutors who withhold evidence, there actually are very rarely consequences, except the reversal of convictions down the line,” Maw said. “When people withhold evidence, innocent people go to prison. And there, as yet, has been no good system of accountability put in place.”
Thompson now serves as the director of Resurrection After Exoneration, a local organization he started after his release to help exonerated inmates readjust to society.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
The Supreme Court back went back into session Monday, and one case that will watched closely in New Orleans is set for oral arguments Wednesday.
In the case of Thompson vs. Connick, former death row inmate John Thompson was awarded $14 million to compensate for his wrongful conviction for murder. Thompson was 22 years old when he was convicted of killing hotel executive Ray Liuzza during a robbery.
He was weeks away from execution when his attorneys showed that prosecutors under former District Attorney Harry Connick intentionally withheld a crime lab report that helped prove his innocence. Thompson served 18 years in prison – 14 on death row – before he was retried in 2003.
At that second trial, a jury came back with a not guilty verdict after deliberating for only 35 minutes.
At issue before the high court is whether district attorneys can be forced to pay damages for failing to properly train prosecutors on how to handle evidence favorable to defendants. Lower courts upheld Thompson’s civil court judgment, putting the district attorney’s office on the defensive to overturn a judgment it says will bankrupt the office.
Assistant Attorney General Kyle Duncan will argue on behalf of the district attorneys office, while a team of out-of-state attorneys will represent Thompson. Several local attorneys are flying to Washington to hear the oral arguments first-hand, including Emily Maw, director of Innocence Project New Orleans.
“For prosecutors who withhold evidence, there actually are very rarely consequences, except the reversal of convictions down the line,” Maw said. “When people withhold evidence, innocent people go to prison. And there, as yet, has been no good system of accountability put in place.”
Thompson now serves as the director of Resurrection After Exoneration, a local organization he started after his release to help exonerated inmates readjust to society.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Crooked Chicago: Man freed 8 years after wrongful conviction
The information that would have cleared him was in the files all the time. Note also bad eyerwiness ID yet again
Before he was sentenced to 30 years in prison for murder, Maurice Patterson told the judge he was innocent -- and then asked, if he eventually was cleared of the crime, "Are you going to be here to apologize to me?"
On Friday, eight years later, Patterson was back in court -- and ordered released after DNA evidence indeed cleared him in the murder. But he got no apology.
The DNA evidence was taken from a knife that the prosecution originally claimed had no connection to the crime, said Rob Warden of the Northwestern University Center on Wrongful Convictions. But years later, it turns out the knife had the victim's blood on it with the blood of another man, a convicted offender.
After that came to light, Judge David Linn ordered a new trial last November. Friday, the Cook County state's attorney's office dropped all charges and Linn ordered Patterson, 44, released.
Patterson walked out of Cook County Jail Friday evening into the arms of his joyful family. "I thought you'd be way taller than this," said his teenage brother, Samuel.
Patterson held up two paperback books he said inspired him: John Grisham's The Innocent Man and Courtroom 302, a non-fiction book on the Cook County court system by Steve Bogira.
Patterson never gave up believing he would be cleared. "I always [believed] through the grace of God. I spoke all this into existence. I proved my innocence."
Indeed, it was Patterson himself who set in motion the process that ultimately freed him. While imprisoned, he filed a Freedom of Information request for the lab report on the knife. Later, after the Center on Wrongful Convictions had taken his case, the request came through.
The Cook County state's attorney's office said it prosecuted the case "in good faith based on eyewitness accounts and forensic evidence that was believed to be the totality of the evidence."
Of the police and prosecutors, he said Friday, "They're evil, but I forgive them through the grace of God."
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
The information that would have cleared him was in the files all the time. Note also bad eyerwiness ID yet again
Before he was sentenced to 30 years in prison for murder, Maurice Patterson told the judge he was innocent -- and then asked, if he eventually was cleared of the crime, "Are you going to be here to apologize to me?"
On Friday, eight years later, Patterson was back in court -- and ordered released after DNA evidence indeed cleared him in the murder. But he got no apology.
The DNA evidence was taken from a knife that the prosecution originally claimed had no connection to the crime, said Rob Warden of the Northwestern University Center on Wrongful Convictions. But years later, it turns out the knife had the victim's blood on it with the blood of another man, a convicted offender.
After that came to light, Judge David Linn ordered a new trial last November. Friday, the Cook County state's attorney's office dropped all charges and Linn ordered Patterson, 44, released.
Patterson walked out of Cook County Jail Friday evening into the arms of his joyful family. "I thought you'd be way taller than this," said his teenage brother, Samuel.
Patterson held up two paperback books he said inspired him: John Grisham's The Innocent Man and Courtroom 302, a non-fiction book on the Cook County court system by Steve Bogira.
Patterson never gave up believing he would be cleared. "I always [believed] through the grace of God. I spoke all this into existence. I proved my innocence."
Indeed, it was Patterson himself who set in motion the process that ultimately freed him. While imprisoned, he filed a Freedom of Information request for the lab report on the knife. Later, after the Center on Wrongful Convictions had taken his case, the request came through.
The Cook County state's attorney's office said it prosecuted the case "in good faith based on eyewitness accounts and forensic evidence that was believed to be the totality of the evidence."
Of the police and prosecutors, he said Friday, "They're evil, but I forgive them through the grace of God."
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Monday, October 11, 2010
Truth is harsher than fiction
A popular television drama, CSI, features attractive, intelligent, scientific crime fighters who solve complex cases from their laboratories. No matter how clever the criminal, these CSI techies are even more clever, and they always get their man.
There is something to forensic science. The Innocence Project has won release of people wrongly convicted of crimes by demonstrating that DNA samples taken at the crime scenes did not match the DNA of the wrongly convicted people. (We see this often in murder and rape cases in which there is a lot of public pressure for police to solve the crimes.)
Yet such methods are not confined to the defense. Prosecutors for years have enlisted DNA and other forensic devices to help gain convictions. For example, prosecutors used analysis of wood slivers to help convict Bruno Hauptmann more than 70 years ago in the kidnapping death of Charles Lindbergh’s son. Prosecutors supposedly solved the Atlanta child-murders case in 1980 using microscopic analysis of carpet fibers.
Police and prosecutors supposedly have the latest scientific tools to solve crimes, and the CSI people show how it works. However, we are dealing with government and – to the surprise of no one – government has managed to corrupt forensic science, creating tragic results.
For example, the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation lab currently is mired in a scandal in which lab workers often withheld evidence unfavorable to the prosecution or botched investigations but never let the defense know what had happened. The results: People who had not committed crimes went to prison, wrongly convicted because of the lab workers corruption and incompetence.
Tainted Testimony
Even worse, Radley Balko of Reason uncovered huge swaths of fraud in Mississippi in which a forensic pathologist and a dentist gave expert prosecution testimony so tainted that most of it never should have been in a court of law. Yet even though the claims of the two witnesses were so bad that even the Mississippi courts ultimately revoked their status as “experts,” Mississippi prosecutors are demanding that they be readmitted to testify. Why? The “experts” would tell jurors what prosecutors wanted to hear, and most jurors simply can’t believe that government-approved witnesses might lie.
This all raises the simple question: Why are prosecutors so ready to embrace fraud? Is not “doing justice” part of their official job description? The answer is found in the nature of government itself.
As we all know, there is a huge gap between government statements and reality. Ever since the Progressive Era a century ago, Americans have come to believe that a government comprised of “experts” provides the best governance, a claim rebroadcast to them repeatedly in schools and the media. Thus the notion that we can trust the experts is ingrained in our body politic.
The reality is different. The Federal Reserve System and the U.S. Treasury are staffed by “economic experts” running the U.S. economy into the ground, yet when someone publicly questions the “let’s-provide-lots- of-liquidity” actions Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has taken in the past three years, that person is portrayed by the media as an idiot.
Unfortunately, the problem is more than simple incompetence. Government players are as self-interested as everyone else, and people in power often make decisions benefiting themselves. In the expert-witness scandals we see that prosecutors want convictions, period; they usually don’t care if the person on trial is guilty or innocent. If fraudulent testimony can win a conviction, then bring it on and let a jury decide.
Those attractive, incorruptible lab technicians on CSI might make good television, but they are a poor substitute for reality. For all the Progressive rhetoric one might hear about the greatness of experts in government, reality bites, and it bites hard. Those who have sat and currently sit in prison cells because of wrongful convictions can tell us something about the real nature of government experts.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A popular television drama, CSI, features attractive, intelligent, scientific crime fighters who solve complex cases from their laboratories. No matter how clever the criminal, these CSI techies are even more clever, and they always get their man.
There is something to forensic science. The Innocence Project has won release of people wrongly convicted of crimes by demonstrating that DNA samples taken at the crime scenes did not match the DNA of the wrongly convicted people. (We see this often in murder and rape cases in which there is a lot of public pressure for police to solve the crimes.)
Yet such methods are not confined to the defense. Prosecutors for years have enlisted DNA and other forensic devices to help gain convictions. For example, prosecutors used analysis of wood slivers to help convict Bruno Hauptmann more than 70 years ago in the kidnapping death of Charles Lindbergh’s son. Prosecutors supposedly solved the Atlanta child-murders case in 1980 using microscopic analysis of carpet fibers.
Police and prosecutors supposedly have the latest scientific tools to solve crimes, and the CSI people show how it works. However, we are dealing with government and – to the surprise of no one – government has managed to corrupt forensic science, creating tragic results.
For example, the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation lab currently is mired in a scandal in which lab workers often withheld evidence unfavorable to the prosecution or botched investigations but never let the defense know what had happened. The results: People who had not committed crimes went to prison, wrongly convicted because of the lab workers corruption and incompetence.
Tainted Testimony
Even worse, Radley Balko of Reason uncovered huge swaths of fraud in Mississippi in which a forensic pathologist and a dentist gave expert prosecution testimony so tainted that most of it never should have been in a court of law. Yet even though the claims of the two witnesses were so bad that even the Mississippi courts ultimately revoked their status as “experts,” Mississippi prosecutors are demanding that they be readmitted to testify. Why? The “experts” would tell jurors what prosecutors wanted to hear, and most jurors simply can’t believe that government-approved witnesses might lie.
This all raises the simple question: Why are prosecutors so ready to embrace fraud? Is not “doing justice” part of their official job description? The answer is found in the nature of government itself.
As we all know, there is a huge gap between government statements and reality. Ever since the Progressive Era a century ago, Americans have come to believe that a government comprised of “experts” provides the best governance, a claim rebroadcast to them repeatedly in schools and the media. Thus the notion that we can trust the experts is ingrained in our body politic.
The reality is different. The Federal Reserve System and the U.S. Treasury are staffed by “economic experts” running the U.S. economy into the ground, yet when someone publicly questions the “let’s-provide-lots- of-liquidity” actions Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has taken in the past three years, that person is portrayed by the media as an idiot.
Unfortunately, the problem is more than simple incompetence. Government players are as self-interested as everyone else, and people in power often make decisions benefiting themselves. In the expert-witness scandals we see that prosecutors want convictions, period; they usually don’t care if the person on trial is guilty or innocent. If fraudulent testimony can win a conviction, then bring it on and let a jury decide.
Those attractive, incorruptible lab technicians on CSI might make good television, but they are a poor substitute for reality. For all the Progressive rhetoric one might hear about the greatness of experts in government, reality bites, and it bites hard. Those who have sat and currently sit in prison cells because of wrongful convictions can tell us something about the real nature of government experts.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Trial lawyer who was dragged from court in handcuffs wins £100k (c. $150,000) from the British political police
A barrister has received £100,000 and an apology from the Metropolitan Police after he was dragged away in handcuffs while defending a client at the High Court.
Colin Challenger later fell into a diabetic coma in a police cell because the arresting officer confiscated his insulin medicine.
The respected barrister, who sued the Met for wrongful arrest, had to be taken from Belgravia Police Station for emergency treatment at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in July last year.
Mr Challenger, 65, was arrested following a fracas at the Royal Courts of Justice after a bankruptcy case against his client, lawyer Jamil Tehrani, was adjourned. Onlookers who claimed they had been mistreated by Mr Tehrani turned on Mr Challenger and accused him of delaying tactics.
Witnesses described how Mr Challenger was confronted by one of the protesters, Ardeshir Oraki, who approached him pointing his finger and hurling abuse.
Mr Challenger is alleged to have pushed Mr Oraki out of a door, locking it behind him. He was subsequently arrested on suspicion of common assault, handcuffed and bundled into a police van.
Last night Mr Challenger said he was relieved the Metropolitan Police had settled the case for ‘completely outrageous behaviour’. He declined to reveal the compensation figure but sources close to the case said it was £100,000.
Mr Challenger, who has 26 years’ courtroom experience in contract, commercial and property law, said: ‘I was arrested even though it was me who was being attacked. [But his attackers appear to have been Muslims so they can do no wrong]
‘Scotland Yard had six months to bring any charges against me and only dropped the case in January – five months and three weeks after the incident.
‘My wrongful arrest has lost me a considerable amount of business, because as soon as potential clients look me up on the internet they see I have been arrested in handcuffs. My treatment by the Metropolitan Police was completely outrageous.’
Scotland Yard has apologised in advertisements in the Law Society Gazette, Barrister Online and The Daily Calls List. A Scotland Yard spokesman said last night: ‘We can confirm that the Metropolitan Police Service has reached a settlement and offered a full apology to Mr Challenger.’
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A barrister has received £100,000 and an apology from the Metropolitan Police after he was dragged away in handcuffs while defending a client at the High Court.
Colin Challenger later fell into a diabetic coma in a police cell because the arresting officer confiscated his insulin medicine.
The respected barrister, who sued the Met for wrongful arrest, had to be taken from Belgravia Police Station for emergency treatment at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in July last year.
Mr Challenger, 65, was arrested following a fracas at the Royal Courts of Justice after a bankruptcy case against his client, lawyer Jamil Tehrani, was adjourned. Onlookers who claimed they had been mistreated by Mr Tehrani turned on Mr Challenger and accused him of delaying tactics.
Witnesses described how Mr Challenger was confronted by one of the protesters, Ardeshir Oraki, who approached him pointing his finger and hurling abuse.
Mr Challenger is alleged to have pushed Mr Oraki out of a door, locking it behind him. He was subsequently arrested on suspicion of common assault, handcuffed and bundled into a police van.
Last night Mr Challenger said he was relieved the Metropolitan Police had settled the case for ‘completely outrageous behaviour’. He declined to reveal the compensation figure but sources close to the case said it was £100,000.
Mr Challenger, who has 26 years’ courtroom experience in contract, commercial and property law, said: ‘I was arrested even though it was me who was being attacked. [But his attackers appear to have been Muslims so they can do no wrong]
‘Scotland Yard had six months to bring any charges against me and only dropped the case in January – five months and three weeks after the incident.
‘My wrongful arrest has lost me a considerable amount of business, because as soon as potential clients look me up on the internet they see I have been arrested in handcuffs. My treatment by the Metropolitan Police was completely outrageous.’
Scotland Yard has apologised in advertisements in the Law Society Gazette, Barrister Online and The Daily Calls List. A Scotland Yard spokesman said last night: ‘We can confirm that the Metropolitan Police Service has reached a settlement and offered a full apology to Mr Challenger.’
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Bungling British cops refuse to compensate murdered woman's son
A little kid's loss of his mother is surely one of the greatest losses of all
The son of Rachel Nickell will not receive a penny in compensation from the police force which failed to prevent his mother’s murder, the Mail can reveal. Scotland Yard chiefs say the force has ‘no legal liability’ to make a payout to Alex Hanscombe, who as a toddler witnessed his mother’s horrific stabbing on Wimbledon Common.
Following legal advice, they have also ruled out the idea of making a ‘goodwill gesture’ payment. This is despite the fact that former prime suspect Colin Stagg has received £706,000 compensation from the Home Office for being wrongly accused of 23-year-old Miss Nickell’s murder.
In addition, the Metropolitan Police paid £150,000 compensation to the undercover policewoman at the centre of the bungled investigation into Miss Nickell’s murder, for the stress caused by the case. The payout to the officer, known as Lizzie James, who was used in a honey-trap operation against Mr Stagg, was approved by senior officers in 2001.
Last year Alex, now 21, and his father Andre Hanscombe, 47, issued a writ against the Met seeking compensation over Miss Nickell’s murder in July 1992. The move came ahead of a police watchdog report which lambasted the force’s handling of the case.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission said errors by Met officers had left Robert Napper free to kill Miss Nickell, who was stabbed 49 times and sexually assaulted as she walked with Alex and their dog.
It added in its report published in June that the lives of another young mother, Samantha Bisset, and her four-year-old daughter Jazmine would also have been saved if police had acted on tip-offs that psychopath Napper was a serial rapist.
But despite the IPCC’s conclusions, senior Met officers have decided that no compensation should be awarded to Alex and his father. Arguing they are ‘answerable to the taxpayer’, they say they will not pay their five-figure legal costs either.
Mr Hanscombe could not be reached for comment last night, but a close friend told the Mail that the Met was ‘morally obliged’ to make a payout to him and Alex. ‘It is mind-blowing that the Met is not even prepared to pay their legal costs, which were necessary to get the IPCC to investigate the case,’ the friend said.
‘It is outrageous that the Met talks about accountability in its letter to Alex and Andre, when no officers have been disciplined, let alone sacked, over the fatal errors that cost Rachel her life.’
The compensation snub was condemned by former Crown Prosecution Service lawyer Jeff McCann, a critic of how the Nickell investigation was handled by the CPS and the Met. Mr McCann, who prosecuted Napper over the Bisset killings, said: ‘The Met is obviously worried about opening the floodgates to other potential claims.
‘However, given the precedent it has set in other cases it would have made sense for it to make a goodwill payment to Alex and Mr Hanscombe. They had a terrible ordeal as a result of the appalling errors by the police and CPS.’
In June, the Met belatedly made a public apology to Alex and Mr Hanscombe for bungling the probe into Miss Nickell’s murder. The investigation is widely regarded as one of the most shameful episodes in Scotland Yard history.
The statement of regret came minutes after the IPCC’s withering report was published. Rachel Cerfontyne, of the IPCC, said that before Napper murdered Miss Nickell in 1992 he could have been arrested over the ‘Green Chain’ rapes on South London parkland.
‘It is clear that throughout the investigations into the Green Chain rapes and Rachel Nickell’s death there was a catalogue of bad decisions and errors made by the Metropolitan Police,’ she said.
‘The police failed to sufficiently investigate after Napper’s mother called police to report that he had confessed to her that he had raped a woman and, inconceivably, they eliminated Napper from inquiries into the Green Chain rapes because he was over 6ft.
‘Without these errors, Robert Napper could have been off the streets before he killed Rachel Nickell and the Bissets, and before numerous women suffered violent sexual attacks at his hands.’
Napper, 44, pleaded guilty to Miss Nickell’s manslaughter in 2008 after a DNA breakthrough. He had been detained at Broadmoor since 1995 for the Bisset killings and the rapes.
For two years, Scotland Yard pursued Colin Stagg for Miss Nickell’s murder but the case was thrown out at the Old Bailey in 1994 after a furious judge slammed police tactics. By then, Napper had also killed Samantha and Jazmine Bisset in Plumstead, South-East London.
Speaking in June this year, Mr Hanscombe, a tennis coach who now lives by the coast on the Mediterranean, said the IPCC shared his ‘sense of shock and disbelief’ at the police blunders. In a statement, he said: ‘Nothing is going to bring Rachel, Samantha or Jazmine back. ‘But having had some time to come to terms with this new reality, I now believe the best way to serve those who paid most heavily is to make sure all the lessons have been learned, to make sure that this could never happen again.’
Following a seven-year legal battle, Alex has previously received around £90,000 criminal injuries compensation for loss of services of the mother and for his own trauma.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A little kid's loss of his mother is surely one of the greatest losses of all
The son of Rachel Nickell will not receive a penny in compensation from the police force which failed to prevent his mother’s murder, the Mail can reveal. Scotland Yard chiefs say the force has ‘no legal liability’ to make a payout to Alex Hanscombe, who as a toddler witnessed his mother’s horrific stabbing on Wimbledon Common.
Following legal advice, they have also ruled out the idea of making a ‘goodwill gesture’ payment. This is despite the fact that former prime suspect Colin Stagg has received £706,000 compensation from the Home Office for being wrongly accused of 23-year-old Miss Nickell’s murder.
In addition, the Metropolitan Police paid £150,000 compensation to the undercover policewoman at the centre of the bungled investigation into Miss Nickell’s murder, for the stress caused by the case. The payout to the officer, known as Lizzie James, who was used in a honey-trap operation against Mr Stagg, was approved by senior officers in 2001.
Last year Alex, now 21, and his father Andre Hanscombe, 47, issued a writ against the Met seeking compensation over Miss Nickell’s murder in July 1992. The move came ahead of a police watchdog report which lambasted the force’s handling of the case.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission said errors by Met officers had left Robert Napper free to kill Miss Nickell, who was stabbed 49 times and sexually assaulted as she walked with Alex and their dog.
It added in its report published in June that the lives of another young mother, Samantha Bisset, and her four-year-old daughter Jazmine would also have been saved if police had acted on tip-offs that psychopath Napper was a serial rapist.
But despite the IPCC’s conclusions, senior Met officers have decided that no compensation should be awarded to Alex and his father. Arguing they are ‘answerable to the taxpayer’, they say they will not pay their five-figure legal costs either.
Mr Hanscombe could not be reached for comment last night, but a close friend told the Mail that the Met was ‘morally obliged’ to make a payout to him and Alex. ‘It is mind-blowing that the Met is not even prepared to pay their legal costs, which were necessary to get the IPCC to investigate the case,’ the friend said.
‘It is outrageous that the Met talks about accountability in its letter to Alex and Andre, when no officers have been disciplined, let alone sacked, over the fatal errors that cost Rachel her life.’
The compensation snub was condemned by former Crown Prosecution Service lawyer Jeff McCann, a critic of how the Nickell investigation was handled by the CPS and the Met. Mr McCann, who prosecuted Napper over the Bisset killings, said: ‘The Met is obviously worried about opening the floodgates to other potential claims.
‘However, given the precedent it has set in other cases it would have made sense for it to make a goodwill payment to Alex and Mr Hanscombe. They had a terrible ordeal as a result of the appalling errors by the police and CPS.’
In June, the Met belatedly made a public apology to Alex and Mr Hanscombe for bungling the probe into Miss Nickell’s murder. The investigation is widely regarded as one of the most shameful episodes in Scotland Yard history.
The statement of regret came minutes after the IPCC’s withering report was published. Rachel Cerfontyne, of the IPCC, said that before Napper murdered Miss Nickell in 1992 he could have been arrested over the ‘Green Chain’ rapes on South London parkland.
‘It is clear that throughout the investigations into the Green Chain rapes and Rachel Nickell’s death there was a catalogue of bad decisions and errors made by the Metropolitan Police,’ she said.
‘The police failed to sufficiently investigate after Napper’s mother called police to report that he had confessed to her that he had raped a woman and, inconceivably, they eliminated Napper from inquiries into the Green Chain rapes because he was over 6ft.
‘Without these errors, Robert Napper could have been off the streets before he killed Rachel Nickell and the Bissets, and before numerous women suffered violent sexual attacks at his hands.’
Napper, 44, pleaded guilty to Miss Nickell’s manslaughter in 2008 after a DNA breakthrough. He had been detained at Broadmoor since 1995 for the Bisset killings and the rapes.
For two years, Scotland Yard pursued Colin Stagg for Miss Nickell’s murder but the case was thrown out at the Old Bailey in 1994 after a furious judge slammed police tactics. By then, Napper had also killed Samantha and Jazmine Bisset in Plumstead, South-East London.
Speaking in June this year, Mr Hanscombe, a tennis coach who now lives by the coast on the Mediterranean, said the IPCC shared his ‘sense of shock and disbelief’ at the police blunders. In a statement, he said: ‘Nothing is going to bring Rachel, Samantha or Jazmine back. ‘But having had some time to come to terms with this new reality, I now believe the best way to serve those who paid most heavily is to make sure all the lessons have been learned, to make sure that this could never happen again.’
Following a seven-year legal battle, Alex has previously received around £90,000 criminal injuries compensation for loss of services of the mother and for his own trauma.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Friday, October 08, 2010
Mother of former East Henderson football star says son's name cleared: Family, Florida police reach settlement
In 44 days, the family of the late Vernon Jones, a former East Henderson High football standout who graduated in 2002, will receive a monetary settlement of $500,000 stemming from a wrongful death lawsuit against the police officer who shot Jones in 2007.
For the family, it provides some closure to a case that's been ongoing for more than three years.
What happened
In the spring of 2007, Jones was shot and killed by West Palm Beach, Fla., police officer Shawn Phillips after a disturbance call. Jones was 23 years old. Phillips claimed he used self-defense, fearing for his life.
According to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, a state attorney's office ruling and an internal police probe cleared Phillips.
Jones' mother, Lenora, was outraged. “Because I knew the type of person my son was, I already knew it was unjustified,” she said Tuesday. “I think the police knew what they did was wrong, but they still won't admit it.”
What happened
According to police records, at 10:40 p.m. on April 14, 2007, Phillips was called to the Briar Bay neighborhood in West Palm Beach to investigate reports of a barefoot Jones going door to door, looking for a place to sleep and begging for food.
Phillips confronted Jones and a fist-fight ensued, according to witnesses cited in a Sun Sentinel story in 2007. Phillips told his fellow officers that Jones hit him in the face with a glass bottle during the fight. He also told investigators the fight went on for about two minutes and spilled out onto the street. He said in fear of his life, he drew his gun and shot Jones, killing him.
Two other eyewitnesses told a different story, the paper reported. They said Phillips subdued Jones and bent him over the hood of the patrol car. They said Phillips then pushed Jones to the ground and shot him four times as he tried to get back up. Medical examiner reports supported these claims.
The lawsuit
After Phillips was cleared, Lenora filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against him, the city of West Palm Beach, Police Chief Delsa Bush, the Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association and two union representatives, alleging wrongful death, assault and battery and fraud and seven other counts.
“It was pretty egregious what happened, and I think the follow-up investigation was a travesty,” attorney Catherine Rodriguez, who represented Lenora, told the Sun Sentinel. “I would call it a cover-up.”
The lawsuit also stated that after Jones died, city police union representatives rushed Phillips from the scene to the hospital, coaching him on the way before he talked to investigators.
Another strong point for the lawsuit was Phillips' past behavior. The officer had been disciplined five times during his tenure for poor “conduct toward the public” since 2002, according to police records.
Partial justice
On Sept. 29, the half-million dollar settlement was reached, said assistant Hendersonville High football coach Chuck Roper.
“They settled out of court,” said Roper, a longtime friend of the family. “That shows you right there they knew they were wrong. Vernon needs to have his name cleared. He didn't deserve to die the way he did.”
Lenora said that just a few weeks ago, she and her lawyer were preparing for the trial. “The police kept saying they were preparing for the trial, too, then they reached the settlement,” she said. “They still deny they did anything wrong.” She said the main reason she agreed to the lawsuit was to clear her son's name.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
In 44 days, the family of the late Vernon Jones, a former East Henderson High football standout who graduated in 2002, will receive a monetary settlement of $500,000 stemming from a wrongful death lawsuit against the police officer who shot Jones in 2007.
For the family, it provides some closure to a case that's been ongoing for more than three years.
What happened
In the spring of 2007, Jones was shot and killed by West Palm Beach, Fla., police officer Shawn Phillips after a disturbance call. Jones was 23 years old. Phillips claimed he used self-defense, fearing for his life.
According to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, a state attorney's office ruling and an internal police probe cleared Phillips.
Jones' mother, Lenora, was outraged. “Because I knew the type of person my son was, I already knew it was unjustified,” she said Tuesday. “I think the police knew what they did was wrong, but they still won't admit it.”
What happened
According to police records, at 10:40 p.m. on April 14, 2007, Phillips was called to the Briar Bay neighborhood in West Palm Beach to investigate reports of a barefoot Jones going door to door, looking for a place to sleep and begging for food.
Phillips confronted Jones and a fist-fight ensued, according to witnesses cited in a Sun Sentinel story in 2007. Phillips told his fellow officers that Jones hit him in the face with a glass bottle during the fight. He also told investigators the fight went on for about two minutes and spilled out onto the street. He said in fear of his life, he drew his gun and shot Jones, killing him.
Two other eyewitnesses told a different story, the paper reported. They said Phillips subdued Jones and bent him over the hood of the patrol car. They said Phillips then pushed Jones to the ground and shot him four times as he tried to get back up. Medical examiner reports supported these claims.
The lawsuit
After Phillips was cleared, Lenora filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against him, the city of West Palm Beach, Police Chief Delsa Bush, the Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association and two union representatives, alleging wrongful death, assault and battery and fraud and seven other counts.
“It was pretty egregious what happened, and I think the follow-up investigation was a travesty,” attorney Catherine Rodriguez, who represented Lenora, told the Sun Sentinel. “I would call it a cover-up.”
The lawsuit also stated that after Jones died, city police union representatives rushed Phillips from the scene to the hospital, coaching him on the way before he talked to investigators.
Another strong point for the lawsuit was Phillips' past behavior. The officer had been disciplined five times during his tenure for poor “conduct toward the public” since 2002, according to police records.
Partial justice
On Sept. 29, the half-million dollar settlement was reached, said assistant Hendersonville High football coach Chuck Roper.
“They settled out of court,” said Roper, a longtime friend of the family. “That shows you right there they knew they were wrong. Vernon needs to have his name cleared. He didn't deserve to die the way he did.”
Lenora said that just a few weeks ago, she and her lawyer were preparing for the trial. “The police kept saying they were preparing for the trial, too, then they reached the settlement,” she said. “They still deny they did anything wrong.” She said the main reason she agreed to the lawsuit was to clear her son's name.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Thursday, October 07, 2010
Australian transit cop charged with assaulting unaggressive passenger
A TRANSIT officer has been charged with assault after a football fan was pepper-sprayed and left with a bloodied face at Subiaco train station in March.
Police say Liam Barry McCalmont, 22 of Maylands, assaulted James Hagerstrom, 46 of Bassendean, after the March 28 AFL game between Fremantle and Adelaide at Subiaco Oval. It will be alleged the assault occurred while transit guards tried to apprehend Mr Hagerstrom and charge him with obstruction.
The victim received facial injuries after his head was slammed into a platform during the altercation.
A Perth magistrate withdrew the obstruction charge against Mr Hagerstrom in July after viewing CCTV footage of the incident.
The Public Transport Authority conducted an internal inquiry into the incident in July and handed its findings to the Corruption and Crime Commission. Mr McCalmont has been charged with assault occasioning bodily harm and will face the Perth Magistrates Court on October 19. The PTA has placed him on "alternative and non-operational duties in the immediate term".
Original report here. Earlier report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A TRANSIT officer has been charged with assault after a football fan was pepper-sprayed and left with a bloodied face at Subiaco train station in March.
Police say Liam Barry McCalmont, 22 of Maylands, assaulted James Hagerstrom, 46 of Bassendean, after the March 28 AFL game between Fremantle and Adelaide at Subiaco Oval. It will be alleged the assault occurred while transit guards tried to apprehend Mr Hagerstrom and charge him with obstruction.
The victim received facial injuries after his head was slammed into a platform during the altercation.
A Perth magistrate withdrew the obstruction charge against Mr Hagerstrom in July after viewing CCTV footage of the incident.
The Public Transport Authority conducted an internal inquiry into the incident in July and handed its findings to the Corruption and Crime Commission. Mr McCalmont has been charged with assault occasioning bodily harm and will face the Perth Magistrates Court on October 19. The PTA has placed him on "alternative and non-operational duties in the immediate term".
Original report here. Earlier report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Wednesday, October 06, 2010
Unarmed black Tasered 13 times by Australian cop as 9 police stand and watch
Nine police who surrounded an unarmed man at the East Perth watch house used a Taser on him 13 times even though he wasn't threatening them, the WA corruption watchdog has found.
The Corruption and Crime Commission investigation was part of a wider examination of WA Police's use of Tasers since their introduction in 2007, the majority of which were found to be reasonable.
The watchdog looked into the watch house incident after the Deputy Police Commissioner Chris Dawson brought it to their attention. It found the 39-year-old man could have been suffering from a mental illness or substance abuse when he was Tasered in August 2008.
Police said they tried to arrest the man on a Bayswater street after complaints of a trespasser sniffing petrol from cars, but he fled. They later arrested him after he ran into a stationary car on Guildford Road. He allegedly collapsed and became violent, kicking two officers when he woke.
He was taken to the watch house, where police attempted to strip search him. Police said he had previously been convicted of a number of offences including assaulting police officers, resisting arrest and common assault.
"The man had been compliant, removing his belt and earring when requested by police officers. However, the man refused to comply with a strip search and held onto the armrest of the bench. One police officer kicked out at the man in an attempt to 'startle' him into letting go of the bench," the report said.
"Another officer drew his Taser weapon and said 'let go or be Tasered'. The man did not let go and a Taser weapon was deployed on him. The man fell to the ground and was restrained by other police officers." While he was struggling on the ground a police officer said "do you want to go again?" before discharging the Taser again.
CCC director of corruption prevention Roger Watson said the incident was subject to an internal police investigation and the two officers who fired the stun-gun faced disciplinary charges and were fined $1200 and $750 respectively for using undue and excessive force. Two senior officers were found to have provided inadequate supervision.
Mr Dawson said the inmate, who was later jailed on assault charges, did not elect to press charges against the two officers after consultations with the Aboriginal Legal Service and advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions. He conceded the officers were fortunate not to be sacked, though one had been promoted to a sergeant's position since the incident.
"This is an example which is not a good example to use in isolation, it is an example from which we have learnt, but it should not represent the way in which police deal with people all the time," Mr Dawson said.
"We're dealing with violent persons regularly, in this particular instance, this person had an extensive criminal record, and clearly in my view the officers overreacted. They didn't do it in accordance with the policy and the training. For that we very much regret what happened."
Mr Dawson said since the incident, stun guns had been raised against some of the 25,000 inmates brought through the watch house, but not fired by prison officers. He said Corrective Services officers had used Tasers in the watch house but they had their own policies on Tasers.
WA Premier Colin Barnett said he was disturbed by what he saw in the footage. "It was excessive use of a Taser that could not be justified," Mr Barnett said. "I think anyone seeing that footage would find it totally unacceptable." Mr Barnett admitted the incident was a major breach of procedure by the officers involved, and their actions could not be "swept under the carpet".
WA Attorney-General Christian Porter said the incident was completely indefensible and a breach of police guidelines that stipulate Tasers should not be used to get people to comply with orders. He said the officers' behaviour could "properly described as outrageous" and that the fines against them were insufficient.
Mr Porter said police guidelines setting out when Tasers could be used needed to be reviewed. "The government accepts that those guidelines need to be reviewed, we accept the CCC's recommendation in that respect and they will be reviewed," Mr Porter said.
"As a second point of priority this government will be looking into the police force regulations and ways in which we can ensure that the use of Tasers is put to a higher standard in terms of disciplinary proceedings, than just any old run-of-the-mill excessive use of force."
A second case highlighted in the CCC report concerned a man who was Tasered while running from police officers, causing him to fall and break a tooth. He was Tasered twice again while on the ground and seemingly not posing a risk to the male and female officer trying to apprehend him.
Tasers are meant to be used in violent situations, to stop officers having to resort to guns or use lethal force. The weapons deliver a 50,000-volt electric shock to the target, disrupting their muscles. They can also be used in stun-mode, where the shock causes pain but not incapacitation.
But the CCC also found the high-voltage weapon had become the favoured option for police over capsicum spray, batons and handcuffs, with officers reaching for their Tasers in 65 per cent of cases where force was used.
The CCC said Tasers were increasingly used to impose compliance by alleged offenders rather than as an alternative to firearms to reduce injury, as originally intended.
Tasers were used in 49 per cent of incidents where force was necessary in 2007. That figure increased to 74 per cent in 2008 and settled at 65 per cent in 2009. The use of guns had doubled in the same time-frame, rising from 6 per cent to 12 per cent.
The investigation found the weapons were being used disproportionately against Aboriginal people. The CCC was also concerned about the frequency of Taser use against people with mental illness and drug users.
An analysis of the weapons revealed police usually used them between 9pm and 3am from Friday through to Sunday. "There were common situations in which a Taser weapon was deployed, including domestic violence incidents, disturbances, fights and brawls, traffic stops, vehicle pursuits, and reports of weapons and/or assaults," the report said.
Injuries to police had not decreased since the introduction of the weapons, while a study of incidents over a three-month period in 2009 showed those involved in altercations were a Taser was used were 54 per cent less likely to be injured.
The CCC gave 10 recommendations surrounding Taser use, asking for the policy to be changed so that officers could only use them in situations where a safe resolution could not be reached in any other way.
It recommended the weapons should not be used when there was a risk of the person falling and sustaining a serious injury, if they were near water or at risk of drowning, against pregnant women, on those with pre-existing medical conditions, or near flammable liquid or gas.
Mr Watson said the recommendations would bring Taser use in WA into line with other parts of Australia and the world.
Original report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Nine police who surrounded an unarmed man at the East Perth watch house used a Taser on him 13 times even though he wasn't threatening them, the WA corruption watchdog has found.
The Corruption and Crime Commission investigation was part of a wider examination of WA Police's use of Tasers since their introduction in 2007, the majority of which were found to be reasonable.
The watchdog looked into the watch house incident after the Deputy Police Commissioner Chris Dawson brought it to their attention. It found the 39-year-old man could have been suffering from a mental illness or substance abuse when he was Tasered in August 2008.
Police said they tried to arrest the man on a Bayswater street after complaints of a trespasser sniffing petrol from cars, but he fled. They later arrested him after he ran into a stationary car on Guildford Road. He allegedly collapsed and became violent, kicking two officers when he woke.
He was taken to the watch house, where police attempted to strip search him. Police said he had previously been convicted of a number of offences including assaulting police officers, resisting arrest and common assault.
"The man had been compliant, removing his belt and earring when requested by police officers. However, the man refused to comply with a strip search and held onto the armrest of the bench. One police officer kicked out at the man in an attempt to 'startle' him into letting go of the bench," the report said.
"Another officer drew his Taser weapon and said 'let go or be Tasered'. The man did not let go and a Taser weapon was deployed on him. The man fell to the ground and was restrained by other police officers." While he was struggling on the ground a police officer said "do you want to go again?" before discharging the Taser again.
CCC director of corruption prevention Roger Watson said the incident was subject to an internal police investigation and the two officers who fired the stun-gun faced disciplinary charges and were fined $1200 and $750 respectively for using undue and excessive force. Two senior officers were found to have provided inadequate supervision.
Mr Dawson said the inmate, who was later jailed on assault charges, did not elect to press charges against the two officers after consultations with the Aboriginal Legal Service and advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions. He conceded the officers were fortunate not to be sacked, though one had been promoted to a sergeant's position since the incident.
"This is an example which is not a good example to use in isolation, it is an example from which we have learnt, but it should not represent the way in which police deal with people all the time," Mr Dawson said.
"We're dealing with violent persons regularly, in this particular instance, this person had an extensive criminal record, and clearly in my view the officers overreacted. They didn't do it in accordance with the policy and the training. For that we very much regret what happened."
Mr Dawson said since the incident, stun guns had been raised against some of the 25,000 inmates brought through the watch house, but not fired by prison officers. He said Corrective Services officers had used Tasers in the watch house but they had their own policies on Tasers.
WA Premier Colin Barnett said he was disturbed by what he saw in the footage. "It was excessive use of a Taser that could not be justified," Mr Barnett said. "I think anyone seeing that footage would find it totally unacceptable." Mr Barnett admitted the incident was a major breach of procedure by the officers involved, and their actions could not be "swept under the carpet".
WA Attorney-General Christian Porter said the incident was completely indefensible and a breach of police guidelines that stipulate Tasers should not be used to get people to comply with orders. He said the officers' behaviour could "properly described as outrageous" and that the fines against them were insufficient.
Mr Porter said police guidelines setting out when Tasers could be used needed to be reviewed. "The government accepts that those guidelines need to be reviewed, we accept the CCC's recommendation in that respect and they will be reviewed," Mr Porter said.
"As a second point of priority this government will be looking into the police force regulations and ways in which we can ensure that the use of Tasers is put to a higher standard in terms of disciplinary proceedings, than just any old run-of-the-mill excessive use of force."
A second case highlighted in the CCC report concerned a man who was Tasered while running from police officers, causing him to fall and break a tooth. He was Tasered twice again while on the ground and seemingly not posing a risk to the male and female officer trying to apprehend him.
Tasers are meant to be used in violent situations, to stop officers having to resort to guns or use lethal force. The weapons deliver a 50,000-volt electric shock to the target, disrupting their muscles. They can also be used in stun-mode, where the shock causes pain but not incapacitation.
But the CCC also found the high-voltage weapon had become the favoured option for police over capsicum spray, batons and handcuffs, with officers reaching for their Tasers in 65 per cent of cases where force was used.
The CCC said Tasers were increasingly used to impose compliance by alleged offenders rather than as an alternative to firearms to reduce injury, as originally intended.
Tasers were used in 49 per cent of incidents where force was necessary in 2007. That figure increased to 74 per cent in 2008 and settled at 65 per cent in 2009. The use of guns had doubled in the same time-frame, rising from 6 per cent to 12 per cent.
The investigation found the weapons were being used disproportionately against Aboriginal people. The CCC was also concerned about the frequency of Taser use against people with mental illness and drug users.
An analysis of the weapons revealed police usually used them between 9pm and 3am from Friday through to Sunday. "There were common situations in which a Taser weapon was deployed, including domestic violence incidents, disturbances, fights and brawls, traffic stops, vehicle pursuits, and reports of weapons and/or assaults," the report said.
Injuries to police had not decreased since the introduction of the weapons, while a study of incidents over a three-month period in 2009 showed those involved in altercations were a Taser was used were 54 per cent less likely to be injured.
The CCC gave 10 recommendations surrounding Taser use, asking for the policy to be changed so that officers could only use them in situations where a safe resolution could not be reached in any other way.
It recommended the weapons should not be used when there was a risk of the person falling and sustaining a serious injury, if they were near water or at risk of drowning, against pregnant women, on those with pre-existing medical conditions, or near flammable liquid or gas.
Mr Watson said the recommendations would bring Taser use in WA into line with other parts of Australia and the world.
Original report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
CA: Crap-headed sheriff's deputy mistakenly fires eight shots at robbery victim, misses
A sheriff's deputy fired eight shots at a man he believed to have just robbed a West Hollywood liquor store early Sunday, but his target turned out to be the just-robbed clerk, and the actual suspects got away.
The deputy-involved shooting occurred around 2 a.m. near Havenhurst Drive and Santa Monica Boulevard, said Deputy Lillian Peck of the Sheriff's Headquarters Bureau.
“Deputies responded to a robbery call of a liquor store in the 8200 block of Santa Monica Boulevard," Peck said. “The call indicated the suspects were armed with a handgun."
Peck said one of the deputies “saw a man matching one of the suspects' description run from the area of the liquor store, holding what he believed to be a gun, and a deputy-involved shooting occurred." The man was not hit. “The man was detained by deputies and was determined not to be a suspect," Peck said.
Lt. Alicia Ault told the WeHo News website a single deputy fired eight rounds at the man, who turned out to be the store clerk. “The deputy fired eight rounds and missed him," Ault told WeHo News.
“Ultimately, deputies determined that the man the deputy fired upon was the store's clerk who was pointing to them trying to get their attention."
The two suspects were described only as a black man armed with a handgun and a black woman. Both suspects were last seen running southbound on Havenhurst Drive.
Windows at a store across the street from the robbery site were blown out by the gunfire.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A sheriff's deputy fired eight shots at a man he believed to have just robbed a West Hollywood liquor store early Sunday, but his target turned out to be the just-robbed clerk, and the actual suspects got away.
The deputy-involved shooting occurred around 2 a.m. near Havenhurst Drive and Santa Monica Boulevard, said Deputy Lillian Peck of the Sheriff's Headquarters Bureau.
“Deputies responded to a robbery call of a liquor store in the 8200 block of Santa Monica Boulevard," Peck said. “The call indicated the suspects were armed with a handgun."
Peck said one of the deputies “saw a man matching one of the suspects' description run from the area of the liquor store, holding what he believed to be a gun, and a deputy-involved shooting occurred." The man was not hit. “The man was detained by deputies and was determined not to be a suspect," Peck said.
Lt. Alicia Ault told the WeHo News website a single deputy fired eight rounds at the man, who turned out to be the store clerk. “The deputy fired eight rounds and missed him," Ault told WeHo News.
“Ultimately, deputies determined that the man the deputy fired upon was the store's clerk who was pointing to them trying to get their attention."
The two suspects were described only as a black man armed with a handgun and a black woman. Both suspects were last seen running southbound on Havenhurst Drive.
Windows at a store across the street from the robbery site were blown out by the gunfire.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Monday, October 04, 2010
Innocent Texan released after almost 20 years in prison
A man who spent almost 20 years in a Texas prison for a wrongful conviction of having kidnapped and raped a 5-year-old girl has been released, local media reported Wednesday. Stephen Matthew Brodie, 39, who is deaf, left a Dallas jail Tuesday a free man, after a new investigation showed he was innocent.
Brodie had to wait an extra day for the release, until the relevant paperwork was completed. 'I was not worrying about it,' the Dallas Morning News quoted him as saying through a sign language interpreter.
In 1993, Brodie pleaded guilty to having abducted and raped the girl three years earlier. However, his plea came after 18 hours of interrogation over eight days, mostly without a sign language interpreter, the newspaper reported.
Earlier, investigators had become aware of Brodie because he had broken into a vending machine near the girl's home.
Brodie's father had never doubted his son's innocence and wrote scores of letters to civil rights groups and authorities to demand his release. Eventually, the conviction integrity unit at the Dallas County District took on the case and found many things wrong with it.
According to the newspaper, Brodie is the third man in Dallas County cleared without DNA evidence, and the second to have previously pleaded guilty to the crime. The county has reportedly recorded 20 DNA exonerations since 2001, more than any other county in the United States.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A man who spent almost 20 years in a Texas prison for a wrongful conviction of having kidnapped and raped a 5-year-old girl has been released, local media reported Wednesday. Stephen Matthew Brodie, 39, who is deaf, left a Dallas jail Tuesday a free man, after a new investigation showed he was innocent.
Brodie had to wait an extra day for the release, until the relevant paperwork was completed. 'I was not worrying about it,' the Dallas Morning News quoted him as saying through a sign language interpreter.
In 1993, Brodie pleaded guilty to having abducted and raped the girl three years earlier. However, his plea came after 18 hours of interrogation over eight days, mostly without a sign language interpreter, the newspaper reported.
Earlier, investigators had become aware of Brodie because he had broken into a vending machine near the girl's home.
Brodie's father had never doubted his son's innocence and wrote scores of letters to civil rights groups and authorities to demand his release. Eventually, the conviction integrity unit at the Dallas County District took on the case and found many things wrong with it.
According to the newspaper, Brodie is the third man in Dallas County cleared without DNA evidence, and the second to have previously pleaded guilty to the crime. The county has reportedly recorded 20 DNA exonerations since 2001, more than any other county in the United States.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Sunday, October 03, 2010
Australia: Crooked policing costs a life -- but the crooks escape any penalty
Police misconduct that led to the wrong man being jailed for nearly 12 years on a murder charge may have allowed the real murderer to kill again.
West Australian Andrew Mallard was convicted in 1995 of killing Pamela Lawrence, who was bludgeoned to death at her central Perth jewellery shop.
In 2006, Mr Mallard was released from jail after the Australian High Court quashed his conviction after it deemed the only evidence linking him to the crime were his "bizarre and fanciful statements" to police.
The court noted that only one of the police interviews was recorded and another was conducted while Mr Mallard was a patient at a mental hospital.
A cold case review of Ms Lawrence's murder found a previously unidentified bloodied palm print at the crime scene belonged to Simon Rochford. Rochford killed his girlfriend nearly six weeks after Ms Lawrence's murder.
He committed suicide in jail in 2006 within days of being questioned over Ms Lawrence's death, after the new evidence emerged. He is now the chief suspect.
WA's Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) recommended disciplinary action against WA Police Assistant Commissioners Mal Shervill and Dave Caporn, who investigated the case as detectives in 1995.
The CCC also recommended disciplinary action against senior Director of Public Prosecutions lawyer Ken Bates. But all three officers resigned and so avoided the public service disciplinary process.
Mr Mallard has told ABC's Australian Story program that the officers need to be made accountable for their actions and he believed there was a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. "Had the police done their job properly from the beginning, I would have been eliminated as a suspect. "They would probably or likely have arrested Rochford before he killed his girlfriend. So they're responsible for another death," Mr Mallard said.
WA's shadow attorney-general John Quigley, who as a lawyer helped expose Mr Mallard's wrongful conviction along with journalist and author Colleen Egan, agrees a second murder could have been prevented. "Another woman's life in all likelihood would have been saved."
Mr Quigley said the prosecutor, Mr Bates, had repeatedly said that Mr Mallard murdered Ms Lawrence by beating her about the head with a wrench. But at the same time he had a report which said a test done on a pig's head had convinced the pathologist that a wrench could not have inflicted Ms Lawrence's injuries, Mr Quigley said. He said this was crucial evidence Mr Bates wrongly kept from the court.
WA Police Commissioner Karl O'Callaghan said it was frustrating there had been no outcome for Mr Mallard. "There was no positive outcome for the WA Police either because we were never able to bring it to a resolution in a way that would have boosted the community's confidence in what we do."
Mr Mallard was awarded $3.25 million in compensation by the WA government and is moving to London to start a Masters degree in Fine Art.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Saturday, October 02, 2010
TX: Three Dallas cops indicted over beating
Three former Dallas police officers were indicted Thursday on charges related to a videotaped chase and beating of a motorcyclist, Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins said.
Patrol car dashboard camera video, released by Chief David Brown earlier, showed officers hitting the suspect. "We want to reiterate to the public that we have a world class police department here in Dallas," Watkins said. "These three officers are the exception and not the rule."
Watkins said that Paul Bauer, Kevin Randolph and Henry Duetsch, who have since been fired, were indicted by a Dallas County grand jury. In a statement Thursday, Brown said the indictments are "another step in the process of bringing this incident to a conclusion."
Randolph and Bauer are accused of striking 28-year-old Andrew Collins after a chase, while Duetsch is accused of turning the in-car video away from Collins and the officers.
Bauer was indicted on charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by a public servant, assault and official oppression. He faces up to 99 years in prison.
Randolph was indicted on charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by a public servant, official oppression and tampering with a governmental record. He also faces up to 99 years in prison.
Duetsch was indicted on a charge of tampering with physical evidence and faces up to 10 years in prison.
Watkins also said Thursday that police have dropped all charges against Collins, who suffered bruising and blood clots following the Sept. 5 beating. Watkins said Collins had initially been charged with evading arrest, resisting arrest and possession of marijuana.
The incident began when Randolph and Bauer saw Collins, who has an extensive criminal record, riding a motorcycle on a sidewalk. Police tried to pull him over, but the video shows Collins repeatedly allowed police to close in before he sped away. On the video, an officer can be heard saying he planned to "beat the (expletive)" out of Collins when they pulled him over.
After Bauer was told by the sergeant-on-duty not to get into a high-speed chase, Bauer continued to follow Collins and even went the wrong way down a street at a high rate of speed, the district attorney's office said.
The district attorney's office said that after Bauer and Randolph spotted Collins sitting on his motorcycle, Bauer struck the motorcycle with his patrol car and Collins went onto the ground on all-fours.
The DA's office said that while Collins was on the ground, Randolph struck him with a baton and Bauer struck Collins with his hands and knee. It said Randolph also struck Collins while Bauer put hand restraints on him. The district attorney's office said that Duetsch, while whistling, turned the in-car video away from Collins and the other officers.
Police have said that 22 officers responded to the scene, but the incident became known only after an officer left an anonymous note for a supervisor suggesting someone look at the recordings.
Collins' criminal record includes convictions on drug, weapons and drunken driving charges, according to Texas Department of Public Safety records. Five of his previous eight arrests were by Dallas police.
FBI spokesman Mark White said that Dallas police notified them when the incident occurred, but the FBI would not comment on whether they are investigating.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Three former Dallas police officers were indicted Thursday on charges related to a videotaped chase and beating of a motorcyclist, Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins said.
Patrol car dashboard camera video, released by Chief David Brown earlier, showed officers hitting the suspect. "We want to reiterate to the public that we have a world class police department here in Dallas," Watkins said. "These three officers are the exception and not the rule."
Watkins said that Paul Bauer, Kevin Randolph and Henry Duetsch, who have since been fired, were indicted by a Dallas County grand jury. In a statement Thursday, Brown said the indictments are "another step in the process of bringing this incident to a conclusion."
Randolph and Bauer are accused of striking 28-year-old Andrew Collins after a chase, while Duetsch is accused of turning the in-car video away from Collins and the officers.
Bauer was indicted on charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by a public servant, assault and official oppression. He faces up to 99 years in prison.
Randolph was indicted on charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by a public servant, official oppression and tampering with a governmental record. He also faces up to 99 years in prison.
Duetsch was indicted on a charge of tampering with physical evidence and faces up to 10 years in prison.
Watkins also said Thursday that police have dropped all charges against Collins, who suffered bruising and blood clots following the Sept. 5 beating. Watkins said Collins had initially been charged with evading arrest, resisting arrest and possession of marijuana.
The incident began when Randolph and Bauer saw Collins, who has an extensive criminal record, riding a motorcycle on a sidewalk. Police tried to pull him over, but the video shows Collins repeatedly allowed police to close in before he sped away. On the video, an officer can be heard saying he planned to "beat the (expletive)" out of Collins when they pulled him over.
After Bauer was told by the sergeant-on-duty not to get into a high-speed chase, Bauer continued to follow Collins and even went the wrong way down a street at a high rate of speed, the district attorney's office said.
The district attorney's office said that after Bauer and Randolph spotted Collins sitting on his motorcycle, Bauer struck the motorcycle with his patrol car and Collins went onto the ground on all-fours.
The DA's office said that while Collins was on the ground, Randolph struck him with a baton and Bauer struck Collins with his hands and knee. It said Randolph also struck Collins while Bauer put hand restraints on him. The district attorney's office said that Duetsch, while whistling, turned the in-car video away from Collins and the other officers.
Police have said that 22 officers responded to the scene, but the incident became known only after an officer left an anonymous note for a supervisor suggesting someone look at the recordings.
Collins' criminal record includes convictions on drug, weapons and drunken driving charges, according to Texas Department of Public Safety records. Five of his previous eight arrests were by Dallas police.
FBI spokesman Mark White said that Dallas police notified them when the incident occurred, but the FBI would not comment on whether they are investigating.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Friday, October 01, 2010
A police state by default: An illustrative episode
I’ll say right out that Paul Karl Lukacs has bigger stones than me. When I’m going through Customs — or airport security in general — I may venture into testiness on my own behalf or run interference if my young son is getting the third degree (yes, it’s happened), but I’m generally focused on getting past the Gestapo, not on asserting my rights.
So I applaud Lukacs for answering “none of your business” to a nosy Customs official when questioned about his overseas trip. His experience went like this:
Ultimately, Lukacs was allowed to go on his way because Americans really don’t have to do anything but show a customs declaration and proof of citizenship in order to re-enter the country. Of course he had to cool his heels first because … well, just because. He hadn’t respected their authoritah, after all.
It makes you think …
There are a lot of protections against official nosiness and pushiness on the books or in our legal traditions that go relatively unused. They go unused, of course, because officialdom makes it increasingly unpleasant to assert those rights. If the cost of telling a police officer to mind his manners is a strip search and a night in the lock-up, followed only months later by a lukewarm apology and an off-hand acknowledgment that you were in the right, many people simply stop telling cops where to get off.
Even the occasional cash settlement isn’t going to be worth it for the average person. As time goes on, we forget what our rights are, and officials are trained in procedures rather than the legal scope of their authority. Eventually, the rights in question may still exist on the books, but largely as quaint museum-quality exhibits.
And then you run across the occasional Paul Karl Lukacs, willing to take a figurative bullet in the hopes that one of the gray-haired supervisors remembers a few vestigial legalisms.
So the question is … Is it a tactic on the part of officialdom to expand their power? Or is it more of a case of institutional mission-creep, fueled by our own timidity and laziness?
Either way, our rights become meaningless if we abandon them because it becomes a hassle to assert them.
And note that not a single statute is altered along the way to changing the balance of power between the folks wielding the power of the state and the rest of us.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
I’ll say right out that Paul Karl Lukacs has bigger stones than me. When I’m going through Customs — or airport security in general — I may venture into testiness on my own behalf or run interference if my young son is getting the third degree (yes, it’s happened), but I’m generally focused on getting past the Gestapo, not on asserting my rights.
So I applaud Lukacs for answering “none of your business” to a nosy Customs official when questioned about his overseas trip. His experience went like this:
“Why were you in China?” asked the passport control officer, a woman with the appearance and disposition of a prison matron.
“None of your business,” I said.
Her eyes widened in disbelief.
“Excuse me?” she asked.
“I’m not going to be interrogated as a pre-condition of re-entering my own country,” I said.
This did not go over well. She asked a series of questions, such as how long I had been in China, whether I was there on personal business or commercial business, etc. I stood silently. She said that her questions were mandated by Congress and that I should complain to Congress instead of refusing to cooperate with her.
She asked me to take one of my small bags off her counter. I complied.
She picked up the phone and told someone I “was refusing to cooperate at all.” This was incorrect. I had presented her with proof of citizenship (a U.S. passport) and had moved the bag when she asked. What I was refusing to do was answer her questions.
Ultimately, Lukacs was allowed to go on his way because Americans really don’t have to do anything but show a customs declaration and proof of citizenship in order to re-enter the country. Of course he had to cool his heels first because … well, just because. He hadn’t respected their authoritah, after all.
It makes you think …
There are a lot of protections against official nosiness and pushiness on the books or in our legal traditions that go relatively unused. They go unused, of course, because officialdom makes it increasingly unpleasant to assert those rights. If the cost of telling a police officer to mind his manners is a strip search and a night in the lock-up, followed only months later by a lukewarm apology and an off-hand acknowledgment that you were in the right, many people simply stop telling cops where to get off.
Even the occasional cash settlement isn’t going to be worth it for the average person. As time goes on, we forget what our rights are, and officials are trained in procedures rather than the legal scope of their authority. Eventually, the rights in question may still exist on the books, but largely as quaint museum-quality exhibits.
And then you run across the occasional Paul Karl Lukacs, willing to take a figurative bullet in the hopes that one of the gray-haired supervisors remembers a few vestigial legalisms.
So the question is … Is it a tactic on the part of officialdom to expand their power? Or is it more of a case of institutional mission-creep, fueled by our own timidity and laziness?
Either way, our rights become meaningless if we abandon them because it becomes a hassle to assert them.
And note that not a single statute is altered along the way to changing the balance of power between the folks wielding the power of the state and the rest of us.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
