Asshole cops and the killings of innocent dogs

Radley Balko has a disturbing and infuriating piece (words that usually describe most of what he writes, anyway) at The Daily Beast, where he once again focuses on the militarization of police as they keep fucking up raids – and keep shooting down innocent and perfectly harmless dogs in the process. It's a horrible and disgusting trend that only Balko seems to dare to cover, so very much kudos to him for taking the lead in the matter.

The piece is long and tormenting, and makes a number of infuriating or otherwise shocking revelations. For example, did you know that dog-killings are increasing every year? That there are 250 to 300 cases reported in the media every single year, with estimates on unreported incidents rising into the thousands? That many of the dogs being killed are breeds as inoffensive as Dalmatians, Labradors, Boxers and Spaniels? And that many other dog killings are about miniature Dachshunds, or 5-pound Chihuahuas? And, perhaps most importantly of all: that New York is the only state to mandate standard courses in dealing with dogs for cops – despite the ASPCA and other organizations' repeated generous offers to train cops themselves?

As Balko says in his last words: there's no doubt that sometimes, a cop truly does have to shoot an animal to save himself or bystanders. The problem is that far too often, lethal force is the first option taken, not the last.

(via The Agitator)

Continued ...»

Some nice examples of just how professional cops can be

Balko from The Agitator has published a new column piece over at Reason Online. It details some examples of how SWAT teams are going haywire with incompetence, cruelty and recklessness in Maryland, and it's a very thrilling and disturbing read – and, for animal-lovers such as I, also quite infuriating and saddening. I've quoted some bits below I thought should be spread around, to increase awareness and hopefully stop these fucking incompetent twits from causing more harm than needed.

Prince George's police originally obtained a warrant to search Calvo's home after intercepting a package of marijuana sent to the mayor's address. Calvo and his family were innocent—the package was intended to be picked up by a drug dealer. But instead of first investigating who lived at the residence, or even notifying the Berwyn Heights police chief, the county police department immediately sent in the SWAT team. In addition to having his two dogs killed, Calvo and his mother-in-law were handcuffed for several hours, and questioned at gunpoint.

That's pretty horrible enough as it is. They guy and his mother-in-law are forcefully interrogated, not to mention the man's two beloved dogs are murdered, probably for absolutely no reason other than they were there (being nonviolent black Labrador Retrievers – not to mention this pisses me off because those are such damn beautiful animals), all because cops were too stupid to look a little deeper into the matter and find out they guy has nothing to do with drugs in the first place. So, of course the cops extended a good, honest apology:

Calvo also learned just how obstinate and unapologetic police and government officials can be, even (or especially) when they're clearly in the wrong. Prince George's County Police Chief Melvin High actually praised his officers' conduct, insisting that if they had to do it again they'd conduct the Calvo raid the same way. "Our investigators went in and showed both restraint and compassion," he told a local TV station.

Prince George's County Executive Jack Johnson told a local newspaper that Calvo would get no apology for the slaying of his dogs. Johnson's puzzling explanation: "Well, I think in America that is the apology, when we’re cleared.... At the end of the day, the investigation showed he was not involved. And that's, you know, a pat on the back for everybody involved, I think."

... Or a slap to the face. "Restraint and compassion"? Gee, I wonder what it would've been like if they'd been reckless and cruel. Would they've burned the house down as well? And seriously, what sort of a half-assed explanation was that? Better off saying "Wedidndoit", they might retain more credibility with that.

As it commonly is with these sorts of stories, the incident brought forth a number of similar horror stories:

Within a few weeks of the raid, other victims of botched search warrants in Maryland began contacting Calvo. One couple was raided after their teenage son was found with a small amount of marijuana during a traffic stop. Another elderly couple had their dog shot and killed by Prince George's officers in a mistaken raid. And in Howard County, police broke down a door in front of a 12-year-old girl, battered a man with a police shield, then shot and killed the man's Australian cattle dog. They were looking for someone suspected of stealing a rifle from a police car. The suspect didn't live at the residence.

There were more:

• Eleven days before the raid on Calvo's home, Prince George's police raided the home of a Secret Service agent after receiving a tip that he was distributing steroids. They found no drugs or incriminating evidence.

• In August 2007 police raided the home of a Prince George's County couple to serve an outstanding arrest warrant for their son. The parents were handcuffed at gunpoint. Police later learned that the couple's son had already been in police custody for 12 days.

• In November 2007 Prince George's police raided the wrong home of a couple in Accokeek. Though the couple presented the police with evidence that they were at the wrong address, the police still detained them at gunpoint, refusing even to let them go to the bathroom. The couple asked the police if they could bring their pet boxer in from the backyard. The police refused. Moments later, the police shot and killed the dog.

• In June 2007 police in Annapolis deployed a flash grenade, broke open an apartment door, and kicked a man in the groin during a mistaken drug raid. When they later served the warrant on the correct address, they found no drugs.

Most victims of these mistaken raids experienced the same callousness and indifference from public officials that Calvo did. When police in Montgomery County conducted a mistaken 4 a.m. raid on a Kenyan immigrant and her teenage daughters in 2005, the county offered free movie passes as compensation. When police in Baltimore mistakenly raided the home of 33-year-old Andrew Leonard last May, the city refused to pay for Leonard's door, which was destroyed during the break-in. When Leonard called the city's bulk trash pick-up to come get the door, no one came. Days later, city code inspectors fined Leonard $50 for storing the broken door in his backyard.

How fucking horrible. Did these lunatics really expect to win the women's forgiveness with movie passes? How stupid are these officers, anyway? And fining a guy because the city's own waste management services are too fucking lazy to come pick it up – what in the world ...?

Just last month, Baltimore's ABC affiliate reported on another mistaken raid, and noted that city officials generally make no effort to compensate homeowners when police trash their houses in search of contraband that doesn't turn up. "If you're searching for drugs or unlawful firearms, these things are not left out in plain view on the living room table," City Solicitor George Nilson explained. "You often will have to do some damage to the premises and...the police department doesn't and we don't pay for those kinds of damages."

Of course they won't pay for damages. They're far too busy fucking around, killing innocent beloved pets and ruining lives on false or misinterpreted charges to deign to say "we're sorry", aren't they now.

And now, get a hold of this next reasoning as to why cops don't feel like they should pay for damages they cause on mistaken raids:

Even if the police find nothing, Nilson said, the city has no obligation to pay, because, "it may have been the stuff that you're looking for was there three hours earlier, but somebody got it out of harm's way."

Folks, we officially have our Stupidest. Fucking. Excuse. Ever.

In January 2005, police in Baltimore County conducted a 4:50 a.m. raid on the home of Cheryl Lynn and Charles Noel after finding marijuana seeds and cocaine residue in the family's trash. After taking down the front door and deploying a flash grenade, SWAT officers stormed up the steps and broke open the door to the Noels' bedroom. Because their daughter had been murdered several years earlier, the couple kept a gun near the bed. When the police entered the bedroom, 44-year-old Cheryl Lynn Noel stood with the gun, clad in her nightgown. She was shot and killed by an armor-wearing SWAT officer, who fired from behind a ballistics shield. Police found only a misdemeanor amount of illicit drugs in the home. Shortly after the family filed a civil rights lawsuit in 2006, Baltimore County gave the officer who shot Noel an award for "valor, courage, honor, and bravery."

"Stupid Fucking Trigger-Happy Moron", rather. FTFY. And also, they lost their case (predictably):

In March, a federal jury returned a verdict in favor of the police. The winning argument in the Noel case is a common one—but it's also paradoxical. Police argued both that these volatile, confrontational tactics are necessary to surprise drug suspects—to take them off guard before they have a chance to retaliate, or dispose of the contraband. At the same time, police argued that Cheryl Lynn Noel should have known the armed men storming her home at 5 a.m. were police; therefore she had no right to be holding a gun, and the police had every right to shoot her. Unfortunately, under the law the jury (and the police) was probably correct. The police didn't appear to violate any department policy.

If killing an innocent woman who grabbed a gun to defend her home from an unjust raid in the middle of the night is perfectly excusable under policy, then I think there's a fucking problem with that policy. And again, you gotta revel at just how pathetic these morons are at making excuses. "She shoulda known they were cops"? Of course! Nevermind she just heard lots of banging and incoherent shouting that couldn't have made sense to anyone and grabbed the gun to defend herself against what would obviously have been a home invasion from her point-of-view, and in turn, without even shooting the weapon, was shot down herself. It's the epitome of unfairness.

It's just like that utterly bullshit and ridiculous concept that "you should know the law". I'm not sure what the proper phrasing is; you know, the excuse jurists and such use against someone who broke a law they had no idea even existed, "well, you shoulda known". FUCK that. You can't be expected to read and memorize every fucking law in every fucking book. If you break a law you had no reason to know even existed, it's NOT YOUR FAULT. Imagine that: people (normal people at least) don't go around reading law books for the fun of it.

And all this shit, to keep drugs illegal and off the streets. I don't see how any sane and rational human being can approve the "occasional" (read: disturbingly frequent) battery of innocent suspects, shooting of innocent animals, coercive interrogation and destruction of property – just to keep pot and coke off the streets. THEY'RE ON THE STREETS EVERY FUCKING DAY AND NIGHT. The system is obviously hopelessly broke and should be put to rest, and a new one needs to be implemented post-haste, or these horror stories will simply keep on going, unimpeded and unstopped.

(via The Agitator)

Continued ...»

A cop shoots an innocent dog and lies his ass off about it

I'm not sure whether reading Balko's blog is a good thing or a bad thing for me; sure, it exposes me to all sorts of dumbass behavior from a variety of sources which always pleases my inner misanthropist, but at the same time it infuriates me to see just how fucking incompetent and/or cruel some of the assholes in charge of upholding the law can be.

Here's an example: a cop in Tennessee shot and killed a "pit-bull/bulldog-type dog" that, according to him, was charging at him in a "very aggressive manner" along with two other dogs, as the cop was busy chasing after two suspects who had apparently broken into a home. However, that's his version of the story – the version from several eyewitnesses to the incident are drastically different.

According to Deputy Chief David Quillin, the incident occurred about 7 p.m. while police were chasing two suspects in the area of Carrington Court.

Witnesses have told the Times-News that police told children playing outside to get back, as they were looking for two black males suspected of breaking into a nearby home.

Quillin told the Times-News that Officer Darrell Johnson stepped over a low wire fence on Derwood Court as he was running after a suspect. He then “encountered three pit bull/bulldog-type dogs.”

“Those dogs charged at him in a very aggressive manner,” Quillin said.

“(Johnson) tried to retreat, but he did not have that opportunity. They continued to charge at him in a very aggressive manner, and that’s when he was forced to fire. As a result, one of the pit bulls died.”

According to Quillin, there were other officers in the area at the time of the shooting, and he based his information on the officers’ statements and police reports.

“It certainly appears at that point that the officer was justified in his actions,” Quillin said.

Indeed, had things actually gone down that way, it would've been a tragic but necessary killing to defend the officer's life and safety. But apparently, it's not at all what actually happened:

Richie Hammonds, 1005 Derwood Court, No. 4, owned “Mace” for three years, since he was a puppy. Contrary to police, he says there were not three dogs in his back yard when Officer Johnson stepped over his fence, but only Mace. His other two dogs remained on the back porch.

And while Johnson’s report on the incident states he traveled about 20 feet into the fenced-in yard when he encountered the dogs, three witnesses have told the Times-News that he only placed one foot over the fence.

“He put his foot back outside the fence, pulled out his weapon and shot him,” said Jonathan Suit, Hammonds’ neighbor. “There wasn’t a noise made, the dog wasn’t running. It was just walking toward him.”

“The officer stepped over the fence,” said Amanda Bellamy, another of Hammonds’ neighbors. “Mace came out of his doghouse, was walking up to (Johnson) to smell him. The officer stepped back out of the fence, pulled his weapon and shot that dog. That dog would not have come out of that fence. It’s an electric fence. They’re scared to death of it. The dog walked up to him wagging his tail.”

“The dogs smell the juice and stay at least two feet back from it,” Hammonds said. “Mace was 10 feet away when (Officer Johnson) shot him.”

Naturally, I'm certainly enclined to believe the dog's actual owner and the other matching eyewitness accounts, rather than the cop, who's best justification for what he's done so far is ...

Hammonds claims that after the shooting, Johnson said “I hate pit bulls.”

Right. Just as Cheyenne Cherry hates cats. Makes you wonder who are the real beasts in these sorts of cases.

As it turns out, even his reasons he gave as to why he was there in the first place are apparently bullshit:

Another point of contention is that police say they were chasing a suspect.

“The cops were supposed to be chasing two black men who just robbed a place, and yet they didn’t even pursue the chase once they shot the dog,” said John Adams, landlord of the apartment complex.

“They weren’t chasing anybody,” said Suit. “They were just looking around. They weren’t after anybody. But to read the paper (police) made it sound like there was a guy in their sights they were running after. That’s not true. I was here; I saw the whole thing.”

Witnesses told the Times-News that police were called to the area to search for two black males. Quillin said the suspect Johnson was chasing was Hammonds’ neighbor, Joe Shupe, 27.

Shupe, a white male, was arrested and charged with resisting and evading arrest.

He can't even get his story straight. Fucking moron.

“If he was in pursuit of somebody, and the dog was going to try and bite him, he should have shot the dog and went on after who he was going after instead of standing there,” Hammonds said. “He stood there and said ‘The reason I shot him was because I hate pit bulls.’ That was his exact words. It took everything I had not to hit that guy.”

Mace, according to witnesses, was not dead after several minutes. Hammonds asked Johnson to “go ahead and finish him off,” putting the dog out of its misery.

“Three shots to the head, that’s ridiculous,” said Bellamy. “And then (police) let him lay there and suffer like that.”

It wasn't enough to kill the dog just because he hates pit bulls. Nah, he had to leave the poor animal there to suffer with three fucking bullets in its head before finally ending its life.

Hammonds says that it took all of his resolve not to hit the cop. I wouldn't have hit him either. I swear, I would've killed the bastard. And definitely have felt zero remorse about it.

Continued ...»

Them magical disappearing house numbers have got cops all confused

What other explanation is there – other than the usual incompetency – for teams of officers who routinely barge into houses, apartments and domains – before realizing it's the wrong frickin' place to begin with? Makes you wonder regarding their literacy aptitudes. Balko from The Agitator has two stories concerning this particular branch of cop incompetency. The first one regards an elderly couple having the shock of their lives when cops wake them up and forcibly restrain them:

INDIANAPOLIS -- An Indianapolis family is asking for an apology from police after officers mistakenly barged into their home during an early-morning warrant sweep.

Marye Minton, 70, and her 72-year-old husband were awoken early Thursday to officers banging on the door of their home, 6News' Ericka Flye reported.

Marye Minton said she is upset that the officers came inside and ordered her husband, who is in poor health, onto the ground.

"They said to him, 'Get on the floor,' like that, and see my husband's had four strokes, and he can't whoop anybody, he can't do anything," she said. "I'm very mad and I don't want it to happen to another citizen."

Officers were trying to serve a warrant for a man wanted on drug charges. The address listed on the paperwork was 4042. The Minton's home is 4048, with both house numbers clearly marked.

But Major Mark Robinett of the Marion County Sheriff's Department, who is in charge of warrant sweeps, said he was told that officers had a difficult time reading the addresses because of overcast skies.

Um – so they couldn't see the clearly-marked numbers ... because of overcast skies? Uh-huh. Sure. Only, I don't recall myself going blind whenever clouds cover the heavens and sunlight is a bit dimmed. I recall I can read door numbers perfectly well. Nice excuse, but seriously, try harder, morons. This reminds me of the time my brother got home past curfew (again) whilst biking, and his brilliant excuse which didn't fly was "the wind was pushing me too hard". Yeah.

At least in the end the police decided to honor her demand for an official apology (according to the report that is).

Our second "isolated incident" comes from Maryland, where apparently even brightly-lit corridors are no match for cops' illiteracy:

Kenyan immigrant Nancy Njoroge had been living in the United States for a year when a Montgomery County SWAT team burst into her Gaithersburg apartment at 4 a.m., handcuffed her and her two teenage daughters, and searched her apartment, court records show.

Police found nothing.

The reason: Njoroge lived in No. 202 of her apartment complex. The police had a search warrant for apartment 201.

After rejecting an offer from the county’s claims adjuster of a “couple of movie passes,” the American Civil Liberties Union is suing the county on the family’s behalf for unspecified damages, according to ACLU records filed in court.

The ACLU said the purpose of the lawsuit was to hold the police department accountable for its mistake.

“Officers had but one apartment to locate, in a quiet and well-lit hallway in the dead of night, without distraction and with clearly marked doors and numbers,” ACLU lawyer Fritz Mulhauser said in a letter to the county.

Njoroge and her daughters have suffered emotional distress since the attack and have seen their work and school lives disrupted, according to their lawyers.

[...]

Police later served the search warrant on the correct apartment, where they found 600 grams of cocaine and $27,820 in cash, according to a report by the Drug Enforcement Administration, which partnered with the county on the drug investigation.

Court records don’t give a clear reason why the police raided the wrong apartment, and the county attorney assigned to the case did not respond to inquiries for the story. But in court records, a SWAT team leader indicated that it was an isolated incident.

An isolated incident. Riiight. Apart from the dozens of such "isolated incidents" Balko routinely digs up and pastes over his blog's front page. Isolated incident, my ass.

As Ed Brayton put it, "If you had a pizza delivery guy who delivered pizza to the wrong address as often as cops do, you'd fire him.". Hell, forget firing him, just make him pay for all the wasted pizzas. And then fire his stupid ass.

Continued ...»

A guy gets probation for beating three people in a bar. Three guesses what's his job.

That's right – he's a cop in Chicago, of course, which basically dictates he can be as big a brutish asshole as he wishes and will still get slapped on the hand, at worst. Must be fun to be a cop, able to commit all sorts of felonies and vile acts and not get punished for them. *Sigh*

Anyway. Today's story is about officer Anthony Abbate, who was caught on security camera beating three people in a bar, including the barmaid herself, just because she refused to serve him any more drinks once he had clearly become inebriated. What's his rightful punishment? Two small years on probation.

Somehow, I figure that stings rather more for the victims of his unprovoked attacks than for himself.

A Chicago police officer avoided jail time today for pummeling a woman who was tending bar, even though prosecutors produced a previously unseen video showing him beating someone else at the bar hours earlier.

Anthony Abbate was sentenced to two years probation for beating Karolina Obrycka in February of 2007. He could have gotten up to five years for the attack, which was captured by the bar's security camera and shown around the world.

Judge John Fleming said he decided against jail because he did not believe the crime was serious enough and throwing Abbate behind bars would not be a deterrent to others.

"If I believed that sending Anthony Abbate to prison would stop people from getting drunk and hitting other people, I'd sentence him to the maximum," the judge said. "But I don't believe that is the case."

Fleming also imposed a curfew of 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. for Abbate, who declined to say anything to the judge before he was sentenced. The cop must also attend anger management classes, undergo alcohol evaluation and perform 130 hours of community service.

So the judge keeps Abbate out of jail, just because it wouldn't "stop people from getting drunk and hitting other people"? What kind of stupid reasoning is that? Since when do you keep bullies and thugs from being punished, on the sole premise that it wouldn't stop others from being bullies and thugs? I'm sorry, "Your Honor", but you sentence criminals to jail because they deserve it, AND to keep them off the streets for a while. Not because it would act as an example for others. That's completely nonsensical.

In arguing for prison time, prosecutors produced a previously unseen video from the bar hours before Obrycka was attacked showing Abbate beating someone else.

In the video, a man in the bar can be seen speaking with Abbate for a few seconds, after which Abbate grabs the man, slams him against a wall and then throws him across the room. The man crashes to the floor and into the bar stools, and Abbate stands over him as the man tries to shimmy away on his back.

Assistant State's Atty. LuAnn Snow said the attack was one of three unprovoked assaults in the span of 6 hours, a violent window into "a day in the life of Anthony Abbate." Authorities did not charge Abbate with the other two alleged attacks.

What a thug. I'm still waiting for Judge Scalia's fabled "New Police Professionalism" here ...

Continued ...»

I think he was getting impatient for his food

Who do you think is to blame: the cop for being another unprofessional reckless imbecile, or the undoubtedly shoddy service?

Sources familiar with the case, and the fast food worker's account of what happened, say two off-duty Denver police officers placed an order from their car in the early morning hours of May 21. But once at the drive through window, the employee said the men became agitated and angry at how long their food was taking. The men thought they were being ignored, according to contacts familiar with the worker's account. The male clerk then said one of the officer's flashed his police badge and pointed a pistol through the drive through window in a threatening manner, before driving off without paying.

Look, I know we all routinely get some insanely long waiting times, but – oh wait, it's a cop. Nevermind.

At least they probably won't get away scotch-clean this time:

A Denver police officer has been suspended after allegedly brandishing his gun at a McDonald's restaurant in Aurora after his order took too long to fill.

Aurora police confirmed the CBS4 investigation saying the incident occurred May 21 at the McDonald's at 18181 East Hampden Avenue.

A spokesperson for the Aurora Police Department said they plan to present the case -- now classified as a felony menacing incident -- to the Arapahoe County District Attorney's Office Thursday for possible filing of criminal charges.

Good. Perhaps a while in the courts, or behind bars for utter stupidity and recklessness with a firearm, will cool this hotshot's temper down a bit.

Continued ...»

Take that, fuckers

Here's yet another case of police corruption, one which lead to two wholly innocent brothers being arrested under charges of dealing drugs – only they'd never sold drugs in their lives. And this time, the whole thing had been caught on security camera. Sweet, no?

NEW YORK (AP) -- When undercover detectives busted Jose and Maximo Colon last year for selling cocaine at a seedy club in Queens, there was a glaring problem: The brothers hadn't done anything wrong.

But proclaiming innocence wasn't going to be good enough. The Dominican immigrants needed proof.

''I sat in the jail and thought ... how could I prove this? What could I do?'' Jose, 24, recalled in Spanish during a recent interview.

As he glanced around a holding cell, the answer came to him: Security cameras. Since then, a vindicating video from the club's cameras has spared the brothers a possible prison term, resulted in two officers' arrest and become the basis for a multimillion-dollar lawsuit.

The officers, who are due back in court June 26, have pleaded not guilty, and New York Police Departmental Justice have downplayed their case.

Not guilty? Too bad they have clear camera footage that shows just how it all went down, completely exonerating the two accused brothers – and inculpating the corrupt assholes of the law. Below is a rendition from the brothers' own testimony as to how the stupid affair went down without them even knowing what was going on.

The brothers' evening started much like any other.

Max's friend worked at a bodega down the street from Delicias de Mi Tierra, where they'd sometimes drink and play pool in the evenings. This night, the pool table was closed. They instead sat at the bar. Security cameras ended up filming their every move.

The brothers barely moved from the same spot for about 90 minutes as the undercovers entered the bar and mixed with the crowd. Moments after the officers left, a backup team barged in and grabbed six men, including the brothers.

Paperwork signed by ''UC 13200'' -- Officer Henry Tavarez -- claimed that he told a patron he wanted to buy cocaine. By his account, that man responded by approaching the 28-year-old Max, who then went over to the undercover and demanded to pat him down to make sure he wasn't wearing a wire.

Max collected $100 from Tavarez, the report said. The officer claimed to see two bags of cocaine pass through the hands of three men, including Jose, before they were given to him.

Jose was released after a court appearance. His brother was shipped off to Riker's Island until he could make bail.

''I was scared,'' Max said of his time at Rikers. ''I don't get into trouble, and here I am with real criminals.''

A disgusting affair, indeed. Thankfully, Jose had the good sense to procure himself the only evidence that would completely exonerate him and his brother.

The moment Jose walked out of the holding cell, he made a beeline for Delicias and asked for a copy of the security tapes from the night they were arrested, Jan. 4, 2008.

''I knew it would be the only way to defend myself, because I knew the police would not believe me,'' he said.

The owner of Delicias queued up the tapes and the two waded through an entire day's worth of surveillance -- until they found the two hours the men spent in the club that night -- supposedly selling drugs.

Jose quickly got the tape to defense attorney Rochelle Berliner, a former narcotics prosecutor. She couldn't believe what she was seeing.

''I almost threw up,'' she said. ''Because I must've prosecuted 1,500, 2,000 drug cases ... and all felonies. And I think back, Oh my God, I believed everything everyone told me. Maybe a handful of times did something not sound right to me. I don't mean to sound overly dramatic but I was like, sick.''

What the tape doesn't show is striking: At no point did the officers interact with the undercovers, nor did the brothers appear to be involved in a drug deal with anyone else. Adding insult to injury, an outside camera taped the undercovers literally dancing down the street.

Berliner handed the tape over to the District Attorney's integrity unit. It reviewed the images more than 100 times to make sure it wasn't doctored by the defense before deciding to drop all charges against the brothers in June.

A lot of turmoil and sick feelings, but at least now the truth is there for all to see – particularly the courts.

And you'll love what kind of stupidity the idiot cops' attorney came up with to try and defend them:

Six months later, Officer Tavarez and Detective Stephen Anderson pleaded not guilty to drug dealing and multiple other charges that their lawyers say were overblown.

Anderson's attorney has described him as a seasoned investigator who had no reason to make a false arrest. Tavarez, his attorney said, was a novice undercover merely along for the ride.

Um – there are never any reasons to make a false arrest. What a fundamentally stupid thing to say. It's just that – they happen. And when they do, the prosecuted party has every right in the world to want retribution for having had their lives turned to hell for the duration of the false charges and imprisonment. It's also interesting how they claim Tavarez was just a "novice undercover merely along for the ride". Perhaps I'm mistaken, but – wasn't that his fucking name signed on the report? Sounds like he was certainly more than just tagging along.

However, even though the two Colon brothers have finally been cleared of all charges and are even suing the department for $10 million (ouch ...), this messy affair has pretty much ruined their lives for now. Turns out it's never good for your reputation, or your business, to be charged with dealing drugs – whether they're false charges or not.

Life quickly deteriorated for Max and Jose after their arrest.

They owned a successful convenience store in Jackson Heights, but lost their license to sell tobacco, alcohol and lottery tickets. The store closed a week before their case was dismissed.

''My life changed completely,'' Jose said. ''I had a life before, and I have a different existence now. ... Now, I'm not able to afford to live in my own house or care for my children.''

Jose has found construction work, while Max commutes two hours to Philadelphia to work at a relative's bodega. They stay away from the old neighborhood, where they say ugly rumors about them persist.

The brothers have filed a $10 million false arrest lawsuit against the police department, the officers involved and the city.

''I'm angry because, why'd it happen to me? I know a lot of people ... they don't go the right way and they can get away with it,'' Max said. ''I'm young and I try to go the right way and boom, this happened to me. So I'm angry with life, too.''

I hope it's not too redundant of me to say that, yes, you certainly have every fucking right in the world to be pissed. Sue the fuckers for all they have and ever will have.

The New York Times article also has some disturbing, but sadly not unexpected, revelations that show that this case is far from unique.

On May 13, another NYPD officer was arrested for plotting to invade a Manhattan apartment where he hoped to steal $900,000 in drug money. In another pending case, prosecutors in Brooklyn say officers were caught in a 2007 sting using seized drugs to reward a snitch for information. And in the Bronx, prosecutors have charged a detective with lying about a drug bust captured on a surveillance tape that contradicts her story.

Elsewhere, Philadelphia prosecutors dismissed more than a dozen drug and gun charges against a man last month when a narcotics officer was accused of making up information on search warrants.

The revelations in New York have triggered internal affairs inquiries, transfers of commanders and reviews of dozens of other arrests involving the accused officers. Many drug defendants' cases have been tossed out. Others have won favorable plea deals.

Let's all marvel at the wonders that are our law enforcement agencies, no? "To serve and to protect" ... any wonder I've never believed that bullshit?

Continued ...»

Maybe he should learn to dodge bullet trains, too

Here's yet another case of cops eschewing their liabilities and covering their asses at the expense of an innocent. An officer in Clark County, Nevada, who apparently had a serious need to use a restroom, was driving at a staggering 109 miles an hour – with his lights and sirens off, effectively turning him into an invisible wheeled speeding torpedo. Sadly, someone was in the way, in the form of a pickup truck. The cop never had a chance, and died on impact. The pickup's driver, though rattled, lived – though he doesn't have much to cheer about still, considering HE's now the one those stupid cops are blaming for the entire incident.

In the moments before officer James Manor plowed into a pickup attempting a left turn, he was driving his patrol car 109 mph without flashing lights or siren, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie said Wednesday.

The speed was the equivalent of traveling the length of a football field in about two seconds. It gave Manor little time to avoid hitting Calvin Darling's truck May 7. At the time of impact, after braking and trying to steer out of the way, Manor was still driving 90 mph.

Gillespie called Manor's speed in the 45-mph zone on Flamingo Road "excessive and unsafe," even if his lights and siren had been on. The facts of the accident probably will alter the charges Darling faces, the sheriff said.

While it's certainly expected that the "original charges" be put under investigation, it's worth noting just how desperate this police department is to lay the blame in the innocent Darling's lap instead of taking responsibility. Just luck at the charges:

Darling, 45, was arrested for driving under the influence and failing to yield to an emergency vehicle. Gillespie said he couldn't see Darling facing the latter charge because Manor's lights and siren were off.

Failing to yield to an emergency vehicle? Well, perhaps – if the fucking moron hadn't been driving his car like a damned rocket at almost 110 mph, WITH his lights and sirens deactivated! How the hell could anyone see that reckless fool coming, much less get out of the way in time?

And then, of course, saying that Darling was "driving under the influence" (DUI). That's a complete and utter lie, as a subsequent blood test taken a little over an hour after the crash showed Darling had less than half the legal blood alcohol level limits, at 0.035 (the limit in the area being 0.08). There's no way he would've been anywhere near that limit of 0.08 only one hour previously. Blood alcohol doesn't rise or lower that fast unless you pump it in or out through a needle or something.

And yet, the asshat sheriff is adamant in assuring that Calvin was indeed driving drunk and had neglected to concede the way to the speeding officer Manor. Figures.

And a final coup-de-grâce: officer Manor wasn't even wearing any seatbelt. Yes, that's some fine police example-setting right there.

I'm starting to wonder if this poor fool should be nominated for a Darwin Award.

(via Dispatches from the Culture Wars)

Continued ...»

Stop following me! ... taken to a whole new level

Here's a disturbing bit of news: a court in Wisconsin has just ruled that state law enforcement officers could attach a GPS tracking device to your vehicle and follow you around on their screens, 24/7 – without a warrant or notification of such. Talking about "prying eyes".

As the law currently stands, the court said police can mount GPS on cars to track people without violating their constitutional rights -- even if the drivers aren't suspects.

Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, Judge Paul Lundsten wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel based in Madison.

That means "police are seemingly free to secretly track anyone's public movements with a GPS device," he wrote.

This is, of course, entirely unconstitutional. No, surveillance by law officers isn't illegal; they're perfectly at east to follow one's movements by patrol car, or surveillance cameras, or anything of that vein as they wish, however worrysome that may be in itself. What it comes down to, is the legality of them attaching a tracking device directly to your own personal possessions, be it your car or in a coat pocket. They simply have no right to touch any of your personal possessions without a warrant, which (in theory) entirely invalidates this appeal court's ruling.

However, if some overly-suspicious cops did try and follow me around via GPS on an ultra-cool CTU*-style screen, I'd just be sure to casually head to the the nearest gun shop, spend a few minutes inside the building while they scratch their noggins, and then feign to race towards the nearest Police precinct. Just for the fun of imagining them running around panicking. =)

* Make sure Jack Bauer's watching, too.

(via Dispatches from the Culture Wars)

Continued ...»