On-duty cops in Nevada show up at a pool hall to rough up a guy who was arguing with one of their buddies. Unfortunately (for them), he wasn’t your typical out-of-town schmoe. He was a federal agent. And now he’s suing.
Police chief in small Wisconsin town asks on-duty detectives to find out the identity of a local anonymous blogger who was criticizing him, the town, and the department.
What do you do when your star witness insists there was no crime? Apparently you harass the hell out of him. Even if he’s a 13-year-old boy with developmental problems.
Another arrest of a man taking photos of a drug raid. If you’re wondering, yes, I think citizens should be free to record and photograph undercover police, too. To give one example, if David Ruttenberg hadn’t recorded the multiple attempts to frame him by undercover Manassas Park police, they’d likely have framed him into several felonies by now.
Using the “obstruction” arrest to cover police misbehavior.
Deputy drifts over center line on a hilly road, wipes out a group of bicyclists, killing two and critically wounding another. It’s a terrible story, but note what happens next. Other police show up and tell the deputy to “stop talking” before he further implicates himself. They then escort him from the accident scene before investigators arrive. How many other people would get that kind of treatment?
A California jury awarded a 72-year-old man $90,000 after California Highway Patrol officers entered his house and roughed him up while looking for a stolen motorcycle. They had the wrong house. Which would probably explain why he was described in the police report as “agitated” after they improperly and forcibly entered his home. Here’s the infuriating part: After the jury award, the judge cut the award to around $13,000, just enough to cover medical expenses related to the incident, which included two surgeries. The judge tossed out all punitive damages.
Also, per the link above, note that the man was initially arrested for “obstruction,” even though police had the wrong house, and he wasn’t suspected of any crime.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, March 20th, 2008 at 3:07 pm by Radley Balko
and is filed under Police Professionalism, Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
TheAgitator.com
The sad thing is, “drifts over the center line” is putting it generously. According to the linked article, the cyclists were riding in the bike lane, which means the deputy not only crossed over the yellow line, but crossed entirely into the opposing lane of traffic, and even beyond that, into the bike lane.
Again, that Nevada stuff is just the tip of the iceberg. Look into Henderson and the problems those officers have caused. I know of a guy who did nothing wrong but was beaten by the side of the road because the officer was having a bad day. And he was being treated for cancer in his arm but the still wanted to twist it around as though he wasn’t complying.
Henderson has a problem and the top brass don’t want to do anything but cover it up. Look at the shootings that have been unjustified.
The street cops in Henderson Nevada are not nice.
[...] balls repeatedly until they fly out his throat for being such scumbag on the public tit. (link: Who else?) Mar 20, 08 | 4:40 pm AxeBitesVarious guitars I see floating by, mostly Gibson and mostly eBay. [...]
I fear for the jury I’d get if I was ever arrested. I got a speeding ticket once so I guess anytime I get pulled over now I’m guilty of whatever the cops say. These commenters on some of these stories are scary how much they defer to authority.
The amusing (alarming?) thing with the cops vs Federal Agent incident is that you know for sure that the only reason it’s getting any coverage is that both sides are in law enforcement.
Cops beat normal guy? No chance of a charge for anyone except the guy (resisting, possession etc.).
Normal guys beat federal agent? Probably attempted murder charges.
When both sides are cops noone quite knows what to do, because the tired old arguments about ‘dangerous job’ ‘resisting arrest’ and ‘line of duty’ can’t work for both sides.
Wow. Just finished the cyclist one. It is beyond disturbing.
Thank you Radley for being a politico-info junkie. Although personally aggravating, the stories you dig up result in my own bloggie being formed mostly from secondhand material.
I didn’t know a judge could summarily change the judgment awarded by the jury in a lawsuit. Anyone know the legalities and care to explain?
So, how do we fix this?
The only thing that I can come up with is that an on-duty police officer (both uniformed and undercover) must be taped (video & audio) during their entire shift. The minute they put on their Sam Browne, the taping starts and doesn’t end until the end of their shift.
All videos are immediately reviewable by any citizen.
Along with a civilian review board that has subpoena powers, I’m not sure what else we can do.
Andyinsdca,
That would be easier said than done. Right now it feels like things are trending towards LESS oversight and surveillance of leos, not more. Besides having perfect accountability for officers, many, many laws need to be repealed, sentencing guidelines need to be changed, etc.
none of these things can happen until the public demands it. Simply put, we need more voices calling for change.
So, the best thing you can do is to convince others to think more like us. Win more individuals over to the cause. It’s a battle of ignorance.
That’s why Radley’s work is so important.
Pinette,
Punitive damages are awarded in tort claims. Suing for a violation of civil rights does not involve punitive damages, it’s an entirely different set of law. If the Jurors listened to the instructions carefully, they would’ve realized that. The remedy is an entirely different thing, and punitive damages are inapplicable. It’s like awarding someone punitive damages when you really should grant someone a divorce. The remedy doesn’t match the legal issue involved.
The solution would be to provide greater award for the violation of the civil rights claim.
From the article about the young man arrested for taking a picture of undercover police officers:
“During the raid, deputies seized a box of ammunition and a checkbook but did not find any drugs. Sievert was the only person arrested that afternoon.”
Pinette:
Violation of civil rights is a tort claim and juries can award punitive damages. However, judges have the power to set aside any jury verdict (in criminal if the defendant is found guilty and in civil regardless of which side wins) if they decide that the verdict is not supported by the evidence.
Here, the judge decided that the officers did not act maliciously enough to entitle the plaintiff to punitive damages. A better course of action would have been to not instruct the jury on awarding punitives (which would prevent them from having that option), instead of setting aside the award.
It can be appealed.
In the case of that deputy who hit the cyclists, I wonder if the blood sample will be checked to insure it’s actually the deputy’s blood or exactly how old that sample is? I mean, accidents happen and if the deputy did fall asleep behind the wheel it’s horrible but it happens to a lot of us…but the story they told about him walking around in a daze while someone else gave treatment to the victims seems indicative that there may have been something else going on besides drowsiness. Maybe he was in shock, but there are several red flags that should be raised by the procedures the cops followed (both Cupertino and the CHP).
What’s concerning about the story of the cyclist is that the police in that capacity should be trying to gather information (of secondarily to assisting those in need) and so advising someone to stop talking is complete inconsistent with their job. Even if they are just patrolmen or what have you, the first officer on the scene should always look to gather information and make observations that can be passed on to the actual investigator. Police only have to advise someone of their right to be quiet if they are conducting a custodial interrogation. Which is clearly not the case here.
I also wonder what would happen if a random guy went up to a non-police driver in the same scenario and right in front of the police told this man to stop talking. Would th epolice just say “oh well, some random dude just informed this guy of his rights, moving on!”
Another disturbing facet to the deputy killing the cyclists in Cupertino is the way the local paper reported it and then hid the comments afterward from outraged readers. Pay close attention to the language used in describing the accident.
Article here: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8517048?source=most_viewed
Hidden comments here:
http://tinyurl.com/32slq7
“Sievert refused a lawful command to erase the photographs, Colonneso said. That “reasonable request” was to protect undercover officers.”
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm