Trial set for Palm Beach Cop Who Lied About Murdering Black Man Waiting for Tow Truck on Side of the Road

From [HERE] The trial of a Florida police officer who fatally shot a black man broken down on a highway has been scheduled for October.

Judge Samantha Schosberg Feuer set an Oct. 30 date Tuesday for the trial of 39-year-old former Palm Beach Gardens officer Nouman Raja.

Raja is charged with manslaughter and attempted murder for shooting 31-year-old Corey Jones, a drummer who was returning home from a performance when his SUV broke down on Interstate 95 before dawn in October 2015. Raja was fired after the shooting.

Raja was not in uniform and never identified himself as a police officer before opening fire on the motorist, prosecutors said — a direct contradiction to the arrested officer’s story. An audio recording shows that the cop lied over and over about what happened. 

Audio reveals the officer, who was investigating car burglaries, was immediately aggressive with Jones and began barking commands at him without ever saying he was with the force.

Jones was leaving a late-night gig on Oct. 18, 2015 when his car broke down on the side of I-95. The 31-year-old musician called AT&T roadside assistance for help, and the call was still connected when Raja, who is of South Asian descent, exited an unmarked white van and approached the stalled car.

That recording captured the exchange between the two men.

“You good?” Raja, dressed in a T-shirt and jeans, asked.

Jones said he was fine, prompting Raja to ask “Really?”

“Yeah,” Jones replied, according to the audio.

Suddenly, Raja became belligerent, and started yelling at Jones.

“Get your f-----g hands up! Get your f-----g hands up!” he shouted as Jones pleaded “hold on, hold on!”

“Get your f-----g hands up! Drop!” Raja screamed again before firing two shots, prosecutors said.

Jones began running down an embankment and into the grass as Raja fired several more shots, killing him. Jones' unfired gun was found about 75 feet from his SUV. Jones' body was found another 125 feet away.

In a 911 call that prosecutors say Raja placed about 30 seconds later, the officer yelled for Jones to drop his gun — even though they say he knew Jones had been hit and was dying on the ground. Jones’ family said he had recently purchased the gun to protect the expensive drum gear in his vehicle's trunk and had a permit for the weapon.

But about four hours after the shooting, Raja voluntarily sat down with a Palm Beach County sheriff's detective and recounted the shooting.

He claimed that he walked up to Jones’ van thinking it had been abandoned, and he was surprised to find Jones inside.

"The door swung open and, uh, this guy jumps outside immediately," Raja told the investigator. "He got out of the van and then he's like, 'I'm OK, I'm OK man.' And at which point I said, 'Hey, man, police, can I help you?'”

Raja claimed that when he identified himself as a cop, Jones became violent.

“And the second I said police, he jumped back and I clearly remember him drawing and...pointing a gun at me,” he said. "It's just like, you know, your family flashed in front of you, your kids flashed in front of you.”

He said he ordered Jones to drop the gun and then fired when he didn't. [MORE]

Suit Claims Plainclothes Norwalk Cops Unlawfully Stopped Black Man w/o Identifying Themselves & Assaulted Him Causing Brain Injury

From [HERE] and [HERE] A judge announced it will allow a police brutality case against four Norwalk police officers to move forward. Cody Greene, a Black man, suffered from the alleged beating by public servants in July of 2014.

His attorney filed a $10 million lawsuit in Federal court against the City of Norwalk and four Norwalk police officers alleging civil rights violations. The 19-page lawsuit alleges that police officers violated Greene's civil rights and caused a series of injuries, some of which were deemed permanent. In addition to the City of Norwalk, defendants are police officers Steven Luciano, Felipe Taborda, Adam Mulkern, and Julio Rodriguez.

The action is being brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 42 U.S.C. 1988 and the first, fourth, fifth, eighth, and eighteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

According to the lawsuit to be filed, Greene was visiting a friend at 16 School St. when a black vehicle with tinted windows pulled up next to him and the four defendants, all dressed in black exited the vehicle and began asking him questions.

"At no point in time did the individual defendants identify themselves as police officers, nor were the individual defendants wearing and/or displaying any clothing or badging that identified them as such. At that point, and for no reason, defendant Mulkern attempted to 'pat down' the plaintiff."

The complaint further alleges that the fearful plaintiff ran from the scene and the police officers engaged in a foot pursuit. During the foot pursuit, the suit further alleges that a gun was pointed at Greene and he was Tasered.

"The plaintiff tired, Tasered, and staggering fell with his arms outstretched ...Thereafter Defendant Luciano rolled the Plaintiff over on his back, placed his knees on the Plaintiff's outstretched arms, sat on the Plaintiff's chest, and beat the Plaintiff's head and face numerous times with closed fists and elbows," according to the complaint.

According to a police report dated July 19, 2012 police say: "We were dressed in black Raid type uniforms with 'POLICE' in bright yellow letters, making us immediately identifiable as Norwalk Police Officers."

His attorney, Phil Russell said, "Cody was accosted by four people in civilian clothes who demanded he submit to a search. When he ran away, he was chased and when he was caught he was Tasered and beat up...His injuries are prodigious and are outlined in the complaint. They are life-altering injuries and this is a tragedy."

Among the injuries to Greene claimed in the complaint are: Left orbital fracture, left upper and lower jaw fractures; fractured nose and septum; left eye hemorrhage; hemorrhage in posterior temporal lobe of brain; cerebral concussion and traumatic brain injury; stuttering disorder; post traumatic stress disorder; nerve damage to face and nose; post traumatic headaches and insomnia; facial numbness, impaired balance and gait; and deficits in attention, concentration, word finding, detail orientation, and short term memory.

The lawsuit alleges that, "The Plaintiff's injuries, or some of them, will be permanent in nature and/or permanently disabling."

Click to read more ...

[racism is done by deception &/or violence] White Miami Cops Claim Latino Man Resisted Arrest but Video Shows Otherwise

From [HERE] A man's family claims he was the victim of excessive force when he was arrested by undercover Miami-Dade police officers in an incident that was caught on camera.

Rafael Gonzalez-Miranda, 22, was arrested Tuesday on charges of resisting an officer with violence and battery on an officer.

The arrest report says officers were doing narcotics surveillance on 131st Place in southwest Miami-Dade when they saw two men buying drugs. That's when they say Miranda pointed at the undercover car letting the two men know they were being watched by undercover cops. The two men ran away leaving the teen alone to the face police officers, and the encounter was caught on surveillance camera.

Gonzalez-Miranda's father said the cops abused his son, and hired an attorney. The family believes their son didn't do anything wrong and was simply outside his home.

"It looks like absolutely excessive force, we can all see that from the video," defense attorney Harvey Watnick said. "I'll be looking into whatever there might be that is not on the video."

Miami-Dade police claim Gonzalez-Miranda was resisting arrest. The department issued a statement Thursday saying it "strives to provide professional service and remains committed to its core values of Integrity, Respect, Fairness and Service. The details involved in this incident are stated within the Arrest Affidavit and the proper departmental documentation has been completed. Anyone that feels they have not been treated in a professional manner is urged to contact our Professional Compliance Bureau."

Gonzalez-Miranda was given a $5,000 bond and has been released from jail.

Suit says Fairfax Cty White Cop Unlawfully Stopped Black Man Walking Down Street, Ordered him to Turn Around & Tasered Him in the Back

From [HERE] A federal judge said a lawsuit against Fairfax County that alleges a white police officer used excessive force can move forward.

The September 2015 incident showing an officer using a stun gun on Elton Cansler was recorded by witnesses on their cell phones in a shopping plaza in the Franconia area of Fairfax County.

During a hearing on Friday, the judge referred to the video calling it "pretty clear evidence" documenting what happened.

“I'm feeling good that everything is going forward,” said Cansler.

The lawsuit filed by Cansler and his attorneys states that the amount of force used by Officer Alan Hanks was excessive. “The suit alleges a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights,” said Maxwelle Sokol, Cansler’s attorney.

Those rights guarantee a reasonable amount of force during an arrest. The portion of the lawsuit states that department policies violate those constitutional protections.

One of the witnesses who took the cell phone video said at the time after the 2015 incident, “The gentleman just happened to be walking down the sidewalk and the cop pulls up in front of him, tells him to turn over, and as soon as he has his back turned towards him, he tases him. He didn’t see it coming.”

Several days after the incident, Fairfax County Police Chief Edwin Roessler held a press conference clearing Officer Hanks of any wrongdoing and saying he complied with policy.

Witness Testifies that San Antonio Cop Shot Marquise Jones in the Back & He Had No Gun in His Hand or Waist

From [HERE] and [HERE] The civil trial is underway following the death of young black man at the hands of a San Antonio cop. The family of Marquise Jones has brought the city of San Antonio and SAPD to court in a long-awaited lawsuit.

They're seeking damages in Jones’ death, which happened more than three years ago, in February, 2014.

The police officer who killed Jones, Robert Encina, was no-billed in 2015. But since the incident, numerous witnesses have gone on record giving their accounts.

On Tuesday, a new witness came forward with what the prosecution alleges is the clearest first-hand account yet.

James Brantley was at Chachos and Chaluccis the night Jones was killed. Encina shot Jones in the back as he ran away from the scene of a minor fender bender in the drive through.  

SAPD and the city have long maintained Jones had a gun, and that Encina was justified in shooting him

But Brantley said he had a clear view of not only his hands, but also the waist of his pants, and said without question there was no gun.

Brantley had just left a bar and wanted some chicken wings before heading home the morning of February 28, 2014, so he stopped by the Chacho's off Perrin Beitel Road. It was there, while parked in the restaurant's drive-thru lane, that Brantley claims he saw Robert Encina shoot and kill an unarmed Marquise Jones as he ran toward the street. 

In fact, Brantley says he was so close to the shooting his ears were ringing when the gunfire stopped. He says Encina, an off-duty San Antonio Police Department officer working security at the northeast side restaurant, walked up to his window after the shooting to ask Brantley if he saw a gun in Jones' hand. Brantley says Encina gave him a strange look and walked away when he replied, "He didn't have no gun. You killed that man" (another news account reported, “Man, I didn’t see nothing. You just killed a man.” -The federal courthouse does not allow cameras inside.)

Not long after that, another officer came and asked Brantley to move his car away from the scene. Brantley says the officer had to help him maneuver around bullet casings. No one from SAPD would interview Brantley or ask him for a witness statement that morning. If they had, Brantley's would have been the sixth witness account taken by police that morning indicating Jones did not have a gun in his hand when Encina shot him in the back. Brantley says he came forward sometime last year after seeing a news report that officials had cleared Encina of wrongdoing in the case. 

Then he got an unexplained visitor. 

In court Tuesday morning, as he testified in the trial over the federal lawsuit Jones' family filed against Encina and SAPD, Brantley claimed an unmarked police cruiser followed him to his car last spring, sometime after he signed an affidavit swearing that he witnessed the shooting and that Jones didn't wield a weapon at officer Encina when he was killed. Brantley said it was nighttime and he was walking to his car, about to go pick up his young daughter, when he noticed he was being followed. Eventually, a man got out of the unmarked cruiser, asked Brantley who he was, cuffed his hands behind his back, put him in the back of the car, and then started driving downtown.

Or as Brantley put it in his deposition: "I'm against the car, handcuffs, and back seat. That quick."

In court Tuesday, Brantley testified that he assumed the car was an unmarked police cruiser because that's what it looked like inside, including a metal grate with a rifle rack that separated the back from the front seats (he called it a "police cage"). The man who detained him — wearing a blue shirt, slacks and boots — looked like a cop, but didn't show Brantley a badge and wouldn't answer any of his questions. "You have to go downtown," was all the guy would tell him, according to Brantley's court testimony. 

Brantley says the mystery man drove him downtown, somewhere off Frio Street, where another car met up with them. The man who detained Brantley got out of the car and started talking to the other driver — Brantley estimates they chatted for maybe 20 minutes while he was still cuffed in the back seat. And then, the maybe-cop got back in the car and drove Brantley home, no explanation.

Click to read more ...

White Hanford Cop Claims Gold Chain Crucifix Can be a Deadly Weapon: Attacks Latino Man After Knocking Him Off Bicycle with Cop Car

From [HERE] A Hanford police report says Michael Valdez was riding his bicycle on the wrong side of the street when white officer Larry Leeds attempted to stop him.

What happened next is the subject of a federal civil rights lawsuit in which Valdez, 49, and his attorney, Morgan Ricketts, accuse Leeds of using excessive force to arrest Valdez, actions that they say contributed to blinding him in one eye.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Fresno last week, says Leeds used his patrol car to knock Valdez off his bicycle. The officer then punched Valdez several times in the face and torso. After being treated at Adventist Medical Center, Valdez was booked into the Kings County Jail with a medical patch over his right eye.

The lawsuit accuses jail staff of repeatedly denying Valdez’s request for medical help, causing him to be permanently blind in his right eye. It also alleges that the Hanford Police Department and Kings County Jail destroyed evidence.

Valdez is seeking unspecified damages for violation of his civil rights, destruction of evidence, battery, and denial of medical care.

Hanford Police Chief Parker Sever said Friday: “We, unfortunately, cannot comment on pending litigation.”

Valdez acknowledged he has had run-ins with the police before. Around 2005, he said, he was arrested for fighting with several Hanford police officers and was sentenced to six years in prison. He was paroled in October 2009.

“That why I didn’t resist arrest (on New Year’s Day),” Valdez said, “because I learned my lesson.”

The incident at issue happened around 4:15 p.m. Jan. 1, 2016. The Hanford police report gives Leeds’ version of the incident:

After seeing Valdez ride on the wrong side of the street, Leeds activates his patrol car’s emergency red lights and siren. Because Valdez ignored the patrol car, Leeds pulled in front of Valdez to cut him off. Valdez’s bicycle then hit the patrol car, causing him to fall.

Valdez got up and began to walk away from Leeds. When it appeared Valdez was reaching for something in his waistband, Leeds drew his weapon and ordered Valdez to stop, show his hands and get on the ground.

At one point, Valdez grabbed his crucifix that was attached to a chain around his neck. Leeds believed Valdez was going to use it as a weapon. Valdez said in an interview Friday that if he did grab the crucifix, it was to say a prayer to God to protect him.

A struggled ensued. Leeds grabbed Valdez, punched him in lower torso and face, and then forced him to the ground. Another officer then helped Leeds handcuff Valdez.

After his hospital visit, Valdez was booked into jail on charges of felony resisting arrest and drug charges. His criminal trial is pending.

On Friday, Valdez said Leeds’s report is filled with lies, saying he never rode on the wrong side of the road or resisted arrest. He also said Leeds was “lying in wait to get me” and that Leeds never read him his Miranda rights.

In filing the lawsuit, Valdez and Ricketts said they would like another law enforcement agency or the grand jury to investigate the incident. Valdez also wants charges against him dismissed and wants prosecutors to charge Leeds with perjury and assault.

“Leeds went nuts,” Valdez said. “He’s too dangerous to be a police officer.”

Valdez’s lawsuit gives his account:

Valdez and a neighbor were working on a fence at his mother’s home on Malone Street, just south of Hanford High School, when he noticed a patrol car slowly drive by. The patrol car then made a U turn and parked.

After the neighbor went home, Valdez got on his bicycle and decided to visit a relative. He said he rode on the right side of the street, obeying traffic laws, when Leeds started to follow him at a high rate of speed.

Valdez took a shortcut, but once he completed the shortcut, Leeds drove rapidly toward him. Valdez “was forced to quickly dodge Leeds’ car and maneuver his bicycle around it,” the lawsuit says.

“You just tried to run me over,” Valdez yelled at Leeds, according to the lawsuit. Though Leeds ordered Valdez to come to his patrol car, he didn’t because he feared for his safety, the lawsuit says.

Valdez rode his bicycle toward a small store on 10th Avenue where there were customers in the parking lot. Leeds followed him, but “still had not activated his lights and sirens,” the lawsuit says.

Leeds then used his patrol car to ram Valdez’s bicycle, knocking him to the ground and causing him to hit his head on the pavement. The impact propelled the bicycle 10 to 15 feet in the air and caused Valdez’s belt to break and his pants to slip downward.

Leeds got out of his patrol car and drew his gun. “Rather than helping (Valdez), he grabbed (Valdez) and pulled him up off the ground,” the lawsuit says.

Valdez said he was so dazed and disoriented, he was unable to walk normally, unable to process what had happened and unable to respond to any commands from Leeds. The lawsuit says Leeds then punched Valdez in the torso, face and head and that Valdez “never resisted Leeds’ punches and never attacked Leeds.”

When Valdez called out for people in the parking lot to take a video, Leeds “seemed to become angry, and loudly ordered the people not to video,” the lawsuit says.

Click to read more ...

Without a Warrant White LVMPD Cops Terrorized Latino Teens Watching TV & Murder Dog in Their Own Home - Las Vegas Settles

From [HERE] and [HERE] An excessive force case will cost the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and taxpayers nearly $200,000.   The LVMPD Fiscal Affairs Committee approved a settlement Monday in a 2009 case.  

White police officers mistook 4 Latino teens, Henry Rodriguez, Jordhy Leal and David Madueno for potential burglars of the house where Rodriguez lived with his family.  The family dog, a pit bull named Hazel, was killed  - shot in the face by a LVMPD officer, just feet away from her owner inside her own home.  All were wrongfully arrested and originally sued the Metropolitan Police Department in 2010, seeking $5 million in damages.

The case hinged on whether police infringed upon the plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches when they entered the residence at 31 Onyx Way following a phone call from a neighbor about a potential burglary in the area. [MORE]

LVMPD says while the settlement was approved, they're not saying the officers involved did anything wrong. What facts did they disagree with? There was no warrant & they had no probable cause. The court's findings in the original case were as follows;

On October 24, 2009, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (“LVMPD”) received a 911 phone call from a witness, Albert Schouten, who said that he saw two white males between ages 18 and 20, one carrying a skateboard, jump a fence and start looking through the windows of a house in the neighborhood. There had been a recent pattern of youths burglarizing homes in the area.

Sergeant Roberts and Officer Dunn of the LVMPD, and later several of their colleagues, responded to the call, and arrived at the residence of Jesus Sandoval, Adriana Rodriguez, and their children. The officers entered the yard and saw open windows, doors, and gates, consistent with residential use, but did not identify any point of entry indicators suggesting a burglary. 

Roberts looked through an open bedroom window and saw “three young males” who were “younger than 18 to 20,” and were “about 14, 15.” Roberts conceded that the boys—Henry, then 18, who lived at the house, and his two friends, David, then 15, and Jordhy, then 16—“did not match” two of the three metrics that Schouten had given him: the number of suspects or the age of the suspects. As to race, Roberts agreed that the suspects, who were Hispanic, were “not the color of a white person that you typically think of as being white,” and that “[w]hen [he] saw them for the first time [he] thought they were either dark-skinned white males or Hispanic.” Two of the boys later testified that they had never before been described as white or confused for a white person. The boys were listening to music, watching TV, and playing video games.

Roberts did not ask the boys any basic identifying questions. Instead, Roberts pointed his gun at the head of one of the boys through the bedroom window, and gave the boys conflicting commands, telling them “don't move,” “[l]et me see your hands,” and “turn the music down.” Roberts told Jordhy to turn down the music, which Jordhy tried to do, and then told him, “I told you don't move, I could shoot you” or “I'll f* * *ing shoot you.” Roberts testified that the boys did not comply with his commands at this stage, but that they complied at all later stages. The boys, to the contrary, testified that they followed the officers' commands at this point and throughout the events that followed. Henry, for example, reported that when Roberts appeared in the window, the boys “all froze,” that they “didn't move,” and that he “didn't want to risk moving at all.” Roberts acknowledged that the boys may not have heard certain of his commands.

Roberts's colleague, Dunn, entered the house through the sliding glass door. Dunn, who could not see the boys, observed his partner pointing a gun and giving commands to someone through the window. He said that he entered the house because he thought that Roberts “could not control the suspects,” since he heard Roberts issue commands more than once and heard the tone of Roberts's voice change. As Dunn entered the house, he began giving commands at the same time as Roberts, and recognized that this could have created confusion.

Roberts ordered the boys to exit the bedroom. Henry asked to be allowed to put away the family dog, Hazel, a pit bull, before letting the officers into the home, but Roberts did not allow him to do so.

As the boys exited the bedroom, Hazel slipped in front of Henry and Jordhy, but continued to walk behind David, according to David's testimony. Dunn shot Hazel in the face, twelve inches from David, and in the direction of Henry and Jordhy. The officers ordered David and Jordhy to the floor, handcuffed them, and brought them outside. Henry was ordered outside, but was not cuffed until later, as he was carrying Hazel, who was bleeding to death. The boys testified that the handcuffing and other treatment by the officers caused them pain.

Only after the boys were cuffed and exiting the house did the officers begin to make their first inquiries as to the boys' right to be in the home.

Henry called his father, Jesus Sandoval (“Sandoval”), and told him that the police had entered the home and shot Hazel. Henry also asked an officer to call the animal hospital, but the officer said, “if you don't shut the f* * * up, I'm going to let your dog die right there.” Sandoval rushed home with his twelve-year-old daughter, Kenya, and found two of the boys handcuffed on the lawn, a swarm of officers and patrol cars, and Henry, covered in Hazel's blood. Sandoval, who was walking with a cane because of back surgery fifteen days earlier, thought his son had been shot, and tried to go to him. When officers told him he could not enter the property, he became upset. Roberts ordered officers to handcuff Sandoval.

As the officers pushed Sandoval against a squad car, Sandoval said, “please don't do this ․ I had a back surgery about 15 days ago․ I had major back surgery.” The officers grabbed Sandoval's arm to handcuff him, “pull[ed Sandoval] up by the arm,” and, “holding [Sandoval] from [his] belt or [his] pants,” “pushed” or “threw” Sandoval inside the patrol car. Sandoval began “screaming” that he was in “severe pain” and that he needed his medication. Sandoval was detained in the patrol car for 25 to 30 minutes, still “screaming in pain,” before officers responded to his requests for medication. Kenya witnessed all of these events.

Click to read more ...

White Vallejo Cop who Attacked Surrendering Black Man w/ Metal Flashlight has Similar Complaint Against Him From Last Year

From [HERE] The white Vallejo police officer, Spener Bottomley, seen in two viral videos attacking an unarmed Black man, Dejuan Hall, in a street median is the subject of a civil rights complaint filed in federal district court last October.

In court documents obtained by the Times-Herald, the complaint alleges Spencer Bottomley, along with four other Vallejo police officers, used excessive force during an April 2016 arrest. Derrick Shields alleges that while laying face down on his stomach, he was kicked, punched, and struck with a baton by the officers, according to the complaint. Shields also alleges Bottomley struck him with a flashlight during the incident.

“As a result of the police beating, plaintiff lost consciousness, experienced bruises all over his body and spine, swollen face, fractured jaw, abrasions, and broken teeth,” the complaint alleges. Shields is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, along with damages for emotional distress.

Two weeks ago the videotaped struggle between Bottomley and Dejuan Hall, 23, of Vacaville — which went viral nationally — has some residents concerned about excessive force by the police department.

The incident occurred about 3:15 p.m. on March 10, when police responded to a call from employees at the Valero gas station on Fairgrounds Drive that a customer, later identified as Hall, was acting erratically.

After Bottomley confronted Hall outside the store, Hall ran, and Bottomley gave chase. Witnesses said the first arriving white officer (Bottomley) chased him for several minutes until he finally gave up and sat down in the middle of the street.

Then, while he was sitting - surrendered on the ground in the median - the officer dove or pounced on him from behind. Perhaps surprised, Hall appeared to defend himself as the officer started striking him in his face with his fist and elbow. The officer then strikes the Black man with a metal flashlight. Subsequently, another white cop arrives and although both cops appear to have subdued him the cop continues to hit him with a metal flashlight. 

A second officer arrives and places his knee on Hall in an attempt to subdue him. Bottomley continues to strike Hall, while additional officers arrive on scene and demand the crowd back up from the incident.

“The kid surrendered,” said one witness who didn’t want to give his name. “The cop, on the other hand, came up right behind him and he was tired too. But he immediately dove on the kid and started wailing on him.” [MORE]

In response, numerous speakers at the March 14 Vallejo City Council meeting expressed concern regarding the content of the videos, with many demanding the council, mayor and city manager get involved and prevent similar incidents from occurring. Other speakers said officers need training on how to handle disabled individuals or persons with mental illness.

The local branch of the NAACP, Chapter 1081, issued a statement last week in response to the videos.

“Physical abuse or excessive police force is not an option,” wrote chapter president Jimmie Jackson. “With that on the table NAACP has launched its own independent investigation as to what occurred before, during and after the arrest of Mr. Dejuan Hall.

Click to read more ...

White Joliet Cops & DA Lied to Arrest, Charge & Detain Black Man: Supremes Rule 4th Amendment Applies to Pre-Trial Detention After Arrest

48 Days in Jail Off Lies & Bullshit. The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Tuesday that Fourth Amendment [text] protections against unreasonable seizure can continue after the legal process has concluded. In Manuel v. City of Joliet [SCOTUSblog materials], the court reversed the lower court in a 6-2 decision. [MORE] The opinion is [HERE] and [MORE] White supremacy/racism is carried out by deception & violence. 

Elijah Manuel, a Black man, was riding through Joliet, Illinois, in the passenger seat of a Dodge Charger, with his brother at the wheel. A pair of white Joliet police officers pulled the car over when the driver failed to signal a turn. According to the complaint in this case, officer Gruber immediately dragged Manuel from the car, pushed him to the ground, handcuffed him, and struck him repeatedly. Gruber yelled at him, saying, “[y]ou remember me, street punk? Now I got you, you fucking nigger.” Manuel claims that the police searched his car and tore it apart in the process.

The policeman then searched Manuel and found a vitamin bottle containing pills. Suspecting that the pills were actually illegal drugs, the officers conducted a field test of the bottle’s contents. The test came back negative for any controlled substance, leaving the officers with no evidence that Manuel had committed a crime. Still, the officers arrested Manuel and took him to the Joliet police station. 

There, an evidence technician tested the pills once again, and got the same (negative) result. But the technician lied in his report, claiming that one of the pills was “found to be . . . positive for the probable presence of ecstasy.”  Similarly, one of the arresting officers wrote in his report that “[f]rom [his] training and experience, [he] knew the pills to be ecstasy.” On the basis of those statements, another officer swore out a criminal complaint against Manuel, charging him withunlawful possession of a controlled substance. 

Manuel was brought before a [white?] county court judge later that day for a determination of whether there was probable cause for the charge, as necessary for further detention. The judge relied exclusively on the criminal complaint—which in turn relied exclusively on the police department’s fabrications—to support a finding of probable cause. Based on that determination, he sent Manuel to the county jail to await trial. In the somewhat obscure legal lingo of this case, Manuel’s subsequent detention was thus pursuant to “legal process”—because it followed from, and was authorized by, the judge’s probable-cause determination.

While Manuel sat in jail, the Illinois police laboratory reexamined the seized pills, and on April 1, it issued a report concluding (just as the prior two tests had) that they contained no controlled substances. But for unknown reasons, the prosecution—and, criticallyfor this case, Manuel’s detention—continued for more than another month. Only on May 4 did an Assistant State’s Attorney seek dismissal of the drug charge. The County Court immediately granted the request,and Manuel was released the next day. In all, he had spent 48 days in pretrial detention. 

The Supreme Court held that those objecting to a pretrial deprivation of liberty may invoke the Fourth Amendment when (as here) that deprivation occurs after legal process commences. The Fourth Amendment prohibits government officials from detaining a person inthe absence of probable cause. It applies at arrest pre-legal-process) arrest, but also for a person's (post-legal-process) pretrial detention - after a finding of probable cause by a judge.

In Manuel's case, cops initially arrested Manuel without probable cause, based solely on his possession of pills that had field tested negative for an illegal substance. Manuel could bring a claim for wrongful arrest under the Fourth Amendment. And the same is true as to a claim for wrongful detention—because Manuel’s subsequent weeks in custody were also unsupported by probable cause, and so also constitutionally unreasonable. No evidence of Manuel’s criminality had come to light in between the roadside arrest and the County Court proceeding initiating legal process; to the contrary, yet another test of Manuel’s pills had come back negative in that period. All that the judge had before him were police fabricationsabout the pills’ content. The judge’s order holding Manuel for trial therefore lacked any proper basis. And that means Manuel’s ensuing pretrial detention, no less than his original arrest, violated his Fourth Amendment rights.

Investigation Shows NYPD Hid Violent History of White Cop who Choked Eric Garner - Over 20 Records of Abuse, Among Worst on the Force

ThinkProgress has uncovered the disturbing secret history of the NYPD officer who killed Eric Garner. Documents obtained exclusively by ThinkProgress indicate that Officer Daniel Pantaleo, who is still employed by the NPYD (earning $120,000 a year), had a history of breaking the rules. These records are the subject of an ongoing lawsuit, and the city refuses to release them.

As you recall, on July 17, 2014, NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo wrapped his arms around Eric Garner’s neck and squeezed. He held tight as a gang of other white cops pounced on and slammed Garner, 43 years old and asthmatic, to the ground. Garner, who was unarmed at the time, gasped for air, arm outstretched, saying “I can’t breathe” over and over as officers piled on top of him. Then he was silent.

The next day, when the New York Daily News released video of the encounter, Garner had already died from neck and chest compression. His death sparked national protests about police violence against the black community, and his final words, “I can’t breathe,” became a rallying cry for the Black Lives Matter movement. On December 3, 2014, when a grand jury decided not to indict Pantaleo, thousands of people in cities all over the country stormed the streets to chant Garner’s dying words.

Pantaleo became a symbol of law enforcement that acts with impunity — especially with respect to white officers interacting violently with black men. Not only had Pantaleo killed a man accused of bootlegging cigarettes, but he’d used a chokehold prohibited by the NYPD to do it.

Before he put Garner in the chokehold, the records show, he had seven disciplinary complaints and 14 individual allegations lodged against him. Four of those allegations were substantiated by an independent review board.

Neither Pantaleo nor the NYPD responded to ThinkProgress requests for comment.

A pattern of problematic behavior

Pantaleo’s apparent disciplinary history was sent to ThinkProgress from an anonymous source who said they worked at the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB), an independent agency that receives and investigates complaints against NYPD officers. The source did not disclose their name or identity to ThinkProgress, but four New York City attorneys told ThinkProgress the documents match the appearance of summaries of disciplinary proceedings before the CCRB. Two of these attorneys declined to have their names associated with the verification of the documents, citing fear that they would be associated with the leak. (The documents can be found at the bottom of the article and [MORE on sources])

The documents show four of the allegations were substantiated by the CCRB, which recommended disciplinary action against Pantaleo years before he killed Garner. According to the records, the agency had sufficient evidence of an abusive vehicle stop and search by Pantaleo in 2011, which resulted in a two-part complaint. The agency also substantiated allegations about an abusive stop and frisk in 2012, which resulted in another two-part complaint that was reported by DNAinfo in April 2016.

According to the opinion of experts interviewed by ThinkProgress and our own review of CCRB data, this, along with the sheer number of cases, indicates a chronic history of complaints against Pantaleo and would make his disciplinary history with the CCRB among the worst on the force.

The documents indicate that the CCRB pushed for the harshest penalties it has the authority to recommend for all four substantiated allegations: charges that aren’t criminal, but “launch an administrative prosecution in the NYPD Trial Room,” according to the CCRB, and can result in suspension, lost vacation days, or termination. But the NYPD, which is not required to heed the CCRB’s recommendations, imposed the weakest disciplinary action for the vehicular incident: “instruction,” or additional training.

It also diverged from the CCRB’s stance on the 2012 stop and frisk. While the NYPD found Pantaleo guilty of unauthorized frisking, it cleared him of making an abusive stop. Instead of eight forfeited vacation days, per the CCRB’s recommendation, Pantaleo only had to forfeit two.

Jonathan Moore, a civil-rights attorney who represented Garner’s family and four of the Central Park Five, noted that the previous stop-and-frisk case was telling.

“Imagine that. Here’s the disposition of a substantiated charge for making a bad vehicle search and a bad vehicle stop, and the remedy is instruction,” Moore told ThinkProgress. “What happened on July 17th with Eric Garner was a bad stop and frisk.”

The documents also show allegations that Pantaleo refused to seek medical treatment for someone in 2009, hit someone against an inanimate object in 2011, made abusive vehicular stops and searches on two separate occasions in 2012, and used physical force during another incident in 2013.

The documents indicate that the 2009 and 2013 incidents were unsubstantiated by the CCRB, meaning “available evidence is insufficient to determine whether the officer did or did not commit misconduct.” So too were the vehicular stops and searches in 2012. The 2011 case was closed because the complainant was “uncooperative,” which the agency describes as not answering investigator requests for an interview or missing two interviews.

But legal experts say the number of complaints should have raised red flags, even if they weren’t substantiated.

“Regardless of the outcome, if you get three complaints in a year, you’re supposed to be on performance monitoring,” Moore said. “He got three in the course of two months in 2012.”

A record that stands out

Even a conservative reading of the documents indicates Pantaleo had among the worst CCRB disciplinary records on the force two years before his encounter with Garner. Yet the NYPD allowed him to stay on the streets.

When compared with publicly available data posted on the CCRB’s website, the records show that Pantaleo was subject to far more disciplinary allegations and substantiated complaints than the majority of his 36,000 fellow NYPD officers. The CCRB data, which is based on cases closed from 2006 to 2017, has its limitations: it does not appear to control for variables such as age or how long an officer has been on the force. For example, an officer with a decade in uniform may have the same number of complaints as an officer with just a year’s experience: common sense would say the less-experienced officer is the worse offender, but the records would make no distinction between these two hypothetical cases.

Nevertheless, a ThinkProgress analysis of available CCRB data found that only 1,750 current NYPD officers — or around 4.9 percent of the force — have received eight or more complaints, as Pantaleo has. The same data also shows that only 738 officers — about 2 percent — have two or more complaints with substantiated allegations.

Click to read more ...