By KEVIN KOENINGER
CINCINNATI (CN) - A diabetic suffering "a medical emergency caused by dangerously low sugar levels" was pulled over by Hamilton County Sheriff's officers, Tasered repeatedly, "violently dragged from the vehicle, thrown on the ground, kicked in the head by a boot, and stomped mercilessly while lying on his back," the man claims in Federal Court. Plaintiff John Harmon, who is black, says he was driving through a white area at the time.
Harmon and his wife sued the county, the sheriff and his department, four patrol officers and a sergeant for the beating he got in October 2009.
Sheriff's officers pulled him over after seeing his vehicle weaving, according to the complaint. Defendant Patrol Officer Ryan Wolf then "approached Harmon's vehicle with his gun drawn along with a second patrol officer, Matthew Wissel," the complaint states. "Without giving Harmon an opportunity to comply with any order, if, in fact, any order was given, Wolf shattered the driver's side window of Harmon's vehicle, spraying Harmon's face and body with broken glass. As this was occurring, a third patrol officer, defendant [John] Haynes, arrived at the scene.
"Almost immediately, Harmon was Tased by defendant Wissel. The officers attempted to remove Harmon from his vehicle by violently pulling on his neck. Harmon was then Tased again. They were unable to remove Harmon because Harmon was caught in his seatbelt. Defendant Wissel cut Harmon's seatbelt in order to remove him from the vehicle.
"Harmon was then violently dragged from the vehicle, thrown on the ground, kicked in the head by a boot, and stomped mercilessly while lying on his back. In the process, Harmon suffered numerous injuries, including a severely dislocated elbow and trauma to his shoulder and thumb. During the course of these events, which lasted approximately two minutes and twenty seconds, he was Tased seven times."
Three more officers arrived during the beating, and one of them "located a diabetic kit on the floorboard of Harmon's vehicle. At one point, Harmon was asked by the officers if he is diabetic, to which Harmon responded, 'Yes.' Paramedics were called to the scene, and it was confirmed that Harmon's blood sugar level was extremely low."
Harmon was taken to a hospital, where Patrol Officer Shawn Cox refused to let him use the bathroom. This "eventually resulted in Harmon being deeply humiliated and embarrassed when he urinated on himself," according to the complaint.
Harmon was charged with "(1) failure to comply with an order or signal of a police officer; (2) resisting arrest; (3) operating his vehicle with only one headlight; and (4) failure to drive in a marked lane." All charges were dropped 2 weeks later.
The complaint states: "The actions taken by the defendants against Harmon ... were due to the fact that Harmon was a large African-American male driving a sport utility vehicle at a late hour through a primarily white area of Hamilton County," Anderson Township.
Officers Wolf, Wissel, Cox and Haynes are named as defendants, along with Hamilton County, the Hamilton County Board of Commissioners, Hamilton County Sheriff Simon Leis Jr., and Sgt. Barbara Stuckey.
Harmon and his wife seek punitive damages for excessive force and other civil rights violations, malicious prosecution, false arrest, constitutional violations, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. They are represented by Timothy Burke with Manley Burke.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Ending era of racism
By Adrian Walker
Frank G. Cousins Jr. freely admits that he has a hard time talking about the entrenched problems involving race and gender in his department.
That isn’t an easy admission for any sheriff. But then again, Cousins might be the only law enforcement boss to file a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination against a group of his own subordinates. For creating a workplace that was hostile — toward him.
The Essex County sheriff won an important measure of vindication a few days ago, when a Superior Court judge ruled in his favor against two employees Cousins had fired for their role in running an often racist and sexist union website. The ruling, by Judge David A. Lowy, overturned an arbitrators’ ruling that would have reinstated them.
Cousins, a former state representative from Newburyport, was appointed sheriff by Governor William F. Weld in 1996. Some employees quickly showed their displeasure with having a black boss. Problems escalated in 1998, when the Essex County Corrections Officers Association was formed.
A union website became home to often anonymous attacks and slurs against minorities and women in the department, including, frequently, Cousins.
“You hear a lot about the culture of law enforcement,’’ Cousins said yesterday. “The culture here has been very difficult.’’
Black male employees were called pimps; females were accused of winning promotions by sleeping with superiors. One person posted a list of ways to commit suicide, and suggested it would be a good idea for “sell-outs — and Frank.’’
The poster was later identified as Lieutenant Scott Thompson, who was successfully prosecuted for making threats against the sheriff. Thompson left the department. The operative posting: In a passage critical of Cousins’s management, one employee asked if there was anyone who could help the situation. “Yeah, there was someone who can help, but James Earl Ray is dead!’’ Thompson responded, alluding to the man convicted of killing the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
That was when Cousins finally became concerned for his own safety. He filed a complaint against the union with the MCAD, which has issued a preliminary finding in his favor. He got a driver. He began watching his back.
“I’ve been around a long time and I have a tough skin, but that was a bad chapter,’’ Cousins said. “What was hard was that you had people who knew who was doing these things and they never came forward.’’
The latest ruling involves Lieutenant Jerry Enos and Sergeant K. Ricky Thompson, who were fired in 2007 over their roles as webmasters for the site. But an arbitrator bought their arguments they were not fired in a timely fashion and were not aware that their actions could cost them their jobs. But the judge roundly rejected that thinking.
“Enos and Thompson’s conduct disrupted the operation of the department, violated multiple rules and regulations of the department, and endangered the safety of their co-workers and those in the custody of the department,’’ Lowy wrote. “Although arbitrator’s decisions are given great deference, they are not sacrosanct.’’
Cousins believes that this ruling, though likely to be appealed, will be a turning point for the department. He said a new union president has brought a more mature and inclusive attitude. He thinks that finally, after 14 years on the job, employees have finally gotten accustomed to the presence of a black boss.
“I’m not naïve,’’ Cousins said. “Change is very difficult. I felt when I went there that we would have to work through some of these issues, but I didn’t expect it to rise to the level that it did.’’
Cousins has just easily won another six-year term, and said he is excited about the prospect of working on issues like recidivism and prisoner reentry without the distraction of racial and gender strife.
“There are a lot of good people here,’’ he said. “At this point, everyone just wants to move forward.’’
Frank G. Cousins Jr. freely admits that he has a hard time talking about the entrenched problems involving race and gender in his department.
That isn’t an easy admission for any sheriff. But then again, Cousins might be the only law enforcement boss to file a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination against a group of his own subordinates. For creating a workplace that was hostile — toward him.
The Essex County sheriff won an important measure of vindication a few days ago, when a Superior Court judge ruled in his favor against two employees Cousins had fired for their role in running an often racist and sexist union website. The ruling, by Judge David A. Lowy, overturned an arbitrators’ ruling that would have reinstated them.
Cousins, a former state representative from Newburyport, was appointed sheriff by Governor William F. Weld in 1996. Some employees quickly showed their displeasure with having a black boss. Problems escalated in 1998, when the Essex County Corrections Officers Association was formed.
A union website became home to often anonymous attacks and slurs against minorities and women in the department, including, frequently, Cousins.
“You hear a lot about the culture of law enforcement,’’ Cousins said yesterday. “The culture here has been very difficult.’’
Black male employees were called pimps; females were accused of winning promotions by sleeping with superiors. One person posted a list of ways to commit suicide, and suggested it would be a good idea for “sell-outs — and Frank.’’
The poster was later identified as Lieutenant Scott Thompson, who was successfully prosecuted for making threats against the sheriff. Thompson left the department. The operative posting: In a passage critical of Cousins’s management, one employee asked if there was anyone who could help the situation. “Yeah, there was someone who can help, but James Earl Ray is dead!’’ Thompson responded, alluding to the man convicted of killing the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
That was when Cousins finally became concerned for his own safety. He filed a complaint against the union with the MCAD, which has issued a preliminary finding in his favor. He got a driver. He began watching his back.
“I’ve been around a long time and I have a tough skin, but that was a bad chapter,’’ Cousins said. “What was hard was that you had people who knew who was doing these things and they never came forward.’’
The latest ruling involves Lieutenant Jerry Enos and Sergeant K. Ricky Thompson, who were fired in 2007 over their roles as webmasters for the site. But an arbitrator bought their arguments they were not fired in a timely fashion and were not aware that their actions could cost them their jobs. But the judge roundly rejected that thinking.
“Enos and Thompson’s conduct disrupted the operation of the department, violated multiple rules and regulations of the department, and endangered the safety of their co-workers and those in the custody of the department,’’ Lowy wrote. “Although arbitrator’s decisions are given great deference, they are not sacrosanct.’’
Cousins believes that this ruling, though likely to be appealed, will be a turning point for the department. He said a new union president has brought a more mature and inclusive attitude. He thinks that finally, after 14 years on the job, employees have finally gotten accustomed to the presence of a black boss.
“I’m not naïve,’’ Cousins said. “Change is very difficult. I felt when I went there that we would have to work through some of these issues, but I didn’t expect it to rise to the level that it did.’’
Cousins has just easily won another six-year term, and said he is excited about the prospect of working on issues like recidivism and prisoner reentry without the distraction of racial and gender strife.
“There are a lot of good people here,’’ he said. “At this point, everyone just wants to move forward.’’
Monday, December 13, 2010
The 6 Most Shocking Cases of Police Stun-Gun Abuse
By Lauren Kelley
Take a police force that’s notorious for its use of excessive force, add a massive arsenal of tasers, put those weapons in the hands of low-level patrol officers, and what do you get?
If you guessed “an awful mess of civil rights abuses and safety concerns,” then, unfortunately, you’re correct. A new report from the City of Chicago Independent Police Review Authority, which investigates police misconduct cases in the city, has found that incidences of taser use by Chicago police officers increased by nearly 350% over the past year in the wake of the department’s decision to more than double its taser arsenal in the name of “increasing officer safety” and “defusing trouble.”
Here are the numbers: In March, the department decided to increase its supply of tasers from 280 to 660 and began putting them in every patrol officer’s squad car. (Previously, only sergeants and field training officers were allowed to carry tasers.) As a direct result, Chicago officers used tasers a whopping 683 times in the 12-month period ending September 30, compared to 197 times in 2009 and 163 in 2008.
The problem with the increase is that tasers are far too often used inappropriately – on innocent citizens and minors, for instance – and they’ve been proven to be unsafe, causing dozens of heart problems and even deaths. To make matters worse, Chicago’s Independent Police Review Authority has said it will no longer investigate every case of police taser use, arguing that the growing caseload is overwhelming the short-staffed office. Instead, it will only investigate taser use “if allegations of misconduct are made, serious injury or death resulted, or a minor or senior citizen was targeted.”
Chicago’s unchecked use of tasers is setting a dangerous example for the rest of the country to follow, as it opens the door to rampant abuses of power. There are myriad stories of taser-happy police officers wreaking havoc on people’s lives that should give us pause on that matter. Below are some of the most egregious examples of taser abuse by police in Chicago and elsewhere in the country, illustrating why the willy-nilly increase of taser use is terrible for citizens.
1. Man having diabetic seizure tasered 11 times: In April 2009, Prospero Lassi suffered a diabetes-induced seizure at his home in the Chicago suburb of LaGrange Park. Lassi’s roommate called 911, and both EMTs and police responded. When the EMTs asked police officers to help move Lassi, who had been unable to move his body, one of Lassi’s arms flailed uncontrollably, striking one of the officers. According to Lassi, he was then tasered an incredible 11 times, for nearly a minute, as he lay immobilized. The attack was so severe that Lassi was hospitalized for five days and out of work for three months due to the injuries he sustained that day.
2. Officers taser 14-year-old boy, sending him into cardiac arrest: In February 2005, Chicago police were called on a young teenager living in a state group home who was reportedly acting out. According to Cook County Public Guardian Robert Harris, the boy had calmed down and was sitting on a couch when the police arrived. Nevertheless, officers said the boy lunged at them, so they tasered him, sending him into cardiac arrest.
3. Officers repeatedly taser, threaten to sodomize foster children: Elsewhere in Illinois, at the Southern Thirty Adolescent Center in Mt. Vernon, two officers lashed out unprovoked at several foster youth in July 2008, repeatedly using a taser on them. One of the officers also threatened to sodomize a young man, causing the boy to soil himself. Both the county sheriff and the Illinois State Police determined that the officers had done nothing wrong. A lawsuit brought against the officers was settled for $750,000.
Take a police force that’s notorious for its use of excessive force, add a massive arsenal of tasers, put those weapons in the hands of low-level patrol officers, and what do you get?
If you guessed “an awful mess of civil rights abuses and safety concerns,” then, unfortunately, you’re correct. A new report from the City of Chicago Independent Police Review Authority, which investigates police misconduct cases in the city, has found that incidences of taser use by Chicago police officers increased by nearly 350% over the past year in the wake of the department’s decision to more than double its taser arsenal in the name of “increasing officer safety” and “defusing trouble.”
Here are the numbers: In March, the department decided to increase its supply of tasers from 280 to 660 and began putting them in every patrol officer’s squad car. (Previously, only sergeants and field training officers were allowed to carry tasers.) As a direct result, Chicago officers used tasers a whopping 683 times in the 12-month period ending September 30, compared to 197 times in 2009 and 163 in 2008.
The problem with the increase is that tasers are far too often used inappropriately – on innocent citizens and minors, for instance – and they’ve been proven to be unsafe, causing dozens of heart problems and even deaths. To make matters worse, Chicago’s Independent Police Review Authority has said it will no longer investigate every case of police taser use, arguing that the growing caseload is overwhelming the short-staffed office. Instead, it will only investigate taser use “if allegations of misconduct are made, serious injury or death resulted, or a minor or senior citizen was targeted.”
Chicago’s unchecked use of tasers is setting a dangerous example for the rest of the country to follow, as it opens the door to rampant abuses of power. There are myriad stories of taser-happy police officers wreaking havoc on people’s lives that should give us pause on that matter. Below are some of the most egregious examples of taser abuse by police in Chicago and elsewhere in the country, illustrating why the willy-nilly increase of taser use is terrible for citizens.
1. Man having diabetic seizure tasered 11 times: In April 2009, Prospero Lassi suffered a diabetes-induced seizure at his home in the Chicago suburb of LaGrange Park. Lassi’s roommate called 911, and both EMTs and police responded. When the EMTs asked police officers to help move Lassi, who had been unable to move his body, one of Lassi’s arms flailed uncontrollably, striking one of the officers. According to Lassi, he was then tasered an incredible 11 times, for nearly a minute, as he lay immobilized. The attack was so severe that Lassi was hospitalized for five days and out of work for three months due to the injuries he sustained that day.
2. Officers taser 14-year-old boy, sending him into cardiac arrest: In February 2005, Chicago police were called on a young teenager living in a state group home who was reportedly acting out. According to Cook County Public Guardian Robert Harris, the boy had calmed down and was sitting on a couch when the police arrived. Nevertheless, officers said the boy lunged at them, so they tasered him, sending him into cardiac arrest.
3. Officers repeatedly taser, threaten to sodomize foster children: Elsewhere in Illinois, at the Southern Thirty Adolescent Center in Mt. Vernon, two officers lashed out unprovoked at several foster youth in July 2008, repeatedly using a taser on them. One of the officers also threatened to sodomize a young man, causing the boy to soil himself. Both the county sheriff and the Illinois State Police determined that the officers had done nothing wrong. A lawsuit brought against the officers was settled for $750,000.
Black teen who filmed an LAUSD campus cop hitting a student faces bizarre charges and years in prison
By KATHARINE RUSS
On Dec. 2, Jeremy Marks, a Verdugo Hills High School special education student, was offered a new plea offer by the L.A. County District Attorney: If he pled guilty to charges of obstructing an officer, resisting arrest, criminal threats and "attempted lynching," he'd serve only 32 months in prison. That actually was an improvement from the previous offer made to the young, black high schooler - seven years in prison. The D.A. then handed Angela Berry-Jacoby, Mark's lawyer, a stack of 130 documents, and the message within those thick files was clear: She says District Attorney Steve Cooley's prosecution team plans to try to discredit Marks, and several other Verdugo Hills High School students on the witness stand, by dragging out misbehavior incidents from their school records over the years. Marks, 18, has been sitting in Peter Pitchess Detention Center, a tough adult jail, since May 10. Bail was set at $155,000, which his working-class parents can't pay to free their son for Christmas. His mother is a part-time clerk at a city swimming pool, his father is a lab tech. The first thing to understand is that Jeremy Marks touched no one during his "attempted lynching" of LAUSD campus police officer Erin Robles. The second is that Marks' weapon was the camera in his cell phone. The third is that Officer Robles' own actions helped turn an exceedingly minor wrongdoing - a student smoking at a bus stop - into a state prison case. The altercation that has ruined Marks' life occurred in early May at a Metro bus stop on a city street a few blocks from Verdugo Hills High School as about 30 kids were waiting to board a bus. Witness accounts say campus police officer Robles challenged an unnamed 15-year-old for allegedly smoking - it's unclear whether he was smoking or just holding what has been variously reported to be a cigar, cigarette or joint. When the 15-year-old resisted, Robles grabbed and shoved him, according to eyewitnesses. In Robles' sworn statement, she says she pulled the resisting boy to the ground as other students shouted "Fuck you!" and Marks called out the name of the gang Piru Bloods. Robles testified that the minor who allegedly was smoking "is screaming, 'Hit me, fucking bitch, hit me, you stupid bitch, hit me, you dyke!'" When that boy turned his body and possibly elbowed her, Robles says, "That is when I did strike him," with her expanded baton, "about three times in the left leg." She further stated that she sprayed him with pepper spray. The kid then hit her hand, she dropped her pepper spray can, and another student grabbed it off the ground. Students and Berry-Jacobs allege to L.A. Weekly that Robles then slammed the student's head against the bus window - a violation of numerous police policies. After that, several stunned students got out their cell phone cameras to record what was unfolding. Robles struck the 15-year-old's head on the window so hard, eyewitnesses tell the Weekly, that the window was forced out of its rubberized casement and broken. Robles has changed her story in documents obtained by the Weekly, as she describes which student allegedly called out, "Kick her ass!" - the phrase at the heart of Cooley's case against Marks, and the basis of the "attempted lynching" charge against him. But student videos of Marks doing his own cell phone taping tell a different story. Two YouTube videos show Marks in a grayish shirt, getting out his cell phone as he stands in the background of the scene near a student in a white shirt. [View the student videos here: Video 1 and Video 2] Marks tapes the final minutes of the MTA bus stop altercation as several students - not including Marks - loudly and repeatedly taunt Robles. The videos appear to show that Robles had little ability or training to handle razzing from angry high schoolers. She holds the 15-year-old against the MTA bus as he repeatedly tries to slap and push her hands off, and she never appears to have him fully under control. She turns several times to look behind her at rowdy students, several feet away on a low wall, who jump around and cheer for the student Robles is grasping. The videos show the loudest and angriest student in a black shirt and sweatpants rushing a few feet toward Robles more than once, and another student in a striped shirt moving toward her - but not Jeremy Marks. In the videos, Marks, in his grayish shirt, can be seen speaking once. He never joins the extended taunting or picks anything up off the ground. [View the student videos here: Video 1 and Video 2] Testifying at a preliminary hearing over the summer, Robles acknowledges she doesn't know who grabbed for her fallen pepper spray, or even why fellow Officer Gilbert Rea decided to pin it on Marks in the incident report submitted by campus police, which Robles did not write. Her preliminary hearing testimony also reveals the chaos during which Robles now claims she is certain it was Marks - who student videos show standing out of her line of sight most of the time - who yelled, "Kick her ass." "I was very scared," Robles testified. "I got my O.C. spray to control (the 15-year-old student) that was facing me, and went to spray him. Sprayed him for about one, maybe two seconds. He had hit the pepper spray out of my hands and it landed in between the bus and the sidewalk in the gutter. It was starting almost a riot. "It was getting very, very wild. There was screaming, people were walking behind me. There were individuals trying to reach for my O.C. spray that had fallen on the ground. I was screaming for help on my radio. I could not leave that weapon there for all the juveniles and a few adults, as well, in the area. So after the O.C. had fallen out of my hands, I used my right hand and got my baton out next. "There is a subject by the name of 'Victor' that went after my O.C. spray, a minor as well. And also - defendant (Jeremy Marks) wasn't necessarily going to grab it, but he was walking around me - made me believe that he was. I believe when I told (Officer Gilbert) Rea that (Jeremy Marks) was in the area - I don't know what conclusions (Officer Rea) formed when he was writing the [incident report], or this Arrest Report." One student waiting for the bus last May described the incident to the Weekly as being driven by Robles' repeated overreactions after coming down on a kid for smoking: "The officer (Erin Robles), initially, confronted the student over a cigar." After the student yelled at and grappled with Robles, "She slammed the student into a wall, threw him on the ground, took out her pepper spray, slammed him into the bus, broke the window out of the bus with his head, sprayed him in the face and slammed him into the bus some more." Marks' mother, Rochelle Pittman, has barely been able to sleep since the campus cops and Los Angeles County prosecutors began to single out her son as the bad actor that day. Yet he had no physical contact with anyone during the bus incident, was shown on video to be among the quieter students watching the altercation, and spent much of the time taking pictures of it with his cell phone. The family recently hired two new criminal defense attorneys, Mark Ravis and Karen Travis, to defend him. Pittman tells the Weekly that Los Angeles School Police Officer George Sandoval told her on the day her son was arrested that Marks was being charged with a serious crime for saying, "Kick her ass!" Several Verdugo Hills students and parents have questioned whether the alleged words spoken by Marks even rise to the severe criminal charges of "attempted lynching," which means trying to "incite a riot during an attempt to free a suspect from police custody." All the other students initially detained by police, including the student who shoved and fought with Robles, were released May 11. But more and more charges were piled onto Marks. Cooley's team claims Marks "resisted arrest" at the McDonalds where he was arrested after he watched the bus incident. Pittman says her son and two of his friends walked to McDonalds after the excitement was over. At McDonalds, "Police cars came flying from everywhere, jumped out on my son with their guns pointed right at him, yelling and screaming for him to get on the ground," she says. Pittman says Marks did not resist arrest, doing everything he was asked. His own mom might be expected to say that. But for many present at the bus incident, something doesn't add up. Student eyewitnesses told the Weekly that Marks is not the student who laughingly told the teenager being struck by Robles to "kick her ass!" But they are terrified of repercussions against them on campus if they speak out against LAUSD's school police. Pittman expects the grandmother of the student struck by Robles to sue the L.A. School Police Department. Attorney Berry-Jacoby says she has a copy of an invoice that shows an order to replace the MTA bus window. The campus police, now blaming Marks for grabbing the pepper spray can after Robles dropped it, have dropped all interest in the "Victor" identified by Robles in her sworn testimony. Says Berry-Jacoby: "In Officer Rea's report of what Officer Robles allegedly told him, Jeremy tried to take her pepper spray after it was knocked out of her hand. In her testimony in court she stated that 'Victor' tried to take her pepper spray but that Jeremy was walking around behind her." The Weekly has contacted Cooley's office four times for an explanation of the changing stories by school police officers. Its calls have not been returned. Lydia Grant, an LAUSD student safety activist and community liaison, says she's disgusted by the piling-on of accusations against a student observer with a cell phone camera, and the severe charges that could send him to a California prison. "In my opinion, the district is responsible for the beating of a youth and the entire bus-stop incident, including the false imprisonment of a special education student for seven months," Grant says. "The officer involved failed to write a police report, and the LASPD has failed on two occasions to appear in court, under subpoena, to turn over any evidence." Coincidentally, six days before the bus incident, Grant says she reported two officers to school authorities, Erin Robles and Angelica Kegayan, "and asked for their removal," after Grant got complaints from students and parents that the two were harassing them. L.A. School District Police Department deputy chief Tim Anderson stands by the case against Marks, saying, "When someone is arrested, we obviously have to know everything from reasonable suspicion, probable cause, the elements of the crime, etc." Berry-Jacoby says Robles met with deputy District Attorney Ed Green for nearly three hours and told Green she saw a video taken by a "kid" inside the bus that would substantiate her claim that Marks urged the 15-year-old to attack her. Berry-Jacoby says she has asked the D.A. for a copy of the video, as is her right as a member of the defense team. But, she tells the Weekly, she was appalled to learn from Deputy D.A. Chuck Stodel that Officer Robles never viewed the video purportedly taken from inside the bus - and the student on the bus no longer has the phone that purportedly contained the footage. Cooley's office has not responded to the Weekly's request for an explanation, nor has the "kid" from inside the bus been identified by prosecutors as a witness. School police chief Anderson says, in defense of the stiff bail hike that is keeping Marks in the rough adult Peter Pitchess jail for months, "I don't know him personally or have any other information about him. However, one of the unique things about our department is that we are on or around these two campuses every day, and we get to know the students, the staff, the community, etc., very well." But in fact, L.A. Weekly investigated the tiny, and controversial, school police agency in 2009 in its cover story "LAUSD's Finest: How an Oblivious School Board Lets a Tiny, Scandal-Ridden Campus Police Force Endanger L.A. Kids"
On Dec. 2, Jeremy Marks, a Verdugo Hills High School special education student, was offered a new plea offer by the L.A. County District Attorney: If he pled guilty to charges of obstructing an officer, resisting arrest, criminal threats and "attempted lynching," he'd serve only 32 months in prison. That actually was an improvement from the previous offer made to the young, black high schooler - seven years in prison. The D.A. then handed Angela Berry-Jacoby, Mark's lawyer, a stack of 130 documents, and the message within those thick files was clear: She says District Attorney Steve Cooley's prosecution team plans to try to discredit Marks, and several other Verdugo Hills High School students on the witness stand, by dragging out misbehavior incidents from their school records over the years. Marks, 18, has been sitting in Peter Pitchess Detention Center, a tough adult jail, since May 10. Bail was set at $155,000, which his working-class parents can't pay to free their son for Christmas. His mother is a part-time clerk at a city swimming pool, his father is a lab tech. The first thing to understand is that Jeremy Marks touched no one during his "attempted lynching" of LAUSD campus police officer Erin Robles. The second is that Marks' weapon was the camera in his cell phone. The third is that Officer Robles' own actions helped turn an exceedingly minor wrongdoing - a student smoking at a bus stop - into a state prison case. The altercation that has ruined Marks' life occurred in early May at a Metro bus stop on a city street a few blocks from Verdugo Hills High School as about 30 kids were waiting to board a bus. Witness accounts say campus police officer Robles challenged an unnamed 15-year-old for allegedly smoking - it's unclear whether he was smoking or just holding what has been variously reported to be a cigar, cigarette or joint. When the 15-year-old resisted, Robles grabbed and shoved him, according to eyewitnesses. In Robles' sworn statement, she says she pulled the resisting boy to the ground as other students shouted "Fuck you!" and Marks called out the name of the gang Piru Bloods. Robles testified that the minor who allegedly was smoking "is screaming, 'Hit me, fucking bitch, hit me, you stupid bitch, hit me, you dyke!'" When that boy turned his body and possibly elbowed her, Robles says, "That is when I did strike him," with her expanded baton, "about three times in the left leg." She further stated that she sprayed him with pepper spray. The kid then hit her hand, she dropped her pepper spray can, and another student grabbed it off the ground. Students and Berry-Jacobs allege to L.A. Weekly that Robles then slammed the student's head against the bus window - a violation of numerous police policies. After that, several stunned students got out their cell phone cameras to record what was unfolding. Robles struck the 15-year-old's head on the window so hard, eyewitnesses tell the Weekly, that the window was forced out of its rubberized casement and broken. Robles has changed her story in documents obtained by the Weekly, as she describes which student allegedly called out, "Kick her ass!" - the phrase at the heart of Cooley's case against Marks, and the basis of the "attempted lynching" charge against him. But student videos of Marks doing his own cell phone taping tell a different story. Two YouTube videos show Marks in a grayish shirt, getting out his cell phone as he stands in the background of the scene near a student in a white shirt. [View the student videos here: Video 1
Friday, December 10, 2010
Jury Convicts 3 Officers in Post-Katrina Death
By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON
NEW ORLEANS — More than five years after a man named Henry Glover was shot and his body burned here by police officers in the days after Hurricane Katrina, a jury has weighed in on the circumstances of his death. Three police officers were found guilty Thursday night on nine federal counts in an emotionally charged case that painted a grim portrait of the city’s troubled Police Department.
David Warren, a former police officer, was found guilty of manslaughter in the shooting of Mr. Glover; Officer Gregory McRae was convicted of obstructing justice and other charges for burning Mr. Glover’s body; and Lt. Travis McCabe was convicted of perjury and obstructing justice for drawing up a false police report.
Two other police officers were found not guilty on various counts. The mixed verdict, returned by the jury after nearly three days of deliberation, left relatives and friends of Mr. Glover with an incomplete sense of vindication.
“All of them should have been found guilty,” said Rebecca Glover, Mr. Glover’s aunt, as she left the courtroom. “They all participated in this. How are you going to let them go free?”
This was the first trial of an untold number of New Orleans officers being investigated by the federal authorities. There are at least eight other such investigations into actions by the city Police Department, including one into shootings on the Danziger Bridge on Sept 4, 2005, that left two civilians dead and six wounded.
Six police officers who were indicted in that case face trial, four of them charged in connection with the deaths. Five other officers have pleaded guilty. One of them, Michael Hunter, was sentenced to eight years in prison last week.
The horrific nature of some of the actions being investigated, as well as the city’s stubborn crime rate, led the Justice Department to begin conducting a full scale review of the department in May.
Few of the criminal cases contain such grisly details as the one involving Mr. Glover, which remained uninvestigated for years despite repeated inquiries by his family. In late 2008, an article about the killing was published by The Nation, in a joint investigative project with ProPublica. Federal investigators began looking into the case shortly afterward.
Preparing to leave the city, Mr. Glover, 31, and a friend drove in a stolen truck to a strip mall in the Algiers neighborhood, across the Mississippi River from downtown New Orleans. They had come to pick up suitcases that had been looted from the mall but left behind earlier, prosecutors said.
Mr. Warren, who was patrolling the strip mall — which was being used as a detective bureau — shot Mr. Glover, who was unarmed. Mr. Warren claimed at trial that he had fired in self-defense, and that he had perceived something in Mr. Glover’s hand. His partner testified that he shot him in the back. Mr. Glover, his shirt covered in blood, was picked up by a stranger, William Tanner, who drove him, his brother and a friend to an elementary school that was being used as headquarters for a police special operations division.
There, Mr. Tanner says, he was beaten by Lt. Dwayne Scheuermann and Officer McRae, though they were both found not guilty on this count. Officer McRae did not deny taking Mr. Tanner’s car, with Mr. Glover’s body inside, and driving it to a levee behind a police substation. There, Mr. McRae used flares to set afire the car and the body.
The other two defendants, Robert Italiano, a retired lieutenant, and Lieutenant McCabe, were charged with creating a false report to cover up the killing. Lieutenant Italiano was found not guilty.
All of the testimony was haunted by the specter of Hurricane Katrina, and a debate about the nature of law and order within catastrophe.
“When you take into account reasonable versus unreasonable,” Rick Simmons, who represents Mr. Warren, said in his closing arguments, “you have to take into consideration the conditions under which he was living.”
But prosecutors, who described Mr. Warren as zealously looking for an opportunity to use his expensive personal assault rifle, said that even under the harrowing conditions after the hurricane, the rule of law was never abandoned.
“Hurricane Katrina didn’t turn petty theft into a capital offense,” said Jared Fishman, a federal prosecutor in his closing arguments.
NEW ORLEANS — More than five years after a man named Henry Glover was shot and his body burned here by police officers in the days after Hurricane Katrina, a jury has weighed in on the circumstances of his death. Three police officers were found guilty Thursday night on nine federal counts in an emotionally charged case that painted a grim portrait of the city’s troubled Police Department.
David Warren, a former police officer, was found guilty of manslaughter in the shooting of Mr. Glover; Officer Gregory McRae was convicted of obstructing justice and other charges for burning Mr. Glover’s body; and Lt. Travis McCabe was convicted of perjury and obstructing justice for drawing up a false police report.
Two other police officers were found not guilty on various counts. The mixed verdict, returned by the jury after nearly three days of deliberation, left relatives and friends of Mr. Glover with an incomplete sense of vindication.
“All of them should have been found guilty,” said Rebecca Glover, Mr. Glover’s aunt, as she left the courtroom. “They all participated in this. How are you going to let them go free?”
This was the first trial of an untold number of New Orleans officers being investigated by the federal authorities. There are at least eight other such investigations into actions by the city Police Department, including one into shootings on the Danziger Bridge on Sept 4, 2005, that left two civilians dead and six wounded.
Six police officers who were indicted in that case face trial, four of them charged in connection with the deaths. Five other officers have pleaded guilty. One of them, Michael Hunter, was sentenced to eight years in prison last week.
The horrific nature of some of the actions being investigated, as well as the city’s stubborn crime rate, led the Justice Department to begin conducting a full scale review of the department in May.
Few of the criminal cases contain such grisly details as the one involving Mr. Glover, which remained uninvestigated for years despite repeated inquiries by his family. In late 2008, an article about the killing was published by The Nation, in a joint investigative project with ProPublica. Federal investigators began looking into the case shortly afterward.
Preparing to leave the city, Mr. Glover, 31, and a friend drove in a stolen truck to a strip mall in the Algiers neighborhood, across the Mississippi River from downtown New Orleans. They had come to pick up suitcases that had been looted from the mall but left behind earlier, prosecutors said.
Mr. Warren, who was patrolling the strip mall — which was being used as a detective bureau — shot Mr. Glover, who was unarmed. Mr. Warren claimed at trial that he had fired in self-defense, and that he had perceived something in Mr. Glover’s hand. His partner testified that he shot him in the back. Mr. Glover, his shirt covered in blood, was picked up by a stranger, William Tanner, who drove him, his brother and a friend to an elementary school that was being used as headquarters for a police special operations division.
There, Mr. Tanner says, he was beaten by Lt. Dwayne Scheuermann and Officer McRae, though they were both found not guilty on this count. Officer McRae did not deny taking Mr. Tanner’s car, with Mr. Glover’s body inside, and driving it to a levee behind a police substation. There, Mr. McRae used flares to set afire the car and the body.
The other two defendants, Robert Italiano, a retired lieutenant, and Lieutenant McCabe, were charged with creating a false report to cover up the killing. Lieutenant Italiano was found not guilty.
All of the testimony was haunted by the specter of Hurricane Katrina, and a debate about the nature of law and order within catastrophe.
“When you take into account reasonable versus unreasonable,” Rick Simmons, who represents Mr. Warren, said in his closing arguments, “you have to take into consideration the conditions under which he was living.”
But prosecutors, who described Mr. Warren as zealously looking for an opportunity to use his expensive personal assault rifle, said that even under the harrowing conditions after the hurricane, the rule of law was never abandoned.
“Hurricane Katrina didn’t turn petty theft into a capital offense,” said Jared Fishman, a federal prosecutor in his closing arguments.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
OC Deputy Charged In On-Duty Sexual Assault Of Teen
SANTA ANA (CBS) — An Orange County sheriff’s deputy was charged Thursday with sexually assaulting a 17-year-old girl while on duty.
Scott Cole, 41, of Hesperia, could face up to three years in prison if convicted of a felony count of sexual penetration by a foreign object of a minor, said Deputy District Attorney Robert Mestman.
Cole made his initial appearance this afternoon before an Orange County judge, who postponed the defendant’s arraignment until tomorrow morning and released him on his own recognizance.
The teen’s mother called sheriff’s deputies on June 23 to report that some of her jewelry was stolen from her residence in unincorporated Orange County near Tustin, Mestman said.
Cole, who responded to the call, first spoke to the girl’s mother and sister in the living room and later allegedly told the 17-year-old, who was in her bedroom, to take off her clothes, Mestman said.
He left the bedroom to speak again to the mother and her other daughter for a few minutes before he returned to the girl’s bedroom and closed the door, the prosecutor alleged.
While in the bedroom, Cole is accused of digitally penetrating the girl, Mestman said.
“She was in shock when it happened,” he said.
The mother and sister “thought it was suspicious he was in there alone with the door closed,” the prosecutor said.
Once Cole left, the girl told her mother what allegedly happened.
Cole, who has been on paid administrative leave since June, has been with the department for 14 years, according to John McDonald, a spokesman for the Orange County Sheriff’s Department.
Scott Cole, 41, of Hesperia, could face up to three years in prison if convicted of a felony count of sexual penetration by a foreign object of a minor, said Deputy District Attorney Robert Mestman.
Cole made his initial appearance this afternoon before an Orange County judge, who postponed the defendant’s arraignment until tomorrow morning and released him on his own recognizance.
The teen’s mother called sheriff’s deputies on June 23 to report that some of her jewelry was stolen from her residence in unincorporated Orange County near Tustin, Mestman said.
Cole, who responded to the call, first spoke to the girl’s mother and sister in the living room and later allegedly told the 17-year-old, who was in her bedroom, to take off her clothes, Mestman said.
He left the bedroom to speak again to the mother and her other daughter for a few minutes before he returned to the girl’s bedroom and closed the door, the prosecutor alleged.
While in the bedroom, Cole is accused of digitally penetrating the girl, Mestman said.
“She was in shock when it happened,” he said.
The mother and sister “thought it was suspicious he was in there alone with the door closed,” the prosecutor said.
Once Cole left, the girl told her mother what allegedly happened.
Cole, who has been on paid administrative leave since June, has been with the department for 14 years, according to John McDonald, a spokesman for the Orange County Sheriff’s Department.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Atlanta Pays $1M to Gay Bar to Settle Suit Against Police
By Ernie Suggs
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Atlanta's long battle with the Atlanta Eagle club is finally over, and the city is $1 million poorer for it.
On Monday, the Atlanta City Council passed a resolution to settle a lawsuit in its dispute with the Atlanta Eagle, a gay bar in Midtown that was the location of a botched police raid in September 2009.
The council voted 14-0 to make the payment of $1,002,500 in the case of Calhoun v. Pennington, but it reserved deep discussion on the matter to executive session. Geoff Calhoun was a patron of the bar, and Richard Pennington was the city's police chief at the time of the raid.
After going into executive session to address Councilman Howard Shook's question on how the final figure was determined, the council returned and voted. As part of the settlement, the city will also oversee reforms within the Atlanta Police Department.
The settlement must now go back to a federal judge for final approval. At this point, the money will go into an escrow account controlled by the nonprofit legal group Lambda Legal.
On behalf of 19 patrons of the nightclub, attorney Dan Grossman filed the lawsuit in November 2009 alleging that the APD violated the federal and state constitutional rights of the people at the bar by illegally detaining them. It also said officers did not present a search warrant and used anti-gay slurs during the raid on Sept. 10, 2009.
Following a court-mandated gag order by federal Magistrate Judge Alan J. Baverman, neither Calhoun nor Grossman would comment on the ruling. But immediately after the council's vote, Calhoun walked out of the chambers wiping tears from his eyes. Grossman followed and hugged him.
In the widely reported raid, dozens of police officers swarmed into the Ponce de Leon nightclub after undercover vice officers reported that they had witnessed men having sex while other patrons watched. The department also received complaints alleging drug sales on the premises. During the raid, 62 patrons were forced to lie down on the bar's floor. No search warrant was served, and no charges were ever filed against any of them. Police did arrest eight Eagle employees on permit violations.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Atlanta's long battle with the Atlanta Eagle club is finally over, and the city is $1 million poorer for it.
On Monday, the Atlanta City Council passed a resolution to settle a lawsuit in its dispute with the Atlanta Eagle, a gay bar in Midtown that was the location of a botched police raid in September 2009.
The council voted 14-0 to make the payment of $1,002,500 in the case of Calhoun v. Pennington, but it reserved deep discussion on the matter to executive session. Geoff Calhoun was a patron of the bar, and Richard Pennington was the city's police chief at the time of the raid.
After going into executive session to address Councilman Howard Shook's question on how the final figure was determined, the council returned and voted. As part of the settlement, the city will also oversee reforms within the Atlanta Police Department.
The settlement must now go back to a federal judge for final approval. At this point, the money will go into an escrow account controlled by the nonprofit legal group Lambda Legal.
On behalf of 19 patrons of the nightclub, attorney Dan Grossman filed the lawsuit in November 2009 alleging that the APD violated the federal and state constitutional rights of the people at the bar by illegally detaining them. It also said officers did not present a search warrant and used anti-gay slurs during the raid on Sept. 10, 2009.
Following a court-mandated gag order by federal Magistrate Judge Alan J. Baverman, neither Calhoun nor Grossman would comment on the ruling. But immediately after the council's vote, Calhoun walked out of the chambers wiping tears from his eyes. Grossman followed and hugged him.
In the widely reported raid, dozens of police officers swarmed into the Ponce de Leon nightclub after undercover vice officers reported that they had witnessed men having sex while other patrons watched. The department also received complaints alleging drug sales on the premises. During the raid, 62 patrons were forced to lie down on the bar's floor. No search warrant was served, and no charges were ever filed against any of them. Police did arrest eight Eagle employees on permit violations.
Man Alleges Sodomy by NYPD Police Officers
By TOM HAYS and LARRY NEUMEISTER
Associated Press
A Wall Street financial worker says New York City police officers responding to a noisy domestic dispute in 2004 sodomized him with a baton, allegations that recall the more notorious cases of a Brooklyn tattoo parlor employee in 2008 and Haitian immigrant Abner Louima a decade earlier.
Those past accusations grabbed headlines and raise concerns about excessive force, but Ralph Johnson's civil case has unfolded largely unnoticed in federal court in Manhattan.
Johnson is seeking unspecified damages from the city and the New York Police Department at his ongoing trial. In recent testimony, he told a jury that the officers violated him with a metal baton and sought to cover up the assault.
"When I was face down ... my legs were held and I felt a sharp jabbing pain into my rectum," Johnson testified.
A doctor who examined Johnson testified that he saw abrasions and oozing blood that were "consistent with what he said happened to him."
Johnson's ex-girlfriend also has taken the witness stand. She said that after officers hauled him off in handcuffs, one made a curious query about their Bronx apartment: "He asked me if there was any reason a video camera would be set up (there)."
There was no video. But Johnson's lawyers have introduced as evidence a pair of Johnson's jeans with a hole torn through the seat and lab results confirming his DNA was on a skinny, retractable police baton - the same type of instrument central to the 2008 Brooklyn case involving Michael Mineo.
Mineo said he was assaulted during his arrest on a subway platform. The allegations resulted in news conferences arranged by his lawyers, criminal charges against three patrolmen and comparisons to Louima, whose attack by a broomstick-wielding officer in a police station bathroom in 1997 ranks among the worst scandals in NYPD history.
The officers in the Mineo case were acquitted, but he has pursued a lawsuit against one in a civil case now on trial in Brooklyn.
The largest settlement ever in a police brutality case in New York resulted in 2001 when the city and police union agreed to pay $8.7 million to resolve a lawsuit Louima brought for the severe internal injuries he suffered. One officer is serving 30 years for the attack, while another served a five-year term for perjury.
By contrast, Johnson's case was obscured partly because of his reluctance to go public with his allegations. He also had to beat what he says were trumped-up criminal charges stemming from the encounter.
The city and the NYPD have defended the officers, claiming the girlfriend was in distress and Johnson was uncooperative. They also cite a taped interview with NYPD internal affairs in which Johnson says he wasn't sure how he was injured.
Johnson has conceded he can't identify the officer who allegedly used the baton on him. In his opening statement, city attorney Sumit Sud accused the plaintiff of trying "to cast an illusion on the facts of this case."
The lawyer argued that Johnson's internal injuries were so minor that they could have been caused by constipation. The tear in the jeans also was misleading, he said.
"He was wearing underwear and, low and behold, the underwear has no hole in it," he said.
An NYPD sergeant who took the stand briefly last week resumed testimony Monday, saying he punched Johnson in the face twice at one point when he thought he was going to reach for a glass object he could use as a weapon.
U.S. District Judge Kevin P. Castel seemed to be urging a settlement Monday when, with the jury out of the room, he predicted that the panel's verdict might lead the losing side to conclude it made a "serious miscalculation." He also said the case had legal issues that were complex enough to ensure appeals and continued litigation.
Johnson, 40, told jurors that he's employed at a financial consulting firm and is a partner in a precious metals venture. He was working at an investment banking firm in the summer of 2004 when a night out drinking with his live-in girlfriend spiraled out of control.
The girlfriend, teacher Alison Bongo, blew up because he spoke to another woman at a Manhattan nightspot. Once back at their apartment, the argument escalated. She confronted with a bank statement with an unexplained charge for a hotel room.
"I tried to talk to him about it and he wouldn't listen," she said.
Even when she began throwing things around and breaking windows, she said, he sat silent.
"It made me even angrier," she said.
She said he finally responded by carrying her to the doorstep and locking her out. She banged on the door and yelled at the top of her lungs.
That's when the 911 calls from neighbors began - six in all. "A woman is screaming like crazy," one caller said.
Bongo testified that about a half dozen officers showed up shortly after midnight on Aug. 27. She told the officers she wanted to get some clothes and leave, and offered her keys for them to let themselves in.
She testified that the officers had trouble unlocking the door, and decided to break it down. Johnson said he was sitting on a couch, clueless about the commotion outside, when they burst in.
"I didn't know what to do," he said. "I just froze."
He continued: "They were kicking and punching me. They threw me on the ground, face first." After feeling the pain in his rectum, he said he "screamed out" for his girlfriend before being dragged out of the home.
The officers tell a different story: They say Johnson knew they were outside but refused to let them in. He also ignored repeated orders to show his hands and stand, and resisted when they tried to pull him up, they say. The retractable baton was used only to pry his arms into position to be handcuffed, the officers say.
At the police station, Johnson told an officer that he had been assaulted and asked for medical attention. He claimed he recanted on the internal affairs tape because of investigators' intimidation.
He said one warned him "that the last time this was true was Abner Louima and you're not Louima." Also, "We're going to prosecute you for a felony if you're lying."
Johnson said he feared police "would put me on the news. They would contact my employer and all my clients. They would interview family and friends."
Bongo refused to press domestic violence charges against Johnson, but prosecutors still pursued a misdemeanor count of resisting arrest. He said he rejected a plea deal that would have required him sign a statement saying "there was no brutality or sodomy." He was acquitted at trial.
Paul Browne, the police department's top spokesman, said the Internal Affairs Bureau found Johnson's allegation to be unfounded after he recanted and after no physical evidence of a sexual assault was found. He noted that the Bronx district attorney had declined to prosecute the officers.
At the current trial, Bongo coolly recounted how the arrest was the beginning of the end for the couple.
"Do you have any interest in testifying on behalf of Mr. Johnson or helping Mr. Johnson?" his lawyer asked.
"No," she replied, without hesitation.
The ex-girlfriend testified she didn't see the arrest because police had her sequestered in a bedroom. But she claimed she was coerced into falsely signing a statement saying, "I was scared and that I was going to get hurt" that night.
In truth, she said her ex was never violent toward her. If he had been, "I would have left."
Associated Press
A Wall Street financial worker says New York City police officers responding to a noisy domestic dispute in 2004 sodomized him with a baton, allegations that recall the more notorious cases of a Brooklyn tattoo parlor employee in 2008 and Haitian immigrant Abner Louima a decade earlier.
Those past accusations grabbed headlines and raise concerns about excessive force, but Ralph Johnson's civil case has unfolded largely unnoticed in federal court in Manhattan.
Johnson is seeking unspecified damages from the city and the New York Police Department at his ongoing trial. In recent testimony, he told a jury that the officers violated him with a metal baton and sought to cover up the assault.
"When I was face down ... my legs were held and I felt a sharp jabbing pain into my rectum," Johnson testified.
A doctor who examined Johnson testified that he saw abrasions and oozing blood that were "consistent with what he said happened to him."
Johnson's ex-girlfriend also has taken the witness stand. She said that after officers hauled him off in handcuffs, one made a curious query about their Bronx apartment: "He asked me if there was any reason a video camera would be set up (there)."
There was no video. But Johnson's lawyers have introduced as evidence a pair of Johnson's jeans with a hole torn through the seat and lab results confirming his DNA was on a skinny, retractable police baton - the same type of instrument central to the 2008 Brooklyn case involving Michael Mineo.
Mineo said he was assaulted during his arrest on a subway platform. The allegations resulted in news conferences arranged by his lawyers, criminal charges against three patrolmen and comparisons to Louima, whose attack by a broomstick-wielding officer in a police station bathroom in 1997 ranks among the worst scandals in NYPD history.
The officers in the Mineo case were acquitted, but he has pursued a lawsuit against one in a civil case now on trial in Brooklyn.
The largest settlement ever in a police brutality case in New York resulted in 2001 when the city and police union agreed to pay $8.7 million to resolve a lawsuit Louima brought for the severe internal injuries he suffered. One officer is serving 30 years for the attack, while another served a five-year term for perjury.
By contrast, Johnson's case was obscured partly because of his reluctance to go public with his allegations. He also had to beat what he says were trumped-up criminal charges stemming from the encounter.
The city and the NYPD have defended the officers, claiming the girlfriend was in distress and Johnson was uncooperative. They also cite a taped interview with NYPD internal affairs in which Johnson says he wasn't sure how he was injured.
Johnson has conceded he can't identify the officer who allegedly used the baton on him. In his opening statement, city attorney Sumit Sud accused the plaintiff of trying "to cast an illusion on the facts of this case."
The lawyer argued that Johnson's internal injuries were so minor that they could have been caused by constipation. The tear in the jeans also was misleading, he said.
"He was wearing underwear and, low and behold, the underwear has no hole in it," he said.
An NYPD sergeant who took the stand briefly last week resumed testimony Monday, saying he punched Johnson in the face twice at one point when he thought he was going to reach for a glass object he could use as a weapon.
U.S. District Judge Kevin P. Castel seemed to be urging a settlement Monday when, with the jury out of the room, he predicted that the panel's verdict might lead the losing side to conclude it made a "serious miscalculation." He also said the case had legal issues that were complex enough to ensure appeals and continued litigation.
Johnson, 40, told jurors that he's employed at a financial consulting firm and is a partner in a precious metals venture. He was working at an investment banking firm in the summer of 2004 when a night out drinking with his live-in girlfriend spiraled out of control.
The girlfriend, teacher Alison Bongo, blew up because he spoke to another woman at a Manhattan nightspot. Once back at their apartment, the argument escalated. She confronted with a bank statement with an unexplained charge for a hotel room.
"I tried to talk to him about it and he wouldn't listen," she said.
Even when she began throwing things around and breaking windows, she said, he sat silent.
"It made me even angrier," she said.
She said he finally responded by carrying her to the doorstep and locking her out. She banged on the door and yelled at the top of her lungs.
That's when the 911 calls from neighbors began - six in all. "A woman is screaming like crazy," one caller said.
Bongo testified that about a half dozen officers showed up shortly after midnight on Aug. 27. She told the officers she wanted to get some clothes and leave, and offered her keys for them to let themselves in.
She testified that the officers had trouble unlocking the door, and decided to break it down. Johnson said he was sitting on a couch, clueless about the commotion outside, when they burst in.
"I didn't know what to do," he said. "I just froze."
He continued: "They were kicking and punching me. They threw me on the ground, face first." After feeling the pain in his rectum, he said he "screamed out" for his girlfriend before being dragged out of the home.
The officers tell a different story: They say Johnson knew they were outside but refused to let them in. He also ignored repeated orders to show his hands and stand, and resisted when they tried to pull him up, they say. The retractable baton was used only to pry his arms into position to be handcuffed, the officers say.
At the police station, Johnson told an officer that he had been assaulted and asked for medical attention. He claimed he recanted on the internal affairs tape because of investigators' intimidation.
He said one warned him "that the last time this was true was Abner Louima and you're not Louima." Also, "We're going to prosecute you for a felony if you're lying."
Johnson said he feared police "would put me on the news. They would contact my employer and all my clients. They would interview family and friends."
Bongo refused to press domestic violence charges against Johnson, but prosecutors still pursued a misdemeanor count of resisting arrest. He said he rejected a plea deal that would have required him sign a statement saying "there was no brutality or sodomy." He was acquitted at trial.
Paul Browne, the police department's top spokesman, said the Internal Affairs Bureau found Johnson's allegation to be unfounded after he recanted and after no physical evidence of a sexual assault was found. He noted that the Bronx district attorney had declined to prosecute the officers.
At the current trial, Bongo coolly recounted how the arrest was the beginning of the end for the couple.
"Do you have any interest in testifying on behalf of Mr. Johnson or helping Mr. Johnson?" his lawyer asked.
"No," she replied, without hesitation.
The ex-girlfriend testified she didn't see the arrest because police had her sequestered in a bedroom. But she claimed she was coerced into falsely signing a statement saying, "I was scared and that I was going to get hurt" that night.
In truth, she said her ex was never violent toward her. If he had been, "I would have left."
Monday, December 6, 2010
The Crime of Punishment
In 2005, when a federal court took a snapshot of California’s prisons, one inmate was dying each week because the state failed to provide adequate health care. Adequate does not mean state-of-the-art, or even tolerable. It means care meeting “the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities,” in the Supreme Court’s words, so inmates do not die from rampant staph infections or commit suicide at nearly twice the national average.
These and other horrors have been documented in California’s prisons for two decades, and last week they were before the Supreme Court in Schwarzenegger v. Plata. It is the most important case in years about prison conditions. The justices should uphold the lower court’s remedy for addressing the horrors.
Four years ago, when the number of inmates in California reached more than 160,000, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a “state of emergency.” The state’s prisons, he said, are places “of extreme peril.”
Last year, under a federal law focusing on prison conditions, the lower court found that overcrowding was the “primary cause” of gruesome inadequacies in medical and mental health care. The court concluded that the only relief under the law “capable of remedying these constitutional deficiencies” is a “prison release order.”
Today, there are almost twice as many inmates in California’s 33 prisons as they were designed for. The court ordered the state to reduce that population by around 30 percent. While still leaving it overcrowded, that would free up space, staff and other vital resources for long overdue medical and mental health clinics.
The case will most likely be resolved by a vote of 5 to 4, with Justice Anthony Kennedy’s vote decisive. At the oral argument, he said that “at some point,” the court must say “overcrowding is the principal cause, as experts have testified, and it’s now time for a remedy.” After 20 years of litigation and 70 court orders, that point has come.
At the intense, sometimes testy argument, Justice Samuel Alito revealed the law-and-order thinking behind the California system. “If 40,000 prisoners are going to be released,” he said overstating the likely number, “you really believe that if you were to come back here two years after that you would be able to say they haven’t contributed to an increase in crime?” To Justice Alito, apparently, it was out of the realm of possibility that, rather than increasing crime, the state could actually decrease it by reducing the number of prison inmates.
Among experts, as a forthcoming issue of the journal Criminology & Public Policy relates, there is a growing belief that less prison and more and better policing will reduce crime. There is almost unanimous condemnation of California-style mass incarceration, which has led to no reduction in serious crime and has turned many inmates into habitual criminals.
America’s prison system is now studied largely because of its failure — the result of an expensive approach to criminal justice shaped by fear-driven ideology. California’s prisons embody this overwhelming failure.
These and other horrors have been documented in California’s prisons for two decades, and last week they were before the Supreme Court in Schwarzenegger v. Plata. It is the most important case in years about prison conditions. The justices should uphold the lower court’s remedy for addressing the horrors.
Four years ago, when the number of inmates in California reached more than 160,000, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a “state of emergency.” The state’s prisons, he said, are places “of extreme peril.”
Last year, under a federal law focusing on prison conditions, the lower court found that overcrowding was the “primary cause” of gruesome inadequacies in medical and mental health care. The court concluded that the only relief under the law “capable of remedying these constitutional deficiencies” is a “prison release order.”
Today, there are almost twice as many inmates in California’s 33 prisons as they were designed for. The court ordered the state to reduce that population by around 30 percent. While still leaving it overcrowded, that would free up space, staff and other vital resources for long overdue medical and mental health clinics.
The case will most likely be resolved by a vote of 5 to 4, with Justice Anthony Kennedy’s vote decisive. At the oral argument, he said that “at some point,” the court must say “overcrowding is the principal cause, as experts have testified, and it’s now time for a remedy.” After 20 years of litigation and 70 court orders, that point has come.
At the intense, sometimes testy argument, Justice Samuel Alito revealed the law-and-order thinking behind the California system. “If 40,000 prisoners are going to be released,” he said overstating the likely number, “you really believe that if you were to come back here two years after that you would be able to say they haven’t contributed to an increase in crime?” To Justice Alito, apparently, it was out of the realm of possibility that, rather than increasing crime, the state could actually decrease it by reducing the number of prison inmates.
Among experts, as a forthcoming issue of the journal Criminology & Public Policy relates, there is a growing belief that less prison and more and better policing will reduce crime. There is almost unanimous condemnation of California-style mass incarceration, which has led to no reduction in serious crime and has turned many inmates into habitual criminals.
America’s prison system is now studied largely because of its failure — the result of an expensive approach to criminal justice shaped by fear-driven ideology. California’s prisons embody this overwhelming failure.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
In Post-Katrina Killing, NOPD Cop Testifies Why He Shot Man, Another Explains Why He Burned the Body
by Sabrina Shankman, ProPublica
In the ongoing trial of five police officers charged with killing a New Orleans man in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, two of those charged have taken the stand in their own defense.
In testimony yesterday and this morning, New Orleans police officer Greg McRae explained his decision to burn the body of 31-year-old Henry Glover, who had been shot by police officer David Warren earlier that day.
"I had seen enough bodies," McRae said. "I had seen enough rot."
McRae testified that he did not know, at the time, that Glover had been shot by a police officer. He said he was motivated by exhaustion, the trauma of the storm, and the need to get the body away from the makeshift police station where he was based.
Glover's death was first detailed by ProPublica nearly two years ago, in an investigative partnership with the Nation Institute and the Nation magazine.
In June, the Justice Department indicted five officers in connection with the case. Warren has been charged with shooting Glover; McRae and Lt. Dwayne Scheuermann have been charged with beating three men who tried to help Glover, and then burning Glover's remains; and former Lt. Robert Italiano and Lt. Travis McCabe are charged with covering it up.
Last week, in the first day of testimony from the defense, Warren told the jury that he believed his life was in danger when he shot Glover on Sept. 2, 2005. Warren said that Glover was running toward him at the time, and that from the second floor balcony where Warren stood, it appeared that Glover was holding a weapon.
His partner that day, NOPD officer Linda Howard, testified earlier in the trial that Glover was actually running away from the strip mall where they stood -- not towards it -- when Glover was shot.
In testimony on Monday, Alan Baxter, an expert for the defense, testified that Warren's shooting was justified, and that Warren met the standard for firing his weapon, which requires the reasonable belief that his or someone else's life was in danger.
As our partners at the Times-Picayune explain, Baxter himself appeared to be on trial at times, as the prosecution picked apart his qualifications, noting that he has never published any articles about police procedure. Baxter says he is a former executive-level police commander with the United Nations, yet the U.N. has no record of his employment, the prosecution said.
A quick look at Baxter's background (PDF) shows that he's not an attorney, but was formerly a member of the Canadian Bar Association as well as two trial lawyers' groups in Washington State.
He's listed as a current member of the National Association of Police Chiefs, the American Correctional Association and the American College of Forensics. We called to confirm he's still a member, and learned that his membership in the first two expired earlier this year. The American College of Forensics doesn't give out information on its members, but says that anyone can join, as long as they pay the fees.
Baxter's testimony was based on a two-hour interview with Warren, he said. He did not speak with any other witnesses of the event.
In addition to saying that Warren's shooting of Glover was justified, Baxter also said that Warren was acting legally when he fired a warning shot at a man earlier in the day.
The NOPD's use of force guidelines, explicitly says, "Police Officers shall not fire warning shots." (We have posted the guidelines.)
Baxter testified that the guidelines were essentially suggestions rather than rules.
The trial is expected to continue at least through the end of the week. Check out nola.com for continued coverage.
In the ongoing trial of five police officers charged with killing a New Orleans man in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, two of those charged have taken the stand in their own defense.
In testimony yesterday and this morning, New Orleans police officer Greg McRae explained his decision to burn the body of 31-year-old Henry Glover, who had been shot by police officer David Warren earlier that day.
"I had seen enough bodies," McRae said. "I had seen enough rot."
McRae testified that he did not know, at the time, that Glover had been shot by a police officer. He said he was motivated by exhaustion, the trauma of the storm, and the need to get the body away from the makeshift police station where he was based.
Glover's death was first detailed by ProPublica nearly two years ago, in an investigative partnership with the Nation Institute and the Nation magazine.
In June, the Justice Department indicted five officers in connection with the case. Warren has been charged with shooting Glover; McRae and Lt. Dwayne Scheuermann have been charged with beating three men who tried to help Glover, and then burning Glover's remains; and former Lt. Robert Italiano and Lt. Travis McCabe are charged with covering it up.
Last week, in the first day of testimony from the defense, Warren told the jury that he believed his life was in danger when he shot Glover on Sept. 2, 2005. Warren said that Glover was running toward him at the time, and that from the second floor balcony where Warren stood, it appeared that Glover was holding a weapon.
His partner that day, NOPD officer Linda Howard, testified earlier in the trial that Glover was actually running away from the strip mall where they stood -- not towards it -- when Glover was shot.
In testimony on Monday, Alan Baxter, an expert for the defense, testified that Warren's shooting was justified, and that Warren met the standard for firing his weapon, which requires the reasonable belief that his or someone else's life was in danger.
As our partners at the Times-Picayune explain, Baxter himself appeared to be on trial at times, as the prosecution picked apart his qualifications, noting that he has never published any articles about police procedure. Baxter says he is a former executive-level police commander with the United Nations, yet the U.N. has no record of his employment, the prosecution said.
A quick look at Baxter's background (PDF) shows that he's not an attorney, but was formerly a member of the Canadian Bar Association as well as two trial lawyers' groups in Washington State.
He's listed as a current member of the National Association of Police Chiefs, the American Correctional Association and the American College of Forensics. We called to confirm he's still a member, and learned that his membership in the first two expired earlier this year. The American College of Forensics doesn't give out information on its members, but says that anyone can join, as long as they pay the fees.
Baxter's testimony was based on a two-hour interview with Warren, he said. He did not speak with any other witnesses of the event.
In addition to saying that Warren's shooting of Glover was justified, Baxter also said that Warren was acting legally when he fired a warning shot at a man earlier in the day.
The NOPD's use of force guidelines, explicitly says, "Police Officers shall not fire warning shots." (We have posted the guidelines.)
Baxter testified that the guidelines were essentially suggestions rather than rules.
The trial is expected to continue at least through the end of the week. Check out nola.com for continued coverage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
