• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Traffic Stop leads to federal charges; all charges thrown out (Police Misconduct)

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
This is scary -- anyone heard of Detective Jason Norton?

Judge tosses guilty pleas over information in Richmond search warrants
A federal judge Wednesday tossed out convictions against three men who pleaded guilty in Richmond to drug and firearms charges years ago, citing the strong possibility false information was used to obtain search warrants.

But U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson — noting that setting aside a conviction for violating fundamental fairness is an extraordinary remedy — three times Wednesday wrote: “This appears to be such a case.”

According to orders issued last year by U.S. District Judge Robert E. Payne in the Andrews and Archer cases, the U.S. Attorney’s Office told the court that a former Richmond police officer, Jason Norton, “likely included in the language used in search warrant applications submitted by him information that was erroneous, if not false, regarding the reliability of confidential informants.”

Judge Hudson wrote Wednesday that the three men maintain they would not have pleaded guilty to the charges were it not for the evidence seized on the basis of the false affidavit and would have insisted on going to trial.

Norton was a member of a small Violence Suppression Team that targeted large narcotics traffickers and violent offenders.

Norton could not be reached for comment Wednesday. A Richmond police spokesman, Gene Lepley, said Norton was hired as a recruit on April 5, 2004, and left the department as a police officer on July 1, 2013.

...

Hudson wrote in his opinions Wednesday that each man argued he be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea because they were based on false information used to obtain search warrants.

The judge added that federal prosecutors, after conducting a thorough investigation, did not object to the motions from the three men and in each case, “concedes there is a high probability that critical information contained in the search warrant affidavit is false.”

Here is what's scary:
A uniformed officer stopped the car driven by Andrews at Third and Jackson streets. Norton asked Andrews if he could search the car. Andrews refused and Norton obtained a search warrant for the car.

The search of the car turned up a brown Nike bag holding more than 33 grams of heroin, a loaded .357 caliber semi-automatic handgun and other items. Andrews had two prior convictions, for possession of cocaine and possession of crack cocaine.

Andrews’ lawyer at the time, the late Murray J. Janus, unsuccessfully sought to have the evidence thrown out because he argued it was seized without a valid search warrant.

Norton 'asked' if he could search the car, and Andrews said no.

So Norton obtained a search warrant for the car -- and lied on the affidavit in order to get it.

This could possible happen to anybody here.

And what the Hell is the Violence Suppression Team?
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
This is scary -- ...

This could possible happen to anybody here.

...

And so could winning the lottery.

What sucks is that it costs so much to get the checks and balances to remedy the egregious acts of a small number of bureaucrats regardless which office they work out of.

That, and that the miscreant does not suffer personally.

stay safe.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
And what the Hell is the Violence Suppression Team?

Oh come on Repeater, this is obvious! The violence suppression team is a government entity that values security more than liberty and therefore uses any means necessary to oppress the pesky rights of bad guys that get in the way of their more important police functions.

No this could not happen to us because we are good guys. This sort of stuff only happens to bad guys. The outstanding officers of the violence suppression team make the determinations of good guy/bad guy. It makes me feel sooooo safe.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
No mentioned of what the RAS was for detaining/stopping the vehicle in the first place. Did they violate some silly traffic ordinance? No disrespect to the deceased attorney in this case but this case should have been dismissed immediately... Unless we are not getting all the facts.

My .02

CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
And so could winning the lottery.

What sucks is that it costs so much to get the checks and balances to remedy the egregious acts of a small number of bureaucrats regardless which office they work out of.

That, and that the miscreant does not suffer personally.

stay safe.

Hi Skid

Title 18 USC sections 241 and 242 of the federal criminal codes will address such acts that you reference from the bureaucrats/tyrants.

Title 42 USC section 1983 will address the civil remedy against the tyrants personally..

My .02

Regards

CCJ
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP Norton 'asked' if he could search the car, and Andrews said no.

So Norton obtained a search warrant for the car -- and lied on the affidavit in order to get it.

This could possible happen to anybody here.

Well, I don't know about anybody else on the forum, but I don't go around with a buncha heroin in my car.

Unless...by saying it could happen to anybody here, you mean to say OCDO is populated by a buncha heroin dealers. Ouch! :D

But, I know you didn't mean "a false warrant turns up drugs" could happen to anybody here.

I'm more worried about a cop, outraged at invoking rights, planting evidence. Or, just plain making up something. I guess ol' Jason Norton figured it would be harder for a defendant to argue successfully against a warrant than against Jason just testilying in court about his RAS or probable cause.
 

scouser

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
1,341
Location
804, VA
..... So Norton obtained a search warrant for the car -- and lied on the affidavit in order to get it.

This could possible happen to anybody here. ....

Well, I don't know about anybody else on the forum, but I don't go around with a buncha heroin in my car.

Unless...by saying it could happen to anybody here, you mean to say OCDO is populated by a buncha heroin dealers. Ouch! :D

But, I know you didn't mean "a false warrant turns up drugs" could happen to anybody here.

I'm more worried about a cop, outraged at invoking rights, planting evidence. Or, just plain making up something. I guess ol' Jason Norton figured it would be harder for a defendant to argue successfully against a warrant than against Jason just testilying in court about his RAS or probable cause.

No, it could never happen that a cop would lie to the magistrate in order to get a warrant of any kind. I, personally, have never heard or witnessed that happening [/sarcasm]
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Well, I don't know about anybody else on the forum, but I don't go around with a buncha heroin in my car.

How do you know until a trained expert searches your car to make sure?

Unless...by saying it could happen to anybody here, you mean to say OCDO is populated by a buncha heroin dealers. Ouch! :D

See above.

But, I know you didn't mean "a false warrant turns up drugs" could happen to anybody here.

That was precisely what I meant. Just like hitting the lottery.

I'm more worried about a cop, outraged at invoking rights, planting evidence. Or, just plain making up something. I guess ol' Jason Norton figured it would be harder for a defendant to argue successfully against a warrant than against Jason just testilying in court about his RAS or probable cause.

Took you long enough to agree with me.

stay safe.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Detective Norton is now Deputy Norton of Hopewell

I'm more worried about a cop, outraged at invoking rights, planting evidence. Or, just plain making up something. I guess ol' Jason Norton figured it would be harder for a defendant to argue successfully against a warrant than against Jason just testilying in court about his RAS or probable cause.

New information from the Times-Dispatch:

Judge dismisses indictments against three over tainted search warrants

This is how the attorneys smelled a rat:
A former Richmond detective accused of falsifying search warrants allegedly used similar or identical descriptions for various confidential informants from 2008 to 2012.

Norton won't comment:
Norton, now a deputy sheriff in Hopewell, did not return a request for comment Thursday. He has not been charged with any crime.

In a previously sealed motion, Richmond lawyer Amy L. Austin wrote last September that the description of the informant given by Norton — used to obtain a search warrant against her client — was exactly the same or similar to the description used for at least four other informants.

Testilying?

So, it looks like Norton will get away with it:
A spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office said Thursday that he could not comment on the existence of any investigation of Norton. Reached by telephone Thursday, Austin said it was her understanding that authorities declined to prosecute him.

Gee, you think?
 

IanB

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
1,896
Location
Northern VA
It's Richmond. Richmond was full of crooked cops, still have plenty.

Everyone calm down! This board supports LEO's, almost to the point of spit polishing their boots. Either toe the company line, or GTFO. You may not make broad overarching statements like these, someone might complain on the "closed-to-non-LEO's" POLICEONE forum about how those meany-head OC guys are talking bad about them! Those guys have delicate feelings, remember?
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Everyone calm down! This board supports LEO's, almost to the point of spit polishing their boots. Either toe the company line, or GTFO. You may not make broad overarching statements like these, someone might complain on the "closed-to-non-LEO's" POLICEONE forum about how those meany-head OC guys are talking bad about them! Those guys have delicate feelings, remember?
Don't know so much about supporting LEOs as it is more to recognizing/honoring the laws.

The rules (#6 & #9) that we have are against broad brushing - bashing them as group.

Most (all?) municipalities have some officers who could make decided improvement. Richmond and VCU/MCV would seem to have more than their fair share.

Pointing out their individual failures as it relates to OC/RKBA is not a violation of our rules.
 

scouser

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
1,341
Location
804, VA
Don't know so much about supporting LEOs as it is more to recognizing/honoring the laws.

The rules (#6 & #9) that we have are against broad brushing - bashing them as group.

Most (all?) municipalities have some officers who could make decided improvement. Richmond and VCU/MCV would seem to have more than their fair share.

Pointing out their individual failures as it relates to OC/RKBA is not a violation of our rules.

The way I see it, though, if there is one bad cop in a department and no one in that department stops his or her behavior and brings it to the attention of the people who pay that bad cop's wages, then they are just as guilty of being a bad cop.

The problem is too many of them are scared of the consequences of exposing the wrong doing of their colleagues. Having heard first hand from a former LEO who did speak up about wrong doing and his tales of how he was treated afterwards, I know those consequences exist. Just wish those so-called good cops would grow a pair of balls and speak up like the guy I'm referring to did.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
The way I see it, though, if there is one bad cop in a department and no one in that department stops his or her behavior and brings it to the attention of the people who pay that bad cop's wages, then they are just as guilty of being a bad cop.

The problem is too many of them are scared of the consequences of exposing the wrong doing of their colleagues. Having heard first hand from a former LEO who did speak up about wrong doing and his tales of how he was treated afterwards, I know those consequences exist. Just wish those so-called good cops would grow a pair of balls and speak up like the guy I'm referring to did.

We have one with a pair right here scouser. Ask me about it when we meet up.
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
You guys don't watch enough TV. The really cool badass cops have to break the rules to catch the scumbags.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
The way I see it, though, if there is one bad cop in a department and no one in that department stops his or her behavior and brings it to the attention of the people who pay that bad cop's wages, then they are just as guilty of being a bad cop.

Sometimes the problem comes from the top. As I indicated, Norton is now a Hopewell Sheriff's Deputy. This could be a problem because it's well known that their department has a notorious speed trap along a small stretch of I-295. AAA called them out on it; the sheriff claimed offense:

Hopewell was issuing 1,000 speeding tickets a month on 2-mile stretch of I-295

The General Assembly said enough:

Virginia General Assembly puts brakes on speed traps
Taking advantage of a two-mile stretch of Interstate 295 that passes through the city, the Hopewell Sheriff’s Office issues about 1,000 speeding tickets a month, according to the American Automobile Association. The advocacy group for motorists says the speed trap generates over $1.8 million annually for city government.

But a state budget amendment approved by the General Assembly would help curb such practices by Hopewell and other localities, AAA says, by reducing the financial incentive for local police to write excessive numbers of tickets.

...

Hopewell employs 11 sheriff’s deputies working in 14-hour shifts to patrol 1.7 miles of interstate highway. Nearly three-fourths of the tickets were issued to out-of-state motorists who are unlikely to return to contest the citations, according to AAA.

So, imagine anyone here being stopped by Deputy Norton ... for speeding. After being issued a ticket, he says ...

Norton: "So, do you have any weapons or drugs in your vehicle?"

You: "No."

Norton: "Okay; do you mind if I search your vehicle, just to be sure?"

You: [What would your response be to him?]
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
Sometimes the problem comes from the top. As I indicated, Norton is now a Hopewell Sheriff's Deputy. This could be a problem because it's well known that their department has a notorious speed trap along a small stretch of I-295. AAA called them out on it; the sheriff claimed offense:

Hopewell was issuing 1,000 speeding tickets a month on 2-mile stretch of I-295

The General Assembly said enough:

Virginia General Assembly puts brakes on speed traps


So, imagine anyone here being stopped by Deputy Norton ... for speeding. After being issued a ticket, he says ...

Norton: "So, do you have any weapons or drugs in your vehicle?"

You: "No."

Norton: "Okay; do you mind if I search your vehicle, just to be sure?"

You: [What would your response be to him?]

To his first question, my response would be, "I have nothing illegal in my vehicle."

To his second question, my response would be, "I do not consent to any searches or seizures of my person, papers or property."

... and my recorder would be running during the entire encounter.
 
Last edited:
Top