• 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.

Ethics - Lying to make an arrest

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

I was watching COPS last night, and I saw a bit from Pittsburg, PA, where two undercover drug officers arrested a guy for possession of a crack pipe. The arrest was dirty from the word go. Here's what happened:

The guys are driving down the street to where they say is a drug neighborhood. They see a guy walk away from the window of a car. Cop 1 is driving and Cop 2 says "look, he just walked away from that window". The officers talk about how he was probably buying drugs. They stop the car and jump out, and say "Police, come here we want to talk to you". The guy says "Yeah, so what?" and keeps walking. They take him with force and toss him around a bit while he resists them. They cuff him and have him spread his legs. Cop 1 searches him and finds a crack pipe in his right pocket. They toss him around a bit more and he resists them some more. A uniformed officer shows up and they put him in the patrol car. Cop 1 says that when they saw the guy, Cop 2 said that he saw him with a crack pipe in his hand and told him that he saw the guy put the crack pipe in his right pocket.

Up to this point,I knew the guy could get the case dropped against him due to the illegal search (there was no probable cause to search him what-so-ever. He lived in the neighborhood and he was walking away from his neighbor's car window). But then Cop 1 lied and made up a story about how Cop 2 had seen the crack pipe, generating probable cause! I couldn't believe my eyes! This is how cops get charges like this to stick. They search and then claim that they had probable cause AFTER they find whatever the perp has!

I was so furious, but I had no idea what to do about this. These cops need to be off the streets! Please, can someone help me find out what can be done about this? I mean there is a very clear video that was played on national television that shows them lieing to generate probable cause, there has to be something I can do about this! I won't stand around and watch this happen in my country; it's unamerican!
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Having not seen it I cannot confirm what you have alleged and reported.

Did the camera operator have the camera on the subject the entire time so you can confirm that no crack pipe could have ever been seen? Or did the camera bounce all around like I have seen in the past.

The police had a reason to stop the subject based on the activity they observed. They even stated they suspected drug activity and later found drug paraphernalia. So they were on the money.

They ordered the guy to come talk to them and he refused. If he walks away and then is resisting an investigative detention.This is going tocause a "roughing up" on both rides as they attempt to control him so they can investigate.

What if they did lie to a uniformed officer. This has NOTHING to do with the case in court.At that point they are not testifying under oath and do not need the officer's approval. They could tell the uniformed officer that they saw smoking crack and it would make no difference. They are the two officer that will go before the magistrate and provide an official statement.

You have not seen their written report, their statement to a magistrate, or their testimony in court. So you have no leg to stand on as far as a complaint to anyone.

And then.... do you think this would really make it past the lawyers and the department that will be reviewing the footage before it is released?

The show COPS has a ton of ways to do it all wrong... but I suspect nothing illegal occurred. And then..... how do you know it was real? It is TV and made for entertainment.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

I understand what you are saying, but the camera was clear and uncut throughout. The officers said that a person walking away from a car window is probably a drug deal. They didn't say that they saw anything happen, they didn't say that they suspected the owner of the vehicle of being a drug dealer based on any previous experience or anything. They mearly stated that they guy was walking away from that car window (parked in a residential driveway in broad daylight) and that they assume he was there to buy drugs. They didn't find that he had bought drugs, but they did find that he had a crack pipe. The search was unwarranted, as was the detention, but they lied (and I'll bet you a month's pay the report says the same thing) and said that they had seen him put the crack pipe in his pocket. They said that they had a conversation where Cop 2 said that he specifically saw the guy put the crack pipe in his pocket and which pocket that was. This conversation never happened, and there was never any evidence of a crack pipe. The guy looked poor with missing teeth, and it was a good bet that he had a crack pipe on him, but that doesn't give them a right to search him or detain him. The lie is the big deal though. Now the judge won't question whether the search was legal or not, because these officers have altered the story to fit the search. The video was clear. There was no misunderstanding. Sure, they could have written the truth in their reports, but you know as well as I do that they wrote the revised version of the story.
 

Bill Starks

State Researcher
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
4,304
Location
Nortonville, KY, USA
imported post

I do audio & video editing. While not having seen that episode I can say that there might have been a slight edit done to the video and you would never know. A few seconds of creative editing here and there can skew the what the viewing audience sees. Like you I want to know the truth but without seeing the raw uncut footage, we may never know.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

M1Gunr wrote:
I do audio & video editing. While not having seen that episode I can say that there might have been a slight edit done to the video and you would never know. A few seconds of creative editing here and there can skew the what the viewing audience sees. Like you I want to know the truth but without seeing the raw uncut footage, we may never know.
I went to film school. I know how to edit video, and I know how to detect edited video. The video was raw and uncut. The footage began with a conversation about how nice of a city pittsburg was and ended with the police car driving away. There was no creative editing in between.
 

Legba

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
1,881
Location
, ,
imported post

I can't watch COPS - it's bad for my blood pressure. "Suspected drug activity" is what got me run in - despite the fact that no drugs or paraphernalia were found. It is bullshit, absolutely. If they had probable cause, they wouldn't have even had to say "we'd like to talk to you" to this guy. Given that theydid say it, they had no cause. Ergo, bad search, bad arrest, bad cops. I don't feel sorry for a crack head who may be made to get help, but we all suffer when rights are routinely disregarded as they are on that show.

Cop bashing? I don't think so. Bad cop bashing, maybe, but I don't really care. I've been through it. Wait till they run you in and then tell me how the system works.

-ljp
 

UTOC-45-44

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,579
Location
Morgan, Utah, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
I was watching COPS last night, and I saw a bit from Pittsburg, PA, where two undercover drug officers arrested a guy for possession of a crack pipe. The arrest was dirty from the word go. Here's what happened:

The guys are driving down the street to where they say is a drug neighborhood. They see a guy walk away from the window of a car. Cop 1 is driving and Cop 2 says "look, he just walked away from that window". The officers talk about how he was probably buying drugs. They stop the car and jump out, and say "Police, come here we want to talk to you". The guy says "Yeah, so what?" and keeps walking. They take him with force and toss him around a bit while he resists them. They cuff him and have him spread his legs. Cop 1 searches him and finds a crack pipe in his right pocket. They toss him around a bit more and he resists them some more. A uniformed officer shows up and they put him in the patrol car. Cop 1 says that when they saw the guy, Cop 2 said that he saw him with a crack pipe in his hand and told him that he saw the guy put the crack pipe in his right pocket.

Up to this point,I knew the guy could get the case dropped against him due to the illegal search (there was no probable cause to search him what-so-ever. He lived in the neighborhood and he was walking away from his neighbor's car window). But then Cop 1 lied and made up a story about how Cop 2 had seen the crack pipe, generating probable cause! I couldn't believe my eyes! This is how cops get charges like this to stick. They search and then claim that they had probable cause AFTER they find whatever the perp has!

I was so furious, but I had no idea what to do about this. These cops need to be off the streets! Please, can someone help me find out what can be done about this? I mean there is a very clear video that was played on national television that shows them lieing to generate probable cause, there has to be something I can do about this! I won't stand around and watch this happen in my country; it's unamerican!

Cops...Politicians...what's the difference ??:question:?? Both are Paid to Lie and live with it. So what's new :question:

TJ
 

Sheriff

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,968
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
Sure, they could have written the truth in their reports, but you know as well as I do that they wrote the revised version of the story.

Just curious.... why does this surprise you?

There's a new breed of cop on the street in 2008. Ask any of the young rookies if they have ever read a copy of the Constitution. Bet they ask, "read what?"

Some may say this is "cop bashing", have at it is all I can say! But it is reality in the year 2008. With hiring standards beinng lowered nationwide it's getting pretty scary in law enforcement ranks out there!
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

I do not need to "say" every detail on how I believe it is drug activity when we are about to go out and approach the guy.

If you are working with a partner this is not always necessary. Example... "That guy just ran a red light" and we go stop him.

I do not need to identify how long it was red, what light was ran, or how many feet prior to the stop line he was before it turned red. All this is assumed to exist in the mix and it not important at that moment.

When you have to quickly jump out and make contact and worry about the guy running away... the details can be said later.

So just because it is not on camera does not mean it never happened.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
I do not need to "say" every detail on how I believe it is drug activity when we are about to go out and approach the guy.

If you are working with a partner this is not always necessary. Example... "That guy just ran a red light" and we go stop him.

I do not need to identify how long it was red, what light was ran, or how many feet prior to the stop line he was before it turned red. All this is assumed to exist in the mix and it not important at that moment.

When you have to quickly jump out and make contact and worry about the guy running away... the details can be said later.

So just because it is not on camera does not mean it never happened.

I completely agree, but I'm not making any assumptions here. What I saw was as clear as day. The cops had no idea what they were going to find, and when they found it, they claimed that they had seen it to begin with. The video was not shaky, and everything happened very clearly. If you saw the video, you would understand what I am saying. I know it's hard to communicate over a forum what was on this video, but I wouldn't pursue this if it weren't as clear as day. This was a bad bust and a lie to make the charges stick. These cops were some of the worst kinds of cops I've ever seen. The question now is what can I do about this? I can't just sit around and not do anything. I am outraged at seeing this man's rights being abused and these cops going around due process and making up stories to justify their illegal search.

What can be done about this?
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
imported post

Seriously, write a complaint. Complaining will start a detective investigation, and it could very easily get these twits in trouble if things are exactly as they seem from the tape. Of course being a department that would air such a tape, you have to wonder if they would just sweep it under the rug, but hey, it will piss some people off, and that is a start.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

Legba wrote:
I can't watch COPS - it's bad for my blood pressure. "Suspected drug activity" is what got me run in - despite the fact that no drugs or paraphernalia were found. It is bullshit, absolutely. If they had probable cause, they wouldn't have even had to say "we'd like to talk to you" to this guy. Given that theydid say it, they had no cause. Ergo, bad search, bad arrest, bad cops. I don't feel sorry for a crack head who may be made to get help, but we all suffer when rights are routinely disregarded as they are on that show.

Cop bashing? I don't think so. Bad cop bashing, maybe, but I don't really care. I've been through it. Wait till they run you in and then tell me how the system works.

-ljp

I've personally had police officers lie in their police reports about me, and even lie in court to make a charge stick. Not stretch the truth, flat out lie. Trust me, I've fought this legal system before, and I know exactly how you feel. You are guilty, regardless of anything, or you wouldn't even be there. That is the attitude of the legal system. Your public defender will talk you out of trying to fight any charges and try to sell the prosecutor's deal to you. They will assign you a different public defender every time you make a court appearance, and he won't even crack your file until you are up. He will tell you not to say anything, but he won't say anything on your behalf either.

Our court system needs to be flushed down the toilet.
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
What can be done about this?
Stop watching COPS?

Seriously, shows like that just glorify the persecution of peoples under the various Wars on Nouns, though primarily serve to desensitize people to the police state.

ETA: To seriously start getting something done about it, forget about this particular incident. Start talking to neo-cons and convince them to support all rights of men, not just the ones that reflect their religious convictions.
 

Sheriff

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,968
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Watch the LIE in this video. Near the end of the video one cop is telling another cop how he verbally warned thedriver before shooting a taser into his back. He claims he said, "Turn around right now, or I tase you!" It's a LIE. The cop made no such verbal warning. I would like to see what he testified to in court.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJVQxLv8GAM
 

ufcfanvt

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
431
Location
NoVA, Virginia, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
I do not need to "say" every detail on how I believe it is drug activity when we are about to go out and approach the guy.

If you are working with a partner this is not always necessary. Example... "That guy just ran a red light" and we go stop him.

I do not need to identify how long it was red, what light was ran, or how many feet prior to the stop line he was before it turned red. All this is assumed to exist in the mix and it not important at that moment.

When you have to quickly jump out and make contact and worry about the guy running away... the details can be said later.

So just because it is not on camera does not mean it never happened.

At this point, we're veering far off the fundamental subject. If you would, please answer the questions given an assumed scenario. I know that we don't have the video and the OP might have missed some or ALL of the details, but let's just assume for the moment that:
1) Perp was merely seen emerging from the parked cars's window.
2) No crack pipe was seen at the time. No other paraphenalia either.
3) None of the cops know anyone or any of the cars/houses on the scene.
4) Subject walks away from the car.
5) Subject continues to walk when the cops ask for him to stop.
6) The officers both suspect drug activity, but no physical evidence was actually seen.

The Question: Is it right and just for the officers at this point, knowing only the information above, to forcibly detain the subject?
I think a lot of people on this forum would like to have an officer's opinion about this. I think we all fully support cops acting on their gut instincts, but there is a line that shouldn't be crossed. We should just make that line more clear.
 

Sheriff

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,968
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
I've personally had police officers lie in their police reports about me, and even lie in court to make a charge stick. Not stretch the truth, flat out lie.
Having been a sworn deputy sheriff in Virginia for almost three decades, I believe every word you have said. And it's a damn shame this is taking place so much now. The fellow officers in blue need to step up to the plate and correct this problem internally, but there's not many Serpicos left out there.
 

Wynder

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
1,241
Location
Bear, Delaware, USA
imported post

ufcfanvt wrote:
At this point, we're veering far off the fundamental subject. If you would, please answer the questions given an assumed scenario. I know that we don't have the video and the OP might have missed some or ALL of the details, but let's just assume for the moment that:
1) Perp was merely seen emerging from the parked cars's window.
2) No crack pipe was seen at the time. No other paraphenalia either.
3) None of the cops know anyone or any of the cars/houses on the scene.
4) Subject walks away from the car.
5) Subject continues to walk when the cops ask for him to stop.
6) The officers both suspect drug activity, but no physical evidence was actually seen.

The Question: Is it right and just for the officers at this point, knowing only the information above, to forcibly detain the subject?
With regards to #1, if the area is known for high crime or drug activity and the individual was exhibiting specific behavior (e.g. stopping by a car window in a neighborhood where that is the common method of drug delivery), that is more than enough to justify a Terry stop of the suspect.

This would, of course, allow for a pat down to look for weapons or contraband. As to whether the suspect can be forcibly detained, officers are permitted to use reasonable force to detain a suspect who can be lawfully detained.

Police don't HAVE to see crack pipe. If they did, that's probable cause to arrest and they can do that right on the spot. But a combination of suspicious behavior consistent with a crime in an area known for that crime will fly by a judge as being reasonable articulable suspicion to conduct a Terry stop.

Edit: With regards to number 5, if an officer actually says to you, "Stop," you can bet your sweet ass that's not a request. Even if you *think* you're doing nothing wrong, stop, turn around and ask if you're being detained.

In the scenario you've given, LEO's would be well within their duties to act.
 

ufcfanvt

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
431
Location
NoVA, Virginia, USA
imported post

Wynder wrote:
ufcfanvt wrote:
At this point, we're veering far off the fundamental subject. If you would, please answer the questions given an assumed scenario. I know that we don't have the video and the OP might have missed some or ALL of the details, but let's just assume for the moment that:
1) Perp was merely seen emerging from the parked cars's window.
2) No crack pipe was seen at the time. No other paraphenalia either.
3) None of the cops know anyone or any of the cars/houses on the scene.
4) Subject walks away from the car.
5) Subject continues to walk when the cops ask for him to stop.
6) The officers both suspect drug activity, but no physical evidence was actually seen.

The Question: Is it right and just for the officers at this point, knowing only the information above, to forcibly detain the subject?
With regards to #1, if the area is known for high crime or drug activity and the individual was exhibiting specific behavior (e.g. stopping by a car window in a neighborhood where that is the common method of drug delivery), that is more than enough to justify a Terry stop of the suspect.

This would, of course, allow for a pat down to look for weapons or contraband. As to whether the suspect can be forcibly detained, officers are permitted to use reasonable force to detain a suspect who can be lawfully detained.

Police don't HAVE to see crack pipe. If they did, that's probable cause to arrest and they can do that right on the spot. But a combination of suspicious behavior consistent with a crime in an area known for that crime will fly by a judge as being reasonable articulable suspicion to conduct a Terry stop.

Edit: With regards to number 5, if an officer actually says to you, "Stop," you can bet your sweet ass that's not a request. Even if you *think* you're doing nothing wrong, stop, turn around and ask if you're being detained.

In the scenario you've given, LEO's would be well within their duties to act.
Thanks for the quick reply. Now consider this:
Given your response and the ease with which an officer can stop, detain and search a citizen, how would one go out in public and insulate himself from being detained and searched by an officer?
It seems to me, by your criterion, that nearly anyone could be detained and searched in their daily travels. Let's face it, I could give someone directions through his car window, turn around, see the cops and though I'm a law-abiding citizen, easily be detained an searched.
I don't personally believe that kind of police discretion is conducive to a free society. Do you?
 
Top