TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

WildBill wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

What about his defense attorney??

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

What about his defense attorney??

Anygunanywhere

Maybe the police knew what was on it and it was 15 months before the defense attorney saw it.

jmra wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

What about his defense attorney??

Anygunanywhere

Maybe the police knew what was on it and it was 15 months before the defense attorney saw it.

If so this violated the discovery, or whatever it is called? More reason to disbar and prosecute??

IANAL and I do not pretend to be one or play one on teevee.

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:

jmra wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

What about his defense attorney??

Anygunanywhere

Maybe the police knew what was on it and it was 15 months before the defense attorney saw it.

If so this violated the discovery, or whatever it is called? More reason to disbar and prosecute??

IANAL and I do not pretend to be one or play one on teevee.

Anygunanywhere

I believe so. If the defense attorney did have the video footage pre-trial, he should be disbarred.

anygunanywhere wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

What about his defense attorney??

Anygunanywhere

What about him?

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

What about his defense attorney??

Anygunanywhere

What about him?

Chas.

His defense attorney should have asked for the videos early on in the trial process. Dashcam videos are not new technology.

AGAW

There should be a state law that requires a municipality, county, or state law enforcement agency that is successfully sued for official misconduct to take the money directly from the agencies retirement fund, so every employee of the agency will have their retirement diminished by a prorated amount to make up for the settlement or award.

It would save the taxpayers money, and I’d bet the thin blue line would become much more transparent – and fast.

Jaguar wrote:There should be a state law that requires a municipality, county, or state law enforcement agency that is successfully sued for official misconduct to take the money directly from the agencies retirement fund, so every employee of the agency will have their retirement diminished by a prorated amount to make up for the settlement or award.

It would save the taxpayers money, and I’d bet the thin blue line would become much more transparent – and fast.

Sounds good, doesn't it? I don't like it. It's punishing all the apples for the rotten actions of a few. What if one of your co-workers (or more than one) misbehaved and it came out of your pay check? Worse, it comes out of the paycheck of everyone that shares your employer.

I heard someone suggest that officers start funding their own "malpractice" insurance. That is, the more they get sued individually, the more expensive it is for them to stay on the job.. And employers, if they're paying for such insurance, aren't going to want to pay more for someone that is "high risk".

Another suggestion would be to have bonus pool for officers in leadership positions. Goof ups like this take money out of that pool. Influence travels down hill, there would be a lot of incentive not to goof up.

I don't like the idea of pulling the entire PDs budget either. For all the goofed up bad things that PDs can do, most offices are doing a lot of good.. pulling that budget punishes the entire office as well as the communities they protect.

I like your idea of the bonus. It would be a good way to incentivize better behavior.

As far as 400k for a year in jail. They are getting off easy. Throw me in jail for a year you have done most serious damage to my life that 400k won't even cover. I will have lost a year of my kids lives. I will have lost my reputation amoung my firens and family, you can't just get those things back. Wherever I go whispers will follow. My kids will have lost a year of having a mother and will have gone through the shame and family upheaval of all that is entailed with that. No, 400k is not enough. It is a pittance. It is what can be paid out because we can't pay what should really be paid.

Throwing an innocent person in jail is so far down the unacceptable line that I cannot begin to think of an appropriate compensation.

anygunanywhere wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:$1.1 million for 15 months is an excellent recovery.

The officer who lied should be prosecuted for aggravated assault, perjury (if he testified before a grand jury), for falsifying a government document (police reports and other documents) and should receive the maximum possible sentence on each offense. He should serve his time in the general population.

It's inexcusable that neither the police nor prosecutors watched the dash camera(s) for 15 months. The officers involved in the investigation should be fired and lose their TCOLE licenses and the prosecutor(s) should be disbarred. Incompetence may not be criminal, but it should not be tolerated and the public shouldn't be required to bear the burden of professional incompetence.

Chas.

I find it hard to believe that the police or prosecutors didn't watch the dash cameras for 15 months.

What about his defense attorney??

Anygunanywhere

What about him?

Chas.

His defense attorney should have asked for the videos early on in the trial process. Dashcam videos are not new technology.

AGAW

He probably did and was told there were none. Also, the state is supposed to provide that evidence. So I have no criticism about the defense counsel. My guess is that it was his counsel who ultimately got the videos released.

Unlike LEOs and prosecutors, private attorneys are not public servants and they don't have access to the evidence that is totally within the control of LEOs and prosecutors.

Chas.

anygunanywhere wrote: SKIP His defense attorney should have asked for the videos early on in the trial process. SKIP

In our country a defense attorney is not obligated to "ask for" exculpatory evidence. The prosecution, on the other hand, is obligated to provide any such evidence to the defense without its first being requested, as decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in its 1963 holding in the case of Brady v. Maryland.

If there may be any who might believe that the prosecution would not sometimes intentionally suppress exculpatory evidence, I will just mention a New York case.
A judge very recently vacated the conviction of a man who spent nearly a quarter of a century behind bars for a Brooklyn slaying that occurred while he was vacationing in Florida. Jonathan Fleming, 51, was 27 years old when he was convicted of a murder that he has always insisted he did not commit. Now, 24 years later, he has been released from prison. Not only did the prosecution fail to meet its Brady obligation, but it even intentionally suppressed exculpatory evidence after being requested by the defense attorney. http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/08/justice/n ... onviction/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thank you, Chas., for reminding us all of Brady, such an important decision

Jim

cb1000rider wrote:

Jaguar wrote:There should be a state law that requires a municipality, county, or state law enforcement agency that is successfully sued for official misconduct to take the money directly from the agencies retirement fund, so every employee of the agency will have their retirement diminished by a prorated amount to make up for the settlement or award.

It would save the taxpayers money, and I’d bet the thin blue line would become much more transparent – and fast.

Sounds good, doesn't it? I don't like it. It's punishing all the apples for the rotten actions of a few. What if one of your co-workers (or more than one) misbehaved and it came out of your pay check? Worse, it comes out of the paycheck of everyone that shares your employer.

I heard someone suggest that officers start funding their own "malpractice" insurance. That is, the more they get sued individually, the more expensive it is for them to stay on the job.. And employers, if they're paying for such insurance, aren't going to want to pay more for someone that is "high risk".

Another suggestion would be to have bonus pool for officers in leadership positions. Goof ups like this take money out of that pool. Influence travels down hill, there would be a lot of incentive not to goof up.

I don't like the idea of pulling the entire PDs budget either. For all the goofed up bad things that PDs can do, most offices are doing a lot of good.. pulling that budget punishes the entire office as well as the communities they protect.

In my world, I am responsible for the actions of my workers. If one of my technicians or inspectors were to lie on a government form and approve a part that does not meet the standards, my company could lose its certificate and I would personally be held responsible facing fines and imprisonment as well as civil charges if someone was injured or killed. I have to have faith in my workers - technicians, inspectors, and supervisors, that the job is being done in the manner prescribed by law, and since I have trained them and have seen the work they perform and the ethics they embody, I am confidant of my continued freedom and employment.

For me it is about the department having accountability, and isolating the individual so not to effect others makes it easier for others to look away when they see a “bad apple” acting recklessly. The good apples can turn their head, stand behind the blue line, and tell themselves it is hurting no one but the bad apple. If they had to bear a burden of those who act in an inappropriate manner I would bet social pressure would correct this faster than any training bulletin could be circulated.

My job keeps people safe and saves lives even though I sit behind a desk and perform more paperwork than I believe is necessary. I would be happy to only have “future retirement uncertainty” the cost of someone falsifying a document rather than fines, imprisonment and civil actions. Also, if our certificate were to be revoked because of someone falsifying a document everyone who works here would find themselves unemployed. What I suggested for the law enforcement agencies is less stringent than what I face, in this real world.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: He probably did and was told there were none. Also, the state is supposed to provide that evidence. So I have no criticism about the defense counsel. My guess is that it was his counsel who ultimately got the videos released.

Unlike LEOs and prosecutors, private attorneys are not public servants and they don't have access to the evidence that is totally within the control of LEOs and prosecutors.

Chas.

There is undoubtedly more to the story than we have access to. My post was not seeking criticism of his defense attorney. I was expecting to hear more from his attorney's statements about what happened over the course of his incarceration. I guess I have been watching too many Law and Order reruns.

Thanks Charles.

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote: He probably did and was told there were none. Also, the state is supposed to provide that evidence. So I have no criticism about the defense counsel. My guess is that it was his counsel who ultimately got the videos released.

Unlike LEOs and prosecutors, private attorneys are not public servants and they don't have access to the evidence that is totally within the control of LEOs and prosecutors.

Chas.

There is undoubtedly more to the story than we have access to. My post was not seeking criticism of his defense attorney. I was expecting to hear more from his attorney's statements about what happened over the course of his incarceration. I guess I have been watching too many Law and Order reruns.

Thanks Charles.

Anygunanywhere

Sorry, I misunderstood your post asking about defense counsel. I thought you were indicating he should be disbarred as well as the prosecutors.

Chas.