It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Officer steals evidence against him in court in front of everyone

page: 1
24

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 11:49 PM
link   
I don't have names, and if I did I don't think it is aloud to post, but this happened in Arizona. A cop came behind a defense attorney and stole a paper out of her not pad that had evidence against the police station. At least that is what I am to understand from some of the comments. It turns out this cop, and judge got in no trouble. Even though the judge clearly saw him take the paper. The only reason he was caught is because the prisoner saw him take it out of the corner of his eye.

The judicial system is crazy with corruption, and this proves it without a shadow of a doubt. If he wasn't caught taking, and making a copy before returning it no one would ever know. Sometimes people do get caught though, and trouble seems to fall thru the cracks. Maybe this guy was a gang banger, but it really doesn't matter when it comes to the law.





posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 12:13 AM
link   
That's crazy. Someone in the youtube comments said his name is Adam Stoddard. This happened in 2009. They threw him in jail for contempt of court but then a bunch of officers didn't show up to work the next day and 150 officers gathered outside the court house in protest. They let him out of jail but still upheld the contempt of court charge and they just made him pay a fine. What a bunch of BS.

this is from Wikipedia


In October 2009, a courtroom video was posted on YouTube, showing an MCSO Detention Officer removing documents from a defense attorney's files.[21] Detention Officer Adam Stoddard was subsequently found in contempt-of-court for violating attorney–client privilege, was ordered by judge Gary Donahoe to hold a press conference and to publicly apologize for his actions.[22] On the deadline set by the court, Detention Officer Stoddard, under orders from Sheriff Joe Arpaio,[23][24] declined to apologize and was jailed. Arpaio argued that only he could order his Detention Officer's actions, and that the court had no authority to enforce any action against his officer, a position that the Appeals Court rejected in Stoddard's appeal. The Appeals Court did order that Judge Donahoe's order to make an apology be stricken and replaced with a fine.[25][26] The next day, 20 MCSO detention officers failed to report for work at the downtown Phoenix Superior Court. A bomb threat was called in, causing the building to be evacuated. The same afternoon, more than 150 deputies and detention officers gathered outside the courthouse and reiterated their support for the jailed detention officer.[27] The MCSO appealed the contempt order, and pending the outcome of the appeal, the deputy was released from jail. Ultimately, the contempt-of-court ruling was upheld, however the court of appeals threw out the penalty (that the officer apologize), and sent the case back to the superior court for the imposition of a fine.[28]



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 03:06 AM
link   
Aren't both parties supposed to have access to all the evidence in order to build their cases?



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 03:18 AM
link   
a reply to: xenon129

From your post.

On the deadline set by the court, Detention Officer Stoddard, under orders from Sheriff Joe Arpaio,[23][24] declined to apologize and was jailed. Arpaio argued that only he could order his Detention Officer's actions, and that the court had no authority to enforce any action against his officer, a position that the Appeals Court rejected in Stoddard's appeal.

Interesting. I wonder why I've never heard of this?



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 03:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles

This is old news someone rehashed it happened in 2009. Officer Adam Stoddard of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office said in court he thought this was a note given to the defence team by another inmate of the prison. Inorder to remove anything from the prison the sheriffs dept has to approve it. Papers are not allowed tobe snuck in or out. Problem was it was approved he realized this when the papers are returned to her 10 min later she had permission to remove them fromthe jail.

All she had to do was notify them she was taking a deposition. His excuse “Part of my job in providing security to the court is to inspect documents brought into the courtroom. On October 19th, I saw a document that I had not yet screened, and that raised security concerns. I retrieved that document in plain sight and had court personnel copy it to preserve it as evidence in case it was a security breach.

He was ordered to apologize to the atty or be held in contempt. However his bossArpaio encouraged his officer to go to jail — just the another outrageous act by Arpaio who has been widely accused of acting more like a petty dictator than a police officer . The judge backs down because the atty refused to share the document with the court so she could determine if it presented a threat. The issue was the defendant was a member of the mexican mob.
edit on 11/9/17 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 05:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles

It certainly looks like the judge didn't have control over her own courtroom. She should have put a stop to that as soon as she noticed the deputy reading the letter! The deputy had no business reading that letter during the hearing let alone removing it in plain sight of the judge! The deputy should have been reprimanded and removed from the courtroom and replaced. The judge was clearly more upset with the attorney who had a legitimate complaint about the out-of-line actions by the deputy.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 05:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: xenon129

Interesting. I wonder why I've never heard of this?


because it highlights corruption of the police and court system....



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles

All corrupt government officials may be revealed publicly. It's 100% legal and justified.
They are criminals just like that gang-banger and even worse because there's no way to stop them as they hold all the power and abuse authority to dominate us and we cannot correct them without facing deadly reprisals.

2009 was not long ago, and this corruption is the very backbone of our "system" today. They do whatever they want, and are all on a big team together, and we can't do anything about it.

That judge that gave him a contempt charge did it reluctantly and only for show. They are the same team, do not forget that. The "myth" that the judicial is impartial and independent of the executive has no basis in reality and the vast amount of evidence shows that they are team players and that we the lowly peasants, we the peons, are their enemy. Their objective is to dominate and control us and then to rob us.

No one is safe from this monster called Tyranny.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: NobodiesNormal

Very true.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Why did the defendant's attorney not stop the officer at the time as she looked at him as he took the papers?



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 07:59 AM
link   

under orders from Sheriff Joe Arpaio

That says it all right there. Arpaio is an absolute crooked scumbag. It's no surprise that he'd order those under him to do such things.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Aloud? Audible? Allowed?



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Umm I saw that on a movie or tv show not that long ago.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles

Hey, anything to attack law enforcement officers, eh?

This guy was a known associate of the Mexican mob, and reportedly made statements/took actions which may have lead the deputy to believe he was in danger. Regardless, the letter was written while he was in custody of the MCSO.

You don't need a warrant to seize a letter written by someone in custody. The fact the defense attorney wouldn't share the letter with even the judge proves there was in fact something on there. Threats to LE/court officials are and should be taken very seriously - especially from the violent groups like the Mexican mob.

Less protection for slimy crims, more protections for those who are sworn to stop them.
edit on 11/9/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

That's fine and dandy, but that gives them no right to steal from a lawyer does it? HE could have murdered someone in cold blood, and that still gives them no right.



posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles


It isn't theft. It's a 4th amendment friendly exigent search & seizure - an exemption allowing warrantless searches/seizures if someone's life is in danger or evidence may be destroyed.

This looks like an instance of a known criminal's defense attorney copping an attitude that put officer lives at risk.




top topics



 
24

log in

join