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.

 

Drunk On-Duty Cop Kills - Mayor Calls In FBI

page: 4
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You made my point beautifully- Thank you




posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by sjorges2002
reply to post by skull_bones
 


Stories like this need to be articulately communicated w/o exageration and hype. Police corruption is a HUGE problem. Most people faced by the the everyday abuse of power by police develop stockholm syndrome. If stories like yours were heard more frequently maybe there wouldbe fewer people w/ stockholm syndrome and more LE accountability. Do you still have that video? If yes, you could digitize and upload it.


No, I never did have a copy of it, it was my buddies camera.

I know it seems odd that we were just out filming everything, but you got to remember this was 15 years ago, and he had just got this really cool smallish camcorder and we were mainly out filming all the girls we saw that night, haha... Cameras arent such a big deal now, but it was pretty cool technology back then.

He turned it over to the States Attorney and now this many years later i dont remember if he ever got it back.

You know we were just kids and the funny thing is, at the time we had no intention of doing anything with that tape except probably showing it to our friends.

If they had just left us alone, im sure they would have gotten away with it.


[edit on 22-8-2010 by skull_bones]



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Another footnote in the long tale of the badged blue mafia...



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Its stuff like this that really pisses me off! Im so tired of the gov't and the law enforcement agencies doing what ever they want, believing that they are above the law! God when will ANARCHY begin...I for one would embrace a massive uprising/revolt in this country!



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   
I think I can shed some light on the DUI being dropped (I work in Law Enforcement). There is something alled a lesser included offense. Its there to prevent people from being charged for the same crime multiple times.

Any type of vehicle accident that results in a death from a DWI/DUI driver becomes complicated. A person was killed, and even though the guy was drunk, you cannot charge him with DWI and Involuntary Manslaughter / Vehicular manslaughter / 2nd murder (depening on the state you live in).

If they charge him with DWI/DUI, and he takes a deal / pleads guilty to that, the PA cannot charge him for the death. Being intoxicated, driving the vehicle, and killing someone are the keys elements, and DUI/DWI would be a lesser included offense to a murder charge. You cant charge him with both (again in most states).

So while things look like a coverup, sometimes they arent. Sometimes the law acts goofy in these cases, but its there for a reason.

A first time DWI offense is usually a fine, classes, and rarely jail time. Its a misdameanor charge (DUI). You dont get to felony DWI until your 3rd conviction.

Being it involved an offier of the department, there are generally 2-3 investigations that are done. The initial investigation, which should be handed off to the State Police or other police entity who dont have a vested intrest in the case. Internal affairs for the department usually will do an investigation as well, and if its bad enough the FBI can investigate.

The cop had to drop the DUI/DWI to prevent the cop from getting out of a murder charge. Because the crime is now a felony, you dont write them a ticket. You file a Probable cause statement, detailing the crime and evidence to support the charge.

The PA will review it and decide if the charges fit, or if they need to be modified.

Hope this explains some of it.

**Double post but worth repeating.

[edit on 22-8-2010 by Xcathdra]



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I hope you are right, but I think the other cops involved should be fired for negligence. The BAC, breathalyzer, and even a FST should have been performed immediately at the scene- it is up to the prosecuter/DA to figure what charges/crimes the facts will convict. The police are supposed to pick up the messes and write the reports based on facts. They are not supposed to decide which facts they will record for any reason.



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by sjorges2002
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I hope you are right, but I think the other cops involved should be fired for negligence. The BAC, breathalyzer, and even a FST should have been performed immediately at the scene- it is up to the prosecuter/DA to figure what charges/crimes the facts will convict. The police are supposed to pick up the messes and write the reports based on facts. They are not supposed to decide which facts they will record for any reason.


Contrary to popular belief none of the SFST (standardized Field Sobriety Tests, the DataMaster (at the jail that gives the legaly admissable bac level) have to be given to make a DWI case. If you can articulate driving patterns that are breaking the law, in addition to the drivers status (blood shot eyes, smell of intoxicants coming from him, slurred speach), and you have the time in service and training / experience you can get them convicted.

I have had drunks who were so drunk, that performing any type of Field Sobriety test would place the drunk person in danger (we are responsible for your safety on traffic stops, calls etc). This would be noted in the report, detailed as possible on observable actions the drunk exhibited.

As a side note the portable breathalyzer are not admissable as evidence in court. They are not considered a calibrated instrument. On the AIR form (alcohol influence report) it asks if a PBT was performed, and then only asks if it tested positive for the presence of alcohol.

Aside from ketoacidosis (medical / Diabetic issue that can mimick intoxication, down to the behavior and fruit smell from the individual) I dont think there are other medical conditions that even come close to mimicking intoxication.

I have done many DWI stops where we never went through the SFSTs. They are not required in all cases.

Secondly, the officers who were present probably helped the PA / prosecution of this officer by not going down certain roads. Anything they do can be called into question by a defense attorney. If even one step is missed, the argument is going to be the Officers are trying to cover something up to get the cop off the hook. Any appearance of this can swing a jurys opinion / or judges to create reasonable doubt.

If the officer who had the wreck went to the Hospital, the PA can subpoena his medical records, including anything that comes back from urine samples or blood draws.


[edit on 22-8-2010 by Xcathdra]


[edit on 22-8-2010 by Xcathdra]

[edit on 23-8-2010 by Xcathdra]



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Dogdish
 


I live in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada... Something similar happened here a few years back. A number of cops partied at a restaurant drinking quite heavily. They all left going to a fellow officers house to continue festivities very late into the night....actually morning because one drunken cop left and rear ended a woman sitting in her car at a red light on her way to work. She died instantly, while he, after getting out of his truck, stumbled about. Cops from a suburb just north of the city attended the scene and screwed things up 'real good' (either on purpose - likely, or because of sheer incompetence). The police captain of the suburb called the Winnipeg Chief of Police from the scene; what they discussed only they and God know. The drunken cop was not given a breathalyzer because in the words of attending cops 'he did not appear to be drunk'. Attending paramedics could smell alcohol coming from him from a distance.

In discovery before the case and during the inquiry (trial was further down the road) every single cop stuck to the same story and that was no one, especially the drunken cop, was drunk. The cop at whose house the party was held could not tell if the drunken cop even drank because he claims he was in the kitchen trying to fix his popcorn popper which stopped working some time during the night.

Later at the trial the drunken cop got off with reckless driving, some other lame convictions and get this "house arrest" for I can't remember how long. At a special enquiry which was held after the trial because the provincial government was forced to call because the public went nuts and the family pushed and pushed and pushed for one, the presiding former chief justice found virtually everyone at fault and couldn't believe the other cops suffered from a collective amnesia. However it only being a special enquiry he could not sentence anyone for wrong doing. Needless to say the drunken cop is no longer a cop and living in a small city a few hours to the west of Winnipeg and the captain from the suburb got the boot. Him and the drunken cop should have been jailed and the others at the party should have lost their jobs.

Guess the cops who attended the party sleep well now, especially after attending all night drinking parties. The husband and two grown children have to live with the fact that cops that arrest drunken drivers can themselves drink and literally get away with murder.



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
...did you even read the article? The cop wasn't given a breath analysis


...yes, i read the article - specifically the part below from the news article linked in the op, second paragraph from the top...


A blood test indicated Bisard was drunk


...so, it was a blood test, not a breath analysis... i made a mistake - not my first, wont be my last...


Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
the other cops on the scene said they couldn't tell that he was drunk.


...maybe they couldn't - or - maybe they could and wouldnt admit it... we dont know yet...


Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
And with a BAC that was still .19 hours after the scene, any person could have told you that he was drunk.


...maybe not - but - the crucial point is, we dont convict people on hearsay and "any person could have told ya" stuff... btw, i've been around chronic drinkers that were so adept at handling biz while loaded that i never could tell when they were drinking and when they werent, unless i could smell it on their breath and theres ways around that too...


Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
So you're saying that we shouldn't hold an armed profession that claims it is supposed to be serving the public good to a higher standard than, say, a sales associate at a department store?


...i didnt say or infer that but i'll comment on what you attempted to insert as my view...

...should cops be held to a higher standard than a retail worker?... a higher standard is required to get in the leo door - education level, for one... a person without a high school diploma can be a retail worker...

...CAN cops be "held" to a higher standard is really your question - and - the answer is no... there is no way to force anyone to maintain a standard... either they will or they wont... if they dont, they lose their job in a perfect world but we dont live there...


Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
The point is that the people that are supposed to be upholding the law are getting away with breaking it. If they can't be held to higher standards than regular citizens, what the hell is the point of having police?


...thats not a point... thats an exaggerated generalization...

...not all cops are bad - and - not all bad cops get away with inappropriate behavior or breaking the law... some do get away with it but, then, so do some criminals and politicians and sweet little retail workers who like to smoke pot and do ectasy on the weekends...

...if a cop breaks the law, should he get a lighter or tougher penalty than a non-cop?... no... does it happen?... yep, both ways...


Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
There are certain professions that must be held to higher standards than others because they are (in theory) trusted with the safety of the public.


...yeah, okay, i'll give ya that one but not without the warning that its unrealistic to believe that just because a profession is held to a higher standard, that everyone who participates in that profession will always adhere to that higher standard - because - we talking about humans, not robots...


Originally posted by Tsuki-no-Hikari
If my city gives a person a gun and the authority to speed, run traffic lights, and detain people, I want to be damn sure that he/she doesn't have any "personality flaws" that will conflict with the ability to carry out his/her job.


...well, good luck with that, since all humans have flaws and there is no way to be "damn sure" that someone's flaws might interfere with their job or how or when...




posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by sjorges2002
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You made my point beautifully- Thank you


How cute, you edited your post after I replied.

Anyways, you claim "nobody made an argument", which is false, many people in this thread have made arguments that are biased sample arguments. Secondly, I replied to the OP of the thread which made this statement in the first sentence of the OP:

"This story is amazing and typical."

This incident is hardly "typical". Nor do a great majority of the police force condone the actions of a criminal few. It's just a thread where folks who's reasoning skills are dictated by logical fallacies, (biased sample and appeal to emotion), can come and bash the great majority of honorable police workers. It's disgusting.




posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:51 PM
link   
Its older but there are some good stats in it.

DWI Video - Springfield MO Police Department.



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by eNaR
 


Despite what xcathdra has said I fear what you've described will be the outcome in this case as well.



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Alright, being a Libertarian, the officer did NOT break the law UNTIL he injured others.

Tell me, are the OFFICERS covering for him going to be charged with obstruction of justice? How bout interfering with a police investigation? How bout being charged with after the fact?

OH, I see, the LEO's are HELD to a different standard. Kinda like the royals of old?

Anyone, that either protects the status quo, or this BLATANT problem in our society, SHOULD BE SHOT!

Oh, is that Tooooooo harsh, frack that.

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by sjorges2002
 


Its Canada.. I am not sure what their laws are and how DWI works there. As for the comment someone else made about not being able to tell if a person is intoxicated or not, you would be very suprised.

The term is functioning alcoholic. I have talked with people whose bac was .4 (not .04, but .4). Most people would be in a Hospital at this level, if not ICU.

Give this person something to lean up against, where he can concentrate on talking, and you would never know he was intoxicated.

Until you actually do Law Enforcement and are working a DWI case, its gonna be difficult for people to say Law Enforcement should know.

As the video stats state, for every 1 person arrested for dwi, 3 more are confronted face to face and released.



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I did not edit after your reply- you continue to make such statements. I was editing with no knowledge of your post. I am setting you to ignore please feel free to extend me the same courtesy.



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Please learn the law before passing judgment on these officers. If you want him to be held accountible for killing a person, they cant charge him with DWI/DUI.

The officers on scene did what they should have done. The more they involve themselves into this, the easier its going to be to get the drunk cop convicted.



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by sjorges2002
 



So I present a flawed logical statement of the OP and you do the internet equivalent of putting both fingers in your ears while saying "Na na na na naaaaah, I can't hear yooooooou!"?



[edit on 23-8-2010 by NOTurTypical]



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Please learn the law before passing judgment on these officers. If you want him to be held accountible for killing a person, they cant charge him with DWI/DUI.

The officers on scene did what they should have done. The more they involve themselves into this, the easier its going to be to get the drunk cop convicted.



Hey, don't let facts derail a hastily put together cop-bashing thread. You're ruining the fun.




posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


My bad man... Uhhm.. ignore the previous post by me, and by all means continue the cop bashing..


/strolls out



[edit on 23-8-2010 by Xcathdra]



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Geesh, is that all it takes to become a cop? a murderer? they all should be facing prison time, jsut like the rest of us would have too. PIGS*****
Ide like to ask, where the states DUI checkpoints now, after a cop did this, further angering the citiznes to a litle outrage n anarchy



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join