It was police investigator Benjamin Himan, according to defense paperwork, who allegedly withheld information in a sworn affidavit at the outset of the case.
"If false statements were made in court documents, that is actionable," attorney Alex Charns said Wednesday, referring to a possible lawsuit.
"It's premature to talk about civil liability, but officers are not immune for any knowingly false statements that may have been made," Charns added. "All of that is extremely significant and will be reviewed in the future."
It was police investigator Benjamin Himan, according to defense paperwork, who allegedly withheld information in a sworn affidavit at the outset of the case.
"If false statements were made in court documents, that is actionable," attorney Alex Charns said Wednesday, referring to a possible lawsuit.
"It's premature to talk about civil liability, but officers are not immune for any knowingly false statements that may have been made," Charns added. "All of that is extremely significant and will be reviewed in the future."
Someone in the media finally got it. It isn't what isn't in the warrant but what is. The judge should throw out the evidence from the warrant. Nifong can say he no longer has a case without the evidence and blame Himan.