Cop stop: False accusation

Cincinnati Enquirer ^ | 11/1/2003 | Editorial

[PieroC]

Saturday, November 1, 2003 Cameras in cruisers

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cop stop: False accusation

The prosecution of Janika Mitchem, 18, of Bond Hill for making a false allegation against a police officer after a May 31 traffic stop serves notice that "police complaints" cut both ways. The new complaint process created by the 2002 collaborative and U.S. Department of Justice agreements is designed to protect citizens from police misconduct but also police officers from citizen misconduct.

The day after Mitchem got tickets for running a red light and not having a driver's license, she filed a written complaint, claiming the officer was disrespectful, yelled and wouldn't let her explain because he was trying to meet "the end-of-the-month quota." The cop she charged was Keith Fangman, vice president of the Fraternal Order of Police. Fangman represented the police union in negotiations that led to settling the racial profiling lawsuit and establishing the new collaborative system.

The police supervisor investigating the 21-minute traffic stop reviewed the videotape from Fangman's police cruiser. The tape shows Fangman repeatedly addressing Mitchem as "ma'am," explaining she was pulled over for disregarding a no-turn-on-red sign. He offered to transport her since neither she nor her two passengers had valid driver's licenses. She pleaded no contest to making a false accusation of police misconduct. She could have been jailed for six months. She got off with only a 30-day suspended sentence, probation, a $100 fine and $80 court costs.

[PieroC]

Read full article. The punishment does not fit the crime: Janika should have been fined an amount sufficient to cover the investigation cost of her allegations.

[MEG33]

I think cameras in police cars are such a great idea.It protects the citizens and the police.I think she should have repented in jail for a month or so.It's cheaper to take the plea,I know.

[Tired_of_the_Lies]

I think she should have repented in jail

I don't. Feeding a liar like her would be a waste of taxpayer's money. I do agree with PieroC that her fine should have been high enough to cover the costs of the investigation her lies caused.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Read full article. The punishment does not fit the crime: Janika should have been fined an amount sufficient to cover the investigation cost of her allegations.

You can't get blood out of a turnip. She probably won't even pay the measly fine she was given.

I guarantee you she does not have car insurance, either, and when she runs into you, you're hosed.

[TheCrusader]

"She got off with only a 30-day suspended sentence, probation, a $100 fine and $80 court costs."

And what do cops get for making false statements against citizens, an extra donut?

[DB]

"Janika should have been fined an amount sufficient to cover the investigation cost of her allegations."

And then some.

[DB]

Pay or jail.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Pay or jail.

Won't happen.

[Yeti]

I think cameras in police cars are such a great idea.It protects the citizens and the police.

I think you're right.

[PieroC]

You are right, but....

The cost to society for false accusations are to large to be dismissed summarily.

[PieroC]

LOL:

It is the other face of a similar problem, "False testimonial," and it should warrant the same penalties as the accusations would mandate on a guilty person.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

The cost to society for false accusations are to large to be dismissed summarily.

I am not dismissing the charges, I am dismissing the perp as a totally worthless piece of human debris.