Police ask judge to dismiss charges in taped scuffle

CNN ^ | Sept 5, 2002 | Smithm

[Pern]

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Lawyers for two Southern California police officers charged with abusing a teen-age suspect said Thursday evidence that might have cleared the officers was withheld by prosecutors from a grand jury.

Inglewood, California, police officers Jeremy Morse and Bijan Darvish face charges in connection with the videotaped arrest of 16-year-old Donovan Jackson at a suburban Los Angeles gas station in July.

[Pern]

...arguing that prosecutors should have presented exculpatory evidence to a grand jury considering the case.

What 'exculpatory evidence' I wonder? He was caught on video and then tried to lie about it!

[Texas_Jarhead]

"John Barnett, Morse's lawyer, said surveillance tapes from the gas station showed Jackson resisting arrest and "fighting with the police officers."

So it doesn't matter that the grand jury didn't get to see the gas station video? Am I misreading you or the article?

[Pern]

And I'm sorry, but this guy punched the kid while he was handcuffed. I know cops have a tough job, but that was inexcusable. You could see the anger on the cops face. He has no business being a cop.

[Pern]

And I repeat:this guy punched the kid while he was handcuffed. If there is another video tape, it'll come out in the trial.

Cops are not above the law. If you or I punched the guy, we would have been arrested on the spot.

Now don't get me wrong, I have several relatives that are cops, and they will have my support as long as they follow the law.

[Just another Joe]

Besides, we don't know what happened before the video began, as his lawyers stated.

It shouldn't matter what happened BEFORE the video began.
Once the perp is handcuffed you DON'T take a swing at his jaw.

[marktwain]

Witholding exculpatory evidence is done all the time at the Grand Jury level. Prosecutors know that they are not required by law to present it, so they don't. It is not the way it should be, but the way it is.

Just because this rather large teenager was handcuffed, doesn't mean that he could not assault the officer.

[Tempest]

It seems sad to me that you appear to have no interest in hearing the ENTIRE story. I don't see the harm in allowing the officers a chance to prove their innocence or guilt.

Why should anyone be afraid to show the gas station tapes?

[PLMerite]

If that thug had grabbed my 'nads, I would have used more than my fists on him, handcuffs or not.

[Rays_Dad]

"And I'm sorry, but this guy punched the kid while he was handcuffed. I know cops have a tough job, but that was inexcusable. You could see the anger on the cops face. He has no business being a cop."

While I agree with you I do have to draw a line somewhere. We do not know what happened before that 20 second video tape, I also think it is sad that the only part of the video that is ever shown on tv is the part of the cop slamming the kid down on the car. What I find weird is that cop had a bloody cut up face and I don't think he would do that to himself nor do I think the other cops on the scene beat him up. There is something that we are not seeing. You also say he has no business being a cop - I say unless you are a cop also you have no business making a statement like that until you walk a mile in his shoes and go through the same type of situation.

Chip

[Pern]

It seems sad to me that you appear to have no interest in hearing the ENTIRE story.

Hey, I want to hear the whole story, but I'm not on the jury, they'll decide if he's guilty or not.

If the teenager was resisting arrest, I'm sure he was charged with it. And if there is another video tape, it should have no bearing on the charges brought against the cop.

For example, if I'm in a bar, and you walk up to me and smack me in the head, then I hit back. The cops are called, we would both probably be arrested. It wouldn't matter who started the scuffle.

But the teen was handcuffed, and the cop assaulted the dude twice.

Like I said before, if this was you or I, we would have been arrested for assault. There can be no 'LEO elite' that's above the law. A crime was commited, and captured on video.

The cop will get off anyway, they always do.

[Pern]

If that thug had grabbed my 'nads, I would have used more than my fists on him, handcuffs or not.

I would have, too. But I admit I don't heve the patience to be a cop.

[Just another Joe]

Well, that thug probably saw the camera, and provoked the officer.

Once he was in the cuffs with another officer holding him down on the trunk there is NO WAY that the officer should have taken another swing.
I realize that no one has infinite patience and the officer might have been pushed a little too far by something.
IMO, the officer should be reprimanded and possibly disciplined but a grand jury is going a little too far.

[Tempest]

If your not aware of the whole story. (Since your not on the jury) Perhaps you should try to be more informed instead of just making a blind judgement.

My understanding is, is that the officer that "assaulted" the teenager was at the time having his family jewels grabbed by the kid. The officer then used justifiable force to get the kid to release him.

Officers do not under any circumstance have to tolerate such a situation. If I was a cop and a handcuffed suspect was grabbing onto my jewels while I was trying to get him into the patrol. well let me tell you a slam to the head would be the least of his problems.

[Pern]

You would be well served to thank the men in blue

I live in Louisiana, famous for the corruptness of our LEO's. That said, I have nothing against good cops, but dirty cops have to go.

[Coeur de Lion]

In my more wild youth I had a few run-ins with the police. In one run-in while being cuffed I was so tipsy I fell over backwards on to this "little Napoleon" officer, pinning him. His fellow officer was so pissed, he pulled me off of him using my hair. Then he threw me on the ground, grabbed me by the cuffs, dragged me acrossed a gravel driveway and slammed my head into the police car door, most likely to dislodge it in case it was jammed. They did all this and I was on my own property. They then took me down and threw me in the county jail. Luckily, I got someone to post bail otherwise, I would've been in the whole weekend. To make matters worst they falsified the police report, and I had to pay a fine for drunk and disorderly. And, by the way, I'm white.

Now should the officers have gotten reprimands? I think so. Perhaps fined? I think so. Did it happen? No, this was back in the days when the police department made it difficult to file a claim of abuse by their officers. The only reason I'm telling this story is because I've gotten jacked by the cops far worse, and on more than one occasions, than that stupid kid. Do I think the officers in that case should be reprimanded and fined? I sure do. Should the city of Inglewood have to pay some stupid award to the kid and his family? No way. Do I think these cops should be on trial? No way. It's gotten ridiculous in this country to believe that cops aren't going to occasionally lose it and maybe abuse someone. We should be judging the cops on the level abuse, not that there was some abuse. If it's in any way truly heinous they should be made to pay, with jail and their careers. But, if it's at the level I saw that kid suffer, the police department should deal with it.

[Pern]

# 14.