Body Cam Footage Of A Cop Planting Evidence Leads To Dozens Of Dismissed Cases
from the giving-(drugs)-back-to-the-community dept
It seems as though a Baltimore police officer forgot about one key feature of his bodycam: the fact that it saves the previous 30 seconds of video recorded before the camera is activated. Most bodycams record and dump constantly. The moment it’s activated, the 30 seconds preceding the activation become part of the recording.
What was apparently inadvertently captured by the camera was the officer planting drugs in a can and hiding them in an alley. All three officers then retreat to the sidewalk outside the alley before heading back in to “discover” the drug stash.
If it wasn’t for the fortuitous discovery (in the legal sense) of the video, the officer might have gotten away with it.
There’s controversy over a Baltimore City police body-camera video and whether it shows an officer tampering with evidence.
The 90-second clip led to the dismissal of a drug case, and 53 other cases that involve the same officer might be under review.
The clip is a snapshot of what appears to be an officer mishandling evidence. The video, which was used in connection with a drug arrest in January, was released Wednesday by the Public Defender’s Office.
The term “mishandling” downplays what appears to be happening in the video: a cop generating probable cause for an arrest. There’s a small possibility the drugs were discovered earlier but no recording existed, so the officers “reenacted” the discovery and hoped no one would notice their subterfuge. Either way, it’s something you just can’t do, not if you want to keep your conviction.
As for the other 53 cases under review, many of them appear to be headed for dismissal. And the original estimate of 53 was incredibly low.
Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby identified 123 cases associated with the officers mishandling evidence as seen on the body-camera video. Mosby said 34 of the cases will be dismissed, and 77 others remain under review.
[…]
“The cases that have been dismissed thus far or are scheduled to be dismissed are felony drug cases or free-standing possession of firearm cases. And we made a decision in every one of those cases after a very thorough review of the facts, that we did not have a case to prosecute without the testimony of one or all of the three officers,” said Antonio Gioia, chief counsel at the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office.
Note that the attorney’s office is ready to let suspects walk if any of the three officers might be involved in the prosecutions. This is the right way to handle this. The cop who planted the evidence isn’t the only problem. It’s also his fellow officers who did nothing to stop him. All three are culpable for this act — whether it was the deliberate framing of an arrestee or a one-act play performed for the camera to make up for the lack of footage during the original find. In a little more than 90 seconds, three cops destroyed their credibility, possibly forever.
And it certainly appears that these aren’t the only three Baltimore cops doing this kind of evidence planting. As I was finishing up this post, we got some more breaking news of… more Baltimore cops faking evidence:
Public defenders in Baltimore say charges against a client have been dropped because police body-camera video “appears to depict multiple officers working together to manufacture evidence.”
Oh, and that’s not all:
Separately, seven other Baltimore officers on a gun crimes task force are accused of faking reports and false detentions.
I don’t know about you, but I’m beginning to think this might not be just one or two “bad apples.”
Filed Under: baltimore, planted evidence, police, trust
Comments on “Body Cam Footage Of A Cop Planting Evidence Leads To Dozens Of Dismissed Cases”
But how were the cops supposed to know? They enforce the law, they don’t need to know the law! /sarc
Re: Re:
Slight correction
“They enforce the law, they don’t need to follow the law”
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, no! It was already correct, per various other stories.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
indeed!
If I were to serve on a jury where a person is accused of having killed an officer of the law, I would immediately exonerate them unless the police played EVERYTHING by the “Constitutional” book.
I am tired of cops playing God with everyone’s lives for shits, giggles, and ego trips!
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
With that attitude, you probably wouldn’t make it out of the jury pool.
Unless you can lie very convincingly.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Never lie as a juror!
Sure I might not make it to jury selection. But I will not be answering questions in such a way as to create assumption about my position on matters.
The jury selection process has been entirely re-designed to fill a jury with the dumbest idiots available. Most people have contempt for the jury system and that is exactly what the Judiciary and Lawyers have worked hard to ensure.
I will never lie, I am just not going to tip my hat.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
what is the point of your post then?
Is it just me, or..?
Am I the only one who finds themselves wondering how all these cops just “happen” to have drugs handy, for planting? I find it difficult to believe that every single one of these “manufactured evidence” scenarios, involves drugs that they found, and just had to re-enact for their body cams.
Perhaps the problem isn’t just the number of bad apples, but the issues with the evidence locker that seems to be oozing baggies of evidence for these cops to plant in the first place.
Re: Is it just me, or..?
It’s not the evidence locker. When a cop actually finds 3 bags of drugs (that they did not plant), they only put two in the evidence locker and the third is either for their recreational use, or to use to plant in a future case.
Re: Is it just me, or..?
Have you seen the movie training day? I imagine it is not far off the mark.
`one bad apple..’ is a bad simile. Fact is that one bad cop compromizes the reputation of the entire corps.
This is the only reaction that lets the attorney keep the trust of the electorate (at least until the next issue crops up).
Re: Re:
sadly there are 3 bad apples in this one 😐
Re: Re: Re:
I’m pretty sure it was all the fault of the body camera.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
This is really why the police don’t like camera’s!!! Because it screws them over when they lie, which they always do.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
This is also why they shouldn’t be able to turn them off & on at will, even with a constant record/dump cycle with a buffer.
This is also why they insist that they be able to turn them off & on at will, as a condition of having to wear them at all.
Re: Re: Re:
Not just bad, but STUPID. If your body camera records 30 seconds prior to turning it on, WAIT THE 30 BLOODY SECONDS BEFORE TURNING IT ON! How hard is that? If you’re going to break the law, at least expend the MINIMUM EFFORT needed to avoid getting caught.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps Baltimore PD is one of those that turns away applicants who score “too high” on the IQ test.
Re: Re:
You are in fact using the phrase ‘one bad apple’ correctly.
You see, the complete proverb is ‘one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch’.
Re: Re: Re:
Which is why if Police Departments are serious about wanting to earn back their trust with the people, they need to be the most proactive and gung-ho about stamping out this kind of behavior.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You see – they do not really want to earn back anything from the public they so despise. No, it is simply a PR campaign that no one will believe and things will continue to get worse. Police will continue to server the rich at the expense of everyone else just like they always have.
Re: Re: Re:
And, in this case, is the “fruit of the poisonous tree.”
Re: Re:
you also forgot the rest of the statement
“…spoils the bunch”
Re: Re:
While others have commented on your first sentence, I’ll provide a correction on your second sentence.
You left of the "e" on corps.
From the dictionary, Obsolete. corpse.
I take it you were referring to meaning 2 and not meaning 1.
Re: Re:
Actually it’s a perfect comparison if you know the original full saying, which tells you to throw out the bad apples, to save the rest from going bad. And since we didn’t throw them out when they first showed signs of going bad…
I’m not condoning the actions of the officers, on the contrary. They must know that what they did is not acceptable under any circumstances.
I think the most reasonable scenario is that these officers did in fact find the drugs. And most likely even in the exact spot where they later "plant" them. They just didn’t have any footage of the find.
So they decided to reenact the discovery, but this time with he camera rolling.
It would at least also explain why these cops have drugs on hand during their shift.
As I said, tampering with evidence in this way is a big no-no, and they should be severely punished for it. More so because they undermine the credibility of the entire police force in a time when that reputation is already showing … euh … great strain.
Re: Re:
Gee, do ya think so, really? Don’t be too rough on them there.
Oh, of course they did. They’re cops, after all!
Because cops would never, ever just so happen to have some "throw down" evidence, as it’s called, stashed in the trunks of their cars.
Re: Re:
“They just didn’t have any footage of the find. So they decided to reenact the discovery, but this time with he camera rolling.”
So, to cover their incompetence, they lie for the camera. There’s no way their “re-enactment” would be completely accurate, especially if the original “find” involved them violating someone’s rights or doing illegal things to get the evidence. It’s faked evidence, presenting a false version of the story to further their own needs.
I’d argue that if such a “re-enactment” was presented to a court without being announced as such, it should be treated as perjury and the officer jailed. I’d also argue that if presented truthfully to a court, it should be laughed out of the room as inadmissible.
Re: Re:
Re: Re:
Yes, always give liars the benefit of the doubt.
Re: Re:
And by severely punish, you mean put in prison for committing a crime, right?
Re: Re:
Oh dear .. aren’t you precious.
Re: Re:
Of course if that was true they could have hit record at the initial discovery and TADA they have 30 seconds back showing them finding it.
Of course that assumes 1) Your right and they really found it instead of planting it. 2) They were smart enough to actually read the freekin manual.
On number 1… I really doubt it. On number 2, well they proved they are too stupid to read the manual because this video exists.
Re: Re:
The cop culture in the US has shifted much too far in the direction of doing everything that they can to punish those they suspect of being criminals, even when they can find no real evidence to support that belief.
Re: Re:
So they decided to reenact the discovery, but this time with he camera rolling.
If you ever get a speeding ticket (right, wrong, or otherwise) try something similar and see how it goes:
Because hey, if it’s reasonable for them, it’s fine for the rest of us, no?
Re: Re: Re:
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It’s even worse … they have a get out of jail free card.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity
A few bad apples spoil the barrel.
Remember that old adage? This is what it means: when there is one rotten apple in the barrel, pretty soon there are more. Rot is a disease that spreads from apple to apple until the whole Barrel is rotten.
That is why it is so important to remove rotten apples from the barrel.
Re: A few bad apples spoil the barrel.
My impression is that the state of Law Enforcement in the US is that many barrels of apples should be thrown out entirely.
Observations
I don’t know about you, but I’m beginning to think this might not be just one or two "bad apples."
I work with LEO quite a lot in my job. In my previous job I worked with LE issues at least twice a day.
My opinion is that 75% of LEO are willing to cheat to obtain "evidence".
Are they evil? They don’t consider themselves so. I believe that it is evil to plant evidence, to lie, and to cheat. Motive to me does not matter.
Here’s the thing: Justice is important to me, and is second only to mercy and understanding. Justice untempered by mercy is not justice, it’s simply revenge.
Yes, there are situations were mercy and understanding should be withheld. But the point of the rule of law is not to blindly apply the law, but to make a livable society. So there are times where we are better off setting aside the letter, and going with the spirit of the law.
People fuck up. It’s important to understand if that mistake is excusable, or if it should be punished.
Lies by LEO should never be excused or covered up.
Re: Observations
IMHO, the real problem with cavalier attitude to evidence, procedure, and general civility that the LEOs exhibit (likewise for the judiciary and the penal system and the politicians) is that it has a corrosive effect on society.
When the population sees these figures of authority say one thing, do another, and generally lie, cheat, steal their way to positions of unaccountable power, the population realizes that their efforts to be honest, civil, and cooperative in the task of building a Just Society (to use PET’s phrase) are being held to ridicule by these people in power.
(see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_society#Canadian_usage)
So the people stop cooperating with the project of nation-building, of democracy, of civilization.
They become uncivil, they cheat, they steal, they don’t pay their taxes, and they kill each other for the most trivial of reasons. For any country, this leads to disaster. I’m sure you can find any number of examples where this has happened, in a dramatic fashion.
Re: Re: Observations
For any country, this leads to disaster. I’m sure you can find any number of examples where this has happened, in a dramatic fashion.
In addition to the ever-requested ‘Sad but True’ button, we now need a ‘Respond With Knowing Wink’ button.
Re: Re: Re: Observations
I’m glad to see that at least one person is paying attention.
Re: Re: Observations
First and second century Rome.
Silver lining on a huge black cloud
Credit where it’s due to the city prosecutor for taking the correct route of dumping any and all cases that might be tainted by those that were caught this time around, that’s a stance that’s far too rare to see.
From the sound of it though they are going to be revisiting a lot of cases, as it seems if not the entire then at least a good portion of the city’s police are corrupt and abusing their power, so hopefully the local attorney can keep up their professional integrity and not let it be subverted by the usual pathetic mindset/excuse of ‘It’s not a problem when the cops do it’ that far too many display.
Re: Silver lining on a huge black cloud
Prosecutors tend to have political aspirations. Don’t give this one too much credit, all he did was keep his conviction rate high while short-stopping a load of court cases where the press would have made him look like a fool, if not a co-conspirator of.
Re: Re: Silver lining on a huge black cloud
Quite possibly, but even then far too often the local courts and prosecutors will bend over backwards to avoid even so much as a suggestion that the police are anything but entirely trustworthy and honest, so the fact that they are actually willing to drop cases this time around is a refreshing change(even if it really, really shouldn’t be).
Re: Re: Re: Silver lining on a huge black cloud
Why is it backwards?
Are they not bending over forwards to intentionally let the police fuck the judges and the system over? I mean what reason does a judge have to LET a police officer lie? Or to give them deference? Or to let them break the law so clearly?
What are those judges getting back in return for letting the police make public fools of them?
Re: Re: Re:2 Silver lining on a huge black cloud
The police back them when it comes time for reelection. And yes, local judges are elected.
Re: Re: Silver lining on a huge black cloud
The prosecutor is a woman, and too many these days would be fighting to protect “her cases” and “her officers.” Look at the resistance in the Boston drug lab cases.
Re: Re: Re: Silver lining on a huge black cloud
Re: Re: Re:2 Silver lining on a huge black cloud
Mosby is an African-American woman, and she is the attorney that went after the cops responsible for Freddy Gray’s death. While I’m sure she has political aspirations, and given the riots happening at the time, she probably didn’t have much choice but to announce charges against those officers. However, she did speak quite passionately, and i think she really wanted to take them down. Unfortunately, she wanted all the glory and made some odd choices in how she handled the cases that probably pushed the chances of conviction even further out of reach. The cops are suing her for malicious prosecution, and she did not get qualified immunity; I don’t think she much considers them ‘her officers’ and this could turn out to be huge. I don’t have a problem with her getting political points if she manages to bring the hammer down on the PD.
Headline is in the URL:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/baltimore-police-commissioner-orders-cops-not-to-stage-body-cam-footage/
Re: Re:
It says a lot that they had to be told that, but it’s good that they are. Although, it’s almost certainly a pR stunt rather than a change in actual policy.
Re: Re:
Wait so the excuse in this case is they really found the drugs there, but didn’t have their camera’s on, and so staged it to film them finding the drugs. So the person was guilty, but getting off because the cops screwed up by doing this.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. Ya, and the police really dug around in a small spot in a very large pile of crap and just happened to find these drugs in no time flat.
When the police go and frame people like this. It screws up their lives. They lose everything!!! You’re sitting in jail for months, did nothing wrong, can’t work. Can’t pay your bills. You lose your house, your car, your job, pretty much everything. Maybe the person 7 months later or longer finally goes to court, is found innocent and what does he or she have to look forward to? They lost everything to corrupt police!!! What happens to the police? NOTHING!!!! They keep on doing what they do. There’s a reason they’re called PIGS.
You go on youtube and watch how they will step all over your rights. Lie right to your face. With the blue line, the other PIGS will stand there letting it happen. Which makes them just as guilty.
Re: Re:
What the commissioner really meant was “don’t get caught or I might have to do something”.
The Chief has said lets not rush to judgement…
like officers do when a brown person moves to quickly.
We can’t assume that this is wide spread…
Oh hey that 2nd video where 3 of you searched a car & found nothing then 1 leaned in cams back on and OH HEY DRUGS!
I am reminding my officers to not reenact events…
If you have to remind them to not submit made up fantasies, they shouldn’t be cops.
This shouldn’t be an indication of any wrongdoing…
But we have a team of 3 interns & a blind guy reviewing the hundreds of thousand of minutes we’ve recorded already so they are a little behind on seeing if its the real deal or if they are putting on a skit…
So what have we learned boys & girls… that even knowing they might be on camera caught red handed violating the law they are charged with upholding…THEY STILL DO IT.
Perhaps there aren’t enough punishments being handed out & to much administrative paid vacation until the heat dies down.
They fabricated evidence.
They presented it as how it happened, not a reenactment of the events.
I know if I tried to make a case using faked evidence my ass would be in jail… not on leave while they decide if what I did was really that bad or was it in “good faith” that I decided I needed to fabricate evidence.
Re: Re:
I actually think these people can’t be trusted with the “good faith” path anymore thus they should be fired. Permanently.
he's already innocent
cops don’t do time
“I don’t know about you, but I’m beginning to think this might not be just one or two “bad apples.”
It is systemic and it is happening all around the world. It’s just that this time defendants were lucky enough to have footage of them planting evidence leaked thus saving them of years in jail even if they are innocent.
Make no mistake, there are judges involved. While I can’t provide evidence I’ve heard from people working to judges saying they are also working with law enforcement to plant evidence to secure a conviction. Sure there are cases where the person is a slippery criminal but if you can’t get the person without planting evidence then you don’t get him/her, though luck/change your tactics. I suspect this is also happening in the US. The footage leaked just scratches the surface.
The question is, how can this be stopped?
Planting evidence + Civil asset forfeiture = Thief by cop
Re: Re:
It's not a serious crime, get over it
The cop was merely planting evidence. It’s not that serious a crime. He will move on to another job and it will be soon forgotten.
It’s not like he was committing copyright infringement or something equally serious where he could lose his life savings, face prison, asset forfeiture, and even extradition upon the mere accusation of such a serious crime.
Re: It's not a serious crime, get over it
you sir, just broke my sarcasm meter.
Re: Re: It's not a serious crime, get over it
A working sarcasm meter in the U.S. is like a working accordion in the rain forest.
It’s really not a suitable environment to keep it in.
30 second buffer
A 30 second buffer seems rather short. Is this something that LEO’s can choose/configure when the device is issued? Seems to me that a longer buffer should be available and used..
Re: 30 second buffer
Maybe it should be random and variable. Then you never know how much is recorded before you turn it on.
Re: Re: 30 second buffer
The recorder should be on for the officer’s entire shift, but he should have a button to encipher it while he considers himself on break. Enciphered footage could be deciphered and viewed only with a court order.
Re: Re: Re: 30 second buffer
Cop TV data should be streamed to NSA storage facility just like your browser history. They can pixelate the bathroom break videos after the fact.
Re: Re: Re:2 30 second buffer
Or they can broadcast bathroom breaks over the web and make some money on the side. 😉
Re: Re: Re:3 30 second buffer
This week on “COPS”….
Re: Re: Re: 30 second buffer
Will the cipher key have a proper back door?
Ya think?
“I don’t know about you, but I’m beginning to think this might not be just one or two “bad apples.” “
What gives you this idea? Cops have been ‘bad apples’ since they discovered that simply blipping their lights would allow them to never have to stop at red lights, something I’ve seen regularly since 1977.
re-enact. and felony possession
do not all ‘re-enactment’ to be a thing .. unless the officers are clearly stating that the video is staged on camera . maybe even with cue cards visible .. then what the officers did was obstruction of justice, crimes commited under the color of authority, and felony drug possesion with intent to distribute…
re-enact. and felony possession
do not allow ‘re-enactment’ to be a thing .. unless the officers are clearly stating that the video is staged on camera . maybe even with cue cards visible .. then what the officers did was obstruction of justice, crimes commited under the color of authority, and felony drug possesion with intent to distribute… word fixed
This isn't the first time...and it's not just drugs
1. This isn’t the first time, or the second time, or the hundredth time cops have done this. The only reason they’re being accidentally caught now is that they have bodycams. Everyone in Baltimore knows that this is standard procedure if they need to make their numbers of if they want a promotion or if it’s a slow day or if they show subservience or if they’re in the wrong place and ESPECIALLY if they’re not white.
2. Sometimes the throwndown isn’t drugs. Sometimes it’s a gun.
So if you’re a black person living in east Baltimore, and you come home tonight to find your back window broken and your TV stolen, do you call the cops? HELL NO. There is no possible outcome of that which is good for you. There are a lot of possible outcomes that end up with you in jail or in the hospital. You’d have to be insane to make that call.
And this, multiplied a few hundred thousand times, is why Baltimore has already hit 200 murders in 2017. The community doesn’t trust them. Doesn’t want to talk to them. Doesn’t want to help them. The community would rather take its chances with gangbangers and drug dealers, because — as brutal as that is — it’s a superior alternative to siding with the cops.
You know how bad it’s gotten? I’m an old white guy, and even *I* might run from the cops if they approach me in Baltimore. (But they probably won’t, precisely because I am an old white guy. I’m nearly invisible to them. I won’t get hassled or stopped, I won’t get followed, I won’t have my car pulled over, etc.)
And I can tell you that is there is zero – ZERO – political will to change this. Doubly given that AG Sessions has signaled very clearly that no police reform efforts anywhere will be pushed.
So cops will keep doing this. They’ll just do it outside the 30-second window. Or leave their cameras off. Or accidentally break them. Why not? It’s not their community burning.
and they weren’t even caught by those meddling kids and their dog.
Next on the LEOBR wish list...
Police unions can ask complaisant State legislators for another item on their Law Enforcement Officer Bill of Rights — an exclusionary rule to delete and or ignore any surveillance footage that ran while the cop was unaware of it.
but they obviously did it in “good faith”…
Bad apples
This whole “bad apple” thing pains me. The original adage strongly implies that if the presence of a single bad apple isn’t immediately remedied, the whole barrel will be spoiled.
Once you’ve discovered a second bad apple, you should be burning the whole thing down and starting over.
“There’s a small possibility the drugs were discovered earlier but no recording existed, so the officers “reenacted” the discovery and hoped no one would notice their subterfuge.”
They are really scrapping the bottom of the barrel for that excuse.
A question that no-one seems to have asked (I may have missed the answer). Just where did the drugs actually come from? I mean by that – where did the police officers *originally* acquire the drugs?
Re: Re:
from their “connection”