New evidence suggests officers at fault, not suspect.

[whitewolf001]

I will normally jump in to defend the name of officers of the law from LEO bashers as I know a couple and they already have a hard enough job as it is but it's guys like this that give those bashers ammunition, so to speak, to do so. Still though I want to know what the heck instigated the officers to react in such a way, were they high on something or is this level of asshattery their norm?  :confused:

 

http://www.guns.com/2014/02/24/dashcam-footage-clears-man-charges-indicts-officers-instead-video/

 

Recently released dashcam footage has helped clear a New Jersey man of criminal charges and has indicted the arresting officers.

Bloomfield resident Marcus Jeter, 30, was previously facing a 5-year sentence for evading police, resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer. But after the dashcam video of Jeter’s arrest was released, his charges were dropped and the officers faced indictment, ABC reports.

During Jeter’s trial, the dashcam video of was withheld and without that piece of evidence, the Bloomfield police officer’s testimony trumped Jeter’s.

Though the officers testified Jeter was combative and resisted arrest, the video clearly shows it was the other way around. Jeter quickly pulled over as soon as he was lit up, held his hands in the air, and was not aggressive towards police. But the officers smashed his window, repeatedly struck him, and drug him out of the car.

The officers involved were charged with falsifying reports, and one of them was charged with assault. However, after reviewing the evidence, the Bloomfield police department found no fault with the officers’ actions.

[enfield]

So what's your purpose in posting this?  Are you trolling for other asshats?  We have 'em, you don't have to put out bait.

[whitewolf001]

I'm not trolling nor baiting, merely providing the same information of stories that can be found in similar posts in this area. If you feel that it is baiting then that is merely your own opinion to which you are entitled but was not my intentions. Were this the other way around I'm sure most wouldn't have posted or if they had, most would have congratulated the officers on their victory in justice but when it's turned around it would seem I'm baiting? Kind of a double standard...

Edited February 25, 2014 by whitewolf001

[Dolomite_supafly]

I am not going to lock it.

 

The reason is this is more than just cop bashing. The post has something we normally don't see which is the bad officers being held accountable. Normally we just see a post and assume the bad officers got away with it but in this case it seems as though they will not.

[whitewolf001]

I am not going to lock it.

 

The reason is this is more than just cop bashing. The post has something we normally don't see which is the bad officers being held accountable. Normally we just see a post and assume the bad officers got away with it but in this case it seems as though they will not.

Exactly, hence my point. Thank you DM, it would seem you understand my reasoning for posting this at least. I like to see justice served, regardless of what side of the law you are on.

[Guest semiautots]

So what's your purpose in posting this?  Are you trolling for other asshats?  We have 'em, you don't have to put out bait.

 

You're calling the OP an asshat? 

[RC3]

This has been eye opening. Showed it to my boss and he is speechless. Officers not found at fault? complete BS.

[Dolomite_supafly]

This has been eye opening. Showed it to my boss and he is speechless. Officers not found at fault? complete BS.

HUH?

 

The officers were found at fault and have been charged.

[Smith]

HUH?

 

The officers were found at fault and have been charged.

Read the story again. Especially the last line. Sounds like it may be a typo.

The officers involved were charged with falsifying reports, and one of them was charged with assault. However, after reviewing the evidence, the Bloomfield police department found no fault with the officers’ actions.

 

Edited February 25, 2014 by Smith

[RC3]

HUH?

 

The officers were found at fault and have been charged.

 

HUH?

 

The officers were found at fault and have been charged.

Sorry Dolomite, this was the part I was referring to. Should have quoted it earlier.

[jtmaze]

I am glad this was posted because I don't have time for reading a searching all the news and would never had known how the case turned out. You know the MSM wouldn't touch this. JTM We the People of the United States, in order to form a more Perfect Union......

[NashvilleStage]

Quote: "During Jeter’s trial, the dashcam video was withheld and without that piece of evidence, the Bloomfield police officer’s testimony trumped Jeter’s."

Which is yet another good reason to get a dashcam of your own.

Edited February 25, 2014 by NashvilleStage

[E4 No More]

Quote: "During Jeter’s trial, the dashcam video was withheld and without that piece of evidence, the Bloomfield police officer’s testimony trumped Jeter’s."

Which is yet another good reason to get a dashcam of your own.

Not as expensive as you'd think.

[Guest Bolt_Overide]

I truly believe that the vast majority of LEO are just folks doing their best in a tough job. I for one am very thankful that they do it so I don't have to. That doesn't mean there aren't bad eggs, and I record any interaction I have thats more than "Hi how are you" just to ensure my own protection. 

 

That said, I've never needed the video.

[RobertNashville]

"after reviewing the evidence, the Bloomfield police department found no fault with the officers’ actions."

 

I think I'm less troubled that these officers did this than I am that their department didn't seem to have a problem with it...that indicates to me that the problem goes far deeper than a couple of a-hole's with badges.

[cj0e]

The ABC source is better coverage than the abridged version at guns.com
 

"Interesting to note, an investigation by Bloomfield PD's scandal plagued internal affairs division had found no wrongdoing by officers."

 

 

Basically, Bloomfield's internal affairs dept didn't see any problems, but the officers have been indicted separately. One has already plead guilty to tampering and has retired. The other two are indicted for tampering, one of those two is also charged with assault.

 

You can watch the clip at ABC's site, couldn't get it to play at Guns.com

[gregintenn]

You're calling the OP an asshat? 

No. I expect he meant me. :hat:

[NashvilleStage]

I wonder if there's a civil suit in the works.

[bersaguy]

I wonder if there's a civil suit in the works.

 

You can almost bet there have been attorney's talking to him about a civil lawsuit. That is what some lawyers do..........jmho

[RobertNashville]

I wonder if there's a civil suit in the works.

I hope so...costing these police departments money is likely about the only thing that will truly get their attention.

[E4 No More]

I hope so...costing these police departments money is likely about the only thing that will truly get their attention.

Aaawww now ya done it. The next person to chime in will spout how it's the tax-payers paying for it.

Edited February 25, 2014 by SWJewellTN

[E4 No More]

Let's see...a "scandal plagued" Internal Affairs didn't see a problem with it? What's wrong with that picture? It seems that the Chief should be losing his job.

[sigmtnman]

Aaawww no ya done it. The next person to chime in will spout how it's the tax-payers paying for it.

 

Argh!!  You ruined my post... 

 

The city will just raise the taxes to cover it.  Problem solved!

[E4 No More]

Argh!!  You ruined my post... 

 

The city will just raise the taxes to cover it.  Problem solved!

Ya, that's why they'll raise taxes! :shake:

[sigmtnman]

Ya, that's why they'll raise taxes! :shake:

 

Please explain.  Where does a municipality get funds from? Governments will raise taxes regardless, but usually a shortfall in budgets is an impetus.