If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Opposing Views)   Innocent man spends month in prison for a crime he didn't commit, despite having both an alibi and video evidence showing he wasn't at the scene of the crime. That's some mighty fine police work, Officer Lou   (opposingviews.com) divider line 133
    More: Fail, Pittsburgh Police, DeAndre Jordan, DeAndre Brown, preliminary hearing, WPXI, robbery, convicts  
•       •       •

16515 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Nov 2013 at 12:21 AM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



133 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-03 08:35:32 PM
Is he black?

*click*

That's a BINGO!
 
2013-11-03 09:04:29 PM
Fails to see the problem:

www.bitlogic.com
 
2013-11-03 09:45:05 PM
WTF is this shiat!

Lawsuit time.
 
2013-11-04 12:04:21 AM
Why let the facts get in the way of your arrest
 
2013-11-04 12:24:02 AM
Who are you going to believe, a good Cop or some lying camera?
 
2013-11-04 12:25:04 AM
Maybe he should call...

the A-Team.

/sunglasses
 
2013-11-04 12:25:17 AM
Hes black and his name is Brown. Thats a probable cause for an arrest right there. Was he on cops? I could swear he was on cops, the episode where they arrest the black guy after running him down.
 
2013-11-04 12:26:33 AM
Time to get all sue-ey!
 
2013-11-04 12:27:10 AM
The metric is "closing cases." Not getting it right. Nobody gets fired for putting the wrong person in jail.
 
2013-11-04 12:27:40 AM
Well, there was an eye-witness and as we all know they are much better than video cameras at recording information accurately.
 
2013-11-04 12:29:54 AM
One: lawsuit
Two: fired cops and prosecutors.
 
2013-11-04 12:30:06 AM
This is my shocked face

cdn-static.denofgeek.com
 
2013-11-04 12:30:10 AM
However, at Brown's preliminary hearing, Nightingale tried to provide the investigating officer with the alibi information, but the officer refused to listen.

I guess I don't understand what a preliminary hearing is exactly.

why would it matter if the cop listened to him or not? isn't that what the judge is supposed to do? he's already arrested and in custody, isn't the prosecutor the one who then decides to continue with charges or dropping them?
 
2013-11-04 12:32:16 AM
I sure hope this guy didnt get fired for not showing up for work for security for 1 month. I mean, it would leave a position open for a white ex-cop.
 
m00
2013-11-04 12:34:14 AM
www.opposingviews.com www.benbarren.com
 
2013-11-04 12:35:08 AM
I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.
 
2013-11-04 12:35:45 AM
A preliminary hearing is a hearing where the state is required to put on evidence showing the probable cause exists to move forward with a trial.  The PH usually has to be held within a relatively short time after an initial arrest.  In most jurisdictions, only the state puts on evidence at a PH.  The defendant can cross examine the state's witnesses, but that's it.  So it's not surprising or unusual that the state refused to acknowledge any potential exculpatory evidence at that phase.  The state doesn't have any way of knowing where you got that tape, if it's authentic, who your alibi witness is, if they're reliable, etc.  Those are things that you use at trial.  Or, in all likelihood, these are things you show to the prosecutor prior to going to trial to get them to drop the charges.  Which appears to be what happened in this case.

The reason he was in jail for a month is that he couldn't post bail.  Which isn't all that surprising considering that was accused of armed robbery.

Oh, and he spent a month in jail.  Not prison.

Other than that, great headline.
 
2013-11-04 12:37:31 AM

m00: [www.opposingviews.com image 301x251] [www.benbarren.com image 850x635]


black people all look alike
 
2013-11-04 12:38:00 AM

m00: [www.opposingviews.com image 301x251] [www.benbarren.com image 850x635]



www.billboard.com
 
2013-11-04 12:38:25 AM

log_jammin: However, at Brown's preliminary hearing, Nightingale tried to provide the investigating officer with the alibi information, but the officer refused to listen.

I guess I don't understand what a preliminary hearing is exactly.

why would it matter if the cop listened to him or not? isn't that what the judge is supposed to do? he's already arrested and in custody, isn't the prosecutor the one who then decides to continue with charges or dropping them?


Yeah, at the prelim, it's not up to the cops anymore to decide if they were going to accept the alibi information or not. That's all on the DA and the judge. According to a five-second Google search of "preliminary hearing:"

A preliminary hearing, also called a probable cause hearing, is held in some jurisdictions after someone has been arrested and charged with a crime or crimes. During the preliminary hearing, a magistrate or judge decides whether the person should be held over for trial, that is, whether there is enough evidence to proceed.

It can be a little different depending on the jurisdiction; but in no place I know of does the COP decide whether he wants to accept evidence or not--it's up to the JUDGE to decide whether he thinks the evidence is sufficient to continue the case.

So either a) the evidence wasn't presented at the prelim and they're talking about something completely different; or b) the judge is in big trouble here.
 
2013-11-04 12:38:29 AM

anuran: Who are you going to believe, a good Cop or some lying camera?


/no such thing as a good cop
 
2013-11-04 12:39:12 AM

khyberkitsune: I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.


You're farking from prison?  Man, I thought cruel and unusual punishment was unconstitutional.
 
2013-11-04 12:43:18 AM

khyberkitsune: I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.


A felony for something email related? Did you get mad after elections and threaten a certain president?
Oh wait, don't answer that. You're innocent. We're all innocent in here. WINK WINK
showwatcher.com
 
2013-11-04 12:44:30 AM
If you support the American legal system, this is the culture you support. With the world's highest incarceration rate and more DA lawyers than anyone else per capita feeding for profit prison systems young men by the scoopful, it's more important to catch a man than to catch an actual criminal.

And don't fool yourself with "innocent until proven guilty" either. If you're arrested, you're guilty. From the moment you're taken you are guilty. The trial is only a formality and can take many months, even years to happen if at all. For some offenses, even if you are found innocent, you're already guilty because of some newspaper article. Accused of rape? Your arrest is headline news, the redaction and dismissal of all charges doesn't even make a single line in 5 point font on the next to the last page printed behind the crossword puzzle.

This is why we need reform in both the system from the ground up. We have to look at people the police have arrested not as criminals, but merely as people the police have arrested. Ghandi went to jail, too, you know.
 
2013-11-04 12:49:29 AM
I've seen Pennsylvania cops in action in person...They are a law unto themselves and the state doesn't care...Poor guy arrested will be lucky to get the state to help him find another job if in fact he lost/can't get his old one back...
 
2013-11-04 12:52:00 AM

Talondel: Oh, and he spent a month in jail. Not prison.


You say that like it means something.

House Arrest or Probation are still a robot making you do breathalyzers 3 times a day and a big black man with a gun making you piss where he can see your dick for the drug test every now and then and angry phone calls that end with a squad car pulling up to your house, lights on, because your bracelet was set up wrong and the mailbox was registering as out of bounds and you have to allow on-duty policemen into your home to re-position an antenna six feet north, EVEN THOUGH NOTHING YOU'RE BEING FALSELY ACCUSED OF EVEN COMES CLOSE TO A DRUG CHARGE. /rant

Anyway, point is six of one is still half a dozen of the other. And with the false conviction rates, prison probably has just as many people as jails do who are legitimately innocent.
 
2013-11-04 12:54:25 AM
Talondel:

Oh, and he spent a month in jail.  Not prison.

Other than that, great headline.


Oh. Forget him then. Damn whiner.
 
2013-11-04 12:59:12 AM
Cops, courts, and prisons aren't for Justice. They are for punishment.

Anyone will fill a cell for the corporation. An innocent one will bring in just as much profit as a guilty one.
 
2013-11-04 01:00:43 AM

Talondel: Oh, and he spent a month in jail. Not prison.


It doesn't matter if the facility is called jail or prison.  Either way an innocent man was locked up in a cage.  The cop who didn't want to see the evidence this guy was elsewhere and couldn't have been the robber.  Cops don't get fired for shiat like this.  They should.  They should also be subject to some time behind bars for idiocy like this.  Because of this cop's attitude, the real criminal has yet to be arrested and is still out there where he can commit another crime whenever he feels like it.
 
m00
2013-11-04 01:01:05 AM

log_jammin: m00: [www.opposingviews.com image 301x251] [www.benbarren.com image 850x635]

black people all look alike


i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-11-04 01:05:11 AM

almandot: Oh. Forget him then. Damn whiner.


It's a shame that a witness identified the wrong person.  And he certainly should complain about that.  But without knowing more about how or why he was identified, it's hard to know who (if anyone) to blame for that. It could be the witness or it could be the cop.  But from the article the procedures that were supposed to be followed were followed.  A PH is not a contested hearing where both sides put on evidence.  It's a procedural check where the state is required to put on enough evidence to show that the matter can proceed to trial and to determine what the accused's release conditions will be.  In this case, the state's evidence was "There's an eyewitness who said he was the guy with the gun" which is enough to satisfy that part of the hearing.  It also appears that bail was set, so he wasn't being held without bail.   However, he was not able to post bail, probably because it was set relatively high, which wouldn't be surprising considering the charges he was facing.

Yes, if you're accused of serious felony, and there's enough evidence to hold you, you're well and truly farked.  But the headline makes it sound like this is something that should have been fixed at the PH, which simply isn't the case.
 
2013-11-04 01:05:42 AM

brimed03: The metric is "closing cases." Not getting it right. Nobody gets fired for putting the wrong person in jail.


seems there is major emphasis put on the cost of training law enforcement personnel as a get out of jail free card. combine that with emphasis on minimizing personal risk to avoid injury and you wind up with a public servant that rarely gets punished or fired for incompetence.

perhaps if there was accredited schools one had to pay tuition to attend a large burden would be taken off the tax payers and personal responsibility would come into play. in a career field filled with psychologically damaged individuals it's even more important to root out the local good ol' boy network of run amuck mental midgets and replace them with competent and semi-sane individuals. we won't be seeing that anytime soon.
 
m00
2013-11-04 01:14:24 AM

Talondel: It's a shame that a witness identified the wrong person.


So hypothetically if this wrong person whom had a videotape alibi died in jail while awaiting trial, is the state accountable? I'm curious at what point a really dubious charge turns into negligence if harm ends up being done.
 
2013-11-04 01:15:54 AM

Talondel: But the headline makes it sound like this is something that should have been fixed at the PH, which simply isn't the case.


It should have been taken care of long before a month. Either the DA is just an ass, or the guys lawyer is criminally incompetent.
 
2013-11-04 01:20:03 AM

timujin: khyberkitsune: I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.

You're farking from prison?  Man, I thought cruel and unusual punishment was unconstitutional.


Felony probation. Still can't go anywhere any my last petition for writ of habeas corpus was denied even in face of the evidence, stating failure to state a prima facie case.
 
2013-11-04 01:21:20 AM
At first, I read the headline and I was all outraged and stuff, but then I opened the article and saw that the dude was black and all my outrage disappeared. I was telling my friend this, and he said that I was racist, though I can't understand why he would say that.
 
2013-11-04 01:22:05 AM

DuudeStanky: A felony for something email related? Did you get mad after elections and threaten a certain president?


Threatening letter with intent to extort. Ex-landlord pulled some serious bullshiat and used a similar trick Nigerian scammers use for e-mail fraud. I only recently discovered the ruse. Even I thought I had done it in a fit of drunken rage.
 
2013-11-04 01:27:06 AM

khyberkitsune: nor public defender that told me to plead guilty


*facepalm*
 
2013-11-04 01:28:57 AM
Hey now - he should grateful they didn't shoot him. His blackness was a danger to the community!
 
2013-11-04 01:32:11 AM
Some cops and prosecutors need to be horsewhipped.

/No, I'm not kidding.
 
2013-11-04 01:32:49 AM
Another thread where a cop is being a piece of shiat!? WHAT A SURPRISE!
I wonder how much wrongdoing would go on if they were personally liable.
This black man should be awarded dumbshiat's bank account, house, and wife.
Don't like it? Go fark yourself, I couldn't care less what a cop-apologist thinks.
After-all, decent cops get to keep their accounts, houses, and wives to themselves with good reason.
The bad ones can suffer for all I care.
 
2013-11-04 01:49:51 AM

AbortionsForAll: At first, I read the headline and I was all outraged and stuff, but then I opened the article and saw that the dude was black and all my outrage disappeared. I was telling my friend this, and he said that I was racist, though I can't understand why he would say that.


Wow. Obviously, your friend is the racist for noticing racism. You just never know who will be one...

/unless he's Chinese, they're all racist
 
2013-11-04 02:04:29 AM

Talondel: A preliminary hearing is a hearing where the state is required to put on evidence showing the probable cause exists to move forward with a trial.  The PH usually has to be held within a relatively short time after an initial arrest.  In most jurisdictions, only the state puts on evidence at a PH.  The defendant can cross examine the state's witnesses, but that's it.  So it's not surprising or unusual that the state refused to acknowledge any potential exculpatory evidence at that phase.  The state doesn't have any way of knowing where you got that tape, if it's authentic, who your alibi witness is, if they're reliable, etc.  Those are things that you use at trial.  Or, in all likelihood, these are things you show to the prosecutor prior to going to trial to get them to drop the charges.  Which appears to be what happened in this case.

The reason he was in jail for a month is that he couldn't post bail.  Which isn't all that surprising considering that was accused of armed robbery.

Oh, and he spent a month in jail.  Not prison.

Other than that, great headline.


You couldn't be more wrong. Most attorneys dont put on affirmative evidence at prelim. Its a chance to see what the prosecution has. HOWEVER, if you have the goods you put it on. Period. A failure to do so is boarder line malpractice.
 
2013-11-04 02:08:29 AM

khyberkitsune: timujin: khyberkitsune: I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.

You're farking from prison?  Man, I thought cruel and unusual punishment was unconstitutional.

Felony probation. Still can't go anywhere any my last petition for writ of habeas corpus was denied even in face of the evidence, stating failure to state a prima facie case.


Habeas only works if and while you are locked up.
 
2013-11-04 02:10:04 AM

Talondel: almandot: Oh. Forget him then. Damn whiner.

It's a shame that a witness identified the wrong person.  And he certainly should complain about that.  But without knowing more about how or why he was identified, it's hard to know who (if anyone) to blame for that. It could be the witness or it could be the cop.  But from the article the procedures that were supposed to be followed were followed.  A PH is not a contested hearing where both sides put on evidence.  It's a procedural check where the state is required to put on enough evidence to show that the matter can proceed to trial and to determine what the accused's release conditions will be.  In this case, the state's evidence was "There's an eyewitness who said he was the guy with the gun" which is enough to satisfy that part of the hearing.  It also appears that bail was set, so he wasn't being held without bail.   However, he was not able to post bail, probably because it was set relatively high, which wouldn't be surprising considering the charges he was facing.

Yes, if you're accused of serious felony, and there's enough evidence to hold you, you're well and truly farked.  But the headline makes it sound like this is something that should have been fixed at the PH, which simply isn't the case.


Wrong. Jesus. All you farkers need to get some MCLE's to sharpen your GED's.
 
2013-11-04 02:11:06 AM

log_jammin: Talondel: But the headline makes it sound like this is something that should have been fixed at the PH, which simply isn't the case.

It should have been taken care of long before a month. Either the DA is just an ass, or the guys lawyer is criminally incompetent.


Thank you.
 
2013-11-04 02:11:17 AM

log_jammin: Talondel: But the headline makes it sound like this is something that should have been fixed at the PH, which simply isn't the case.

It should have been taken care of long before a month. Either the DA is just an ass, or the guys lawyer is criminally incompetent.


I can't believe the DA could be that big of an ass. Laziness trumps being an ass, and given once less case to worry about the DA would be prone to listen.
 
2013-11-04 02:14:00 AM
"I'm extremely disappointed the police officer investigating this matter completely ignored the alibi witness," Nightingale said.

You?

Try being on the ass end of fourth reich horsesh*t like this.

Never mind, I forgot.  Cops just do as they please and never catch hell for the wake of misery they leave behind.
 
2013-11-04 02:19:59 AM

Por que tan serioso: Habeas only works if and while you are locked up.


Several other attorneys said it applies if you are in custody of the state. Probation/parole is still in custody when you cannot leave the state.

They probably wanted money and told me some nonsense, then.
 
2013-11-04 02:23:39 AM
"I'm just glad this thing is over," said Yvonne Brown, DeAndre's mother.

I really, really  hope it isn't
 
2013-11-04 02:24:26 AM

Por que tan serioso: You couldn't be more wrong. Most attorneys dont put on affirmative evidence at prelim. Its a chance to see what the prosecution has. HOWEVER, if you have the goods you put it on. Period. A failure to do so is boarder line malpractice.


Defense attorneys rarely present evidence at a preliminary hearing, although they are allowed to do so. At a prelim, the judge must look at the evidence "in the light most favorable to the prosecution," so defense evidence doesn't hold much weight.

In this case the investigating officer should have looked at the alibi evidence and, if it was convincing, approached the DA and asked for the charges to be dropped pending further investigation. If the cop didn't do that, the defense attorney should have asked for a pretrial conference with the DA and presented the evidence for consideration.

Either the cop was lazy, incompetent, or he didn't believe the alibi evidence. The defense attorney is not without blame, however. If his alibi evidence was that convincing he should have presented it at the preliminary hearing for the judge to consider, or he should have asked for a pretrial conference.

I'd like to know how they considered this guy a suspect in the first place. Why did they even show his picture to the victim for identification? There's something missing from this story.
 
2013-11-04 02:25:03 AM

log_jammin: khyberkitsune: nor public defender that told me to plead guilty

*facepalm*


Yea, tell me about it. Sucks when you can't afford a lawyer that even has a shred of a clue regarding technology to defend your ass in court.

On the other hand, I could try pleading the PD as incompetent and trying to fight this outright myself.
 
2013-11-04 02:25:27 AM

Talondel: It's a shame that a witness identified the wrong person.


That witness deserves to be hit by a bus. What a shame that would be.
 
2013-11-04 02:27:42 AM
"I'm just glad this thing is over," said Yvonne Brown, DeAndre's mother.

I really  hope it isn't
 
2013-11-04 02:30:48 AM
Just a month? Is that all? Pfffft!
 
2013-11-04 02:36:47 AM

doglover: If you support the American legal system, this is the culture you support. With the world's highest incarceration rate and more DA lawyers than anyone else per capita feeding for profit prison systems young men by the scoopful, it's more important to catch a man than to catch an actual criminal.

And don't fool yourself with "innocent until proven guilty" either. If you're arrested, you're guilty. From the moment you're taken you are guilty. The trial is only a formality and can take many months, even years to happen if at all. For some offenses, even if you are found innocent, you're already guilty because of some newspaper article. Accused of rape? Your arrest is headline news, the redaction and dismissal of all charges doesn't even make a single line in 5 point font on the next to the last page printed behind the crossword puzzle.

This is why we need reform in both the system from the ground up. We have to look at people the police have arrested not as criminals, but merely as people the police have arrested. Ghandi went to jail, too, you know.


This!
 
2013-11-04 02:39:40 AM

CruiserTwelve: Por que tan serioso: You couldn't be more wrong. Most attorneys dont put on affirmative evidence at prelim. Its a chance to see what the prosecution has. HOWEVER, if you have the goods you put it on. Period. A failure to do so is boarder line malpractice.

Defense attorneys rarely present evidence at a preliminary hearing, although they are allowed to do so. At a prelim, the judge must look at the evidence "in the light most favorable to the prosecution," so defense evidence doesn't hold much weight.

In this case the investigating officer should have looked at the alibi evidence and, if it was convincing, approached the DA and asked for the charges to be dropped pending further investigation. If the cop didn't do that, the defense attorney should have asked for a pretrial conference with the DA and presented the evidence for consideration.

Either the cop was lazy, incompetent, or he didn't believe the alibi evidence. The defense attorney is not without blame, however. If his alibi evidence was that convincing he should have presented it at the preliminary hearing for the judge to consider, or he should have asked for a pretrial conference.

I'd like to know how they considered this guy a suspect in the first place. Why did they even show his picture to the victim for identification? There's something missing from this story.


You need to get out of here with your facts and thoughtfullness and stuff. We have witches to burn, dammit!
 
2013-11-04 02:40:45 AM
 
2013-11-04 02:44:05 AM
Everybody sucks in this story--his lawyer, his family, the cops, the DA, the witness.  I would hope the State will offer some settlement and clear his record (including expunging the arrest record).

That said, 30 days in jail is a lot better than 30 days in prison.  I've spent a night in jail (arrested on a warrant b/c some jerkhole stole my identity and wrote bad checks, and I'm a white guy go figure).  Over 90% of the people in jail are there for things like driving on a suspended license or failure to appear.
 
2013-11-04 02:44:17 AM

CruiserTwelve:  the defense attorney should have asked for a pretrial conference with the DA and presented the evidence for consideration.


That should have happened long before the hearing.
 
2013-11-04 03:02:50 AM

CruiserTwelve: Por que tan serioso: You couldn't be more wrong. Most attorneys dont put on affirmative evidence at prelim. Its a chance to see what the prosecution has. HOWEVER, if you have the goods you put it on. Period. A failure to do so is boarder line malpractice.

Defense attorneys rarely present evidence at a preliminary hearing, although they are allowed to do so. At a prelim, the judge must look at the evidence "in the light most favorable to the prosecution," so defense evidence doesn't hold much weight.

In this case the investigating officer should have looked at the alibi evidence and, if it was convincing, approached the DA and asked for the charges to be dropped pending further investigation. If the cop didn't do that, the defense attorney should have asked for a pretrial conference with the DA and presented the evidence for consideration.

Either the cop was lazy, incompetent, or he didn't believe the alibi evidence. The defense attorney is not without blame, however. If his alibi evidence was that convincing he should have presented it at the preliminary hearing for the judge to consider, or he should have asked for a pretrial conference.

I'd like to know how they considered this guy a suspect in the first place. Why did they even show his picture to the victim for identification? There's something missing from this story.


As an officer you are no doubt aware that it would be unlawful for you to consider anything outside the scope of the hearing. Sure you can listen all you want before but attempting to sell the states designsted investigator on evidence with no factual bases or offer of proof at a prelim is unheard of. A) wrong time B) Wrong place C) wrong person. The atty should have had the video authenticated showed the video and put on the other evidence. Most attorneys would love to hand the state their ass at prelim because as you stated the burdon to bind a defendant over for trial is so low. Unfortunately the PD's office is seriously understaffed and overworked. Bottom line most competent attys would have put the time in and got it kicked then talked shiat to all their buddys at the courthouse. Hell. That's the kind of shiat you call your friends in to witness. In this case the PD wrongly assumed he could do an end run because he didnt prepare. Also yes!!! Settlement conference!! No DA would risk getting stomped at prelim if they knew the defense has the goods. To many of those and you are answering up in traffic court so I seriously doubt the DA had any prior knowledge of the evidence before prelim and did their job as they swore to do. No my friend. This fubar is only on the PDs shoulders.
 
2013-11-04 03:09:28 AM
If he wasn't guilty, then he never had anything to worry about when he got to trial.  So what's he complaining about?
 
2013-11-04 03:12:09 AM
Oops. Sorry 12. In my zeal I misread your comment to say that the def atty was not to blame.
 
2013-11-04 03:14:50 AM
Cousin is cop. Heated arguments every year at thanksgiving. Always telling me how its defense attorneys who necessitate he and his partner getting their storys straight after a questionable arrest.
 
2013-11-04 03:20:25 AM

Por que tan serioso: As an officer you are no doubt aware that it would be unlawful for you to consider anything outside the scope of the hearing. Sure you can listen all you want before but attempting to sell the states designsted investigator on evidence with no factual bases or offer of proof at a prelim is unheard of. A) wrong time B) Wrong place C) wrong person. The atty should have had the video authenticated showed the video and put on the other evidence. Most attorneys would love to hand the state their ass at prelim because as you stated the burdon to bind a defendant over for trial is so low. Unfortunately the PD's office is seriously un ...


 http://lampmanlaw.com/prelimhearing.htm

The above link will explain what can be presented at a preliminary hearing in Pennsylvania. The defense attorney should have presented the alibi evidence to the DA or the police officer for consideration, or alternatively should have presented it to the judge as evidence during the prelim.

If the alibi evidence was so convincing, the defense attorney should have done something with it long before the prelim. He could have met with the investigating officer and his supervisor and asked that the case be reopened, and if that didn't work, he could have gone to the media. It sounds like he just sat on it while his client sat in jail though.
 
2013-11-04 03:23:11 AM

CruiserTwelve: Here's a better story with a video


And here is the pertinent information:

Pittsburgh police major crimes Lt. Dan Herrmann told [the Pittsburgh Times] that Brown declined to speak with police after the robbery victim identified him as the suspect, noting that the first time police heard the alibi story was minutes before the Sept. 24 preliminary hearing. Brown's family strenuously denies that and says Brown told police of his alibi in preliminary interviews.

In any case, once the guy was in jail, it's not really up to the cops to decide whether or not he gets out of jail. It's up to the attorneys. Just about the only time the cops get to decide that is at the moment of arrest and in the time between your arrest and your arraignment. Those would be the "preliminary INTERVIEWS" the family is talking about.

So the question here becomes: Why was the guy detained for a whole month between his arrest and his prelim? Usually (i.e. under the law) you have to be arraigned within 72 hours of your arrest unless you're unlucky enough to be arrested the Thursday before a long weekend in which case you don't get to see a judge before Tuesday. Neither the cops nor the DA has a good reason for holding someone for a simple armed robbery for A MONTH unless the guy waived his right to a fast arraignment--which means his attorney dropped the ball IF his alibi was really mentioned the night of the arrest.

So either the cops just tucked this guy in jail and forgot to bring him out; or the DA lost the paperwork for a month; or the guy's defense attorney didn't have the alleged alibi evidence until a month later. Given that the alibi evidence means this guy is going to win a nice juicy settlement for wrongful imprisonment from the county...I'm guessing they didn't really get the video evidence till a month later. Which is fine; but it doesn't mean the cops did anything MORE wrong than just not believe him when he said he didn't do it.
 
2013-11-04 03:33:21 AM

Gyrfalcon: ou have to be arraigned within 72 hours of your arrest unless you're unlucky enough to be arrested the Thursday before a long weekend in which case you don't get to see a judge before Tuesday. Neither the cops nor the DA has a good reason for holding someone for a simple armed robbery for A MONTH unless the guy waived his right to a fast arraignment--which means his attorney dropped the ball IF his alibi was really mentioned the night of the arrest.


he was arraigned. He went before a judge who set bail, he just couldn't make bail.

Gyrfalcon: Given that the alibi evidence means this guy is going to win a nice juicy settlement for wrongful imprisonment from the county.


nope. never happen. rightly, or wrongly, they system worked as it's intended.

He was arrested after being accused of a crime by a witness, he went before a judge who felt there was enough evidence to support the bond amount he set(and there is no requirement that a judge set bond at an amount the defendant can afford). later upon seeing new evidence thatexonerated the guy, the DA dropped charges and he was freed.

The only reason this is a story is because he couldn't afford to bond out for one reason or another. But the real story is like I said before, either this DA is an asshole, or the guys lawyer is lazy and incompetent.  or some combination of those things.
 
2013-11-04 03:43:25 AM
Lawsuit time against the court AND against the idiot at the bakery who fingered him.
 
2013-11-04 03:49:27 AM

TV's Vinnie: Cops, courts, and prisons aren't for Justice. They are for punishment.

Anyone will fill a cell for the corporation. An innocent one will bring in just as much profit as a guilty one.


sad but I think you are correct. What has our country come too?
 
2013-11-04 04:28:20 AM
Police arrested Brown, who has no criminal record, on Sept. 16 after Lloyd Bundy, who works at the bakery, identified him as the robber. Bundy, 54, of Homewood declined comment.

According to a criminal complaint, a man with a white T-shirt covering part of his face entered the bakery and demanded money. Bundy told police he caught a glimpse of the man's face when the shirt fell while he fidgeted with the register.

The following day, the complaint states, Bundy called 911 when he recognized a man at the shop as the one who had robbed him and reported his license plate to police.

Nightingale said Bundy identified Brown because he works nearby and visits the shop often.



What is so disturbing about this is that the police just picked up Brown and put him in jail. Brown had a job and had no criminal history. Why would he commit an armed robbery for $80?

If Brown hadn't been at the job training seminar, he would still be in jail.

What did Brown do wrong here? What is the advice for people who have been wrongfully accused? Try to talk to the police to clear the misunderstanding or just ask for an attorney?
 
2013-11-04 04:37:17 AM

log_jammin: The only reason this is a story is because he couldn't afford to bond out for one reason or another. But the real story is like I said before, either this DA is an asshole, or the guys lawyer is lazy and incompetent.  or some combination of those things.


I've never known a DA who wasn't an asshole.  Or a practicing attorney for that matter.  I have, however, known MANY of them who are lazy and/or incompetent, and would screw over their mothers for a dollar.
 
2013-11-04 05:07:59 AM

doglover: If you support the American legal system, this is the culture you support. With the world's highest incarceration rate and more DA lawyers than anyone else per capita feeding for profit prison systems young men by the scoopful, it's more important to catch a man than to catch an actual criminal.

And don't fool yourself with "innocent until proven guilty" either. If you're arrested, you're guilty. From the moment you're taken you are guilty. The trial is only a formality and can take many months, even years to happen if at all. For some offenses, even if you are found innocent, you're already guilty because of some newspaper article. Accused of rape? Your arrest is headline news, the redaction and dismissal of all charges doesn't even make a single line in 5 point font on the next to the last page printed behind the crossword puzzle.

This is why we need reform in both the system from the ground up. We have to look at people the police have arrested not as criminals, but merely as people the police have arrested. Ghandi went to jail, too, you know.


The gist of this is what I came here to ask: is this man's record going to be expunged? Is the newspaper going to run a retraction paid for and placed by the arresting party?

In other words, if he sues and wins a pile of money, that will not set him right. Is it common practice that people wrongly accused, arrested, and detained are "set right" in the ways I've outlined above, or is SOP to just hide and hope that the person doesn't lawyer up, or doesn't think the ramifications fully through?
 
2013-11-04 05:43:21 AM

mr0x: Police arrested Brown, who has no criminal record, on Sept. 16 after Lloyd Bundy, who works at the bakery, identified him as the robber. Bundy, 54, of Homewood declined comment.

According to a criminal complaint, a man with a white T-shirt covering part of his face entered the bakery and demanded money. Bundy told police he caught a glimpse of the man's face when the shirt fell while he fidgeted with the register.

The following day, the complaint states, Bundy called 911 when he recognized a man at the shop as the one who had robbed him and reported his license plate to police.

Nightingale said Bundy identified Brown because he works nearby and visits the shop often.


What is so disturbing about this is that the police just picked up Brown and put him in jail. Brown had a job and had no criminal history. Why would he commit an armed robbery for $80?

If Brown hadn't been at the job training seminar, he would still be in jail.

What did Brown do wrong here? What is the advice for people who have been wrongfully accused? Try to talk to the police to clear the misunderstanding or just ask for an attorney?


If you're wrongfully accused, hope you have an alibi, because if you don't, you're toast. The prosecutor wants you to go to jail. There are no rewards for exonerating an innocent person. There are also a lot of no-backsies.

A friend of mine, grad of an Ivy League school, in a business internship, no record, was picked up for an armed robbery he was innocent of, but had no alibi other than he was on the phone with me while the crime was supposedly being committed. The eye witness for some reason couldn't pick him out of a crowd because she was 'traumatized' but that didn't stop the process after the arrest, which was based on proximity to the crime, as he was walking back from a grocery store with bags, and the fact he was wearing a sweat suit of a different color than was reported. And my friend had $110 in his pocket, while the armed robbery at the donut shop manned by the single eye witness, netted $89. That was enough.

When the family was gathered for the hearing, they were occasionally smiling and telling jokes out in the hallway to cheer him up a little...his family are very close and deal with things with humor. The Prosecutors office saw this and was FURIOUS that the family were being so disrespectful to the process out there in the hallway by the elevators, that the prosecutor told the defense atty that they were pissed and would make sure that the case went to trial.

They managed to get a lesser plea from the innocent guy because there was no alibi other than our cell phone conversation, and the eye witnesses' description that was roughly his description, sans height, sans same clothing. The defense atty. was convinced that if it went to trial, he'd likely go to jail. So the plea. Now the Ivy League grad has a record.

/was there for that
 
2013-11-04 05:57:30 AM
Jail /= Prison

Just saying....  jails are full of innocent people who cannot afford bail.  This is a big part of why they exist.
 
2013-11-04 06:04:20 AM
No video of the robbery, but a video of an alibi.
 
2013-11-04 06:10:20 AM
someone is about to get PAID!

(the cop, while on a 2 week vacation)
 
2013-11-04 06:35:45 AM
This is why it is no longer the justice system, but the law system.

There is no justice to be had for the innocent. If you are arrested, you are farked unless you happen to be filthy rich.

/USA... best justice money can buy.
 
2013-11-04 06:37:33 AM
Was Miles Edgeworth the prosecutor?
 
2013-11-04 06:44:46 AM

log_jammin: khyberkitsune: nor public defender that told me to plead guilty

*facepalm*


Yup, your problem was the public pretender. Shoulda forked out for a real lawyer. Liberty and justice at the right price, you know.
 
2013-11-04 06:52:14 AM

Mentalpatient87: log_jammin: khyberkitsune: nor public defender that told me to plead guilty

*facepalm*

Yup, your problem was the public pretender. Shoulda forked out for a real lawyer. Liberty and justice at the right price, you know.


Freind of mine in story above had a 'real' lawyer, that's no guarantee that a plea deal is not encouraged.
 
2013-11-04 07:16:21 AM
Wait... so his Alibi is that he was being trained as a security guard at the same time and place as the place that got robbed?

How is that an Alibi again?
 
2013-11-04 07:21:44 AM

log_jammin: isn't that what the judge is supposed to do?


Judges? In Pennsylvania?  The reporter would have mentioned a judge if one was needed.
 
2013-11-04 07:27:08 AM

DO NOT WANT Poster Girl: Mentalpatient87: log_jammin: khyberkitsune: nor public defender that told me to plead guilty

*facepalm*

Yup, your problem was the public pretender. Shoulda forked out for a real lawyer. Liberty and justice at the right price, you know.

Freind of mine in story above had a 'real' lawyer, that's no guarantee that a plea deal is not encouraged.


Which also blows, I agree.
 
2013-11-04 07:35:40 AM
Happens all the time, especially against blacks in big cities. Every other day, there was something in the Chicago papers about this exact same thing. And the city's had to cough up some major bucks because of people like John Burge and rogue cops playing the real like version of:

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-11-04 07:50:47 AM

Alonjar: Wait... so his Alibi is that he was being trained as a security guard at the same time and place as the place that got robbed?

How is that an Alibi again?


Um...no. He is a security guard at one library. He was in a training session at a different branch of that library. The robbery was in a bakery, which was not either of the other two places. That's how it's an alibi.
 
2013-11-04 08:04:58 AM

untaken_name: Alonjar: Wait... so his Alibi is that he was being trained as a security guard at the same time and place as the place that got robbed?

How is that an Alibi again?

Um...no. He is a security guard at one library. He was in a training session at a different branch of that library. The robbery was in a bakery, which was not either of the other two places. That's how it's an alibi.


www.movieactors.com
The school's valet explains how he managed to RUN down the hall, into the bakery, STAB the cook, and return to his security training.
 
2013-11-04 08:12:13 AM

untaken_name: Alonjar: Wait... so his Alibi is that he was being trained as a security guard at the same time and place as the place that got robbed?

How is that an Alibi again?

Um...no. He is a security guard at one library. He was in a training session at a different branch of that library. The robbery was in a bakery, which was not either of the other two places. That's how it's an alibi.


ah yeah I misread the article.  Cue appropriate outrage.
 
2013-11-04 08:18:11 AM
Remember kids; Cops aren't there to get to the truth. They are there to inflict maximum damage at put your ass in jail any way they can. It makes them feel like they are "doing something" and since you are a "civilian" you probably have it coming anyway.

Only other cops are worthy of benefit of the doubt.
 
2013-11-04 08:19:09 AM

Talondel: A preliminary hearing is a hearing where the state is required to put on evidence showing the probable cause exists to move forward with a trial.  The PH usually has to be held within a relatively short time after an initial arrest.  In most jurisdictions, only the state puts on evidence at a PH.  The defendant can cross examine the state's witnesses, but that's it.  So it's not surprising or unusual that the state refused to acknowledge any potential exculpatory evidence at that phase.  The state doesn't have any way of knowing where you got that tape, if it's authentic, who your alibi witness is, if they're reliable, etc.  Those are things that you use at trial.  Or, in all likelihood, these are things you show to the prosecutor prior to going to trial to get them to drop the charges.  Which appears to be what happened in this case.

The reason he was in jail for a month is that he couldn't post bail.  Which isn't all that surprising considering that was accused of armed robbery.

Oh, and he spent a month in jail.  Not prison.

Other than that, great headline.


Jail is worse.
 
2013-11-04 08:21:48 AM

SpectroBoy: Remember kids; Cops aren't there to get to the truth. They are there to inflict maximum damage at put your ass in jail any way they can. It makes them feel like they are "doing something" and since you are a "civilian" you probably have it coming anyway.

Only other cops are worthy of benefit of the doubt.


Guilt or innocence is just a matter of timing.

"There's no money you can steal!"
"Oh? Then why are you people here?"
 
2013-11-04 08:22:39 AM

filter: Jail /= Prison

Just saying....  jails are full of innocent people who cannot afford bail.  This is a big part of why they exist.


I bet they feel pretty similar when yo are the one behind bars and completely innocent.
 
2013-11-04 08:25:22 AM
My cousin is in jail right now..because his laptop was in a vehicle pulled over for drugs.Cops and everyone else dont care that he has the boxes and a reciept for it sitting in my garageSo he sits..
 
2013-11-04 08:26:03 AM
The first spring after my son was born, I almost got arrested for something I hadn't done.  I was working third shift at a retail store working the register, when the robbery took place on my last night.  I was busy training the replacement when a guy came in wearing a badge and carrying tools.  He claimed to be there to fix the Coinstar machine and since I was busy, didn't question it.  Later he comes up to me and tells me the machine cannot be fixed by him, he will need to get his supervisor to help him.  I say okay, and put an 'Out of Order' sign up.  A week later, I was being interrogated for the robbery since the video showed me casually talking with the thief.  My alibi was he ripped off 8 more stores before being caught, as we just happened to be the first store hit.  The investigators, store company investigators, did break into my car looking for evidence, which my boss denied.  It was too obvious the way my car was unlocked three days in a row when I left work, until I had an uniform officer come out to see if I could file a report.  I never had an unlocked car before or since then, so there was no coincidence.

/I so get this man's stress level, even though I wasn't arrested, I was a newlywed with an infant son
//hopefully his boss takes him back without issue.
 
2013-11-04 08:26:16 AM
The legal system is for the wealthy.
 
2013-11-04 08:27:42 AM

Alonjar: untaken_name: Alonjar: Wait... so his Alibi is that he was being trained as a security guard at the same time and place as the place that got robbed?

How is that an Alibi again?

Um...no. He is a security guard at one library. He was in a training session at a different branch of that library. The robbery was in a bakery, which was not either of the other two places. That's how it's an alibi.

ah yeah I misread the article.  Cue appropriate outrage.


www.myconfinedspace.com
 
2013-11-04 08:33:56 AM

InternetSecurityGuard: "I'm just glad this thing is over," said Yvonne Brown, DeAndre's mother.

I really, really  hope it isn't


You're right - every job he ever applies for from now on will do a background check (he works as a security guard), see that he was arrested for armed robbery and promptly toss his application in the trash.
 
2013-11-04 08:47:39 AM

lack of warmth: The first spring after my son was born, I almost got arrested for something I hadn't done.  I was working third shift at a retail store working the register, when the robbery took place on my last night.  I was busy training the replacement when a guy came in wearing a badge and carrying tools.  He claimed to be there to fix the Coinstar machine and since I was busy, didn't question it.  Later he comes up to me and tells me the machine cannot be fixed by him, he will need to get his supervisor to help him.  I say okay, and put an 'Out of Order' sign up.  A week later, I was being interrogated for the robbery since the video showed me casually talking with the thief.  My alibi was he ripped off 8 more stores before being caught, as we just happened to be the first store hit.  The investigators, store company investigators, did break into my car looking for evidence, which my boss denied.  It was too obvious the way my car was unlocked three days in a row when I left work, until I had an uniform officer come out to see if I could file a report.  I never had an unlocked car before or since then, so there was no coincidence.

/I so get this man's stress level, even though I wasn't arrested, I was a newlywed with an infant son
//hopefully his boss takes him back without issue.


I didn't get that level of harassment, but I was once pulled over while walking by a cop on the lookout for a rapist described as tall, white, with red hair and a black shirt. It would had to have been one calm rapist to walk from the rape to the McDonald's and then towards home, but apparently, it happens. I was walking along the street when a cruiser starts following me. I thought it a little strange but at first figured he was doing something else. But when I turned into my parking lot and he turned as well, I knew something was up. He flashed his lights and got out to talk to me. I put my McDonald's bag on his hood to help keep it warm while he talked to me. He asked for my picture and I assented. We bade each other farewell and I never heard from them again.

I've since wondered about the whole, "never talk to the cops," thing while balancing against the whole asshole cop thing. I could have refused the pictures, or even to talk, but then he might have arrested me on suspicion of rape (after all, I fit the description) and it would have ruined not just my day but easily the whole week (I had some serious projects due). I'm thinking that you're generally better off being helpful. After all, time spent arresting my innocent ass is time not spent finding the rapist.

/Don't know if they caught him
 
2013-11-04 08:52:36 AM

vygramul: lack of warmth: The first spring after my son was born, I almost got arrested for something I hadn't done.  I was working third shift at a retail store working the register, when the robbery took place on my last night.  I was busy training the replacement when a guy came in wearing a badge and carrying tools.  He claimed to be there to fix the Coinstar machine and since I was busy, didn't question it.  Later he comes up to me and tells me the machine cannot be fixed by him, he will need to get his supervisor to help him.  I say okay, and put an 'Out of Order' sign up.  A week later, I was being interrogated for the robbery since the video showed me casually talking with the thief.  My alibi was he ripped off 8 more stores before being caught, as we just happened to be the first store hit.  The investigators, store company investigators, did break into my car looking for evidence, which my boss denied.  It was too obvious the way my car was unlocked three days in a row when I left work, until I had an uniform officer come out to see if I could file a report.  I never had an unlocked car before or since then, so there was no coincidence.

/I so get this man's stress level, even though I wasn't arrested, I was a newlywed with an infant son
//hopefully his boss takes him back without issue.

I didn't get that level of harassment, but I was once pulled over while walking by a cop on the lookout for a rapist described as tall, white, with red hair and a black shirt. It would had to have been one calm rapist to walk from the rape to the McDonald's and then towards home, but apparently, it happens. I was walking along the street when a cruiser starts following me. I thought it a little strange but at first figured he was doing something else. But when I turned into my parking lot and he turned as well, I knew something was up. He flashed his lights and got out to talk to me. I put my McDonald's bag on his hood to help keep it warm while he talked to me. He asked for ...


So the takeaway here is if you are going to rape someone, go to McDonald's afterward and make sure to walk home calmly?
 
2013-11-04 08:56:08 AM

redmid17: So the takeaway here is if you are going to rape someone, go to McDonald's afterward and make sure to walk home calmly?


I wouldn't bet on that. My picture was used in a lineup and they knew where I lived. If you're planning on fleeing, best to do it before they know who you are and where you live.
 
2013-11-04 08:56:40 AM
When are we going to get over this "eye witness" fetish? Memory is a faulty thing at best and you never encode correctly what you see. Your brain interprets it and remembers it as it interpret what you see.
 
2013-11-04 09:03:44 AM

Slaves2Darkness: When are we going to get over this "eye witness" fetish? Memory is a faulty thing at best and you never encode correctly what you see. Your brain interprets it and remembers it as it interpret what you see.


Camera phones are in danger of supplanting eyewitness testimony as the chief source of convictions.
 
2013-11-04 09:05:59 AM

vygramul: redmid17: So the takeaway here is if you are going to rape someone, go to McDonald's afterward and make sure to walk home calmly?

I wouldn't bet on that. My picture was used in a lineup and they knew where I lived. If you're planning on fleeing, best to do it before they know who you are and where you live.


Okay make sure to wear a Nixon mask. That will do the trick.
 
2013-11-04 09:21:13 AM

Slaves2Darkness: When are we going to get over this "eye witness" fetish? Memory is a faulty thing at best and you never encode correctly what you see. Your brain interprets it and remembers it as it interpret what you see.


It's usually the single eye witness that causes the most trouble.  When you have a few eye witnesses that can give the same account without having to consult each other, that is usually going to be accurate.
 
2013-11-04 09:21:42 AM

theotherles: Some cops and prosecutors need to be horsewhipped.

/No, I'm not kidding.


Anyone that intentionally ignores exculpatory evidence should lose their jobs and any benefits they were entitled to.  Cops, prosecutors, judges, the whole lot of them.  I'm sick of hearing prosecutors brag about 100% conviction rates.  All that tells me is that you knowingly put innocent people in prison or you knowingly let guilty people go because you thought there was a chance you would lose the case and your perfect record was more important than justice.
 
2013-11-04 09:22:35 AM

khyberkitsune: timujin: khyberkitsune: I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.

You're farking from prison?  Man, I thought cruel and unusual punishment was unconstitutional.

Felony probation. Still can't go anywhere any my last petition for writ of habeas corpus was denied even in face of the evidence, stating failure to state a prima facie case.


Get a lawyer and sue the living shiat out of the state.
 
2013-11-04 09:23:58 AM

redmid17: vygramul: redmid17: So the takeaway here is if you are going to rape someone, go to McDonald's afterward and make sure to walk home calmly?

I wouldn't bet on that. My picture was used in a lineup and they knew where I lived. If you're planning on fleeing, best to do it before they know who you are and where you live.

Okay make sure to wear a Nixon mask. That will do the trick.


And flee to a beach in Australia.
 
2013-11-04 09:25:30 AM

Callous: theotherles: Some cops and prosecutors need to be horsewhipped.

/No, I'm not kidding.

Anyone that intentionally ignores exculpatory evidence should lose their jobs and any benefits they were entitled to.  Cops, prosecutors, judges, the whole lot of them.  I'm sick of hearing prosecutors brag about 100% conviction rates.  All that tells me is that you knowingly put innocent people in prison or you knowingly let guilty people go because you thought there was a chance you would lose the case and your perfect record was more important than justice.


The incentives, unfortunately, are line-up that way. It's partly our own fault, as the public does not like the use of discretion, no matter how much they say they do. Actions speak louder than words, and when the public votes for the guy who promises to put criminals away over the guy who says it's better to let 14 guilty men go free than to imprison one innocent man, we get what we voted for.
 
2013-11-04 09:47:04 AM
"Officer Lou?" Subby sounds as awkward with casual English as the guy who answers the phone for tech support, and insists his name is "Dave."
 
2013-11-04 09:47:46 AM
Black guy? I'm thinking black guy. *clicks* Black guy.

This f$^#&ing country.
 
2013-11-04 10:14:29 AM

theotherles: Some cops and prosecutors need to be horsewhipped.

/No, I'm not kidding.


I'm sure there are some cops and prosecutors that need some moderate to extreme horsewhipping, as I'm sure there are some defendants, defense attorneys, judges, bail bondsmen, ambulance drivers, and circus clowns that need a bit of the ol' leather strap.  But, what exactly in this case requires a horse whipping, dear plantation overlord?
 
2013-11-04 10:20:47 AM

Target Builder: InternetSecurityGuard: "I'm just glad this thing is over," said Yvonne Brown, DeAndre's mother.

I really, really  hope it isn't

You're right - every job he ever applies for from now on will do a background check (he works as a security guard), see that he was arrested for armed robbery and promptly toss his application in the trash.


Nope.

HR forms don't ask about arrests, they ask about convictions. (since you are not guilty until convicted). So he is fine if he is not convicted. Except for being locked up wrongly and all that.
 
2013-11-04 10:29:46 AM

SpectroBoy: Target Builder: InternetSecurityGuard: "I'm just glad this thing is over," said Yvonne Brown, DeAndre's mother.

I really, really  hope it isn't

You're right - every job he ever applies for from now on will do a background check (he works as a security guard), see that he was arrested for armed robbery and promptly toss his application in the trash.

Nope.

HR forms don't ask about arrests, they ask about convictions. (since you are not guilty until convicted). So he is fine if he is not convicted. Except for being locked up wrongly and all that.


HR forms where you work may not ask about arrests.  But background checks ALWAYS show them.  And in my field, they ALWAYS ask about arrests.
 
2013-11-04 10:32:33 AM

SpectroBoy: Target Builder: InternetSecurityGuard: "I'm just glad this thing is over," said Yvonne Brown, DeAndre's mother.

I really, really  hope it isn't

You're right - every job he ever applies for from now on will do a background check (he works as a security guard), see that he was arrested for armed robbery and promptly toss his application in the trash.

Nope.

HR forms don't ask about arrests, they ask about convictions. (since you are not guilty until convicted). So he is fine if he is not convicted. Except for being locked up wrongly and all that.


Maybe it varies a lot by line of work or state you live in. I've had loads of work related circumstances where I've been asked "have you ever been arrested or convicted of any offence". For professional certifications I also have to state whether I've been arrested or convicted of any offence, excluding minor traffic offences. If you're going for almost any federal job or working with almost any federal agency (not "Top Secret" or anything fancy, even mundane stuff like 'night cleaner at Federal Building XYZ for Contractor ABC) you'll almost certainly have to tick a box somewhere stating if you've ever been arrested or convicted for anything more than traffic infractions.
 
2013-11-04 10:43:23 AM
1) Are there plenty of villians with dusky complexions? Sure.
2) Are there plenty of pale cops with presets that see guilt in the colour brown? Clearly.
3) If I were a law-abiding black in America, would I be pissed off most of the time, particularly when driving or in any common encounter with "authority"? Yeah, probably.

I hope this guy cleans out these cops' pensions, but it's likely going to dun the local taxpayers.
 
2013-11-04 11:07:35 AM
i.imgur.com

Don't ask questions, Citizen.
 
2013-11-04 11:15:23 AM
Where is the surveillance video from the bakery?
 
2013-11-04 11:30:46 AM
I'm not sure I like the looks of that...
t3.gstatic.com
...Carl guy.
 
2013-11-04 11:59:14 AM

chubby muppet: I'm not sure I like the looks of that...
[t3.gstatic.com image 256x192]
...Carl guy.


I thought Lenny was yellow. The only white character I've ever seen was that little Wendell kid.
 
2013-11-04 12:00:23 PM

Alonjar: Wait... so his Alibi is that he was being trained as a security guard at the same time and place as the place that got robbed?

How is that an Alibi again?


Because it wasn't the same place.  He was being trained in Oakland, PA, which is roughly 40 minutes from Homewood, PA according to Google Maps.

It helps to read.
 
2013-11-04 12:07:50 PM

Por que tan serioso: khyberkitsune: timujin: khyberkitsune: I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.

You're farking from prison?  Man, I thought cruel and unusual punishment was unconstitutional.

Felony probation. Still can't go anywhere any my last petition for writ of habeas corpus was denied even in face of the evidence, stating failure to state a prima facie case.

Habeas only works if and while you are locked up.



Not true.
A Writ of Habeas Corpus is proper any time the State has improperly restrained the freedoms of a person.  Case law has repeatedly said probation and parole count too.
 
2013-11-04 12:21:46 PM

log_jammin: Gyrfalcon: ou have to be arraigned within 72 hours of your arrest unless you're unlucky enough to be arrested the Thursday before a long weekend in which case you don't get to see a judge before Tuesday. Neither the cops nor the DA has a good reason for holding someone for a simple armed robbery for A MONTH unless the guy waived his right to a fast arraignment--which means his attorney dropped the ball IF his alibi was really mentioned the night of the arrest.

he was arraigned. He went before a judge who set bail, he just couldn't make bail.


That's what I'm thinking too.  This was way too far out to be an arraignment.
Given that the story indicates he was released on lowered bond afterwards but before the case was dismissed, sounds like it was maybe what we call in Texas a "pre-trial" or perhaps a motion to modify bail.


Gyrfalcon: Given that the alibi evidence means this guy is going to win a nice juicy settlement for wrongful imprisonment from the county.

nope. never happen. rightly, or wrongly, they system worked as it's intended.

He was arrested after being accused of a crime by a witness, he went before a judge who felt there was enough evidence to support the bond amount he set(and there is no requirement that a judge set bond at an amount the defendant can afford). later upon seeing new evidence thatexonerated the guy, the DA dropped charges and he was freed.



Was going to say this too.
Had someone been able to make bond on him initially, this would have been nothing more than an exciting "jail" story to tell at Christmas parties.
 
2013-11-04 12:23:28 PM

corn-bread: Por que tan serioso: khyberkitsune: timujin: khyberkitsune: I feel sympathy for the man. I truly do. I'm doing felony time and yet I have the evidence that outright proves the crime was never committed and the evidence was fabricated (e-mail header is forged) and the DA nor public defender that told me to plead guilty want to do shiat about it.

/RIVERSIDE CA IS CORRUPT AS FARK, YO.

You're farking from prison?  Man, I thought cruel and unusual punishment was unconstitutional.

Felony probation. Still can't go anywhere any my last petition for writ of habeas corpus was denied even in face of the evidence, stating failure to state a prima facie case.

Habeas only works if and while you are locked up.


Not true.
A Writ of Habeas Corpus is proper any time the State has improperly restrained the freedoms of a person.  Case law has repeatedly said probation and parole count too.


Interesting. Here in san diego the 4th district court of appeals says otherwise.
 
2013-11-04 12:45:16 PM
More precisely the fact pattern at bar precludes a habias petition as the subject has not stated a claim upon which relief can be granted.
 
2013-11-04 12:51:08 PM
Riverside is in fact the worst place in SoCal to catch a case. Deal (if there is one) only good up to first readiness. Only gets worse from there.
 
2013-11-04 01:00:19 PM

log_jammin: Gyrfalcon: ou have to be arraigned within 72 hours of your arrest unless you're unlucky enough to be arrested the Thursday before a long weekend in which case you don't get to see a judge before Tuesday. Neither the cops nor the DA has a good reason for holding someone for a simple armed robbery for A MONTH unless the guy waived his right to a fast arraignment--which means his attorney dropped the ball IF his alibi was really mentioned the night of the arrest.

he was arraigned. He went before a judge who set bail, he just couldn't make bail.

Gyrfalcon: Given that the alibi evidence means this guy is going to win a nice juicy settlement for wrongful imprisonment from the county.

nope. never happen. rightly, or wrongly, they system worked as it's intended.

He was arrested after being accused of a crime by a witness, he went before a judge who felt there was enough evidence to support the bond amount he set(and there is no requirement that a judge set bond at an amount the defendant can afford). later upon seeing new evidence thatexonerated the guy, the DA dropped charges and he was freed.

The only reason this is a story is because he couldn't afford to bond out for one reason or another. But the real story is like I said before, either this DA is an asshole, or the guys lawyer is lazy and incompetent.  or some combination of those things.


The better reported version of the story (linked above) makes it sounds like the DA dropped charges once they reviewed the video.  So I find it hard to blame the DA.  The PH is just a probable cause hearing.  If the state puts on an eyewitness that IDs the guy, the court is probably going to find that probable cause exists even if the defense is able to put on exculpatory evidence, especially if the defense isn't able to lay adequate foundation for the evidence or establish its authenticity.  So I wouldn't necessarily blame the defense either.

Also, thanks to Cruiser Twelve, who linked about Pennsylvania PHs above, I see that the time for a typical PH there is 30 to 45 days.  If anything about the story is outrageous it's that.  In AZ a PH must be held within 10 days if the person is in custody.  20 if they're out of custody.  45 days for a PH with a person in custody is excessive.

Again, without more to go on it's hard to know who to blame, but I imagine it's either the witness who wrongfully ID'd the guy, or the cop who set up a bad lineup which led to a bad ID.  But from the stories we have, we don't even know if there was a lineup, let alone if it was a bad one.
 
2013-11-04 01:45:37 PM

Magnus: theotherles: Some cops and prosecutors need to be horsewhipped.

/No, I'm not kidding.

I'm sure there are some cops and prosecutors that need some moderate to extreme horsewhipping, as I'm sure there are some defendants, defense attorneys, judges, bail bondsmen, ambulance drivers, and circus clowns that need a bit of the ol' leather strap.  But, what exactly in this case requires a horse whipping, dear plantation overlord?


Deliberately ignoring exculpatory evidence.  And thus not properly performing their tasks.
 
2013-11-04 02:09:36 PM

theotherles: Deliberately ignoring exculpatory evidence.  And thus not properly performing their tasks.


I guess the prosecutor should have dismissed the case as soon as he viewed the exculpatory evidence.  Oh wait he did.
 
2013-11-04 02:13:26 PM

KrispyKritter: brimed03: The metric is "closing cases." Not getting it right. Nobody gets fired for putting the wrong person in jail.

seems there is major emphasis put on the cost of training law enforcement personnel as a get out of jail free card. combine that with emphasis on minimizing personal risk to avoid injury and you wind up with a public servant that rarely gets punished or fired for incompetence.

perhaps if there was accredited schools one had to pay tuition to attend a large burden would be taken off the tax payers and personal responsibility would come into play. in a career field filled with psychologically damaged individuals it's even more important to root out the local good ol' boy network of run amuck mental midgets and replace them with competent and semi-sane individuals. we won't be seeing that anytime soon.


Uh...what exactly do you think a police academy is?
 
2013-11-04 02:17:34 PM

theotherles: Magnus: theotherles: Some cops and prosecutors need to be horsewhipped.

/No, I'm not kidding.

I'm sure there are some cops and prosecutors that need some moderate to extreme horsewhipping, as I'm sure there are some defendants, defense attorneys, judges, bail bondsmen, ambulance drivers, and circus clowns that need a bit of the ol' leather strap.  But, what exactly in this case requires a horse whipping, dear plantation overlord?

Deliberately ignoring exculpatory evidence.  And thus not properly performing their tasks.


Who deliberately ignored the evidence?
 
2013-11-04 02:32:41 PM

Magnus: theotherles: Magnus: theotherles: Some cops and prosecutors need to be horsewhipped.

/No, I'm not kidding.

I'm sure there are some cops and prosecutors that need some moderate to extreme horsewhipping, as I'm sure there are some defendants, defense attorneys, judges, bail bondsmen, ambulance drivers, and circus clowns that need a bit of the ol' leather strap.  But, what exactly in this case requires a horse whipping, dear plantation overlord?

Deliberately ignoring exculpatory evidence.  And thus not properly performing their tasks.

Who deliberately ignored the evidence?


Do you pay attention?  Are you a Democrat?

The police and prosecutors.
 
2013-11-04 02:43:00 PM
Did you read the article?  Are you at all familiar with legal proceedings?

The police don't get to drop charges once they are filed.  They only testify at a preliminary hearing or any court proceeding.  The prosecutor dropped the charges.  The police had sufficient evidence at the time of the arrest to detain the defendant.  They helped establish his preliminary bail based on a schedule of charges against the defendant.  Defendant was unable to post bail.  What exactly went wrong here?  Was the defendant's word not good enough to have the police just immediately drop all charges once he said he had an alibi after the charges were filed?  Shocking as that may seem, some people lie about their innocence.  What exactly would you have done differently?

Now, again, where is this horsewhipping behavior you are so raged up about?
 
2013-11-04 09:50:38 PM

SpectroBoy: Target Builder: InternetSecurityGuard: "I'm just glad this thing is over," said Yvonne Brown, DeAndre's mother.

I really, really  hope it isn't

You're right - every job he ever applies for from now on will do a background check (he works as a security guard), see that he was arrested for armed robbery and promptly toss his application in the trash.

Nope.

HR forms don't ask about arrests, they ask about convictions. (since you are not guilty until convicted). So he is fine if he is not convicted. Except for being locked up wrongly and all that.


The application may not ask about arrests. But the background checks done for security jobs are usually done through state patrol, and show all arrests and convictions.
 
2013-11-05 12:58:26 AM
Innocent man spends month in prison for a crime he didn't commit, despite having both an alibi and video evidence showing he wasn't at the scene of the crime.

FTFA:The armed robbery charges against DeAndre Brown were dropped on Friday after a surveillance video proved he wasn't at the scene of the crime when the incident took place.

That's some fine headlining, Joe.
 
Displayed 133 of 133 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report