I will tell you how it happens:
(1) Internal Affairs refusal to investigate: I am assuming that some of these 79 people filed a citizen’s complain against the lying officer. As I stated in a prior post, Internal Affairs do not have to investigate. Also, some of the people who complained probably opted to take the “informal route” because the department vowed to correct this wayward cop. But that cop is generating revenue for the city, so they turn the blind eye and allow the people to be abused. You cannot wake someone who is feigning sleep. The city, district attorney, and police department knews exactly what was going on.
(2) The DA: “According to Scully's office, most of the defendants were convicted in a court of law despite Mullock's legally unsound decision to detain the motorists, despite his misuse of preliminary alcohol screening and despite wild inaccuracies in his field interviews.” The District Attorney’s office is not interested in the truth. They are conviction centered. This is how innocent people go to jail and are convicted of crimes. They have no trouble with arguing an immoral cause.
(3) The People: It is a case of the cop’s word against yours. We are also conditioned to believe that cops are moral and virtuous people when they are no different from other humans. You are missing work and are stressing due to all of the court days and other messes that comes with an illegal arrest. You are told that the evidence against you is pretty heavy and you give in and plead guilty. Your family, friends, lawyer told you to “let it go” it is not a big deal or a major crime, so you reluctantly take their advice.
(4) Your Attorney: Attorneys will try to scare you into taking a deal even if you proclaim your innocence. They will tell you about how unfair the system is and how you will probably not win if you demand to go to trial. You have no witnesses and we are lead to believe that no one will believe the accused. So you take the path of least resistance and don’t fight for you rights.
I don’t understand how someone can be charged with a crime based on one person’s testimony. We must fight for our rights and not allow the system to feed off of our lives.
California DUI attorney Lawrence Taylor explained on a DUI blog "Drunk driving is one if those crimes which is highly susceptible to falsifying evidence…this is because the offense is highly dependent on the cop's own observations and opinion. Typically, proving 'driving under the influence of alcohol' depends upon the officer's testimony of such symptoms as weaving on the highway, odor of alcohol on the breath, flushed face, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, poor balance, staggering when walking, etc. Usually, there are no other witnesses to contradict these 'observations'; certainly, no one will believe the accused... The motive? Fulfilling quotas overtime pay for testifying in court, promotions for high numbers of arrests, gaining awards in personnel files from MADD, etc." Well said Mr. Taylor…well said…
No comments:
Post a Comment