
Body Camera Once Again Catches an NYPD Officer Planting Drugs in Someone's Car - miles
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200318/19164444128/body-camera-once-again-catches-nypd-officer-planting-drugs-someones-car.shtml
======
djaque
This reads like some sort of dark comedy.

These police officers plant drugs on the poor guy's car, they then take him
out. He wasn't even the driver BTW.

Because he asks them to be careful of his recently stitched up stab wound the
officers decide to toss him on the ground breaking open his stitches and
causing him medical problems.

Then, they hold him for two weeks because of course he can't pay bail.

When it comes to light that the officers planted the evidence... mind you, not
because the department handed over the footage, but because a non-profit got
their hands on it... the case gets dropped.

The officers walk away with no punishment and the man got nothing for the two
weeks he had to spend with ouy of a job and for his new medical expenses.

Is there a way to just start over when it comes to policing in America?
Stories like these make me think that our problems are so deeply rooted that
this is the only way to resolve them.

~~~
chrisco255
If this is true the guy can sue and should do so.

~~~
craftinator
There is a logical progression here that I think means sueing isn't necessary:

Are police protected by law from coming under charges such as assault,
kidnapping, breaking and entering, manslaughter, etc, if those things are done
in the course of duty? \- Yes

Are police required to follow certain regulations in order to retain those
legal protections? \- Yes

Do those regulations allow for drugs to be intentionally planted, then used as
false evidence for an arrest? \- No

Were these officers under special legal protection during this arrest? \- No

Was this arrest legal? \- No

Are these officers solely liable for their actions, as any other person would
be? \- Yes

Did they assault and kidnap a man, then perjure themselves on a legal
document? \- Yes

Is the State District Attorney required to press criminal charges against
them? \- Yes

Are they required to be tried in front of a jury of 12 other citizens? \- Yes

~~~
polotics
Can someone please identify and name the DA who's not doing his job? This guy
needs notoriety. Where best to put a billboard?

------
geofft
Isn't it strange how we never had this many problems with bad cops before the
invention of body cameras? It's a pity that the upright and moral institution
of policing in the US, from its noble origins in runaway slave patrols, has
been suddenly and inexplicably corrupted of late.

~~~
gchamonlive
You assume there wasn't problems before, because none was being brought to
public attention. You also assume there has been an increase in corruption
because there is an increase in problems, as you say it.

You are linking two separate issues through correlation and implying
causation, which is a fallacy.

~~~
yellowapple
I'm reasonably sure that comment was dripping with sarcasm.

------
stingrae
Why isn't it standard for all body cam footage of an arrest to automatically
be entered as evidence? It seems like even for a judge to accept a plea deal,
they should be forced to see the footage. Someone should be catching things as
clear as this.

~~~
Melting_Harps
> Why isn't it standard for all body cam footage of an arrest to automatically
> be entered as evidence? It seems like even for a judge to accept a plea
> deal, they should be forced to see the footage. Someone should be catching
> things as clear as this.

Because they don't have an incentive to do so and have every incentive to not
do so.

I won't go into a great deal of detail, but in short: getting this as
discovery without an attorney present and actively forcing the Courts to
release it won't yield much, it is often entirely impossible to do so in time
by the forced court dates forcing most people to accept plea deals if they
cannot afford legal counsel, getting even the District Attorneys to review
this footage before moving with a case in time of said case is equally
unlikely (combination of apathetic and being overwhelmed), and Judges' will
ALWAYS favour with an officers recount of events UNTIL FORCED for compelling
reasons to over turn this. Which means an almost certain guilty verdict.

Discovery in general is so hard to get, and they can/do use a series of
excuses; not limited to using proprietary software to release the body cam
footage which is not compatible with any other system. Even between other
attorneys and jurisdictions.

You need to realize that you're assumed to be guilty in the Legal system, and
the burden and responsibility to prove otherwise is on the defendant: who is
possibly injured (physically as well as mentally), all the while you're
incurring costs left and right for everything (even wrongful arrest cases), in
addition to apathetic-callused District Attorneys/Public Defendants just
trying to bide their time and not 'rock the boat' until getting to the next
level of their careers and are often forcing people to just accept untenable
time frames for court dates or pleas deals to just churn the numbers and look
good in front of the Judge who they will encounter again in their career(s).

~~~
lainga
So... on another note... what were the career prospects like for a mid-level
ex-Okhrana officer ca. 1918?

------
maest
The post on r/protectandserve got immediately locked:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtectAndServe/comments/fl57x6/nyp...](https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtectAndServe/comments/fl57x6/nypd_officer_caught_apparently_planting_marijuana/)

~~~
notRobot
Try r/bad_cop_no_donut

~~~
maest
The responses there are predictable and uninteresting. I'm much more
interested to see how a cop subreddit responds to this.

------
yardie
Don’t consent to a search, ever. Even if they say they have probable cause.
Even if you actually did what they accuse you of. A good attorney may be able
to get the evidence tossed from an unconstitutional search. But the best
attorney can’t get anything done if you consent. And if you allow a search and
they plant evidence you’re really pushing a rock up a hill.

~~~
wkimeria
If you are black, and you don't consent to a search, you are probably getting
arrested for "resisting arrest" (I've had it happen to a friend). It's a lose-
lose situation.

~~~
beatgammit
Honestly, if I was black, I would just lay down with my hands behind my back
anytime I was asked to be searched and never consent. It's certainly a rights
violation, but I'd rather fight an illegal search/seizure case than a
resisting arrest case. If they want to arrest you, they will, and I'd rather
make that as easy as possible.

However, since I'm white and relatively well off, I'll try my chances with
talking my way out of the search.

~~~
heavenlyblue
They will simply beat you while shouting "STOP RESISTING ARREST"; do you
really think it's that simple?

------
didgeoridoo
How on earth is the on/off switch for the body camera under the officer’s
control?

~~~
sneak
Furthermore: if we don’t trust them not to turn off the cameras, we shouldn’t
be trusting them to be cops.

~~~
pas
Trust, but verify.

~~~
maximente
not great for super high stakes stuff (which interacting with US law
enforcement absolutely is, given your life may be in jeopardy) - really need a
streaming externally enforced trust and confirmation mechanism... perhaps
something like, i dunno, oversight? just brainstorming here though.

~~~
pas
Isn't there Internal Affairs? Though the problem is the incentive is not
there. Budget problems prevent hiring only good candidates, and similarly the
courts don't think cities should be paying a lot after these bad apples.

------
ken
In all the TV shows I've ever seen featuring police as protagonists, I believe
100% of them show police corruption as part of standard procedure.

And it's gotten far, far worse over the years. Dick Wolf's "Law & Order"
(1990) sometimes had rather subtle corruption, while his "Chicago P.D." (2014)
makes torture a primary investigative method in every episode. Even in the
rare case where a corrupt cop is taken down on TV, it's done by a slightly
less corrupt cop.

Is it any surprise that we see issues with police in real life, when our
entertainment has normalized much more brutal behavior? There's a huge
discrepancy here. In the fictional world, torture works, and corruption always
ends up being justified.

I love a good crime story, but all I see today is producers competing for who
can be the most outrageous.

~~~
loeg
Even if they don't show corruption, they do show 100% correct identification
of suspect and 100% conviction rates.

------
caseysoftware
I hope every case this officer has ever been involved in gets re-examined. Any
defense attorney worth anything should raise hell over it.

~~~
l0b0
This is the sort of poisonous waters where basically anything this officer has
ever said as part of their job should be instantly discounted. Anyone
convicted based solely on the testimony of this officer should be released,
their record stricken, and they should be well compensated for what must be
_assumed_ to be false evidence.

------
alloutblitz85
The cops are still in patrol. Wow.

------
whoisjuan
So the article is just going to dismiss the fact that he was targeting
specifically Afro-Americans?

Not only he was setting people up, but he was specifically setting up black
people. So fucked up.

------
jMyles
> The video the NYPD kept hidden from the public shows officers removing Jason
> Serrano from the car, ignoring his warnings that he had just been stitched
> up after being stabbed in the stomach. The cops decided Serrano's reluctance
> was an invitation to throw him on the ground and reopen his wound. Once they
> were done brutalizing Serrano, they decided this might pose less of a
> problem for them if they came up with something they could bust him for.

> As Serrano curls up on the sidewalk, bleeding from his wound, and as more
> officers and bystanders gather on the scene waiting for an ambulance,
> Pastran searches Serrano’s jacket. “We gotta find something,” Erickson tells
> him. [...] Erickson again returns to the car and continues to meticulously
> search it, while Pastran briefs a supervisor who has arrived on the scene.
> Erickson then appears to place something in the car’s drink holder, before
> opening the front seat’s console and a small toiletry box. Erickson then
> says “I smell a little weed” just as he appears to pick up and move the
> little bud he seemed to have dropped in the drink holder moments earlier.
> Erickson then searches the back of the car, and when Pastran approaches, the
> two exchange a charged look as Erickson tells Pastran “I see nothing. … You
> know what I mean?” He then returns to search the front seat area for a third
> time, this time dropping a larger bud in the drink holder and saying,
> “There’s a little bit of weed.”

> That's the end result of the NYPD's internal investigation deciding two
> years ago that planting evidence was no big deal. The cop went back out on
> the street with a partner who enabled evidence-planting. Serrano didn't
> spend two weeks in jail but he did spend five days handcuffed to a hospital
> bed. He pled guilty to the resisting arrest charge, even though it was a
> blatantly bogus arrest.

As I usually ask in these sorts of threads: what are we going to do about
this?

Many police officers seem to have just the right combination of poor
incentives, mental illness, and power-drunkenness sufficient to result in
wanton lying, lawlessness, and victimization.

This is not a situation compatible with a society in which thoughtful, calm,
mature innovation unto a pursuit of happiness can occur.

So what's the plan? How can we approach this with an adult disposition and put
an end to this bizarre experiment of giving the state unchecked power?

~~~
grecy
I feel sure the vast majority of Police officers are doing upstanding work, so
it's a matter of identifying and punishing the bad apples. Once a few have
been targeted and made examples of, surely the rest of the bad apples will
smarten up, or quit.

Without question, these officers should be charged with battery, kidnapping,
planting false evidence, unlawful arrest, possession of drugs, etc. etc.

Minimum 5 years jail each, maybe 10.

It's not like they did any of this by accident. Yes, five to ten years in jail
will ruin their lives, and it's important to remember they did it to
themselves.

We place our trust in them, and they're caught on camera behaving like regular
street thugs. This is utterly unacceptable and should be eliminated.

~~~
sykick
_I feel sure the vast majority of Police officers are doing upstanding work,
so it 's a matter of identifying and punishing the bad apples._

I strongly disagree that the vast majority of police office are doing
upstanding work. Officers don't testify against each other. They refuse to
help investigations of colleagues. The whole thin blue line mentality is a
stain on the whole profession. As Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary
for evil to prevail is that good men do nothing." Police officers that refuse
to call out the bad apples are themselves bad apples.

~~~
Melting_Harps
> I strongly disagree that the vast majority of police office are doing
> upstanding work. Officers don't testify against each other. They refuse to
> help investigations of colleagues. The whole thin blue line mentality is a
> stain on the whole profession.

I think this comes from a person based on ignorance, in that they usually have
limited to no exposure to most LEO; or alternatively, they have vested
interests in keeping that narrative up.

To this day I still cannot fathom not just how the 'blue line' practices holds
true to this day given all the cameras, but they CAN AND DO PURPOSELY LIE and
are allowed to do so with impunity in court. This is what is considered law
enforcement in the US?!

Punishing them is limited in scope, you can at best get minor monetary
compensation (which is tax derived) when they abuse their power, but as seen
with this example they're allowed to return to their patrol in most cases, or
given a paid leave of absence when its deemed too embarrassing to sweep under
the rug.

>> How on earth is the on/off switch for the body camera under the officer’s
control?

Honestly, plausible deniability; here is a horrid case in which you can see
(Graphic/NSFW) they can use that to justify their violent behaviour as
small/thin woman is forcefully strapped down, choked and repeatedly tazed by a
group of officers claiming she was 'suicidal' but somehow that part wasn't
recorded but is seen complying with the officers requests:

[https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/woman-sues-
alleges-...](https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/woman-sues-alleges-
excessive-force-boulder-county-jail/73-a7898c65-8d79-4630-83ce-478a83cba090)

Worth noting, as it coincides with the quote above its not just police but
also the Court system the enables their behaviour, the local State court ruled
in favour of the police stating the use of force was justified; it wasn't
until it was taken to the Supreme Court that it was exposed to the public what
took place with body cam footage.

> The cops in prosperous, egalitarian places are generally pretty chill, so
> the idea is to recreate those conditions.

God, I'm just going to put aside how absolutely elitist this statement is, but
consider that the case above took place in Boulder, CO. Where for a few years
the average home price was well over $1 million dollars, and her initial
arrest took place in the Downtown mall that's typically yuppy-centric shops.

------
aaomidi
During an outbreak why the fuck are we still dealing with drug crimes?

~~~
squarefoot
Creating criminals is necessary to keep prisons crowded and the associated
businesses going. Just like hotels.

~~~
aaomidi
Maybe its time to kill these businesses?

------
gryzzly
Russia and the US are so similar actually.

~~~
mirimir
I've always thought so. But the US does a far better job re appearances, and
has far better propaganda.

------
oriettaxx
the more policemen, the more trouble.

------
dntbnmpls
Makes you wonder how many people are in jail or have criminal records because
of corrupt cops.

If a cop plants drugs/evidence on you, how do you fight the charge without
video proof? Especially if another cop or the cop's partner backs up the
"planter"?

People programmed to trust cops, so your word vs 2+ cops would mean nothing.
You are entirely at the mercy of corrupt cops, corrupt prosecutors, corrupt
system. Lets be honest here, most of us here would take the cops' side without
the video proof.

Essentially, your best bet is to plead guilty to lesser charges. But your
criminal record will be an albatross around your neck and ruin your life.

~~~
omegaworks
Yes, and jails are about to become (if they haven't already) massively
burdened by the COVID outbreak.

Over-policing and mass-incarceration in America are about to produce a
massive, preventable loss of life.

~~~
dragonwriter
Some (probably inadequate) steps are being taken to mitigate the magnitude of
that problem.

[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-
canada-51947802](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51947802)

------
rolltiide
so of all those minorities you see pulled over on the curb, 90% of them were
just being arbitrarily frisked and had nothing on them and were not arrested,
but you wouldn't know the difference, some of the other 10% had drugs planted
on them, and many of those weren't their first random stop

the other validation of all those arrests and prison population records, many
of them simply took the plea deal or violated parole where anything from any
minor infraction to exercising a freedom you already have such as staying out
after a certain hour imprisons them for the original length of the sentence

the other validation is all the violent crime stats, which comes from
communities demanding certain areas are policed, based on the images of 90%
non-arrests already burned into their mind

all while all the minorities have been trying to say this is exactly what has
been happening while the majority power remains in actual and intentional
denial, now relying solely on an unquantifiable comfort that this is
statistically rare, because it has to be, .... right?

------
forkexec
Consider:

\- how many people don't vote because it's a rigged sham that's setup to
benefit the Property party, not the people

\- how poor and how close to homelessness most average people are

\- how corrupt and unaccountable the police are

\- the nation with the highest incarceration rate except Seychelles, for-
profit prisons, and the legal slavery loophole exploited by corporations

\- a nation without a viable healthcare or mental healthcare system

\- a nation that gives public commons and public services over to for-profit
corporations

The revolution is that much closer because the US has been gradually becoming
a banana republic failed state for at least 50 years, if not 70.

~~~
webninja
“How many people don't vote because it's a rigged sham that's setup to benefit
the Property party, not the people”

If you don’t vote, you don’t have a say.

