This case is going to get dropped... gauranteed. He's calling the DA and Cops bluff and he's going to win the hand. If he's willing to duke this one out all the way, which not taking the plea deal essentially says, then I'm sure when it comes time to try the case, they're going to let it go and he'll be stuck with some lawyer fees.
I get tired of hearing people say that cops have such a hard job and they have to deal with a lot of weird situation. Well guess what, we pay an auful lot of money to have the right people hired and trained to handle those situations. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
I went over this story with my 2 brothers, one who is a cop and another who is a lawyer and they both agreed the cop was in the wrong, but they'll never prove it. They both thought the charges would be droped, and the guy tased would get stuck with his attorney fees. Essentially, the department isn't going to want to risk the chances of losing the case when witnesses corroborate the accused story, the guy has no criminal history, and some of the witnesses have impecible credentials (unlike my spelling).
The main goal the DA and the cops had was to bluff the guy into taking the plea, and he obviously didn't. So know what will happen is the DA will fold and live on to go prosecute real criminals instead of trying the case, possibly losing, and damaging the reputation of his office and that of the police departments... its no good for them to even try it... but if they drop it, they'll save some face...
edited: Tasering at Club Nationals Afterparty
Report Thread
-
-
giddy wrote:
This case is going to get dropped... gauranteed. He's calling the DA and Cops bluff and he's going to win the hand. If he's willing to duke this one out all the way, which not taking the plea deal essentially says, then I'm sure when it comes time to try the case, they're going to let it go and he'll be stuck with some lawyer fees.
I get tired of hearing people say that cops have such a hard job and they have to deal with a lot of weird situation. Well guess what, we pay an auful lot of money to have the right people hired and trained to handle those situations. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
I went over this story with my 2 brothers, one who is a cop and another who is a lawyer and they both agreed the cop was in the wrong, but they'll never prove it. They both thought the charges would be droped, and the guy tased would get stuck with his attorney fees. Essentially, the department isn't going to want to risk the chances of losing the case when witnesses corroborate the accused story, the guy has no criminal history, and some of the witnesses have impecible credentials (unlike my spelling).
The main goal the DA and the cops had was to bluff the guy into taking the plea, and he obviously didn't. So know what will happen is the DA will fold and live on to go prosecute real criminals instead of trying the case, possibly losing, and damaging the reputation of his office and that of the police departments... its no good for them to even try it... but if they drop it, they'll save some face...
Like it or not but this will be the precise outcome - end of thread (I always wanted to say that). -
Biophy6 wrote:
[quote] The state is going to use that against you believe it or not, because these people not only saw you get tazered (which is good for you) but they saw you walk up to a cop who was in the middle of handling a situation(which is bad for you). Reguardless of if the cop was using excessive force you're not supposed to nose in. You wait and press charges later..
Is there a law that states you cannot ask a cop a question while they are walking with someone else?
The cop was not arresting the bathroom guy... he was forcefully walking with him...
Anyone ever been to New Orleans during Mardi Gras?... This Cincy cop would tazed everyone on Bourbon street. Bystanders are always trying to defend their friends or strangers getting arrested down there, and these people are actually being arrested.. And it's not a group of 140-150 lbs runners. -
.......................... wrote:
Biophy6 wrote:
[quote] The state is going to use that against you believe it or not, because these people not only saw you get tazered (which is good for you) but they saw you walk up to a cop who was in the middle of handling a situation(which is bad for you). Reguardless of if the cop was using excessive force you're not supposed to nose in. You wait and press charges later..
Is there a law that states you cannot ask a cop a question while they are walking with someone else?
The cop was not arresting the bathroom guy... he was forcefully walking with him...
Anyone ever been to New Orleans during Mardi Gras?... This Cincy cop would tazed everyone on Bourbon street. Bystanders are always trying to defend their friends or strangers getting arrested down there, and these people are actually being arrested.. And it's not a group of 140-150 lbs runners.
I've come to the conclusion that some people started out as playing devils advocate by defending the police in this situation. As more and more people who were there shed light, these devils....errrr devils advocates went through a few changes.
Change #1: Their blinders grew in size and moved further inward towards their noses.
Change #2: The hair in the ears of their inner dialogue grew thicker and thicker as if a full moon was nearing.
Change #3: While some people can learn to read between the lines, the devils have learned to actually skip lines and by pure coincidence those seem to be the lines that refute their claims in the defense of the proud man in blue. Yes the proud man with a slight shoving problem, and an acute knack for human bowling, and a kneejerk reaction on his taser arm, and a the composure of a pitbull in a room filled with greyhounds.
Is there any way we can turn the officers badge into a medal of honor? -
A cop's job is difficult enough, but it's made more difficult by rogue cops and the code of silence that enables them. It's only is cases like these that there's a opportunity to weed out the bad ones before they go too far. One only needs to click on this link to be reminded of what happens when rogue cops are allowed to run free.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampart_Scandal
Nearly half (46 percent) of 1,116 law enforcement officers surveyed by the institute's Neal E. Trautman confirmed that they personally had "witnessed misconduct by another employee" and had concealed what they knew.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/03/09/IN138668.DTL
The job of patrolling the womens room at a bar during a private party goes to the assistant junior coat check girl, not the SWAT team. -
Do you have a link to the Cincinnati Enquirer article?
-
Biophy6 wrote:
You may get your charges reduced is my guess, but don't be suprised if you end up with everything sticking to you.
Did you miss the part where he (and the newspaper article) said that he didn't accept a plea bargain?
And if a witness claims, under oath, that they were sober then it becomes testimony for the jury to accept as a fact. To establish circumstantial evidence, all the defendant's attorney has to do is ask the witnesses if they were sober. Simple. -
From the first article above:
"Gerber bumped him, grabbed his left arm and said "I had to leave his friend alone" while he escorted the man outside, Cresap wrote."
Doesn't lend a whole lot of credibility to the cop's case that the two didn't know each other. -
As a friend of Mike, I hope everything turns out well. That being said, I am still laughing about the account of Mike throwing a beer at the cop and then charging him! haha, yeah right...
-
I hear talk of requests for a defense fund. I also hear talk of a lawsuit in this thread.
If I contribute to the defense fund, can I get a piece of the action of any potential suit? -
capitalist pig wrote:
I hear talk of requests for a defense fund. I also hear talk of a lawsuit in this thread.
If I contribute to the defense fund, can I get a piece of the action of any potential suit?
You don't have any money to donate, and even if you did you wouldn't do it, so it doesn't matter anyway. -
capitalist pig wrote:
I hear talk of requests for a defense fund. I also hear talk of a lawsuit in this thread.
If I contribute to the defense fund, can I get a piece of the action of any potential suit?
I think the fairest thing to do would be if he won a civil suit to first pay back those who contributed to the defense fund. And yes, there is a fund. -
Read the question. Notice the "if". If you are unable to answer the question just say so.
-
Read my answer "you won't donate anyway."
Altruism has no strings. -
So give if you wish. It is a DONATION. Do not expect anything back if he makes a load of cash on a suit.
-
That's the whole point of altruism.
-
Been out of commission for a few days, but just checking back in. Good to see the story is coming out, but it makes my blood boil reading that officer's purely fabricated account of the incident. Yes, there are always two perspectives when anything happens, but Deputy Chris Cresap's statements and report are blatantly and gallingly inconsistent with reality and shameful.
I'm not one to normally support civil suits just because there is money to be had, most are frivolous and irresponsible, but I think Mike would be very justified in this instance. With all the legal fees, hostiptal bills, travel expenses...not to mention time away from work and mental duress. It's really too bad there is no video of this incident because someone would have already been out of a job. -
A few things:
1. Gerber: As a former state's attorney, I can tell you that defendants (or even witnesses) like you have provided me and my colleagues very usefult cross-examination fodder by posting their "account" of a particular incident on their myspace page or their blog. Bad idea. Give a copy of your post to your lawyer so he knows what you've said. If this goes to trial, he doesn't want to be surprised. One of the benefits a defendant has is that he is not required to give his side of the story unless and until he choose to take the stand. (Same goes for their witnesses in cases like yours.) Don't give up that advantage by putting pen to paper (or fingers to keyboads).
2. Witness statements mean squat unless your witnesses show up on the day of trial. If they do, your case gets a lot better. But I imagine that by the time this case goes to trial, your witnesses (who I suspect are not from the area) may be a little less thrilled about traveling to Ohio for a disorderly conduct trial.
3. Before you all go making predictions about how much money this guy's going to get in a civil suit, I'd look up 42 U.S.C. 1983, then look up qualified immunity and see how the Sixth Circuit handles cases like this one. These are difficult cases to make.
4. It's not illegal to blow a 0.18 when not driving, but a prosecutor will get a lot of mileage out of being able to say you were over twice the legal limit. -
On Cincinnati.com today:
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20080109/NEWS01/801090423/
