Remember the railroaded Hero cops who keep you safe.

Sgt. Ray Corll
Sgt William Dukes, Jr.
Jackson County Deputy Zach Wester 
NYPD detectives Michael Bergmann and Kevin Desormeau 
NYPD Officer Jonathan Munoz

A politicial witchhunt against a hero cop is a valid PTSD disability retirement reason.

Will embattled Glendale officers get disability pension?

Posted: 6:05 PM, Jan 22, 2020

Updated: 10:13 PM, Jan 22, 2020

By: Dave Biscobing

The City of Glendale police pension board unanimously voted to advance the disability retirement applications of two officers exposed by ABC15 for excessive use of force.

GLENDALE, AZ — The City of Glendale police pension board unanimously voted to advance the disability retirement applications of two officers exposed by ABC15 for excessive use of force.
Officer Matthew Schneider and Sgt. Aaron Aldridge will now undergo medical examinations to review whether they have physical/mental conditions that prevent them from doing their jobs.
FULL COVERAGE: ABUSE OF FORCE
Following the examinations, the Glendale Public Safety Personnel Retirement System Local Police Board will then vote to approve whether the two officers can receive full pension benefits ahead of normal retirements.
Voting board member Justin Harris, a fellow Glendale officer, hugged and embraced Schneider following the initial vote.
Schneider, who is not currently on any type of leave, is under a criminal FBI investigation following an ABC15 report last February.
During a July 2017 traffic stop, Schneider repeatedly tasered a man , including once in the testicles when was handcuffed laying on the ground, according to body camera footage and a federal lawsuit.
Attorneys for Schneider have claimed in court during a civil case that criminal charges are presumed and expected in the near future.
Schneider was suspended for three days by the city for his role in the traffic stop. Independent experts called his actions one of the most troubling and sadistic cases of police misconduct they’ve ever seen.
ABC15 also obtained video showing Sgt. Aldridge immediately tasering a man in the chest in late 2018 without warning. The suspect, who was accused of stealing a bait bike, had both hands clearly raised above his head.
Accidental disability retirements would allow the two officers to collect full pension benefits without reaching the required 20 years of service.
Schneider, his wife, and attorney attended the public meeting and were expected to speak about his condition.
However, once ABC15 journalists arrived, his attorney asked the board to rescind his waiver of confidentiality and requested only to address the board in executive session, which is closed to the public.
Aldridge did not attend the meeting.
The public meeting was held on the fourth floor of Glendale City Hall behind a locked door.
When ABC15 journalists arrived ahead of the meeting, a security guard told the crew the meeting was not public.
Shortly later, the security guard asked the ABC15 journalists to sign a blank loose-leaf piece of paper. And a pair of city spokespeople also came to ask why the journalists were there.
The request conflicts with Arizona open meeting laws.
“Open meeting law does not grant public bodies authority to require that members of the public sign an attendance sheet in order to attend an open meeting,” according to the Arizona Obmudsman’s website.
After showing the spokespeople the agenda for the public meeting and further requesting access, employees unlocked the door and let ABC15 into the meeting.
A spokesman later apologized for the confusion.

Cop Haters commited misconduct by hiding video from police. SAPD will get a warrant and do a SWAT raid on the house where the video was recorded. SOP.

Video of officer-involved shooting appears to contradict San Antonio police chief’s initial claims

Surveillance footage raises new questions about fatal shooting of Randy Goodale

SAN ANTONIO – Video surveillance footage of a fatal officer-involved shooting obtained by the KSAT 12 Defenders appears to contradict the San Antonio police chief’s claims about what led up to the moment law enforcement officers opened fire on the suspect.

On Jan. 13, police and federal law enforcement agents were attempting to arrest Randall Goodale at a home in the 4400 block of Stetson View on a federal felony warrant for felon in possession of a handgun, SAPD Chief William McManus previously said on the day of the incident.

McManus told media in a two-minute briefing at the scene that officers opened fire after Goodale “started ramming into occupied police vehicles.” He said Goodale, 45, was shot and killed by one SAPD officer and one federal law enforcement agent.

When asked by a reporter at the scene why police officers opened fire, McManus doubled down: “Well, he was ramming the cars, for one. And there were officers in the vehicles whose lives were being threatened by that."

Police have not said whether Goodale was armed and have not yet responded to requests for information beyond a written statement and McManus’ briefing at the scene. “This investigation is far from over,” McManus cautioned shortly after the shooting.

But McManus’ claim that Goodale was killed while ramming occupied police vehicles appears to be contradicted by home surveillance footage of the fatal incident obtained by KSAT. The footage appears to show that Goodale’s vehicle didn’t move until after the fatal shots were fired.

The roughly 2-minute video, filmed from above the garage, begins as multiple officers pull up in marked and unmarked vehicles to a house in a neighborhood that has a trailer and red pickup truck parked in the driveway. (Goodale is sitting in the driver’s seat but cannot be seen clearly in the video because the trailer blocks the camera’s view.)

As soon as officers block the driveway, several exit the vehicles and draw their guns. About 15 seconds after pointing their weapons, officers can be seen opening fire on the truck from multiple angles.

Shortly after officers finished shooting (police have not yet provided the number of shots fired), the truck slowly moves down the driveway and bumps into one of the parked, unmarked police vehicles, which appears to be unoccupied.

A plume of smoke rises from the truck’s rear tires, potentially a result of Goodale’s feet hitting the brake and accelerator after being shot.

The footage does not include audio of the shooting, and KSAT has muted the video to leave out comments of residents who were watching the footage. A white cursor arrow seen in the footage was part of the original video and was not added by KSAT.

In a statement released Wednesday, SAPD spokesperson Sgt. Michelle Ramos reiterated that the information McManus provided on the day of the shooting was preliminary. She also said videos “don’t always provide the full scope of an officer’s perception.”

“Chief McManus provided information at the scene as the investigation was just underway. As always, this is preliminary information and subject to change as the investigation unfolds. Surveillance videos are important, however, they don’t always provide the full scope of an officer’s perception. For example, there is no audio in the video you obtained so you cannot hear what the officers are experiencing. In addition, you cannot see what the suspect is doing so you do not know what the officers are perceiving. The SAPD Officer Involved Shooting Team is conducting an investigation. At the conclusion of the investigation, the results will be forwarded to the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office for an independent review.”Sgt. Michelle Ramos, police spokesperson

The owner of the surveillance system and property where Goodale was shot and killed spoke to the Defenders via telephone Wednesday morning on the condition that he not be identified by name for fear of retribution.

He said Goodale was working on the truck when officers pulled up to the home, and that the footage provided to the Defenders shows their entire encounter.

He conceded that he and other people inside the home at the time of the shooting hid a recording of the incident out of fear that officers would destroy it.

Randall Goodale, 45, was shot and killed by San Antonio police and a federal task force member on Jan. 13, 2020. (KSAT)

During the briefing, McManus said police removed Goodale from his truck after the shooting and took him down the street before administering first aid, due to concerns that other people who could pose a threat to law enforcement were inside the home.

KSAT requested the police report and Goodale’s arrest warrant, but as of Wednesday, the documents were not provided.

Goodale has an extensive criminal history in Bexar County that spans back to 1995, when he was convicted of burglary of a habitation by force. He was sentenced to seven years in prison.

Goodale also has convictions for drug possession, stealing a vehicle and being a felon in possession of a firearm. He was convicted in federal court for identity theft, records show.

Goodale was most recently arrested in May by San Antonio police for a drug charge, which violated the terms of his parole in the federal identity theft case.

San Antonio police were cooperating with the Lone Star Fugitive Task Force, comprised of deputy U.S. Marshals and local law enforcement, when serving the warrant.

The U.S. Marshals, which had agents on scene, declined to comment on the shooting and referred all questions to San Antonio police, the lead agency on Goodale’s case.

Since the shooting, San Antonio police officers have been removed from the federal task force, though SAPD officials did not provide a reason for the move.

Copyright 2020 by KSAT - All rights reserved.

San Antonio police pull detectives from federal task force after officer-involved shooting

San Antonio Police Chief William McManus said he pulled his officers from the task force Friday citing resource and operational issues.

Author: Mariah Medina (KENS5)

Published: 10:29 PM CST January 21, 2020

Updated: 10:49 PM CST January 21, 2020

SAN ANTONIO — The San Antonio Police Department decided Friday it would pull its detectives from the U.S. Marshals Lone Star Fugitive Task Force, officials from both agencies confirmed Tuesday. 

The decision came days after members of the task force fatally shot a wanted man while attempting to apprehend him at a home in the 4400 block of Stetson View near Interstate 37. The task force – comprised of federal, state and local agencies, including the San Antonio Police Department – was attempting to arrest Randy Goodale on a felony warrant last Monday. 

Goodale's friends and family shared home surveillance video with KENS 5 shortly after the deadly shooting. KENS 5 is not showing the video because the individual who shared it did not have permission from the owner to give it to KENS 5. 

The video appears to contradict the sequence of events San Antonio Police Chief William McManus gave immediately after the shooting. 

"When task force members arrived at the scene, they surrounded the individual and he started ramming into occupied police vehicles," McManus told members of the media hours after the shooting. "One of the members of the task force fired, and one member of the SAPD who was there in support, fired."

The video provided by friends suggests the truck that Goodale was in rolled forward and hit law enforcement vehicles after shots were fired, though a trailer blocks the view of the truck Goodale was in when he was shot. Smoke from the tires is seen rising from behind the trailer as the task force moves in.

“(The video) didn’t even get close to telling the story of what happened, so it’s tough to rely on that video to make a determination of what happened," McManus said Tuesday. "Especially with no sound.”

Asked squarely whether he intentionally misled members of the public in the aftermath of the shooting, McManus responded, “No, I never have and I never would.”

McManus said he tries to inform the public of what's going on immediately after critical situations, such as last Monday's officer-involved shooting, as an effort to quell any panic.

ADVERTISEMENT

If You're Trying To Lose Weight, Stop Eating Salad (Have This Instead)

There Is One Protein That Can Restart Your Body's Slow Metabolism, And No, It's Not Fish

Ad By GundryMD 

"What I know at the time is the information I pass on," McManus explained Tuesday. "The trade off to not being 100% accurate is to not give any information at all if I'm not clear on it."

McManus said the owner of the video has so far refused to share it with police and that the first time he had seen the video was when KENS 5 sent it over to the public information office last week for comment.

“You could only see the roof of the car in the video," McManus said. "You could just see it moving, the smoke coming up—that was about it. Difficult to make any assessment from that video.”

The video doesn't show what marshals and police saw before they fired shots. McManus said he wouldn't speculate on why they shot until the investigation is complete.

McManus said his agency has been working with the U.S. Marshals Service to fill any voids their absence from the task force may cause.

“We had been taking internally about pulling those detectives from the task force, pulling them back under our umbrella as an additional resource," McManus said. "It was some operational issues as well. A combination of those two things. I spoke with the marshal, we met on it, and told her I was pulling the detectives back from the task force.”

We don’t want criminals escaping justice through court room trickery

 NYC PBA testimony opposing repeal of Police Personnel records protection

“The advocates are intentionally misleading lawmakers about the nature of Civil Rights Law Section 50-a. Far from being the ‘most regressive’ law of its kind in the nation, it is on par with 23 states plus the District of Columbia that protect these records from public disclosure under most circumstances.

“Additionally, the many agencies charged with overseeing the actions of police officers including district attorneys and civilian review boards, to name just two, have full and complete access to personnel records.

“The law was created for two reasons that are as valid today as they were when it was signed into law.  First, to prevent unscrupulous defense attorneys from abusing access to those records in order to win acquittals for criminals who prey on the public. Second, the law protects the personnel records of police officers in order to prevent criminals from identifying and locating those officers in order to extract revenge for their arrest.

“Both reasons are in the public’s best interest. We don’t want criminals escaping justice through court room trickery nor can we expect police officers to risk their lives without at least a minimal amount of personal protection for them.  Amending or repealing the law will have devastating effects on public safety and on the safety of all law enforcement officers throughout New York State.”

Former detective who handcuffed Utah nurse sues Salt Lake City Police Department

Former detective who handcuffed Utah nurse sues Salt Lake City Police Department

By Gretel Kauffman@gretelkauffman Oct 11, 2019, 8:31pm MDT

University Hospital nurse Alex Wubbels is arrested by a Salt Lake police detective Jeff Payne in Salt Lake City in this July 26, 2017, frame grab from video taken from a police body camera. The footage was provided by Karra Porter, Wubbels’ attorney.

Salt Lake City Police Department

SALT LAKE CITY — The Salt Lake police detective who was fired after his arrest of a hospital nurse went viral is suing the department.

Former detective Jeff Payne filed a lawsuit Thursday against the Salt Lake City Police Department, claiming he was wrongfully terminated in 2017 after following orders from his commanding officer and complying with department policies.

The lawsuit describes Payne and nurse Alex Wubbels as two birds in a “cock fight staged and orchestrated by the persons in charge at the Salt Lake City Police Department and those in charge of the burn unit at the University of Utah Hospital,” each doing what they were instructed to do by their superiors.

But while “Ms. Wubbles was paid $500,000 for her involvement in the cock fight,” the suit says, “officer Payne’s life is ruined forever forced to live a life in seclusion with scant employment opportunities.”

The lawsuit comes two years after Payne was fired and nearly one year after he declared his intent to sue Salt Lake City, describing himself as a “fall guy” for the city and police department.

The veteran police detective’s name and face spread across the internet after an incident on July 26, 2017, when he was sent to the University of Utah Hospital to collect blood from a man who was injured in a crash that left another man dead.

When the charge nurse, Wubbels, refused to tell Payne where the unconscious patient was or let him draw blood — citing policy agreed upon by the police department and hospital that required he have a warrant or meet certain criteria — Payne arrested Wubbels for interfering with an investigation. Body camera footage showing the detective dragging the screaming nurse out of the emergency room and handcuffing her against a wall spread quickly online, drawing widespread public criticism.

Payne was fired from the department the following October in a 17-page letter from Salt Lake Police Chief Mike Brown, who wrote that the detective’s 27 years of service was “outweighed by the glaring absence of sound professional judgment and extremely discourteous, disrespectful, inappropriate, unreasonable and unwarranted behavior you displayed in this incident.”

Two years later, Payne, who has since been hired as a part-time civilian corrections assistant in Weber County, is suing his former employer for breach of contract, breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, wrongful termination, defamation, and false light publicity.

Payne argues in the suit that he was following the department’s training and policy manual in his interaction with Wubbels that day. He claims he acted according to orders from his commanding officer to pursue an obstruction charge against Wubbels, and blames what he describes as a lack of clarity regarding department policies in the manual.

The embattled former detective also says the city prematurely authorized the public release of the body camera footage that later went viral.

“The video released was wholly misleading,” the lawsuit states. “Because of the backlash, defendants fabricated the events so that officer Payne would take the blame for this event, when he was only following orders of his supervisors.”

After the incident became public, Payne claims the city and department slandered and defamed him in the public eye rather than taking responsibility for the department’s role in the incident.

The former detective is seeking more than $300,000 in damages.

PA is a stop and ID state.

 https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=34&div=0&chpt=9&sctn=4&subsctn=0

TITLE 34

GAME

§ 904.  Resisting or interfering with an officer.

(a)  General offense.--When an officer is in the performance of any duty required by this title, it is unlawful for any person to interfere with or resist an arrest, inspection or investigation of the officer by threat, force, menace, flight or obstruction. A violation of this subsection is a summary offense of the first degree.

(b)  Failure to produce identification upon demand.--

(1)  A person who refuses to provide identification upon demand of an officer whose duty it is to enforce this title after having been told by the officer that the person is the subject of an official investigation or investigative detention, supported by reasonable suspicion, commits a summary offense of the fifth degree.

(2)  A person who provides false identification to an officer whose duty it is to enforce this title for the purpose of avoiding prosecution or hindering apprehension or obstructing an investigation commits a summary offense of the second degree.

(June 23, 2004, P.L.434, No.42, eff. 60 days; Oct. 7, 2010, P.L.474, No.64, eff. 60 days)

2010 Amendment.  Act 64 amended subsec. (b)(1).

Lawsuit claims Des Moines police detained man who was legally filming them

Stephen Gruber-Miller, Des Moines RegisterPublished 6:29 p.m. CT Sept. 5, 2018

CLOSE

(Photo: Special to the Register)

CONNECTTWEETLINKEDINCOMMENTEMAILMORE

Des Moines police face a lawsuit alleging that officers unlawfully stopped a man and seized his phone after he recorded police department employees from a public sidewalk.

The lawsuit argues that the man, Daniel Robbins of Des Moines, "was surrounded, detained and threatened with arrest" on May 10 when he recorded a Des Moines Police Department employee illegally parked in front of a "no parking" sign outside the police station on East Second Street.

The suit names the city of Des Moines and police officers Brad Youngblut, Joseph Leo and Christopher Curtis as defendants.

Robbins argues in the lawsuit that the officers violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution, and that the city failed to properly train the officers on what his rights are when recording police. Robbins is seeking monetary damages for compensation and as a sanction on the officers' alleged conduct.

Robbins, a radio producer and journalist, alleges he was standing on East Second Street when he saw a police employee leave the police station, get into an illegally parked vehicle and drive away. Robbins began recording what he saw on his phone, the lawsuit states.

Robbins continued filming and crossed the street to stand on the sidewalk nearest to the police station, the lawsuit states. At that point, Youngblut approached Robbins in a vehicle and asked what he was doing and told him he was being "a little suspicious" because he was taking pictures of officers' personal vehicles, the lawsuit states.

Other officers, including Curtis and Leo, approached Robbins and asked what he was doing. He said "I'm taking pictures because it is perfectly legal for me to be taking pictures," according to the lawsuit. Robbins declined to give his name or produce an ID when asked.

Robbins alleges the officers continued to say he was behaving suspiciously and that Leo told him he was loitering. Police also told him that cars have been stolen out of the parking lot he was observing, Robbins says in the suit.

Des Moines Police Sgt. Christopher Curtis is named in a lawsuit that accuses police of improperly stopping and detaining a man who says he was filming police from a public sidewalk. (Photo: Special to the Register)

Robbins alleges police took his Samsung Galaxy phone and a Canon camera, stopped his recording, then patted him down and searched his pockets. After several minutes, police let him go without citing him or arresting him. Robbins says police told him he was trespassing at the police headquarters.

Gary Dickey, an attorney at Dickey & Campbell who is representing Robbins, said in a news release that citizens have a constitutional right to film law enforcement from public sidewalks if they are not interfering with official acts.

BY XFINITY

Fast speed with Xfinity

See more →

"When citizens have to worry about police retaliation, they are less likely to exercise these constitutional rights and democracy suffers as a result," Dickey said.

Dickey & Campbell filed the suit on Robbins' behalf along with Downey & Mundy Law Offices, the release states.

Sgt. Paul Parizek, a spokesman for the Des Moines Police Department, said there would be an internal review of the officers' behavior to investigate the allegations in the lawsuit, including claims that vehicles were illegally parked and that Robbins' was improperly detained and his property was seized.

Parizek said it would have been an "easy fix" for Robbins to report a complaint about the employee he saw illegally parked, rather than filming the person.

"If he had a complaint about an employee that was parked illegally, that’s a simple fix for us. Walk in the front door, tell us about that employee and we’ll handle it from there," he said.

Parizek said it was reasonable for officers to ask Robbins for his name and his reason for recording by the police station.

"We had a civilian female employee getting into her personal car when she saw a guy video taping her," Parizek said. "Obviously for reasons that are self-explanatory that made her very uncomfortable."

He said that although a crime was not reported, police were investigating a call about suspicious activity as they would have if someone had called from a private business.

"Let me put it in perspective: if I were to go up to any public building and stand on the sidewalk lawfully and take video of their female employees coming and going from their personal vehicle, I don’t think the impression I would leave those ladies with was that I was exercising my rights," Parizek said.

The lawsuit is the latest against the city's police. Another suit filed in August accuses officers of racial profiling. Civil rights groups are pushing a law that would ban that practice.

Other lawsuits include one against two former Des Moines officers who resigned after officials said they planted methamphetamine on a suspect in 2015. One of the officers, Tyson Teut, pleaded guilty in June to non-felonious misconduct in office and was sentenced to probation.

In another lawsuit, a man alleges his constitutional rights were violated when a Des Moines police officer with a history of excessive force attacked him in his home after he called the police for help.