Rare ‘Perry Mason’ moment in court 5 Cops Caught Lying on the Stand


tay
+1
#1
A seemingly routine suppression hearing in a suburban Chicago courthouse last month took an unexpected dramatic turn when video from a police car was introduced that disproved the testimony of five police officers.

They had said Joseph Sperling was arrested after officers who pulled him over in a traffic stop smelled marijuana, searched the vehicle and found nearly a pound in a backpack lying on the back seat of his car. But the Glenview police video showed the search occurred only after Sperling was taken from his car, frisked and handcuffed, reports the Chicago Tribune .

The newspaper dubbed it "a 'Perry Mason' moment rarely seen inside an actual courtroom."


Castigating the officers for their "outrageous conduct," Cook County Circuit Judge Catherine Haberkorn granted a defense motion to suppress the search, which eliminated a basis for his arrest and resulted in a swift dismissal by prosecutors of the felony drug case against the 23-year-old.


"All the officers lied on the stand today," said Haberkorn, who herself is a former prosecutor, at the March 31 hearing. "So there is strong evidence it was conspiracy to lie in this case, for everyone to come up with the same lie."


The officers were later put on desk duty as investigations of their conduct proceed.


The Tribune says the Glenview arrest of Sperling last June came at the request of Chicago narcotics officers who had Sperling under surveillance. They asked local police to pull him over in a marked car, which occurred when Sperling allegedly failed to use his turn signal (he says he did). Then, one of the Chicago officers testified, he smelled marijuana as he waited for Sperling to produce his license and registration. Sperling testified he was never asked to do so.


The officer, supported by testimony from four other Chicago and Glenview officers, said he ordered Sperling to exit the vehicle and stand by the trunk as he searched it. However, the video shows the search didn't occur until after Sperling was sitting, handcuffed, in a police car.


Another discrepancy in testimony concerned the location of the backpack in which the marijuana was located: Police said it was in plain view on the back seat of the car. Sperling said it was under the seat.


If not for the video, which Sperling's lawyer Steven Goldman got by issuing a subpoena to the Glenview police department, and produced in rebuttal at the suppression hearing, Sperling likely would have been convicted and jailed, the attorney told the newspaper.


Now Sperling has filed a federal civil rights suit over his arrest.




Rare 'Perry Mason' moment in court wins dismissal for defendant, desk duty for 5 police officers
 
taxslave
+2
#2
The only surprise is that there was an undoctored video to present in court.
 
Ron in Regina
+2
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

The only surprise is that there was an undoctored video to present in court.

...or that the dash-cam didn't 'malfunction' leaving no video to produce.
 
damngrumpy
+3
#4  Top Rated Post
cops either forgot about it or they didn't think it would ever be questioned just another
person going to a privatized jail to support the government statistics as to how well
the war on whatever is doing.
He was guilty of transporting pot but the police were guilty of much more and they
should now be put on trial
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
+1
#5
cops incompetence lets druggie loser go free. They should be fired.
 
Sal
#6
so all five lied, had no problem with lying and conspiring... I've always heard the forces were corrupt but really? five of them...and they get put on desk duty...they have sworn an oath to uphold truth and justice... how can they ever be trusted again?
 
lone wolf
+1
#7
I got three of them to admit to fibs with a blank cassette and hints about recording equipment up and running. Might have been more interesting to have done it in Court rather than in a wardroom with the Deputy Chief....
 
Sal
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

I got three of them to admit to fibs with a blank cassette and hints about recording equipment up and running. Might have been more interesting to have done it in Court rather than in a wardroom with the Deputy Chief....

don't really know what this means but it sounds interesting

are ya gonna tell more or would that be incriminating in some way
 
lone wolf
+1
#9
Nothing incriminating. The power of someone's own fear of discovery works both ways. A by-the-book account of arrest was presented in Court. It didn't exactly happen that way.

"I advise you. The words "You are under arrest" followed by a caution statement are very conspicuous in their absence on this tape". They saw (and noted) the recording equipment when they did their search. I saw an imitation of See no, Hear no, Speak no, then one admitted I was co-operative so they felt no need for formalities.
 
SLM
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by SalView Post

so all five lied, had no problem with lying and conspiring... I've always heard the forces were corrupt but really? five of them...and they get put on desk duty...they have sworn an oath to uphold truth and justice... how can they ever be trusted again?

Sometimes it doesn't take a whole lot of convincing for the ends to justify the means. How do they get from entering law enforcement to uphold the law to circumventing it to get the 'bad guy'? I suppose it's probably difficult to continually conduct yourself with integrity when the criminals sure don't. But when you cross that line, you cross it and I think they should be stripped of the uniform. Because it's not just them that we (the public) will have trust issues with, but the entire police force. It drives a wedge between the public and the force.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+1
#11
Tough being a cop. Tough towing the line and keeping a positive attitude. But with that said, integrity should never be for sale and the end does not justify the means.
 
gopher
+1
#12
More technology should be used which fully reveals police procedures and which cannot be suppressed. Every car, every corner in every intersection, and other areas need live cams. This will insure that the cops behave themselves and preserve justice.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

More technology should be used which fully reveals police procedures and which cannot be suppressed. Every car, every corner in every intersection, and other areas need live cams. This will insure that the cops behave themselves and preserve justice.

What about your privacy?
 
gopher
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

What about your privacy?




Actually, the Constitution does not specifically refer to a right to privacy. While reasonable expectation of privacy in one's home is protected by the Fourth Amendment*, walking the streets does not guarantee a right of privacy. Moreover, the rights of those charged are protected by such technology as shown in the example of the case in the OP.








* The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized


Note: it says 'secure' but does not guarantee privacy
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
#15
I'm not real keen on having big brother watch my every move.
 
gopher
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

I'm not real keen on having big brother watch my every move.






I share your concern. But at least this way you are protected against rogue cops planting evidence on you or making up stories like they did in the OP.


You might recall a post I made here several years ago re prosecutorial misconduct in Cook County, Illinois. You might also recall our earlier thread on police misconduct. Had this technology been available back then, a great many innocents would have been spared the horrors they were subjected to by those criminally inclined prosecutors and cops.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

I share your concern. But at least this way you are protected against rogue cops planting evidence on you or making up stories like they did in the OP.

I haven't had that problem.

Quote:

You might recall a post I made here several years ago re prosecutorial misconduct in Cook County, Illinois. You might also recall our earlier thread on police misconduct. Had this technology been available back then, a great many innocents would have been spared the horrors they were subjected to by those criminally inclined prosecutors and cops.

I'd be more worried that some bald guy that looks a lot like me does something that gets pinned on me because of a camera.
Last edited by Retired_Can_Soldier; Apr 19th, 2014 at 10:23 PM..
 
gopher
+1
#18
Actually, you bring up another interesting scenario as videos can readily settle disputes over mistaken identity of suspects. Anyone can then use their own video which shows they were nowhere near the crime scene and go off free rather than face unjust prosecution.
 
shadowshiv
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_SoldierView Post

I'm not real keen on having big brother watch my every move.

If you had wanted that, you would move to Britain, right?
 
no new posts