Cops Caught Lying - lulz!

Azelma · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:52 am

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20111 ... page=1&c=y

Quote:

It looked like an open-and-shut case. A cop pulls over a car, walks up to the driver's door, and sees a plastic baggy of marijuana. He brings in a drug-sniffing dog to prove probable cause for a search, gets a warrant, and finds a kilo of weed in the trunk.

That's what Officer Steven Lupo put in his report and testified to in Philadelphia Municipal Court.

Then defense attorney Michael Diamondstein produced the video.

Turned out reality was different.

Basically the cop lied on the stand about having a warrant before searching the defendants car trunk. The cop also lied about speaking to the defendant before having him step out of the vehicle. The video proved it.

I wonder how often cops lie about circumstances surrounding arrests? It's a shame.

Aestu · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:59 am

It seems to be much more a case of cops being lazy and taking procedural shortcuts in investigating a real crime, than out-and-out abuse of power against otherwise innocent people. Probably the cop had cause for suspicion he could have built into a case with good gumshoe work, but instead decided to cut corners, break the law, then get caught. This cop deserves to get busted, but its not particularly egregious so far as common police malpractise goes.

Laziness and incompetence first, abuse of power second.

Usdk · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:09 pm

you don't need a warrant(call a judge to get one, plead case, then get one) on a traffic stop if there's probable cause.

the guy gets off, the cop is probably suspended without pay if not released altogether.

or at that least should be the case.

Azelma · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:13 pm

Usdk wrote:

you don't need a warrant(call a judge to get one, plead case, then get one) on a traffic stop if there's probable cause.

the guy gets off, the cop is probably suspended without pay if not released altogether.

or at that least should be the case.

The article mentions that Pennsylvania has stricter laws about warrants when it comes to trunks.

The cops needed a warrant to search the guys trunk, claimed they got one before searching...but in reality they didn't.

From reading the article, the cop in question is no longer going to be allowed to be a witness in trials lol.

Usdk · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:14 pm

ah I see. here you can search the trunk with probable cause, but not any containers in the trunk, bags, boxes etc.

unless the bags are clear and not themselves in a container, i think.

Aestu · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:13 pm

There is a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding objects in the trunk of a car therefore a warrant is necessary to perform a search. This is not so for objects stowed in the passenger area of the car in line of sight of the windows.

Weena · **Posted:** Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:31 pm

Exactly why I don't understand states legislating against hidden/unhidden cameras.

Actually, I have an idea as to why they do it, I guess I don't understand the lack of protest against it.

Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Cops Caught Lying - lulz!

Who is online