Judge reverses guilty verdict because a cop lied

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/12/03/court-footage-of-judge-reversi.html


Talking over the judge. Not answering the judge’s questions. That’s how you flunk moot court. And real court. Got to wonder what law school that prosecutor went to.

Answer: Cooley.


It isn’t that he is holding the prosecutor responsible for the cop lying … he is reaming her because she is doubling down on the arrest DESPITE procedural misconduct (at minimum) on the cop’s part. She wants to continue the prosecution even after the cop admitted, in court, that the entire basis for the suspended license was untrue.


Even when the only thing at stake is one iffy DUI case.

While it might have been an “iff DUI case” for the county, these things have large impacts on the individual. Some counties and states have rather draconian results from a “minor” DUI: year probation without drinking, periodic piss tests ($$), breathalyzer in the car ($$), seeing a probation officer on a continuing basis, court fees ($$), legal fees ($$), lawyer fees ($$). I have a friend who went through this hell for a year. Once it was all said and done, he moved to the next state over. I’m not saying there should be no repercussions to a minor DUI, but the personal costs for some are rather high.


I don’t understand. Suddenly it’s wrong for police to lie?


[quote=“kaibeezytentroy, post:2, topic:134244”]
Talking over the judge.
[/quote]Fucking hell, I don’t know if that’s normal in the US but there is no fucking way that would be countenanced in Ireland. Fucksake. Judge was way more tolerant than you would expect.

I mean it wouldn’t be normal for a lawyer to be chucked in jail for contempt but they would have been reminded of the concept when they were being told to shut up by the judge.


He, the Judge, asked that the cop who lied be charged with perjury. The prosecutor refused to charge him. Then the judge is defacto censured for sticking up for the rule of law.
Naked authoritarianism has superseded our courts.


If I get this straight, the judge is the only one being disciplined here? Seriously, how did we come to this? The cop blatantly lied, the prosecutor doubled down on it and the judge who got pissed at these shenanigans is the one in trouble? WTF???


Police and prosecutors adhere to Order 227, “Not one step back.”

The phrase “thin blue line” was supposed to represent the police as a barrier between chaos and order, but those thin blue line stickers show the blue line separating darkness from darkness-- the police are under assault from all sides, it’s them against the world!


To your list of “don’ts” I’d add: ordering the judge to do things. I don’t know what Cooley Law School is, but I get the distinct impression it does a lot of advertising on basic cable.


Before people start opening the can of whoop-ass on Cooley, with the “worst law school” and Michael Cohen business, let me just say: I have worked with people at this and other for-profit institutions, and even if the owners may have arguably dubious priorities, and even if many of the students have not done their homework so-to-speak when choosing a school or whilst in school, nearly all the people who work there are lovely earnest folk doing their best in a challenging situation and deserve respect.

Now, carry on.


Thanks. We’ve all seen people doing their best to make an honest living working for arsehole bosses and serving arsehole customers, so that was important.

Just looked it up. It explains everything about this “lawyer” and also Michael Cohen. Wow.


I’ve been a jurist on 2 DUI trials - it’s a huge thing to all the people involved in the process.

As a technical detail, if this were California where I was a jurist, there would be a whole slew of very precise procedural documents backing up the chain of evidence leading up to and including the administering of the breathalyzer test. The breathalyzer is not conducted by the arresting officer/s.

If this was just a procedural error on the cops part, it should have been caught way before trial.

That’s why the judge is pissed.


In my opinion, the judge isn’t shouting.


Yeah, he seemed perfectly reasonable to me. Maybe he was a little emotional but it’s not like he flew off the handle.

1 Like

They went to law school at this place?!


I don’t think it matters at all if the defendant was drunk as a skunk. What matters is that the State (the cop) lied. It wouldn’t matter if this was a murderer being caught red-handed. The moment any court condones knowing perjury by the State to secure a conviction, is the moment we have no longer have a valid justice system. It is the moment we have totalitarianism. The case MUST be dismissed.

The judge here would have been justified to be more angry than he was.


In other court cases involving this officer in the future, I assume the defense can bring up this incident to attack his credibility. In appeals of past cases where this officer’s testimony was the crucial piece of evidence, the defense can bring this up to attack his credibility.


This man deserves to be on the Supreme Court more than any of the last 3 nominees.


If you find yourself with everyone against you, you’re either the last holdout of good in the world (not likely), or you really need to re-evaluate your viewpoints…

Rarely (but it does happen), will the lone holdout find themselves vindicated. Usually, everyone (rightly) just thinks you’re an asshole.

1 Like