Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
How to File a Police Misconduct Complaint

How to File a Police Misconduct Complaint

Ratings: (0)|Views: 220|Likes:
Published by Joshua J. Israel
Police abuse and misconduct is on the rise, and when you know what to say and where to say it, the odds shift to favor yourself, and backdown the cops.
Police abuse and misconduct is on the rise, and when you know what to say and where to say it, the odds shift to favor yourself, and backdown the cops.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Joshua J. Israel on Mar 05, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/16/2012

pdf

text

original

 
1
MINNESOTA BOARD OFPEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING
Paul Monteen, Standards Coordinator1600 University Avenue, Suite #200St. Paul, MN 55104-3825Phone (651) 643-3060
COMPLAINANT:
Most Recent Occurrence:Joshua J. Israel, P. X. Box XXX January 11, 2010Shakopee, MN XXX Shakopee Police OfficersPhone (XXX) XXX-XXX SXXXXXXX SXXXRace: Black American Citizen Numerous Incidents
ALLEGED PEACE OFFICER MISCONDUCT
The alleged misconduct consists of a series of falsified police reports, a series of retaliatoryactions against the witness of disorderly conduct, retaliation against the witness of domesticviolence, and retaliation against the witness of a hit-and-run auto accident. Moreover, theseactions of misconduct are considered to be
“classroom discrimination
,
” based on race
, where theinaction of peace officers have deprived the Complainant of public assistance, which created the
opportunity for third persons to “aggravate”
their disturbances and to
aggravate
theirdisorderly conduct, so as to create violent situations for Complainant. In addition since the peaceofficers are presumed to know the law, these officers knew that they were in collaboration withthe biased motives of the property owner who desires to retaliate against the Complainant.Therefore, this collaboration has deprived Complainant of access to the courts and the equalprotection of laws, in violation of the 14
th
Amendment, and this deprivation has also deprivedComplainant of liberty without due process, and to demonstrate, Complainant states as follows:The Statutes Violated and Conduct Prohibited, under Rule 6700.1600(A)
Minn. Stat. 626.862(1) Powers of Law Enforcement Officers
: Except as specifically provided by statute,only a peace officer and a part-time peace officer may: (1) issue a citation in lieu of arrest, or continueddetention, unless specifically authorized by ordinance.
Minn. Rule 6.01(1) Mandatory Issuance of Citation
: Law enforcement officers acting without a warrant,who have decided to proceed with prosecution, shall issue citations to persons subject to lawful arrest formisdemeanors *** Ordinarily, for misdemeanors not punishable by incarceration, a citation shall be issued.
Case Law Precedent
: Generally, law enforcement officers do issue citations to people subject to lawfularrest for misdemeanors, unless it reasonably appears that (1) arrest for detention is necessary to preventbodily harm to the accused or another or to prevent further criminal conduct; or (2) there is a substantiallikelihood that the accused will fail to respond to the citation
State v. Richmond (Minn. App. 1999) 602 N.W.2d 647 
.
Minn. Stat. 609.43(1)(4) Misconduct of Public Officer or Employee
: A public officer or employee whodoes any of the following *** may be sentenced to imprisonment or pay a fine of both: (1) intentionally failsto perform a known mandatory nondiscretionary or ministerial duty of the office or employment within thetime or manner required by law; or in the capacity of such officer, makes an official report having knowledgeit is false in any material aspect.
 
2
Minn. Stat. 609.72 Disorderly Conduct
: Whoever does any of the following in any public or private place,knowingly, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger, or disturb othersor provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor.
Minn. Stat. 626.5531(1) Reporting of crimes motivated by bias
: A peace officer must report to the head
of the officer’s department, every violation of chapter 609
, or a local criminal ordinance, if the officer hasreason to believe, or if the victim alleges, that the offender was motivated to c
ommit the act by the victim’srace *** The reports must include…
Minn. Stat. 609.745 Permitting Public Nuisance
: Whoever having control over real property, permits it tobe used to maintain a public nuisance or lets the same knowing it will be so used is guilty of a misdemeanor.
Minn. Stat. 609.498(1)(f) Tampering With Witness
: (1) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of tampering with a witness in the first degree: (f) Intentionally causes injury or threatens to cause injury to anyperson or property in retaliation against a person who has provided information to law enforcementauthorities concerning a crime within one year of that person who provided the information.
18 USCA 1512(b)(1)(A)(2)(C) Obstruction of Justice
: Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or ***corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward anotherperson, with intent to
 – 
*** prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; cause or induceany person to
 – 
withhold testimony, or withhold a record, or document, from an official proceeding; evadelegal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, or document, in anofficial proceeding.
Narrative and Summary of Events1.
 
During the late summer season, in the year 2003, the Complainant was a witness to a black semi-tractor hit & run accident. The black semi-tractor did rear-end a red corvette that wasparked in the parking-lot of the property owner causing substantial damage to the corvette.Complainant did notify the property management, and did notify the owner of the corvette,and when the corvette owner sought the identity of the semi-tractor driver, the managementof the property did withhold the identity of the semi-driver. Thereafter, the investigatingpolice officer, at that time, did take a witness-statement from this Complainant, which didcontradict the claims of the property management; and thereafter, the Complainant has notbeen involved in the matter since that time.2.
 
In retaliation to being a witness to said hit & run accident, and in retaliation for beingrequired to give a statement to the investigating police officer, the property management didretaliate against the Complainant, which caused Complainant to file a housing discriminationcomplaint (Case No. 05-04-0639-8; Barbara M Knox, Director). After being coerced toaccept a conciliation agreement (A-1),
(by Thomas Leach, Field Director),
and during theone year duration of this settlement agreement, the property owner was abandoned by theVillager Franchise system, (Case No. 05-CV-00279-JMR-FLN) & (70-2005-03211).3.
 
As consequence, the Shakopee police began to withhold public assistance from Complainantfor his property damage, for the nuisances, for the distress, and the for retaliations that wereperpetrated upon Complainant thereafter (Report 07-011466).4.
 
On 4/02/10, after the property management allowed a dog nuisance problem to escalate,Complainant did file a police report on this dog nuisance problem (A-2). After this dognuisance did escalate into a disturbance, the Complainant did relocate away from thedisturbance. However, the property management assisted the perpetrator, allowed them tofollow the Complainant, and to again relocate near the Complainant (A-3).
 
3
5.
 
After a complaint was filed with the Shakopee Police Department concerning the property
management’s actions that
escalated and perpetuated the dog nuisance problem, the policerefused to investigate or issue a citation to the property management for permitting theirproperty to be used to maintain a dog nuisance (A-4) - (
 Minn. Stat 609.745)
.6.
 
After the perpetrator of dog-disturbance began to intimidate the Complainant, the Shakopeepolice refused to issue a citation for
aggravated
disorderly conduct even when theperpetrator admitted that he was threatening to the Complainant (A-4). Moreover, the policefalsified their reporting because their report did omit the many admissions made by thisperpetrator, which did detail that this perpetrator was upset with the Complainant for callingthe police, and reporting his conduct. Even though there was the substantial likelihood thatthe perpetrator would continue to threaten the Complainant, the Shakopee police still refusedto issue a disorderly conduct citation (A-5)
 Minn. Crim. Rule. 6.01(1)(1).
 7.
 
After another complaint was filed with the Shakopee Police Department (A-5), Sgt. Ryan didcontact the perpetrator, did identify Complainant to this perpetrator, and did inform theperpetrator that no citation would issue (A5); therefore, at this time, the Shakopee Police didescalate the
aggravation
,”
made worse this situation, and created the situation whichafforded the perpetrator an opportunity to retaliate and commit an act of violence against theComplainant (A-6),
City of Birmingham v. Benson, (Ala. S. Ct. 1993) 631 So.2d 902, 906 
.8.
 
Since
the Shakopee police refused to issue a citation to the perpetrator of “aggravated”
disorderly conduct, this perpetrator escalated his retaliation against Complainant, and beganto utter the word
nigger
,”
which occurred on the very same day that Sgt, Ryan did informthis perpetrator that no citation would issued for his dog nuisance problems, that no citationwould issued for any disorderly conduct, and that no citation would issue for
“aggravated”
threats made against the Complainant (A-6)
City of Birmingham v. Benson, (Ala. S. Ct. 1993)631 So.2d 902, 906 
.
9.
 
Therefore, the Shakopee Police created the opportunity for this perpetrator to commit an actof race hate violence against the Complainant, and the police refused to comply with theMandatory Rule of Criminal Procedure to issue citations for misdemeanors when the
 perpetrator has “escalated”
disorderly conduct
 Minn. Crim. Rule 6.01(1)(1)(a), State v. Richmond, (Minn. App. 1999) 602 N.W.2d 647, 653.
10.
 
On the date of 5/23/09, the Complainant filed a police report with Shakopee police and didreport the drunk and disorderly conduct, from a White Male Adult (WMA) resident of theproperty owner, who was trying to duel and fight with the Complainant, and Complainant didinform this police officer that this threat is motivated by racial bias; however, this policeofficer did failed to document that Complainant alleged racial bias, as is required and definedby
 Minn. Stat. 626.5531
(A-7).11.
 
On 7/23/09, the Complainant filed another police report on this same WMA, for drunk anddisorderly conduct, and this WMA was again directing hostility and aggression to theComplainant (A-8). On 7/26/09, Complainant filed another police report on the drunk anddisorderly conduct from this same WMA, and his girlfriend (Report # 09-010505); however,after Shakopee police did perform an arrest, the police willfully falsified their arrest report to

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->