Exactly right. Even I agree the cop was unprofessional.
But perjury??
What did he lie about?
The case details are this. The cop said he removed her from the car for safety reasons to continue his investigation. SCOTUS case Maryland vs Wilson says he can lawfully do this.
The grand jury simply said they didn't believe him. That they THINK he had so some other motive or some other mental intent....and they just don't believe him. Basically they thought "nah...that's too convenient...he just had to have been having racist thoughts when he did that lawful act"
SO....the job of the prosecutor is PROVE this cop was thinking something bad when he removed her. Prove what he was THINKING when he took a LAWFUL ACTION. To which the defense will say "We plead the 5th. Go ahead....proven what my clients brain was thinking."
Have you read Encino's affidavit, which is the instrument the DA used to bring about the indictment? Or are you making assumptions?
This case obviously has absolutely no shot at being won by the prosecution.
The "libs" haven't charged Encino. The DA has done that by presenting facts which were determined by investigation. You may rest assured if there were any way those facts could be arranged and interpreted in Encino's favor they surely would have been.
The simple fact is Encino has over the years acquired some false notions about appropriate behavior toward car-stop subjects and the basic rights of citizens who are being cited. He manipulated a situation which resulted in an unnecessary arrest and I'm sure he lied in his report. I believe he was given the chance to re-submit his report under oath (affidavit) and as the result of acquired habit he paraphrased or directly repeated the lie(s).
And if you libs wanna start charging cops in this fashion.....whew boy....look out....because crime is about to get ******* insane.
I understand there is an active
job action occurring nationwide in response to public dissatisfaction with the rise in police misconduct and excessive aggression. While this
job action has resulted in decreased arrest and summons activity the overall effect has thus far produced a relatively moderate negative effect.
If the effect of this (informally) union-backed slowdown begins to produce serious consequences the public will not put up with it. Pressure will be applied to high-level politicians who will seek (and acquire) legal suspension of union protections. Internal Affairs activities will intensify. Punitive actions ranging from demotion of incompetent and ineffective superiors, rank-and-file transfers, reassignments, fines and unpaid suspensions to
terminations and criminal charges will commence.
I think you know that once the shit hits the fan, the goodie bag is closed and a few major troublemakers are fired, the vast majority of good cops, who quietly understand the root problem is the result of misconduct by a few stupid, sadistic recalcitrants, will ignore the ill-advised
job-action and begin playing by the rules.
This notion you have of spoiled, foot-stomping police looking the public in the eye and refusing to do the job they are paid to do is both naive and a bit childish.
