2012 lawsuits filed with the assistance of PoliceAbuse.com
The clients listed below came to PoliceAbuse.com reporting varied forms of police misconduct. Some reported that they were physically assaulted, falsely accused & arrested, and more… Their emotions ranged from disbelief to anger that they could be subject to such events by police officers whom swore an oath to protect and serve.
Our job was to collect evidence and support our clients’ innocence. In some cases, we testified in court against the police officers involved. In other instances, we gathered valued evidence to prove our clients’ innocence. We are proud to say we did our job. That means, doing thorough investigations, requisite evidence collection, and the application of expert opinion – built on a foundation of decades of experience and dedication. The outcomes in these cases speak for themselves.
A Record of Success
Jake Rhealt suing Fargo North Dakota Police Department-false arrest
Dr. Pete Desai suing Sumter County Sheriff's office-excessive force
Salem Zahn suing Dallas Texas Police Department-excessive force
Damieon Raspberry suing Henderson County Sheriff office-false arrest.
5 more cases being added
Found an attorney after PoliceAbuse.com stepped in to help.
Carmen Rincun-false arrest and assault
Tyra Henderson-police homicide
Not guilty 2012 verdicts or dismissals
Jessica Duty False Charge-breaking and entering
Darrell Lee False Charge-possession of controlled substances
Crystal Thomas False Charge-disturbing the peace and resisting arrest
Not Guilty 2011
Deborah Carney False Charge-assault with a deadly weapon against a retired police officer.
Robert Smith False Charge-resisting arrest
Settlements and judgments
2010 client Name Withheld Settlement Niagara Falls PD. amount undisclosed
2009 Michelle Olson Settlement amount undisclosed San Bernardino County Sheriff's office
2006 Freddie MacLeod settlement $2 million Jefferson County Sheriff's office
1992 Leonard Barrela $5 million settlement Hawthorne Police Department
1990 Hildebrandt Flowers $3 million settlement divided among several victims Los Angeles Police Department Southwest division
I am a police practices expert and an independent film producer. I have been retained as a consultant to investigate a police homicide involving members of the Bexar County Sheriff office in Texas. On August 6, 2011, Michael Henderson was killed by police gunfire after allegedly failing to surrender to a Bexar County SWAT team. On its face, the case is a simple justified police homicide. However, my investigation leads me to believe that this is not a justified use of police force.
The police report released to Mr. Henderson's wife is deficient in information that would support the use of deadly force. The shooting is summarized in less than one paragraph. In the limited information provided by the police, the evidence justifying the shooting is contradictory and dubious. The police and the county attorney are resisting the release of the full homicide report claiming that there is a criminal investigation that would be harmed. Strangely, they have not told Mrs. Henderson who they are investigating. Perhaps they are investigating an officer or a SWAT team member. We have appealed the withholding of the records by the Sheriff to the Texas Attorney General’s office. Today, we received a ruling from the Texas, AG. The police have been ordered to release an important portion of the information they have been withholding. That additional information will be added to my report after the police comply with the Texas AG order.
Evidence reviewed:
In the course of my investigation, I reviewed the police reports publicly available, crime scene photographs, witness statements and approximately 10 hours of video and audio recordings with Mr. Henderson's wife Tyra Henderson. I have also reviewed cell phone footage of the police action filmed by neighbors. As a use of force expert, the information I have reviewed leads me to conclude to a reasonable degree of professional certainty that this homicide was a misuse of police force.
The police report states that Mr. Henderson was hiding under a bed. Allegedly, he pointed a weapon at an officer. The Bexar county police report offers no evidence to support this claim. Modern beds are close to the floor. Mr. Henderson was a large man 5’4 250 lbs. It is unlikely that he could squeeze under a bed without great difficulty. If he did, it would undoubtedly interfere with his movement. The police report claims that the Swat team attempted to extract Mr. Henderson from under the bed, at the same time that Henderson was pointing a weapon at the officers. The police also claimed that they deployed a taser, but they do not say if the taser was fired. If the taser was fired, did it work? We don’t know. If it were used the taser would have rendered Henderson helpless. There was no evidence in the residence supporting the deployment of a taser. If it had been deployed there would be taser cartridges at the crime scene. If the police retrieved the cartridges they do not say so in their reports and my review of the homicide victims body did not show evidence of taser puncture wounds.
It is not consistent with police training for the police to extract Mr. Henderson while shooting him with a taser. The officers would have to stand clear if the taser were deployed. The deputies would not be pulling Mr. Henderson because they would be subject to the taser electrical charge (50,000 volts) if they were in physical contact. Moreover, the officers would not use a taser against an armed suspect. And the police contradict themselves when they imply in the report that Henderson knew they were police by their uniform. If Mr. Henderson were under the bed on his back, it is unlikely he could see what the officers were wearing because he would be looking up at a box spring mattress. His view would be of the officer’s feet. Was he on this back? The police report does not say what position he was in when Henderson allegedly pointed the weapon at officers.
In addition to these questions there are substantial questions about why the police officers came into the residence. Mr. Henderson was stationary in his bedroom and alone in the house before the police entered. He was not firing his weapon at officers and he was asking to be left alone. The police report does not explain why they entered the residence or what failed in the prior telephone negotiations with Mr. Henderson before the shooting. His family was not allowed to speak with him. How long did the police negotiate and what did they say?
Mrs. Henderson has supplied my office with evidence that her husband was a whistle-blower in a countywide corruption scandal prior to the shooting and that this may have caused him to go into depression. We need more information before we can say that this secondary issue played a role in the shooting. However, there are many questions unanswered by the evidence which is currently publicly available. Based on the information I have reviewed I believe that this is a case of excessive force.
It is my understanding that your office has relied on the conclusions of the Bexar County Sheriff office and County prosecutor's office for a determination regarding insurance liability in this homicide. If Mrs. Henderson's insurance claim has been denied based on information from the Bexar County Sheriff's office the decision deserves reconsideration. Bexar County Sheriff office is one of the most troubled police departments in the country. Policeabuse.com monitors police conduct nationally. We have received many complaints about Bexar county sheriffs. The complaints include wrongful shootings, vulgar and offensive conduct and a general disdain for public safety by Bexar county deputies. In one instance a woman reported that the deputy spat in her face. In another case, a father reported that his son was shot by an off-duty Bexar county deputy in an off-duty love triangle.
The parents of the shooting victim said Bexar County showed no interest in conducting a thorough and impartial investigation of the shooting. But i do not have to rely on anecdotes from misconduct victims I have dealt directly with Bexar County IA. In 2010, I was told that a woman abused by an officer could not have her case investigated because the officer had resigned. After my client complained about the officer, she was ignored by Bexar County. The officer went on a county wide crime spree. He was later arrested for robbery and other felonies. Bexar County is not an agency that can be trusted to look for the facts when they have a direct interest in the outcome of the investigation.
I intend to testify in a federal lawsuit on behalf of Mrs. Henderson against the Bexar County Sheriff office. My testimony will be consistent with the information supplied to your office in this report. I formally request that you add this report summary to your case file concerning Mrs. Henderson's insurance claim. It is my professional opinion that Mrs. Henderson's insurance claim should not be denied based on the investigative conclusions by the Bexar County Sheriff office that this was a justified homicide. The Bexar Sheriffs have demonstrated that the agency has a history of dismissing serious complaints and a demonstrably poor record of employee supervision and discipline. Bexar County’s investigation of their deputies is not an independent or credible source for reviewing this homicide. I submit this report with confidence that responsible parties will consider the facts supporting my conclusions. Feel free to contact me regarding the evidence and conclusions in this report.
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Ms. Deborah Lightfoot
Division of Consumer Services 2005 Apalachee Pkwy. Tallahassee, FL 32399
Dear Ms. Lightfoot:
I am responding to a complaint filed with your office
by a former client Sonya Gingras. Ms. Gingras reported that she was the victim
of fraud. To substantiate her complaint, she has supplied Internet complaints
from other former clients purporting to show corroboration for her
complaint. Ms. Gingras' complaint is the 2nd complaint received by your office
where someone has pointed to Internet complaints against my company,
PoliceAbuse.com, to defend a false
allegation . Accordingly, I feel that it is best
that I address not only the complaint made by Ms. Gingras but also the
complaints she alludes to in support of her allegations.
About our company PoliceAbuse.com has been in business for
approximately 25 years. We assist approximately 1000 victims of alleged police
misconduct a month. We receive referrals from the Justice Department and
several domestic violence shelters across the country. In our 25 years history, we have had 10 Better Business Bureau
complaints and three arbitration hearings. We have prevailed in virtually every Better Business
Bureau case that has gone to a hearing. At least half of the complaints made
against our company were by clients who had received pro bono services. When
services were discontinued the clients made complaints. Because we have limited
staff some cases must be terminated. Other complaints were made because we
determined the evidence in the case proved the police misconduct
complaint to be false. I believe that the complaint of Sonya Gingras falls in
that category. An objective evaluation of the evidence in the case shows that
the complaint is undoubtedly false.
Gingras Case Background
Ms. Gingras contacted PoliceAbuse.com November 4,
2012. She reported a complaint that her son, Matthew Gingras, had been
assaulted by the Santa Rosa County Sheriff's office after his arrest. Ms.
Gingras alleged that deputies from the Sheriff's office savagely attacked and
beat her son. She supplied our office with police reports recordings and other
evidence. She asked for an expert witness opinion and report. She was told that
before a report can be written, her case would have to be reviewed to test the
integrity of her evidence and evaluate the credibility of her witnesses and her
son. Ms. Gingras was told that I would personally interview her son to question
him about the facts in her complaint made on his behalf and to verify that he
was in fact a victim of assault.
After making a payment for the preliminary
investigation, Ms. Gingras refused to allow her son to be interviewed. Ms.
Gingras abruptly abandoned the investigation just before interviews were to be
scheduled with her son. She asked for a refund. Though it is not our policy to
refund payments for consulting services, we gave her a full refund.
Three months later, Ms. Gingras contacted our
office a second time stating that she wished to now pursue a civil lawsuit. She
told us that she was having difficulty finding a lawyer to take the case. She
asked if our paralegals could assist her with drafting documents and doing
legal research. She was quoted a fee for a preliminary investigation and a
paralegal review.
After paying the fee, I contacted Ms. Gingras. I told
her that I would need to speak with her son. Mrs. Gingras scheduled four appointments
with me and her son. Each time her son failed to call into the conference line
number we supplied. On the 4th try, I called him directly. He did not answer
his cell phone - with my nearly a half a dozen call attempts. When I told Ms. Gingras that his failure to speak
with investigators was unacceptable, she scheduled a final meeting. But, again
at that meeting her son did not show up. Instead, Ms. Gingras showed up in his
place and provided the facts included in the video below. It was evident that
Ms. Gingras' son was evading an interview with our investigators.
After a thorough review of documents we retrieved from the Sheriff's office, it explained why Ms. Gingras' son did not want to be interviewed. Though Ms. Gingras is adamant about
her son's innocence, police records totally
contradict her son's story. Police reports we reviewed for an investigation,
show that the police conducted a substantial investigation into Ms. Gingras
allegations after we filed a complaint on her behalf more than 6 months ago.
The Sheriffs’ Department told Ms. Gingras that they had video of the alleged
assault. The video proves that the assault did not take place! Evidence we have
reviewed corroborates the Sheriff's position that Ms. Gingras' son was not the
victim of an assault.
Rather than accepting that her sons complaint is
false, Ms. Gingras continues to advocate for her son. She goes on relentlessly
claiming that he was a victim of abuse in spite of evidence to the contrary. Now,
after mounting a failed Internet campaign against the Sheriff office, Ms.
Gingras has turned her attention to PoliceAbuse.com. Her claim that she was the
victim of fraud is baseless, false, and made in bad faith.
Ms. Gingras has now mounted her own Internet campaign posting negative reviews on our Better Business Bureau page and filing complaints with the Tallahassee Police Department, the Florida State Atty. Gen., and multiple other offices of government officials.
In closing, I wholeheartedly believe that her complaint against Policeabuse.com is false and is based on her dissatisfaction with our examination of her son's case. This neither warrants a refund for services rendered nor does it warrant an apology for aligning with the facts & the truth of the case.
Other Internet Complaints
As referenced earlier, there are nominal Internet complaints about
PoliceAbuse.com on the Internet that I want to address primarily since Ms, Gingras
cites them in an effort to substantiate her complaint. I will take them in order of their submission:
Internet complaints
· In
2005 PoliceAbuse.com was contacted by Mary Lou Hoerster of Fredericksburg
Texas. Ms. Hoerster reported that her husband was attempting to kill her and
that the local police chief was assisting him. Her story proved to be a fraud.
We made more than half a dozen trips to her home and Fredericksburg looking for
suspects. She has lambasted us on the Internet claiming that she was the victim
of fraud. She is also litigious. She has filed lawsuits not only against
PoliceAbuse.com but against her prior private investigator and her former
lawyer. The police chief sums up Hoerster's motivation for her complaints in the call recorded below.
Ms. Hoerster's lawsuit against our company was dismissed in 2012 by a federal judge.
· The
second complaint is from Dennis Obado. Mr. Obado was arrested for selling
cocaine by the New Brunswick New Jersey Police Department. He contacted
PoliceAbuse.com claiming that he was being stalked and followed by the police
after his arrest. We found nothing to support any of his claims. After
requesting an expensive undercover video unit to record his comings and goings,
Mr. Obado refused to return the equipment and then claimed that he was the
victim of fraud. We went to arbitration with Mr. Obado and agreed to refund his
money after he returned our camera equipment. At a court ordered mediation the
equipment was returned and we refunded Mr. Obado $1500. But, less than a year
later, Mr. Obado contacted me again asking that I pay him a 2nd $1500 - though
it was not part of our agreement nor was it ordered by the court. He threatened
to make Internet complaints if I did not pay him a 2nd time. We did not pay
him. His Internet postings can be found on ripoff report and 3 other online
consumer websites. My conversation with Mr. Obado's father will give a much
different impression of his complaint. We suspected that Obado was suffering
from a mental health issue. When we reported our concerns to Obado's parents
they refused to confirm or deny our suspicions.
· With
regard to complaints submitted in the last 12 months to the Better Business
Bureau each case has been decided in favor of PoliceAbuse.com. Though
service refunds from the clients totalled nearly $12,000, after a review by the
Better Business Bureau (BBB), PoliceAbuse.com was asked by an arbitrator to pay
1 client $100 to close the case. The
remaining balance, $11,900, initially in question, was not deemed to be
refunded.
· Lastly,
Tammy Wells, the client below requested a refund of nearly $8000. However, she
failed to show for the arbitration hearing that she had requested after we
supplied recordings of what actually transpired to the arbitrator. This
client also went into business with one of our terminated staff.
We subsequently discovered that this former
client and former staff person created
a webpage competing directly with my business. The motives and intent here are obvious.
Pinellas County Sheriffs investigation Special report, Pinellas County 911 Slip and Fall.
It was May 27, 2010, at 5:45 PM when the Pinellas County
Sheriff's office received a report of domestic violence. A patrol car was
dispatched to 10136 63rd Ave North, Pinellas County Florida. Maureen
Dobson a 65 year-old renter, reported that she had been assaulted by her
landlord, James McArthur. The responding deputy, Scott Reid, arrived and started
an investigation. Reid interviewed Dobson and determined that there were no
physical injuries. Dobson reported that she had been struck in the chest four hours earlier by McArthur
during an eviction notification. Dobson was never asked why it took her four hours to file for a report with the police. Nor was her motive for making the allegation questioned. Dobson was 11 months behind on her rent. According to Dobson, McArthur had paid her bills and purchased food for her after Dobson's husband left her. Dobson told the police that McArthur came to
her rental May 27, 2010 at 1 pm. He became angry and attacked her by striking her in the chest with his fist. Dobson reported that she had two
witnesses, her foster son, and a neighbor across the street. According to the
police report, neither witness saw the incident. Both witnesses could only
state that they heard yelling and screaming. Nevertheless, deputy Reid implies in his report that both witnesses affirmed McArthur's guilt. An independent witness who observed the eviction was not interviewed nor included in the deputy's report. According to the witness the deputy refused to talk to him though he told the officer he had critical evidence and that he had witnessed everything. The deputy was told before making an arrest that no assault had occurred by the only independent witness at the scene. Initially, Deputy Reid determined that he did
not have enough information to make an arrest, but according to his police
report, just before getting into his patrol car, he changed his mind.
Deputy Reid said he took another look at the
victim Dobson before leaving. It was then that he noticed scratches and
swelling on Dobson's chest. Reid says that he decided to make an arrest. This is how Dobson explained the lack of injuries in her deposition and courtroom testimony:
Dobson testimony
Question: when the Deputy talked to you when
he first got there, you told him that you didn't have any visible injuries. Had
you looked at your chest?
Answer: no. I had-I have high blood pressure
real bad. That made me go red red. So there wasn't any marks that he could see
at the time. Then he took me-Mr. Reid I think his name was, he took me to the
site here, and we were talking. Then all of a sudden he see the bruising,
because the redness had gone down I mean I was angry.
According to Dobson deposition and courtroom
testimony she was either unaware of the injuries or the injuries were so faint
that they were not noticeable for several hours. Dobson claims she was
assaulted around 1 PM yet she made her call to the police at approximately 5:40
PM almost 4 hours and forty minutes later. Even at that point in the day the deputy did not
see an injury upon his initial examination. But according to Deputy Reid the
invisible scratches and marks suddenly appeared visible.
On cross-examination Dobson said the
following about her lack of injury:
Attorney: Describe how he pushed you. You
said he just popped you in the chest?
Dobson: he just thumped me like that in the
chest.
Attorney:
like a quick pop in the chest?
Answer uh-huh
Attorney with his knuckles?
Answer: I really don't know. It happened so
quick. He just stood up and went like that. And went like this and he went like
that.
Dobson's late reporting, lack of injury and
motive for making such a complaint would have raised concerns for most police
officers.
Exhibit 1 evidence photos of Maureen Dobson the alleged assault victim
No significant injury
According to McArthur he was at
a business meeting when he received a telephone call from Deputy Reid. Deputy Reid
conducted an interview with McArthur by phone. He told McArthur that he had a warrant for his arrest though no warrant had been issued. Reid demanded that McArthur
return to the crime scene. According to the police report McArthur was
uncooperative and delayed the deputy. Deputy Reid speculated that McArthur had
gone to a bar and that he was willfully failing to return to the location. Records we reviewed for this report show that McArthur was at a previously scheduled business meeting. He was not at a bar and it does not appear that he made any effort to avoid responding to law enforcement. The deputy's speculation about McArthur being at a bar is consistent with other hyperbole injected into his police report.It is evident from the deputy's report that he was not happy because McArthur declined to leave his meeting immediately. At approximately 11 PM Deputy Reid arrived at McArthur's home. Reid entered McArthur's home without permission through an unlocked screen door. At 11:30 PM, James McArthur was arrested and charged with assault on an elderly
person over 65 years of age.
PoliceAbuse.com has completed a six-month investigation into the arrest of James McArthur. We found evidence of perjury and a deliberately falsified police report by a deputy with substantial credibility problems. We have posted a portion of the evidence we have reviewed below. Expert Summary: Maureen Dobson, had little to no injury. She reported her criminal complaint five hours after the incident allegedly happened. She was nearly a year behind on her rent. A complaint of assault could stall the process indefinitely. The officer failed basic investigative steps and he ignored witness credibility issues. Dobson's key witness Sherman Williams has been charged with felony assault and armed robbery. Problems with the Deputy Dobson's witness is not the only one with credibility problems, responding deputy Scott Reid has been accused of sexual misconduct and a range of other serious offenses. It appears Reid escaped prosecution because the key witness in the coerced sex case would not cooperate.
What's Wrong with This Case? Key Points: Substandard police report (the officer repeatedly mischaracterized witness statements. The officer also drew erroneous conclusions based on little evidence or pure speculation). Substandard investigation (the investigating officer ignored evidence and witness statements available at the time of his investigation). Witness credibility (the investigating officer relied on the statements of a witness previously convicted of robbery and felony assault. Witnesses favorable to the defendant were ignored and intentionally omitted from the police report). Officer credibility (the arresting officer had his own serious credibility problems. The officer has had multiple complaints of misconduct against him including sexual coercion of a female suspect). Inflated Credentials (Deputy Reid told the court he was an expert on domestic violence. None of domestic violence shelters we spoke with in Pinellas County had ever heard of Deputy Reid. He has no special training in the records we reviewed sufficient to call himself an expert).
False Courtroom testimony by Deputy Reid
* Deputy Reid under oath stated
that the witness Mujeeb P, had told him he was parked down the street, saw
nothing, was looking the other direction. On a second trip to the stand under
oath, Reid stated Mujeeb specifically told him he had his windows up and the
A/c on, and as a result could hear nothing… Reid refused McArthur’s request to
enter Mujeebs name or contact information as witness statements on the Police
Report.
* Mujeeb stated he had his
windows down and could hear and had unobstructed view of both parties very clearly
at all times during the alleged incident. Mujeeb stated his view was unobstructed
and he was advised to pay attention in case something bad happened to McArthur or
his vehicle during the visit with the tenants being evicted.
* While under oath, Deputy Reid
stated the witness for McArthur, Mujeeb P told him he was parked down the
street facing a different direction, and his vehicles windows up and the air
conditioning on, so he could hear or see nothing as it related to the incident in
Case number CRC10-11678CFANO on _1/19,
2012.
Exhibit 2 audio recording of witness Mujeeb. His statement was omitted from the police report so he was there for the entire event. Exhibit 3 documents demonstrating that the officer committed perjury during his trial testimony.
PoliceAbuse.com was contacted on Sunday, January 29, 2012 by client Andrea Gray. Ms. Gray reported that her son Trent Brewer was assaulted by four Atlantic City New Jersey police officers. Through interviews with Mrs. Gray and her husband the following factual summary has been obtained:
Mr. Gray left his home at approximately 7 PM to visit a local convenience store. He was accompanied by his 15-year-old son Trent and two of his friends. When they arrived at the store the boys waited outside for Mr. Gray to return. As Mr. Gray exited the store he witnessed four men in a van. Without warning one of the men approached his son and began yelling, "Are you a tough guy?" Mr. Gray was alarmed and demanded to know why the man was confronting his son. Moments later two men grabbed him and slammed him to the ground. He was taken away from the other young men. According to Trent and witnesses the four men who turned out to be police officers started striking Trent in the face, head, and stomach. He was slammed to the ground and handcuffed. The officers continued beating him while he lay prone on the ground in handcuffs. According to witnesses a blow to the eye resulted in serious injury. A witness can be heard on tape yelling, "He knocked his eye out of the socket." Trent was arrested for resisting arrest and assault on a police officer, according to police officials.
Andrea Gray tried repeatedly to obtain a police report from the Atlantic City Police Department. The police department told her that criminal suspects cannot have a copy of the police report leading to their arrest because they are criminal defendants. Policeabuse.com sent an undercover investigator to the Atlantic City Police Department to witness Ms. Gray attempting to obtain a copy of her son's police report. Our investigator confirmed that the police were uncooperative and refused to provide her with a complaint form. As of this date, Mrs. Gray does not know the names of the officers who attacked her son.
Staff Assigned:
Two Licensed Private Investigators
PCC Office Staff
Paralegals
Opinions
It is my opinion to a reasonable degree of professional certainty that the officers employed by the Atlantic City Police Department identified in this report have violated policies, and broken several laws during their interaction with Trent Brewer. The amount of force used in this incident was clearly excessive and cannot be classified as reasonable with respect to accepted standards and practices for police officers. Based on witness statements the police failed in a number of responsibilities regarding citizen contacts. The officers were said to be working as an undercover unit. Nevertheless upon contacting citizens to make an arrest or conduct an investigation the officers were required to identify themselves as police officers. According to several witnesses, no such advisory was made. If as witnesses have stated Trent and his friends were standing outside the store waiting for his father, there was no crime in such conduct. There is no report of a loitering complaint or a trespassing complaint by anyone working at the business. The absence of a radio call or a criminal complaint raises immediate questions about the propriety and legality of this police contact. Based on the information I have reviewed the police had no reason to approach, detain, or arrest Trent Gray. With respect to the use of force the requisite rules are defined by the international Association of Chiefs of police model policy.
Policeabuse.com investigates a case 42 years old. Warren Williamson called our investigators looking for closure after King County IA investigators told him it was their job to protect the cops. Williamson has asked that we conduct a review and investigation of his internal affairs complaint against King County cop Gary C. Krueger badge #3172. After IA gave him a pass Krueger went on to murder four people. He died in one of his final treacherous acts, a home invasion robbery of a Seattle doctor's home.
Date of incident 02/12/2012 Nature of Complaint Illegal Entry into a home Unprofessional Conduct False Arrest
Location Home of the Smith Family East Spencer, North Carolina
Details: On Feb. 12th, 2012, officers with the Rowan County Sheriff Office arrived at the home of Robert Smith, alleging to have an arrest warrant for Robert's son, Anthony - hadn't lived at the residence in over a year. This was the 2nd time in less than 9 months that officers came to Robert's home looking for Anthony. Just like he did in the first incident, last July, Robert advised the officers that his son does not live at the residence and hasn't for quite some time. The officers ignored Robert, as well as his repeated requests to produce a warrant and demanded that he open the door. So that the incident could be documented, Robert picked up his phone and dialed 911. He informed the dispatcher, who wasn't much help at all, about what was going on and that would not open his door without a warrant. No sooner than he could get the words out of his, the officers kicked Robert's door down and stormed into the house. After looking through the house and realizing that Robert was being truthful about his son not being there, the officers made the decision that they weren't going home empty handed and that someone would be going to jail that night. For asking to see a warrant Robert was arrested and charged with resisting/obstructing an officer and misuse of 911.
The day after, Robert complained to the Sheriff's Office about the incident and in less than 24 hours Capt. Wyrick determined that his officer acted appropriately.
In Wyrick's letter to the Smith Family (left), he states that his officers did not violate any policies, because where there serving "criminal arrest warrants against Robert Smith". However, the Rowan County Sheriff's Office's own records show that Capt. Wyrick's claims were false. Not only was there never a "criminal warrant" for Robert, but there wasn't one for his son either. Robert's son, Anthony, did have a warrant, however it was related to a civil matter. Nothing that would allow police to enter in this manner. Despite the Rowan County Sheriff's Office's failure to handle this situation properly, they still chose to peruse the charges against Robert Smith.
_______________________________________________________________ Follow this case
Interview w/ Robert Smith
Robert Smith 911 call
The Rowan County Sheriff's Office have a laugh at Robert's expense (Radio transmissions)
Last week Jules Friday accepted a plea deal for a misdemeanor offense. Thus far there has been no investigation by the Coral Springs Police Department into his allegations of excessive force. We are preparing a follow-up report on this case for release within the next 30 days. Please return to this post for further information.
