LA deputies accused of planting guns to justify arrest

[Jazzy]

Two former Los Angeles sheriff's deputies allegedly planted guns in a medical marijuana dispensary in order to justify an arrest, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office.

Julio Cesar Martinez, 39, and Anthony Manuel Paez, 32, were arrested on felony conspiracy to obstruct justice and perjury charges on April 18 and later freed on $50,000 bail.

According to a statement from the prosecutor's office, Martinez and Paez wrote a report saying that on Aug. 24, 2011 they "witnessed a narcotics transaction and observed one suspect with a firearm" then followed the suspect into the dispensary and discovered two guns - one near a trash bin and one "on top of a desk next to ecstasy pills."

The officers arrested two men, Antonio Rhodes for possession of an unregistered firearm, and Johnny Yang for possession of a controlled substance while armed with a firearm.

But according to the prosecutor, video from inside the dispensary contradicts the deputies' report.

Prosecutors contend that the deputies planted the weapons and that Martinez shut off electricity to the room, and Paez crawled under the desk to disable the dispensary's video surveillance system.

Both deputies were dismissed from the sheriff's department last year and face more than seven years in prison if convicted.

Source

Wonder how they're going to try and get out of this one.

 

[DrLeftover]

Wonder how they're going to try and get out of this one.

They could turn state's evidence against other dirty cops.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Everywhere you look there are dirty and violent cops. Its getting to the point the last people I want to call for help are cops.

 

[DrLeftover]

Everywhere you look there are dirty and violent cops. Its getting to the point the last people I want to call for help are cops.

You're right.

You could call this kid instead:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-boy-arrested-beating-woman-retirement-home-20140425,0,4879268.story#ixzz2zvA2fpse

 

[Jazzy]

In my job, as a Paramedic, I work almost daily with either State Troopers or Sheriff's Deputies. They are usually the first that respond to 911 calls coming in. Or they are out on patrol and happen upon an accident. In my years of working with them, I would trust each and every one of them to help me if I needed help. The shame is, you never read about the good things that Law Enforcement Officers do. Why? Because that doesn't make the headlines. What makes the headlines are the corrupt or violent ones and unfortunately, that makes the public think they all are this way.

 

[DrLeftover]

In my job, as a Paramedic, I work almost daily with either State Troopers or Sheriff's Deputies. They are usually the first that respond to 911 calls coming in. Or they are out on patrol and happen upon an accident. In my years of working with them, I would trust each and every one of them to help me if I needed help. The shame is, you never read about the good things that Law Enforcement Officers do. Why? Because that doesn't make the headlines. What makes the headlines are the corrupt or violent ones and unfortunately, that makes the public think they all are this way.

Amen.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Everywhere you look there are dirty and violent cops. Its getting to the point the last people I want to call for help are cops.

You're right.

You could call this kid instead:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-boy-arrested-beating-woman-retirement-home-20140425,0,4879268.story#ixzz2zvA2fpse

No thanks! I know there are lots of good cops out there that want to do good. But it just seems like a roll of the dice on what you are going to get more and more. I dont know if the training and weeding out the bad apples is not done well. Or the training is more militarized instead of being a peace keeper for the people. But it just seems like a drastic change in the attitudes of so many cops today.

Glad they got that scum off the streets. But why did they poor bleach on the victims?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

In my job, as a Paramedic, I work almost daily with either State Troopers or Sheriff's Deputies. They are usually the first that respond to 911 calls coming in. Or they are out on patrol and happen upon an accident. In my years of working with them, I would trust each and every one of them to help me if I needed help. The shame is, you never read about the good things that Law Enforcement Officers do. Why? Because that doesn't make the headlines. What makes the headlines are the corrupt or violent ones and unfortunately, that makes the public think they all are this way.

I dont think they are all bad. But you when have a average of 500 innocent people being killed a year from cops you find the public not wanting to trust any of them. And when you have more and more towns getting militarized tanks and gear you find the level of trust going down even more when they need to justify keeping that gear and start storming homes with the equipment for the smallest infractions like unpaid tickets. They themselves are giving themselves a bad rep.

 

[Jazzy]

I dont think they are all bad. But you when have a average of 500 innocent people being killed a year from cops you find the public not wanting to trust any of them.

On an average, how many innocent lives have they saved?

And when you have more and more towns getting militarized tanks and gear you find the level of trust going down even more when they need to justify keeping that gear and start storming homes with the equipment for the smallest infractions like unpaid tickets.

Can you name some towns where this is happening?

 

[Evil Eye]

I dont think they are all bad. But you when have a average of 500 innocent people being killed a year from cops you find the public not wanting to trust any of them.

On an average, how many innocent lives have they saved?

That doesn't matter, he's right, public perception is everything. Like you said, you only hear about the bad ones. So you hear about those 500 people being killed each year, but you don't hear about the (presumably hard to quantify amount of) lives they save.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I dont think they are all bad. But you when have a average of 500 innocent people being killed a year from cops you find the public not wanting to trust any of them.

On an average, how many innocent lives have they saved?

And when you have more and more towns getting militarized tanks and gear you find the level of trust going down even more when they need to justify keeping that gear and start storming homes with the equipment for the smallest infractions like unpaid tickets.

Can you name some towns where this is happening?

Pick a state. Any state.

http://news.yahoo.com/column-militarization-u-police-forces-175828669.html

http://wonkette.com/476644/small-town-police-departments-really-need-those-tanks-okay

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/12367-military-vehicles-in-american-neighborhoods

http://www.wired.com/2012/06/cops-military-gear/

http://www.businessinsider.com/program-1033-military-equipment-police-2011-12

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/our-local-police-departments-are-usin

 

[DrLeftover]

The 'military vehicle' deployment is nationwide.

For instance:

http://www.marionstar.com/article/20140425/NEWS01/304250017/Law-enforcement-add-armored-vehicles-fleets



http://sbnewspaper.com/2014/04/26/special-to-the-news-the-city-of-san-benito-received-a-733000-multi-use-armored-vehicle-free-of-charge-this-week-a-reconditioned-mine-resistant-ambush-protection-vehicle-mrap-was-awarded-to-the/

 

[Jazzy]

Sorry for the confusion. I was asking what towns this was happening in:

storming homes with the equipment for the smallest infractions like unpaid tickets.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Sorry for the confusion. I was asking what towns this was happening in:

storming homes with the equipment for the smallest infractions like unpaid tickets.

This shows examples.

A key distinction between the U.S. and other nations, even relatively free nations, long has been American restrictions on domestic use of the military, for police actions, law enforcement and keeping things under control.

However, when the local police officer or sheriff’s deputy is equipped with night vision goggles, laser-scope rifles, electronic eavesdropping equipment and body armor and comes up a citizen’s driveway in a military-type personnel carrier with shielded windows and oversize wheels, the prohibitions seem to lose some of their teeth.

It’s an issue on which WND has reported for more than a decade, and others now are taking note.

Since 1878, with the passage of the Posse Comitatus Act, it has long been an established legal principle that the federal government is not allowed to use the military to enforce federal or state laws.

See the BIG LIST of SWAT-team attacks on innocent Americans.

In recent years, the law has been modified to allow the president to deploy federal troops to enforce the law. Two of the most notable cases are President Dwight Eisenhower’s decision to send federal troops into Little Rock, Ark., to enforce desegregation and the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

However, while American armed forces may be limited in their ability to enforce the law, the act is essentially being circumvented by militarizing local enforcement, equipping it with some of the same equipment, training and tactics used in war zones.

Radley Balko raised the issue recently a Wall Street Journal article, “Rise of the Warrior Cop.” He says the trend is to erase the line between military and law enforcement.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/frightening-new-reason-to-fear-police/#PDurB1Ets3XAxDKO.99

 

[Jazzy]

Sorry for the confusion. I was asking what towns this was happening in:

storming homes with the equipment for the smallest infractions like unpaid tickets.

This shows examples.

A key distinction between the U.S. and other nations, even relatively free nations, long has been American restrictions on domestic use of the military, for police actions, law enforcement and keeping things under control.

However, when the local police officer or sheriff’s deputy is equipped with night vision goggles, laser-scope rifles, electronic eavesdropping equipment and body armor and comes up a citizen’s driveway in a military-type personnel carrier with shielded windows and oversize wheels, the prohibitions seem to lose some of their teeth.

It’s an issue on which WND has reported for more than a decade, and others now are taking note.

Since 1878, with the passage of the Posse Comitatus Act, it has long been an established legal principle that the federal government is not allowed to use the military to enforce federal or state laws.

See the BIG LIST of SWAT-team attacks on innocent Americans.

In recent years, the law has been modified to allow the president to deploy federal troops to enforce the law. Two of the most notable cases are President Dwight Eisenhower’s decision to send federal troops into Little Rock, Ark., to enforce desegregation and the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

However, while American armed forces may be limited in their ability to enforce the law, the act is essentially being circumvented by militarizing local enforcement, equipping it with some of the same equipment, training and tactics used in war zones.

Radley Balko raised the issue recently a Wall Street Journal article, “Rise of the Warrior Cop.” He says the trend is to erase the line between military and law enforcement.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/frightening-new-reason-to-fear-police/#PDurB1Ets3XAxDKO.99

Sorry, but your quoted source isn't very trustworthy:

WND Founder Joseph Farah Is Right: WND Publishes Misinformation

WND Makes Up Stuff

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Sorry for the confusion. I was asking what towns this was happening in:

storming homes with the equipment for the smallest infractions like unpaid tickets.

This shows examples.

A key distinction between the U.S. and other nations, even relatively free nations, long has been American restrictions on domestic use of the military, for police actions, law enforcement and keeping things under control.

However, when the local police officer or sheriff’s deputy is equipped with night vision goggles, laser-scope rifles, electronic eavesdropping equipment and body armor and comes up a citizen’s driveway in a military-type personnel carrier with shielded windows and oversize wheels, the prohibitions seem to lose some of their teeth.

It’s an issue on which WND has reported for more than a decade, and others now are taking note.

Since 1878, with the passage of the Posse Comitatus Act, it has long been an established legal principle that the federal government is not allowed to use the military to enforce federal or state laws.

See the BIG LIST of SWAT-team attacks on innocent Americans.

In recent years, the law has been modified to allow the president to deploy federal troops to enforce the law. Two of the most notable cases are President Dwight Eisenhower’s decision to send federal troops into Little Rock, Ark., to enforce desegregation and the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

However, while American armed forces may be limited in their ability to enforce the law, the act is essentially being circumvented by militarizing local enforcement, equipping it with some of the same equipment, training and tactics used in war zones.

Radley Balko raised the issue recently a Wall Street Journal article, “Rise of the Warrior Cop.” He says the trend is to erase the line between military and law enforcement.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/frightening-new-reason-to-fear-police/#PDurB1Ets3XAxDKO.99

Sorry, but your quoted source isn't very trustworthy:

WND Founder Joseph Farah Is Right: WND Publishes Misinformation

WND Makes Up Stuff

I disagree on all accounts. I gave you the proof with plenty of links in the story. If you can dismantle all of them then continue this debate.