Arkansas

Arkansas Cops Refuse to Return Medals Rescinded by City Council

Evgen — Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:54:16 +0000

Police officers in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, are lawyering up after the city council voted to rescind medals of valor handed out to the SWAT team in 2013.

What did the SWAT team do to earn those valorous medals? They stormed into the home of 107-year old Monroe Isadore, shot him to death—and then successfully dodged a state investigation of the incident.

Nearly three years after the incident, the city council voted unanimously this month to revoke the medals. As of Monday, however, the police force has yet to return the medals and is seeking legal counsel to challenge the city’s decision, according to local TV station KATV.

“I don’t understand the rationale, I don’t understand why anyone would want a medal, who can you show it to? Oh, I have a medal of valor, well were you in the war? No, I killed a 107-year-old man…you know…who would want that?”Councilwoman Thelma Walker told KATV, the local ABC affiliate.

Walker sponsored the resolution, which said conferring medals and awards “in the aftermath of such a sensitive and emotionally charged event is unconscionable and reprehensible and should not be sanctioned by the City of Pine Bluff.”

Awarding those medals seems to have been done in secret. Isadore’s children were unaware the medals even existed until the city council voted to rescind them, and the city won’t say how many were actually given or who made the decision to award them, according to KATV.

Asked about the city’s decision to revoke the medals, Pine Bluff Police Chief Jeff Hubanks told the Pine Bluff Commercialthe department was “going to talk to an attorney” and declined further comment.

It’s unclear whether the city has the legal authority to strip the medals. City Attorney Althea Hadden-Scott told theCommercial that the council resolution is not binding and lacks enforcement authority.

Isadore was killed on September 8, 2013. Police responded to a call and found him in his bedroom with a gun—his family later said he was upset about being moved to an assisted living community.

After safely evacuating two other people from the house, the cops used negotiation tactics and smoke bombs in an unsuccessful attempt to get Isadore to surrender.

When that failed, they called in the county SWAT team. When SWAT officers broke down the door to Isadore’s bedroom, he fired at them and they returned fire, killing him.

Although the shooting might have been justified since Isadore reportedly fired at the cops first, it appears that police escalated the situation to a point where a violent ending was nearly unavoidable. It was not a hostage situation and Isadore was not a threat to anyone but himself, at least until officers forced their way into his room. Was sending in a SWAT team to use deadly force against a 107-year old man really the best option available?

It’s doubtful that any answers will be forthcoming. Nearly three years later, even with awareness of police violence at higher levels, it’s unlikely that there will ever be a full investigation of the circumstances that led to Isadore Monroe’s death.

The officer who killed Isadore was placed on paid leave, and his or her name was never released to the public. The state police declined an invitation to investigate the incident and subsequent attempts by Isadore’s family to have the shooting investigated went nowhere.

(Lawyers’ fees for the cops are being covered by the local Fraternal Order of Police, so the police are not costing taxpayers anything by refusing to comply with an order issued by the local government that, theoretically, controls them.)

But even if accountability is out of reach, is it too much to ask that police officers not be feted like they returned home from a war zone after gunning down a confused centenarian?

Isadore’s daughter, Paula Aguilar, told KATV that she doesn’t think the honors were deserved. “I looked up `valor,’ and I’m like, `No, that doesn’t fit to what they did to my dad.”

Published by Reason.com

Tagged with

Arkansas Cops Admit They Shot and Killed Handcuffed Man

Evgen — Fri, 22 May 2015 10:30:10 +0000

Arkansas Community Correction Deputy Director Dina Tyler

CABOT, Ark. – The Associated Press wire reported that Arkansas police officers admit they shot and killed a man whom they had handcuffed and detained in the back of their patrol car.

State Department of Community Correction Deputy Director Dina Tyler says Jonathan McIntosh, 35, was killed Tuesday in Cabot, Arkansas. Neither video footage, sound clips, or names of the police who shot and killed McIntosh have been released.

Tyler said Arkansas Department of Community Corrections (ADCC) and Lonoke County Sheriff’s Department officers detained McIntosh, whom they claim to have searched, while looking for another suspect. When officers searched McIntosh, they claim they found drugs on his person, but did not find any weapons.

Cops say when McIntosh was detained, he had his hands cuffed behind him and was seated the back of the vehicle. The officers then alleged that they left McIntosh in the back of the car, and that while out of view he was somehow able to get his handcuffed hands in front of him, acquire a gun, and fire it at them when they returned to interview him.

Officers were unable to explain how McIntosh was able to do this. They also claim they don’t know how McIntosh was able to acquire a gun, or where it came from.

No officers were reported as injured. As of yet, there have been no reports that any officers were charged for the slaying.

Tagged with

Little Rock Police Killing Lawsuit Claims Internal Coverup Caused Missing Video And Audio

Evgen — Tue, 28 Apr 2015 10:17:50 +0000

The father of a man shot and killed by police in 2008 is refiling his lawsuit against the police department, alleging fraudulent concealment on behalf of the department to hide the truth of what led to his son’s death.

On the morning of July 16, 2008, Little Rock Police Department officers arrived to Christina Hatfield’s home on Gillette Drive shortly before 11 a.m.

Dashcam video captures the drive up to the home, and through the audio you can hear officers approach Hatfield and ask if her daughter and Collin Spradling are at the home.

“I’ll go get them,” she tells officers.

The police respond, “We need to talk to them about an incident.”

The audio then goes silent, aside from bits and pieces of static, officers’ yells of shots fired and then the sound of women screaming. The audio doesn’t come back up, until the Hatfields are being escorted to police cars on the street.

The portions of audio missing, attorney Mike Laux argues, are the critical moments when 25-year-old Collin Spradling left the home and was shot and killed by police.

“During crucial portions of this event where the police are alleging they made certain warnings and certain statements – that portion is damaged ,” Laux said. “So, we can’t tell if those statements were ever made or warnings ever given and that’s a real problem that we all need to take a look at.”

The moments after Spradling was shot, are on the tape, including the sound of Paul Hatfield’s voice speaking to officers in the backyard and on the way to the police car.

“I’m not going to do anything I just want to know why you guys just killed someone in my —,” you hear Paul allegedly say before the audio crackles out.

Officers were at the Hatfield home following up on a complaint by a woman who said Spradling had burglarized her home, stealing a gun in the process. The woman was the mother of Spradling’s ex-girlfriend and alleged that she didn’t know who drove the getaway car, but that it was a woman driving a white Honda. Supposedly, the complainant later followed up with the police officer, saying the woman’s name was Rachel.

According to police and the Hatfields, Spradling walked out the back door where police officers were waiting. He was told to put his hands behind his back, and both Christina and Rachael Hatfield reported the officer told Spradling he knew why they were there.

According to the Hatfields, Spradling then rolled his right shoulder forward, as if resisting arrest, and that’s when officers took him to the ground.

According to both Rachael and Christina Hatfield, an officer immediately placed a gun to the back of Spradling’s head.

Officers claimed Spradling reached for a gun during the struggle.

“When they told him to put his hands behind his back he started fighting, and they took him down to the ground,” Officer Michael Lundy tells another police officer on scene in the dascham video following the shooting. “And he put his hands in his pants. He’s dead. They shot him.”

Witness statements that day, and in later depositions, contest those details.

“He’s on the ground, next thing I know he’s being unloaded on. That’s ridiculous,” a voice attributed to Paul Hatfield, and identified as himself in a deposition says. “I know he had a gun, man, I know he had a gun. but he’s [explicative] pinned to the ground, he’s got his arms behind his back, and it’d be really hard for him to aim at anything.”

According to Paul Hatfield, during a later deposition, he never saw Spradling with a gun that day, but had seen he had a gun the day before. According to Christina and Rachael Hatfield, Spradling had encouraged Rachael to get a gun because of the late hours she worked as a nurse in a rougher part of town.

When Christina Hatfield asked for the gun not to be in her home, Rachael said Spradling took the gun and placed it in the glove box of his vehicle, which was parked on the street. According to Rachael, he never retrieved it. According to Christina’s and Rachael’s testimony during depositions, neither of them ever saw a gun on or near Spradling at the time of the shooting or after.

The gun officers said they recovered, which they said they placed on a ledge in the yard for safety reasons, was the gun Spradling’s father had loaned him to show the Hatfields. According to the complaint, police never found the gun Spradling was accused of stealing.

Officers said they had shouted, “gun, gun” prior to shooting Spradling, and one officer reported asking if “they were sure”. According to Christina, Rachael and Paul, they never heard those statements from police.

In Laux’s 320-page complaint, he alleges a cover-up was underway within moments after the shooting. He points to the fact that officers told Christina Hatfield they had a warrant for her daughter and Spradling, when in fact they did not.

“Trying to serve a warrant for burglary and they got him to come out when he came out,” Officer Lundy says on the dashcam video to another officer.

Later in the tape, he reiterates that to Christina Hatfield, saying “there’s a warrant for her [Rachael]”.

The department later confirmed there was not a warrant, and told reporters that the officers were there to talk to Spradling and Rachael about the burglary complaint, not to arrest them.

“You have an unjustified police shooting, but more troublesome we’re alleging in the complaint is a patternistic, systemic attempt at covering up what happened,” Laux said.

Throughout the complaint, Laux alleges investigators and the department violated their own policies investigating the shooting, including failing to maintain crime scene logs properly and failure to separate the officers from one another after the shooting.

“That extends to witness statements that were disregarded, evidence that was compromised and damaged and evidence and videotapes withheld by the city despite Freedom of Information Act requests a long time ago,” Laux said.

Laux’s ultimate allegation against the police department is that a pattern of police misconduct was allowed to flourish and directly led to Spradling’s death.

“We allege if proper discipline had been implemented years before this incident, this incident very well would not have happened,” Laux said. “And everyone should care about that, because this case shows you don’t have to be some hardened criminal to have this happen to you.”

Laux’s case hinges on whether there is ample evidence that fraudulent concealment took place. If the judge decides there is not enough evidence that occurred, the statute of limitations has run out on the case. The statute of limitations had actually run on the case the first time it was filed in 2012. Laux asked for the case to be voluntarily dismissed, saying additional evidence had been provided by the city and he needed time to sort through it.

We reached out to City of Little Rock attorney Tom Carpenter to get his perspective on the complaint filed Friday. He was out of town, but aware of the complaint. We intend to follow up with him for an interview to gain the city’s perspective on what’s alleged in the lawsuit and what the city intends to do next.

The officers involved in the shooting were never charged by prosecutors, and the shooting was deemed justified. Rachael Hatfield was never charged with a crime in relation to the burglary accusation that led police to the Hatfield home.

Tagged with

Cops Send Computer Virus to Attorney of Whistleblower

Evgen — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:13:25 +0000

Little Rock attorney Matt Campbell is alleging in a lawsuit that an officer with the Fort Smith Police Department attempted to place “malicious software” on his law office computer. Campbell is the attorney representing former Fort Smith police officer Don Paul Bales in his lawsuit against the police department.

Bales was fired in October 2014 by the Fort Smith Police Department. He was accused of providing inside information about a police matter to Campbell, and lying in correspondence to a supervisor and to City Administrator Ray Gosack. His firing was upheld by the Fort Smith Civil Service Commission.

Bales is also the leader of Take Back the Fort, a group attempting to raise enough signatures to call for an election changing the form of government in Fort Smith. The group launched the effort in late January, but has since Feb. 13 been unwilling to provide an update on the signature-gathering process.

In a “Motion for Sanctions” action filed April 10, Campbell alleges that certain members of the FSPD “engaged in intentional spoliation of evidence,” provided emails with “improper redactions” and, in responding to a documents request, supplied Campbell with an external hard drive that “contained malicious software designed to hack into Plaintiffs’ counsel’s computer, rendering the hard drive unsafe for Plaintiffs’ use.”

In the filing with the Circuit Court of Sebastian County, Campbell is asking for sanctions against the defendants, to include criminal contempt of court and entering a default judgment in favor of Bales.

The filing by Campbell includes an affidavit from Geoff Mueller, manager of information security at the Lower Colorado River Authority. Mueller said he found four “Trojans” designed to open Campbell’s computer up to outside control. The Trojans included a password stealer, malicious software installer and “control and command of infected computer,” according to Mueller’s report. Mueller said is review of the hard drive and its contents indicated that the bad software “were not already on the external hard drive that was sent to Mr. Campbell, and were more likely placed in that folder intentionally with the goal of taking command of Mr. Campbell’s computer while also stealing passwords to his accounts.”

Fort Smith Police Chief Kevin Lindsey told The City Wire he had no comment on the allegation and would “let the courts speak on the matter.”

Campbell provided this statement to The City Wire:

“This whole thing is alarming, not only because they tried to hack my computer, but also because of what it means big picture. The Fort Smith Police Department – or at least certain people within the FSPD – have demonstrated that they will act criminally if they think it will allow them to get even with someone they don’t like. Rather than let the underlying litigation play out properly in court, they opted to commit a federal crime, apparently in the hopes that their criminal acts would give them information that they couldn’t get legally.

“I strongly believe that the overwhelming majority of officers at the FSPD are good. Yet, if the person or persons responsible for this aren’t investigated, arrested, and prosecuted, the leadership of the department is basically telling all of the good cops that they don’t care if the citizens of Fort Smith trust the department as a whole. Sadly, based on past practices, that’s exactly what I expect will happen.”

Campbell notified Sebastian County Prosecuting Attorney Dan Shue of the alleged hacking attempt, and Shue sent a letter to the Arkansas State Police asking them to investigate. The ASP declined, saying the matter appears “limited to misdemeanor violations which do not rise to a threshold” for a special investigation. In his Oct. 1, 2014 letter to Campbell, Shue said the matter could also be sent to the office of Conner Eldridge, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Arkansas.

Tagged with

Arkansas