Jury Finds Occupy Wall Street Protester Innocent After Video Contradicts Police Testimony

[G_j]

Source: Village Voice

Jury Finds Occupy Wall Street Protester Innocent After Video Contradicts Police Testimony

Friday, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:53 AM
By Nick Pinto

Michael Premo was found not guilty of assaulting an officer after video evidence contradicted police testimony.

In the first jury trial stemming from an Occupy Wall Street protest, Michael Premo was found innocent of all charges yesterday after his lawyers presented video evidence directly contradicting the version of events offered by police and prosecutors.

Premo, an activist and community organizer who has in recent months been a central figure in the efforts of Occupy Sandy, was one of many hundred people who took part in a demonstration in Lower Manhattan on December 17 of 2011, when some protesters broke into a vacant lot in Duarte Square in an attempt to start a new occupation.

After police broke up the action in Duarte Square, hundreds of protesters marched north, playing a game of cat and mouse with police on foot and on scooters, who tried to slow and divide the column of marchers. At 29th Street near Seventh Avenue, police finally managed to trap a large number of marchers, kettling them from both sides of the block with bright orange plastic netting. After holding the crowd in the nets for some time, a few people managed to escape, and police rushed in to the crowd with their hands up.
In the commotion, Premo fell to the ground and attempted to crawl out of the scrum. (Covering the march, I was also kettled on this block for a time, though I only witnessed Premo's arrest from a distance.)

..more..

Read more: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2013/03/jury_finds_occu.php

[bemildred]

1. Good. nt

[Enrique]

2. when does the perjury trial start? n/t

[bamacrat]

6. Doubt it will, police are given a different set of rules. n/t

[valerief]

19. Like members of Congress and the 1%. nt

[Poll_Blind]

23. I'm thinking the accusation that he fractured an officer's bone could...

...be grounds for a perjury trial, but only his lawyer is likely to be able to assess that. From my understanding of what perjury is, it has to be a lie about something "materially related" to the charges directly.

PB

[MADem]

29. It's an interesting question, though, don't you think?

Was he "mistaken" (cough) about who fractured said bone....or was said bone even fractured at all in that fracas?

If it turns out he banged the bone on a car door after the contretemps had finished, and tried to pass it off as a 'line of duty' injury, well, he's got some 'splainin' to do....


And it looks like, based on the video and the excerpt below from the above cited link, that there were a lot of liars in uniform involved in this mess:

For one thing, the video prominently shows a TARU cop named Bosco, holding up his camera, which is on, and pointing at the action around the kettle. When Premo's lawyers subpoenaed Bosco, they were told he was on a secret mission at "an undisclosed location," and couldn't respond to the subpoena. Judge Robert Mandelbaum didn't accept that, and Bosco ultimately had to testify [Correction: Bosco didn't take the stand; he had to appear at the District Attorney's office for a meeting with Maurus and prosecutors. Judge Mandelbaum accepted that Bosco would likely say on the stand what he said in the meeting, and didn't require him to testify.] Bosco claimed, straining credibility, that though the camera is clearly on and he can be seen in the video pointing it as though to frame a shot, he didn't actually shoot any video that evening.

Even more importantly, the Democracy Now video also flipped the police version of events on its head. Far from showing Premo tackling a police officer, it shows cops tackling him as he attempted to get back on his feet.

After watching the video, the jury deliberated for several hours before returning a verdict of not guilty on all counts.

I remember Bosco as a childhood after-school beverage or dessert topping, not a lying police operative! My, how words and meanings morph over time!!

[firenewt]

9. Exactly what I was thinking. Answer to question: Never

[AnotherMcIntosh]

30. Never, of course. It is unlikely that anyone can find even one case in which a cop was prosecuted

for perjury. Not even one.

[riqster]

3. Back in the day, we had it right:

Pigs.

[atreides1]

4. Okay

So the police lied and then attempted to with hold evidence...under the law isn't this considered perjury and obstruction of justice?

But I keep forgetting...there are two sets of laws, and even under the special ones for police and prosecutors they're hardly ever held responsible for their actions!!!

[TheMadMonk]

12. Attempting to PERVERT the cause of justice where I come from. /nt

[DeSwiss]

16. BINGO! n/t

[HooptieWagon]

21. Exactly!

[mountain grammy]

5. if someone lies under oath, isn't that perjury?

just sayin'. How about some real justice.

[Vinnie From Indy]

7. One wonders whether these officers will be charged with perjury

It seems there were several police officers that lied about what happened in a case that could have sent this guy to jail for many years.

[formercia]

8. NYPD is a Criminal Gang

Time after time, they prove it without a doubt.

You can thank former Mayor Ghouliani for systematizing the corruption.

[WilliamPitt]

10. The whole world was watching, with cameras on their phones.

[Wednesdays]

14. If anyone ever wondered why cops grab cameras at such events

Well then, now we know.

"No cameras! No cameras!" while manhandling anyone who's videotaping.

Fortunately things are becoming different these days, since just about everyone carries a cell phone with a high resolution camera now. Cops would be spending more time trying to eradicate the phone cameras than on the event itself.

[DCKit]

20. Or why they worked so hard to make filming the police illegal.

Kind of hard to enforce when everyone is carrying a camera.

[Dryvinwhileblind]

11. To Serve and Protect........guess who?

[hootinholler]

13. Since there are no perjury charges nor obstruction charges

I think he should have a good case for a suit.

[ybbor]

15. Wow, the police lie?

I would never thought this to be true. They are here to "Protect and Serve", their best interests apparently. I know there are many honest police officers, but there sure seem to be many times more who are power junkies! Just my opinion.

[frylock]

17. fuck tha police

[L0oniX]

18. To be fair ...everyone lies ...we are a nation of liars.

It's almost like we want to be deceived. Just look at what we put up with and or accept: advertisement, Fox news , congress, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Powel, Wolfowitz, banksters, the military ect. It's no wonder they call us The Great Satan.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

31. You can't legitimately say that everyone lies under oath. There is no factual basis for that.

[L0oniX]

34. I didn't say that ...but thanks for playing. n/t

[Spitfire of ATJ]

22. If it had just gone before a judge it wouldn't have gone down that way.

[another_liberal]

41. Quite so!

Juries are far more difficult to buy off. And with a jury there is at least a chance the briber might get caught.

[indepat]

24. Incidence encapsulates big brother's determination not to tolerate constitutionally-protected First

Amendments rights to left-wing protesters of Wall Street fraud and greed, all the while allowing domestic right-wing extremist groups and individuals to basically roam free to do their thing, as their stochastic terrorists foment hate, sedition, and rebellion, knowing some of the deranged will do their thing. Oh, the joys of living in a right-wing soused society for that's what one gets living in a right-wing soused society.

[Downtown Hound]

25. NYPD are STILL paying out money from illegal arrests made during the 2004 RNC

Yeah, they committed perjury during those trials also, and once again, the protesters were exonerated by video.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/02/nyregion/protesters-arrests-during-2004-gop-convention-are-ruled-illegal.html?_r=0

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2005/04/renc-a19.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/06/nyregion/06about.html

Why would the police ever change when it's taxpayers that foot the bill for their misconduct and they never face criminal penalties?

[christx30]

28. Absolutely:

Make police, prosecutors, ect personally, legally, and financially liable for crimes that they commit while on duty. You and your buddies pin down a guy at the BART station in San Fransisco and shoot him in the back? If I did it, I would be in jail for the rest of my life, as would my friends. If a cop does it, he gets 18 months.
It fosters mistrust and hatred of the police. This needs to change.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

32. Not just "shoot him in the back" or shoot him in the back while handcuffed, but kick him afterwards.

[G_j]

33. A lawyer for the ACLU told me years ago

that departments set aside money specifically to pay law suits for illegal arrests that they know they would be making at a protest.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, G_j.

[The Magistrate]

27. It Is An Unfortunate Fact, Sir, That There Is No Particular Reason Ever To Believe Police Testimony

It may well be that not everything said by police on the stand is a lie, but enough of it is that none can be believed without question, or should be believed in the absence of corroborating evidence.

[blkmusclmachine]

35. .

.

[7wo7rees]

36. You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.

[quakerboy]

37. Regular proof

The courts should require video confirmation of any accusation or claim made by a police officer. Give them an incentive to carry the cameras and to play it straight.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

39. I like how you think.

[Fire Walk With Me]

38. K&R!

[CanonRay]

40. It used to be that if an officer lied under oath, he/she could never be used in court again

rendering the officer virtually useless for anything but desk duty, as the lie under oath would be brought up at every trial. This officer needs to be held accountable. Sue his ass personally.