bad BAD COP!!!

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by Marlin T, Oct 6, 2009.

  1. Marlin T

    Marlin T Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,877
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Family Says 911 Tape Caught Cops Planning Cover-Up After Shooting


    By JAMIE ROSS
    ShareThis

    [​IMG] PHOENIX (CN) - A homeowner says a Phoenix police officer shot him six times in the back during a 911 home-invasion call, and the 911 tape recorded the officer's partner saying, "That's all right. Don't worry about it. I got your back. ... We clear?" The family says the officers were not aware that the 911 call was still recording as they spoke about covering up the shooting.
    In their complaint in Maricopa County Court, Anthony and Lesley Arambula say an armed intruder "crashed through the front window" of their home on Sept. 17, 2008 and ran into one of their son's bedrooms.
    Anthony, worried about his son who was still in his bedroom, says he "held the intruder calmly at gunpoint" and called 911.
    Phoenix Police officers already in the neighborhood heard the crash of the Arambulas' window. When they approached the house, Lesley says, she told Sgt. Sean Coutts that her husband was inside holding the intruder at gunpoint. Lesley says Coutts failed to pass on that information to the two other officers.
    Inside the house, the Arambulas say, Officer Brian Lilly shot Anthony six times in the back while he was still on the phone with the 911 operator - twice when he was on the ground.
    The officers ran into the bedroom after Anthony told them, "You just killed ... you just killed the homeowner. The bad guy is in there."
    The complaint states that Officer Lilly "admitted that it was only after Tony was laying, bullet-ridden, on the ground that he assessed the situation. The 911 tape continued to record what happened even after Officer Lilly unloaded his weapon into Tony, including Officer Lilly's post-shooting, one-word 'assessment': '****.'
    "Tony believed he was going to die; the 911 tape records his plaintive goodbye to his family: '... I love you ... I love you.' Then Tony made what he believed was a dying request to the officers; he did not want his young family to see him shot and bloodied. Officers callously ignored his request and painfully dragged Tony by his injured leg, through the home and out to his backyard patio, where they left him bloodied and shot right in front of Lesley, Matthew and Zachary."
    The Arambulas say the officers later dragged Anthony onto gravel, then put him on top of the hot hood of a squad car, and "drove the squad car down the street with Tony lying on top, writing in pain."
    According to the complaint, Lilly can be heard on the 911 tape telling Coutts, "We ****ed up."
    Lilly says on the tape that he did not know where Anthony's gun was when he shot him and that he "opened fire because he heard loud noises and saw someone who looked like he might be the 'Hispanic' male they were pursuing" before getting to the Arambulas' house, according to the complaint.
    The complaint states: "Sgt. Coutts knew that officers has just shot up and likely killed an innocent homeowner and the husband of Lesley, with whom he had spoken before entering the home, instead of the armed intruder. Sgt. Coutts was quick to commence the cover-up of their terrible mistake. Sgt. Coutts asked Office Lilly where Tony's gun was at the time Officer Lilly had opened fire on Tony. Officer Lilly admitted that he did not know where Tony's gun was: 'I don't know. I heard screaming and I fired.'"
    Lilly later told a police internal affairs investigator that Anthony had pointed his gun in his direction, "in the 'ready' position," the complaint states. But Anthony Arambula says he was facing away from the officers, who could not have even seen his gun.
    The complaint continues: "Still not knowing that he is being recorded n the 911 tape, Sgt. Coutts interrupted Officer Lilly's admission and apology with his assurance that the cover-up would commence: 'That's all right. Don't worry about it. I got your back. ... We clear?'"
    After the shooting, the Arambulas say, the Phoenix Police Department treated them "like suspects in a drug bust," denying Lesley, Michael and Zachary information about Anthony's condition and denying friends and family members access to him at the hospital.
    Anthony Arambula survived, but continues to suffer pain, which he expects will last for the rest of his life.
    The City of Phoenix and Officer Dzenan Ahmetovic also are named as defendants.
    The Arambulas seek punitive damages for gross negligence, civil rights violations, failure to supervise, excessive force, deliberate indifference to medical needs, false arrest, and emotional distress. They are represented by Michael Manning with Stinson Morrison Hecker.


    http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/..._Cover-Up_After_Shooting.htm?=protectandserve [​IMG]
  2. artabr

    artabr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,859
    Location:
    New Iberia, Louisiana
    I saw this on a local forum a couple of days ago. This is the kind of thing the gives a black eye to all of the LEO's who put their lives on the line every day.
    That being said, if this is what happened, I hope that they burn ALL of those who are responsible for both the shooting and the cover up. :( :mad:


    Art
  3. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,720
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio

    I agree Art. Unfortunately the public tends to judge the many fine cops by the action of a few a** holes.

    This was a terrible misjudgement followed by a callous and criminal attitude after the fact.
  4. Doc1911

    Doc1911 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    874
    Location:
    USA
    I am not so sure of that "whole" story (which happened app. a year ago). A shooting did take place, but possibly not with "all" those events as explained in the report. The officer was cleared by a police board in regards to the shooting. While the PD will lose a civil suit (a given normally), there seems to be no criminal or civil charges (gross negligence, civil rights violations, failure to supervise, excessive force, deliberate indifference to medical needs, false arrest, and emotional distress) for a coverup.
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2009
  5. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,720
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    Ah, interesting detail. I wasn't aware that this happened that long ago. If the cop received no punitive action for this then there MUST be more to the story.
  6. Keystone

    Keystone New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    106
    Location:
    Portageville, MO.
    There are always going to be a few BAD cops out there. I hate to say this but it is the sad truth.
  7. Nighthawk

    Nighthawk New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    3,330
    Location:
    South Central Texas
    But most of public do not trust police boards. Police have a reputation of protecting their own. I knew a
    Sargent who was ostracized for turning in fellow officers. They were kicked off force and some prosecuted
    but he was then the enemy to other officers.
  8. Doc1911

    Doc1911 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    874
    Location:
    USA
    I am not sure what statistical data you have to claim MOST of the public do not trust police boards, but even if that is true, MOST people on this forum state they do not trust liberal, anti-gun papers either – but yet your opinion is being based upon one (Courthouse News Service is a news wire for lawyers and while its reporting on appellate rulings, new legislation is normally accurate, it is NOT an investigative much-less conservative newspaper… attorneys vs. cops, etc.).

    The Use of Force Review Board in Phoenix includes an officers’ commanders and peers as well as two citizens. This same board recently found another police officer in another shooting administratively guilty. Later criminal charges were filed against the officer in this other case. This Board also has MORE evidence than we are reading in this poorly written article. Are they part of the so-called cover-up? I don’t know. However, I think we need to consider their findings at least as much as the article’s.

    My point in my posts is WE DO NOT HAVE ALL THE FACTS. Therefore, we should not be making a rush to judgment – like saying “bad BAD COP!!!” “cover-up,” believe every word of a biased article, etc. While I will admit that some LEOs protect their own (I have arrested some bad cops [and attorneys, even a judge, etc.] and saw them do time for their felonies), so do defendants and families. As a matter of fact the victim’s wife in this case has changed her story – which the police have documented.

    As for the media they like their names in the news as well, so they write/edit a certain way! Ask yourself some questions about the article. Why didn’t they state that the officer in question was cleared by a Board? Why are they using the word “cover-up” when the lawsuit filed against the department DOES NOT use this terminology? If not being used by an attorney in a multi-million $$$ lawsuit, the officers wording must have been explained and understood to mean something other than “cover-up.” Then look at this:

    Is this even believable? If you were a cop and had just shot someone – is this what you would do with all those witnesses around (children, wife, neighbors – there was a shooting outside seconds before this …. the neighborhood was awake)? During “all” this, the cops allegedly dragged the homeowner by his “injured leg” (but he was shot 6 times in the back, right - not in the leg? – in reality he had wounds to his hand, knee (top of knee entry), leg, and back –the article was WRONG), put him on the hood of a car, and drove him down the street? Were the cops trying to hide the body by taking it down the street? Something is NOT RIGHT here. (PS: shooting someone in the back is NOT necessarily an unjustified shooting …).

    With so many unanswered questions, IMO, the article seems to be an embellishment of only one side of the story. If indeed, the officers DID everything as the article states – then they deserve a nice long prison term – like life. However, if the victim is embellishing the case – then we know he voted for Obama and will still win a law suit …

    No matter what, the department appears to need re-training on how to approach these type situations, as IMO it was poorly handled (according to the tactics I was taught …). The Phoenix PD SAU Unit (SWAT) assisted me one time getting a homicide suspect. They did everything by the book. So, I know the training is available.

    You can listen to part of the video here. It shows you how fast everything went down. A lot of it is difficult to make out, but: ABC 15
  9. artabr

    artabr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,859
    Location:
    New Iberia, Louisiana
    As much is I support LEO's, I'd rather trust a Grand Jury that an "unbiased" internal review board.
    They are in a position to incriminate their department and thus have their department sued if they rule against the officers.
    My lawyer would be saying "see you in court".


    Art
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2009
  10. Doc1911

    Doc1911 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    874
    Location:
    USA
    Actually, the Dept is getting sued no matter what a Review Board says. In our Dept. we had no fear of firing or disciplining a person - we would do so if they broke procedure. Integrity actually won our Dept. 2 cases - in which the officer was found civilly guilty. However, not all Depts are like mine was, so I can understand thoughts to the contrary ....

    A Grand Jury is only impaneled if a criminal offense has taken place. In this case the attorney suing is not even claiming such. The evidence does not support it.
  11. artabr

    artabr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,859
    Location:
    New Iberia, Louisiana
    All Officer involved shootings in the state of Louisiana are automatically turned over to the La. State Police for investigation, completely (as much as can be) removing the officers department from the investigation. There is a lot to be said for independent investigation.


    Art
  12. Doc1911

    Doc1911 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    874
    Location:
    USA
    Agreed. Most departments have some type of system, but it varies from State to State and even county to county. Our department had civilians and the Head of IA on their panel. The citizens were selected at random from the people selected for jury duty on any given month. The head of IA presented the case, but also understood police procedures for each division of the police department. He though had no voting rights and the panel had to have a 100% agreement on any verdict.
  13. 40CalJoe

    40CalJoe New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    421
    Location:
    In the middle
    On the surface, it certainly does not sound good. Natural tendancy is to wonder how times this happens, one cop covering for another. Hopefully its isolated. You would like trust those sworn to uphold the law would do so even against one of their own.

    I'm sure more of this story will come out to fill in the blanks.
  14. artabr

    artabr New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,859
    Location:
    New Iberia, Louisiana
    This, I think, would be a very workable system. It takes the department out of the decision making part of the process and removes most/all suspicion or doubt off of the backs of the department.
    It also helps the department with positive P.R. by having the public interaction with the force. ;)


    Art
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2009
  15. Marlin T

    Marlin T Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,877
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Where is that 911 tape at?
    That would clear up a lot of what happened.

    I'm holding my opinion till more facts come out, but holyshoot, if this story is anything like it says it is....
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2009
  16. Doc1911

    Doc1911 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    874
    Location:
    USA
    See my post above ABC 15. The tape is not that clear but can be made out.

    This is a year old. So until the civil suit - which will probably be a settlement out of court - there will not be much more.
  17. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,720
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    It has always seemed to me that police IA's are tougher on their own than the average jury would be on a civilian charged with comparable crimes. That's why IA is both disliked and feared in so many police departments across the country.

    Yeah cops may circle the wagons and cover their friends a**es just like doctors and many others in various professions. But Internal Affairs are not part of that circle. at least not in most police departments.
  18. ssatch

    ssatch New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    4
    Location:
    Charlotte NC
    so far as internal affairs goes, I can tell you from first hand experience that it took no less than three trips to internal affairs for a bad cop that I knew to get kicked off the force...he was basically being a look out for thugs breaking into places in his zone...finally after the third time before them they had no choice and had to can him....of course he never was taken to court or anything, he just got canned....so, no...I've got no confidence in IA....
  19. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,720
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    Welcome to TFF. I assume by your comments then that you are a cop yourself???
  20. Artemus

    Artemus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    358
    Location:
    Mass.
    Stories in the news are never the full story.Sometimes the full story is not known for months.I have seen Police misconduct yes.I have also seen outrageous claims by perps and their families.What some folks don't understand is that scumbags have nothing to lose but everything to gain.When someone is hurt during an arrest,many families of scumbags see dollar signs.They will say anything to make the cops look bad.In fact they will lie so much that I truly believe that they actually start believing their own lies after a while.
    How most of the cops survive many of these accusations is that after interviewing neighbors you find out what kind of people they are.Also in court,their past criminal records are brought up and their credibility crumbles.I am not trying to say there are not bad cops out there because there are.However,if cops were fired as soon as someone made a complaint against him or her,there would be no Police forces anywhere.The only cops that never get complaints against them are cops that are out there not doing their jobs.

Share This Page