Contact Me By Email

Atlanta, GA Weather from Weather Underground

Friday, July 16, 2010

New York Officers Accused of Lying About Searches -

New York Officers Accused of Lying About Searches -

A New York City police sergeant lied to cover up several unlawful stops and seizures in Manhattan and forced subordinates to falsify paperwork to justify the stops, authorities said Thursday in announcing the indictment of two officers.

In the indictment, prosecutors portrayed the sergeant, William Eiseman, 41, as a renegade who routinely stopped people for no justifiable reason, searched their cars and then arrested them when he recovered drugs or weapons.

Sergeant Eiseman, a 13-year veteran of the force, and a junior officer accused of lying in court in one of the cases, Michael Carsey, 29, were charged with perjury, offering a false instrument for filing and official misconduct. They pleaded not guilty and were released without bail, The Associated Press reported.

Lawyers for the officers could not be reached for comment on Thursday night.

In the indictment, prosecutors described a number of instances dating to 2007 in which they said Sergeant Eiseman made unlawful stops and covered them up. In one, they said, he unlawfully searched a van and obtained a search warrant for the driver’s home, where the police found drugs and a gun. In court testimony, Sergeant Eiseman and Officer Carsey said that they approached the van after smelling marijuana smoke and that they were later told by the driver that he had drugs and weapons in his apartment. In fact, prosecutors said, they learned of the drugs only when they found pictures on the man’s phone.

The case against the driver was eventually dismissed. More...
This is the type of police behavior that discredits all police officers in the mind of particularly minorities. It is wonderful however to know that we live in a country which prosecute and convicts police for this kind of misconduct. This fact is heartwarming. The illegally seized evidence could not be used against the original defendants because it was the fruit of the poisonous tree.

John H. Armwood

No comments:

Post a Comment