Mediaboss Marketing

The Graham Police Department is using a tried and true defense against the lawsuit Jaquyn ONeill Lights family has brought in the 20-year-olds 2020 shooting death at the hands of an officer and put blame on Lights own actions.

More: Rural Hall headaches follow Graham City Manager

Late on Jan. 28, 2020, three officers went to Lights family home to execute a warrant for his arrest. While two officers went in the back door looking for Light, he ran from the front of the house and into Graham Police officer Marcus Pollock who was alone in the front yard.

Pollock told the other officers Light ran into him in the dark, and his gun went off. The .45-caliber bullet hit Light in the belly, but he kept struggling with Pollock, according to the report, and the two of them moved 20 to 25 feet before Pollock brought Light to the ground and handcuffed him. Pollock lost his gun briefly in the struggle. Light died in a hospital later that night.

Please support local journalism as a Times-News subscriber

There are several forms of legal immunity for police and police departments. Originally intended to protect them from frivolous lawsuits, U.S. Supreme Court decisions have made them stronger protections for law enforcement over the years. Critics say they shield police from accountability, while law enforcement officials and supporters call them protections for officers making split-second decisions in dangerous situations.

Generally, the question comes down to whether officers used excessive force in violation of Fourth Amendment protections and whether they knew they were breaking established law.

More: Family of slain Graham man, Jaquyn Light, sues police officer who shot him, police chief and city

The departments response to the Light familys federal lawsuit also calls Lights own actions that night negligent.

The familys suit charges excessive force because Light was unarmed and not actively committing a crime and claims officers didnt need to approach Light with deadly force to execute a warrant for a probation violation and a misdemeanor charge. For its part, the departments filing says the warrant was for two felonies and a misdemeanor.

According to the state Department of Public Safety, Light was sentenced to probation in 2018 on felony charges of breaking and entering and larceny after breaking and entering. In 2017, Light was also convicted of felony common law robbery and misdemeanor larceny.

Graham Police did not clarify the charges by press time, Tuesday.

The familys suit also alleges former Police Chief Jeff Pritchard with having poor hiring practices and failing to train and properly discipline officers. Pollock, according to the suit, had previous use-of-force claims against him from a previous job, though it does not elaborate on what complaints he faced.

Pollock was in the Greensboro Police Department for 18 years, according to his LinkedIn page. The departments filing says Pollock faced an excessive-force complaint before coming to Graham, but it was deemed unfounded.

After an SBI investigation into Lights shooting and death, the Alamance County District attorneys office found the evidence supported an accidental-shooting theory and gave it no probable cause to prosecute Pollock.

Even so, when asked District Attorney Sean Boone said it was troubling that Light was unarmed and Pollock did not turn his body camera on until after he shot and handcuffed Light, a violation of department policy. The other two officers had activated their cameras when they got out of their cars before going to the house, but neither of them was there when Light was shot.

Lawyers representing the family and department did not return Times-News calls for comment, Tuesday.

Read more from the original source:
Graham Police respond to suit from family of slain 20-year-old - Burlington Times News

A former Hutchinson police officer working for the Minneapolis Police Department will not face charges following the Feb. 2 fatal shooting of Amir Locke.

Locke, 22, was staying in his cousins apartment in downtown Minneapolis when police entered early in the morning without knocking as part of a homicide investigation from St. Paul. During the incident, Locke was fatally shot by Mark Hanneman.

A video of the incident shows Locke was on the couch when officers approached.

Amir was not a suspect. Our investigation found no evidence that he had any role in the homicide investigation that brought police to his door on 6:48 a.m. on Feb. 2, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said in a prepared statement this past Wednesday. Amir was a victim. He never should have been called a suspect.

Body camera footage that was released in February showed police using a key to enter the downtown apartment. The video shows Locke wrapped in blankets on a couch when officers entered the apartment and yelled Police, search warrant! One officer is seen kicking the couch as other officers yell Hands! and Get on the ground! Locke begins to move and is seen holding a gun when Hanneman shoots him.

The role that (Hennepin) County Attorney (Michael) Freeman and I took on was to determine whether current law allows us to file criminal charges in Amirs death, Ellison said.

A U.S. Supreme Court precedent called Graham vs. Connor, which informed Minnesotas use-of-force law, was the lens through which the attorneys evaluated the evidence.

We have determined that under that precedent and the laws we have, we cannot file criminal charges, Ellison said. Current law only allows us to evaluate the case from the perspective of a reasonable officer. That language is from the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and relevant cases and statutes. We are not allowed to evaluate the case from the perspective of the victim.

In a written statement to investigators, Hanneman said he was convinced he would suffer great bodily harm or death if he did not use deadly force.

With all the available evidence, we would not be able to prove in court that the officers use of force was not authorized under the law beyond a reasonable doubt, Ellison said. It would be unethical for us to file charges in a case in which we know we will not prevail because the law does not support the charges.

Lockes mother, Karen Wells, said she was disgusted by the decision at a news conference this past week. She vowed to pressure Minneapolis city leaders.

The shooting of Locke, a black man, has led to protests in Minneapolis and calls for reviewing police use of no-knock warrants. According to reporting by the Pioneer Press, the Minneapolis Police Department restricted use of no knock warrants following the killing of George Floyd in May 2020. A new policy formally requires officers to knock and wait before entering a residence, but there are limited exceptions.

Hanneman, a Hutchinson High School graduate who worked as a full-time police officer at Hutchinson Police Services from March 21, 2012, to Sept. 12, 2015, and again as a part-time officer from July 25, 2017, to March 24, 2019, was part of a Minneapolis police SWAT team. According to a statement from Interim Minneapolis Police Chief Amelia Huffman, Hanneman returned to active duty on Feb. 28 but is no longer on a SWAT team.

The rest is here:
Former Hutchinson officer will not be charged in shooting - Crow River Media

DENVER The City of Denver will appeal a federal jurys verdict that awarded $14 million in damages to a dozen protesters who were injured by police officers in Denver during the 2020 George Floyd protests.

In a statement obtained by Denver7, Jacqlin Davis, a spokeswoman for the City Attorneys Office, said that while a final judgement on how the city will proceed has not been entered, the Denver City Attorney's Office has decided to pursue post-trial relief, including an appeal.

The verdict was handed down following a three-week trial the first excessive force and civil rights trial to come out of the demonstrations over the death of the unarmed Black man in Minneapolis, Minn. in which the jury heard testimony about failures in leadership and coordination by police in responding to the protests in Denver and injuries suffered by protesters at the hands of officers from Denver and other nearby departments.

The 12 plaintiffs were hit with pepper spray, bean bags and more during several days of protests in the downtown area, and claimed in the lawsuit that their First Amendment rights to demonstrate were violated because of officers unreasonable force and use of less lethal ammunition.

The plaintiffs also alleged Fourth Amendment violations in using excessive force by firing the munitions often without warning and at sensitive parts of their bodies, like their heads.

Denvers attorneys had argued that missteps and mistakes made by officers did not necessarily mean they had violated the constitutional rights of the demonstrators.

The jury ended up ruling in favor of all 12 plaintiffs, though to varying degrees, with plaintiffs getting between $750,000-$3 million in compensatory damages.

Denver has already settled other lawsuits tied to the protests for more than $1.3 million so far.

See the article here:
Denver will appeal $14 million verdict from federal jury over George Floyd protests - Denver 7 Colorado News

FORT COLLINS, Colo. A Denver-based attorney is fighting in court after calls with his client were recorded at the Larimer County Detention Center. He's now filed a motion he said could have broader implications for the criminal justice system in Colorado.

Jason Flores-Williams is representing Ramon Sepulveda, who was arrested last year in Larimer County on charges of drug trafficking and he's been held on $500,000 bond.

Flores-Williams said he recently learned that several of his phone calls with Sepulveda were recorded since they took place over the jail telephone line, and he's now filed the motion in response to the issue.

Jail was never meant to be a discovery tool for the prosecution, Flores-Williams said. The folks recording the line are very often as they are in Larimer County the investigating law enforcement officers who are integral to prosecuting the defendant who is being held there.

Flores-Williams argued this is a violation of both Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure and Sixth Amendment rights to privileged legal counsel. He is now fighting to ensure the recorded calls will not be used against his client, as well as to end all jail phone recordings between an attorney and client.

The Larimer County District Attorney, who is pursuing prosecution of Sepulveda, contends the entire matter is Flores-Williams fault. The jail in Larimer County operates a second, non-recorded line for attorney calls.

As soon as law enforcement learned of Mr. Flores-Williams carelessness, they worked to mitigate his mistakes, a spokesperson with the sheriff's office said. The judge did not request any further action, and we consider the matter finished.

Flores-Williamss rebuttal is that the separate attorney line is not always in operation and goes down several times each day during meals, shift changes and lockdowns, which Denver7 confirmed with the Larimer County Sheriffs Office.

Flores-Williams said this all points to a broader problem in Colorado's criminal justice system with law enforcement agencies charging individuals with crimes and then holding the suspects on high bonds in jails they operate until trial.

Its a fox guarding the henhouse situation, Flores-Williams said.

Ian Farrell, a professor of law at the University of Denver, agreed that it is a broad, systemic problem one that intertwines with other abuses within the criminal justice system.

You have situations where people will be in jail for a longer period of time than they would have spent in prison if they were convicted, Farrell said. There are massive problems associated with this that connect with the problem of the phone calls, which I agree is a very serious problem in and of itself."

We need to have a mechanism that disincentivizes police and prosecutors from violating the rights even when someone is potentially guilty," he added. "Otherwise, theres nothing to prevent them from violating all of our rights, including those of us who may be innocent.

The phone lines at the Larimer County Detention Center disclose the fact they are being recorded. Because of this, Farrell said it will be up to the court to decide if it was reasonable for Flores-Williams and his client to expect privacy during their calls.

The prosecution provided a log of the recorded calls at a hearing on the defense motion in March but had not been requested to provide the recordings themselves at that time.

Sepulvedas trial is set for June.

Visit link:
Colorado lawyer fighting Larimer County Sheriff's Office after calls with client were recorded - Denver 7 Colorado News

A University of Kansas professor was found guilty this week of concealing ties to a Chinese government-linked university, and in a second case a Chinese national was sentenced to more than two years in prison for stealing agricultural trade secrets.

The two cases are part of the Justice Departments initiative targeting Chinese technology theft that officials say has been scaled back by the Biden administration but not canceled, as some news reports have said.

The conviction of Tao Feng, also known as Franklin Tao, a full-time professor at the University of Kansas, and the sentencing of Xiang Haitao, a Chinese national, were both linked to the Chinese government Talents programs to link with overseas Chinese researchers to obtain U.S. civilian and military technology.

Tao was found guilty on Thursday by a jury in Kansas City, Kan., following a two-week trial.

The professor was convicted of three counts of wire fraud and one count of making a false statement as part of a scheme to conceal an $80,000 a year contract with Chinas Fuzhou University that he hid from both KU and the government.

Tao worked at KUs Center for Environmentally Beneficial Catalysis and conducted research for the Energy Department and the National Science Foundation, which required him to notify authorities of foreign work. The U.S. government work resulted in Tao receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in reimbursements from the Energy and NSF grants.

He faces up to 20 years in prison and a fine up to $250,000 for wire fraud, and up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 for federal program fraud convictions.

Peter Zeidenberg, a lawyer for Tao, said the case amounted to charging the professor with grant paperwork omissions and that his client looks forward to being fully vindicated.

Court documents in the case revealed that a Chinese colleague hostile to Tao obtained the Fuzhou University contract and provided it to the FBI.

In the second case, Chinese national Xiang Haitao was sentenced to 29 months in prison for charges related to stealing agricultural trade secrets from The Climate Corporation, a subsidiary of Monsanto.

Xiang was employed by Monsanto and The Climate Corp. from 2008 to 2017 as an imaging scientist.

Both companies produced a digital online software platform called Nutrient Optimizer, a platform used by farmers to gather agricultural field data designed to increase productivity. According to court documents, Xiang in 2015 applied to the Chinese Academy of Sciences Nanjing Institute of Soil Science that conducted agricultural research.

Emails in the case said he sought employment as part of Beijings Hundred Talents Program, first launched in 1994 to recruit high-level talent.

The program was later renamed the Thousand Talents Program and has been at the center of a number of U.S. prosecutions of American and Chinese university researchers with links to institutions in China.

A search of Xiangs baggage in 2017 found copies of the Nutrient Optimizer, but the discovery was made after he had traveled to China. He was arrested in November 2019 during a return trip to the United States.

Xiang conspired to steal an important trade secret to gain an unfair advantage for himself and the PRC, said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen, with the Justice Departments National Security Division. The victim companies invested significant time and resources to develop this intellectual property. Economic espionage is a serious offense that can threaten U.S. companies competitive advantage.

Vadim A. Glozman, a lawyer for Xiang, said the sentencing was the first step in his battle to be reunited with his family. Xiang will appeal a denial of a motion related to the Fourth Amendment search and seizure in the case, he said.

Although he has served the entirety of his sentence already, he will be subject to deportation proceedings, Mr. Glozman said. It is our intention to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress we had litigated on his behalf which will be a matter of first impression in the Eighth Circuit. The appeal will be based on an important Fourth Amendment issue that has wide-reaching consequences for all individuals in this country.

Alan E. Kohler Jr., FBI assistant director in charge of counterintelligence said: The government of China does not hesitate to go after the ingenuity that drives our economy. Stealing our highly prized technology can lead to the loss of good-paying jobs here in the United States, affecting families, and sometimes entire communities. Our economic security is essential to our national security. Thats why at the FBI protecting our nations innovation is both a law enforcement and a top national security priority.

Excerpt from:
Jury convicts Tao Feng, Kansas professor accused of hiding China ties - Washington Times