Tag: police accountability

Trans Pedophile Still Free After Attempting to Meet Child, Baby for Sexual Abuse

Berkeley Police allowed a suspected pedophile to walk away from a sting conducted by predator hunters despite being shown evidence that he had been expressing interest in molesting multiple children, including an infant.

On August 20, anti-pedophile vigilante group Predator Poachers uploaded footage of a sting they conducted in Berkeley, California to YouTube involving a trans-identified male who had been purportedly seeking to meet a 9-year-old for the purposes of sexually abusing her.

The girl was in fact a decoy established by the group as part of a months-long investigation into the man, who went by the name Sophia Westfall.

Speaking to Reduxx, predator hunter Alex Rosen says Westfall first contacted the decoy’s Instagram account in April, and soon after began initiating sexual conversations with the child.

Rosen is a full-time anti-pedophile vigilante, and he and his small team have traveled across the United States conducting stings on predators since 2019. Ample evidence is gathered prior to a confrontation, and police are then called.

Rosen told Reduxx that the sting uploaded on the 20th had actually been conducted on June 7 when he and his team were in California.

“Sophia was one of the reasons we were in California but we actually had multiple suspects in the state,” he explained, noting that Sophia had been picked up by two different decoys on two different platforms — Instagram and Telegram. Rosen says both decoy accounts had been populated using altered and AI-generated photos.

Keep reading

More Than a Half-dozen Officers Stood and Watched for 8 Minutes as a Teen Hung Himself

Eight minutes — this is the amount of time multiple officers and a captain stood by and watched as 18-year-old Nicholas Feliciano wrapped a homemade noose around his neck and proceeded to hang himself in a jail cell. More than a half dozen officers and jail staff did nothing as he hung from his neck, flailed around before going completely limp.

Only after watching the 18-year-old go still and his lifeless body hang limp in the jail cell did anyone move to cut him down. On Nov. 27, 2019, the rope was cut and Feliciano’s limp body slammed to the floor.

According to court documents, Feliciano used a sweater to try to hang himself from a U-shaped piece of metal in the ceiling above the toilet. The ceiling fixture was supposed to have been removed after another detainee had used it to attempt suicide six days earlier. It was not.

For seven minutes and 51 seconds, seven correction officers, a captain and two paramedics walked by or watched on from a guard station as Feliciano hung himself, and according to the surveillance footage, not a single one of them acted.

For three years as Feliciano remained hospitalized with severe brain damage, requiring round-the-clock care, not a single one of the officers faced charges, and, in fact, they all continued to collect their paychecks from the New York City Department of Corrections.

Last week, however, that changed and Darcel D. Clark, the Bronx district attorney who has jurisdiction over Rikers Island, filed felony charges against four of the officers involved.

Keep reading

Cops Claimed Handcuffed Woman Kicked Open Patrol Car Door, Fell Out and Died, But They Were Lying

When Hancock County Sheriff Terrell Primus visited Mary and Marvin Grier earlier this month, he told them that their daughter, Brianna Grier had been airlifted to Grady Hospital in Atlanta. Brianna, according to the sheriff, had kicked open the door on the patrol car and jumped out while it was rolling.

On July 14, her parents and sister had called 911 for help when Brianna had a schizophrenic episode. Marvin Grier told WMAZ that this wasn’t the first time Brianna has had a schizophrenic episode. He said usually EMS would come, transport her to Atrium Health Navicent Baldwin and take her to the psychiatric unit, but this time was different. Brianna got guns and badges instead of ambulances and hospital beds.

Instead of EMS, two deputies arrived at the home between 12 and 1 a.m. and put the 28-year-old in handcuffs and put her in the back of the deputy’s car.

She was supposed to be taken to the sheriff’s office but she would never make it there.

The sheriff told the family the next day that she had “kicked the door out and jumped out the car,” Marvin Grier told WMAZ.

When the Griers made it to the hospital to see Brianna, they were heartbroken to find her on life support.

“I just broke down and cried because it’s just ridiculous how she laying up there with tubes and pipes everywhere on her for no reason because it didn’t have to be that. It didn’t have to be that,” Mary Grier said.

Brianna would die four days later.

As the family began their grieving process, they also had lots of questions. Given that police patrol car doors cannot be opened from the inside, how was it that Brianna was somehow able to kick open the door and “fall” out of the car?

“I would do what any other parent would do, and that’s what we’re trying to do is find answers,” Marvin Grier said.

“If she got out the car, they had to let her out the car. That’s my interpretation, because in a police car, you can’t open the door from the inside, it had to be the outside,” Mary Grier said last week.

Fast-forward to this week, and Mary would be proven right. Brianna never kicked open the door — because the door was never closed.

Keep reading

Cop Arrested for Showing up to 911 Call & Masturbating in Front of Family as Well as Multiple Sexual Assaults

Over the years, the Free Thought Project has reported on some utterly disturbing behavior by members of American law enforcement — up to and including public masturbation. Most of these incidents, however, involved cops who were off duty. However, a family in San Jose found out in April that cops responding to 911 calls can and will show up to a call and think they are on a porn set.

That officer was Matthew Dominguez — who began masturbating in front of the family — and has since been charged and arrested. After his case garnered national headlines, more victims came forward and detailed multiple allegations of sexual assaults.

One of the women says Dominguez turned off his body camera during a traffic stop before sexually assaulting her. Another woman detailed a sexual assault that took place at a barbeque. Notably, both of these women filed their complaints before Dominguez was caught masturbating in front of a family, and both of these women had their complaints dismissed.

Only after Dominguez was arrested and the women came forward again, did the department launch another investigation which led to additional sexual battery charges against the officer. On July 7, prosecutors added another misdemeanor sexual battery charge based on the woman’s account.

As TFTP reported at the time, on April 21, a family in San Jose called 911 to report that a mentally ill family member was being violent. Officer Dominguez, a 32-year-old who has been with the department for four years, showed up on the scene with two other officers.

Being the senior officer, Dominguez sent the two officers away to locate the allegedly violent family member. After he made himself alone with the women in the home, he decided it was time to act. As the two officers left, Dominguez started to masturbate in front of two daughters before the mother walked into the room.

When the mother walked in, seeing the two girls in shock, Dominguez took to exposing himself to her as well. Authorities said the victims were “shocked and scared” and ran away after realizing what was going on. Two male relatives were notified about Dominguez’s sick behavior as another witnessed him in the dining room masturbating as well.

Exactly what possesses a police officer to begin masturbating at a crime scene or even to think that it would be acceptable, is mind blowing. Yet here we are.

It would take nearly three weeks for Dominguez to be arrested and eventually he was booked and charged with indecent exposure. He has since been placed on administrative leave.

Keep reading

It is Now Illegal to Film Near Police Officers in Arizona

Frequent readers of the Free Thought Project know that filming the cops is not a crime. Despite this being a widely known provision — held up with multiple court precedents — cops continue to violate the First Amendment protected right of citizens to film the police. Earlier this year, the Arizona House Appropriations Committee approved a bill that would criminalize filming cops on the job, dealing a massive blow to First Amendment rights. The following month, the Senate passed it, and on Wednesday, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey signed it into law.

On Sept. 24 it will be illegal to record the police in Arizona within an 8-foot distance.

Republican Representative John Kavanaugh, who is a former police officer, was the lead sponsor of the legislation. According to the new law, it is illegal “for a person to knowingly make a video recording of law enforcement activity, including the handling of an emotionally disturbed person, if the person does not have the permission of the law enforcement officer” and is within 8 feet of the cop.

Kavanaugh originally stipulated a 15 foot radius, however it was later amended after multiple objections. But for many, this is still too far.

As Valera Voce, points out, the law also classifies unlawful video recording of law enforcement activity as a petty offense, unless a person fails to comply with a verbal warning of a violation or has been previously convicted of a violation in which case an offense is a class 3 misdemeanor. A class 3 misdemeanor comes with a minimum of 30 days in jail. Finally, the bill explicitly declares that it “does not establish a right, or authorize any person, to make a video recording of a law enforcement officer.”

“It’s crazy thinking about that for a second. The video that led to the criminal conviction of the police officer who killed George Floyd would itself be a criminal act. And that makes no sense whatsoever,” attorney Dan Barr told FOX 10.

Keep reading

Rogue Cops: The Supreme Court Is Turning America Into a Constitution-Free Zone

“No one should get used to their rights. Predicting with certainty which ones, if any, will go, or when, is impossible.”—Mary R. Ziegler, legal historian

The Supreme Court has spoken: there will be no consequences for cops who brutalize the citizenry and no justice for the victims of police brutality.

Although the Court’s 2021-22 rulings on qualified immunity for police who engage in official misconduct were largely overshadowed by its politically polarizing rulings on abortion, gun ownership and religion, they were no less devastating.

The doctrine of qualified immunity was intended to insulate government officials from frivolous lawsuits, but the real purpose of qualified immunity is to ensure that government officials are not held accountable for official misconduct.

In Egbert v. Boule, the Court gave total immunity to Border Patrol agents who beat up a bed-and-breakfast owner, in the process carving out a massive exception to the Fourth Amendment for border police (and by extension, other federal police) who unconstitutionally use excessive force. As journalist Ian Millhiser concludes, “Egbert v. Boule is a severe blow to the proposition that law enforcement must obey the Constitution.”

In Cope v. Cogdill, the Court let stand a Fifth Circuit ruling that granted qualified immunity to jail officials who watched a suicidal inmate strangle himself without intervening or calling for help. Likewise, in Ramirez v. Guadarrama, the Court let stand a lower court ruling granting qualified immunity to police officers who fired their tasers at a suicidal man who had doused himself in gasoline, causing the man to burst into flames.

Both Cope and Ramirez move the goal posts for the kind of misconduct that merits qualified immunity, suggesting that even sheer incompetence is excusable when it involves a cop.

It’s a chilling reminder that in the American police state, ‘we the people’ are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to ‘serve and protect.”

This is how unarmed Americans keep dying at the hands of militarized police.

Keep reading

Five Stories You’re Missing While Obsessing Over The “Current Thing”

In recent years and months it has become apparent that more often the attention of the American public is easily diverted. With increasing frequency we are seeing attention spans decrease, swaying incoherently from one curated narrative to the next, often irrational and logically inconsistent, to align with the “current thing” that establishment officials and their obedient talking heads on the ‘tell-lie-vision’ proselytize.

The new “current thing” takes the place of the old “current thing” in a seemingly never-ending game of Simon Says: Empire Edition. In just a month’s time we’ve seen virtue signalers exchange Ukrainian flags for Pride Flags, and COVID hysteria for monkeypox hysteria, with a smattering of gun control hypocrisy in between; shifting back and forth from “No one needs an AR-15!” to “Weapons for Ukraine!”, and “all cops are racist!” to “Only cops should have guns”.

All aided and abetted by an establishment media all too willing to participate in the degradation of common sense so long as it bolsters their abysmal ratings. It is tiresome for the intellectually competent.

But under the fanfare of these ridiculous charades a number of actually important news stories are either being ignored or at the very least obfuscated in favor of these insufferable ineptitudes.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Issues Ruling, Gutting Miranda Rights And Threatening The Fifth Amendment

On Thursday, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Vega V Tekoh, a case involving the administration of Miranda rights, with the court ruling that a suspect’s words or statements can be used in court regardless of their Miranda rights. 

For background, these are the facts of the case in question:

Terence Tekoh worked as a patient transporter in a hospital in Los Angeles. After a patient accused him of sexual assault, hospital staff reported the allegation to the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. Deputy Carlos Vega went to the hospital to ask Tekoh questions and take Tekoh’s statement. Although the parties described vastly different accounts of the nature of the interaction between Tekoh and Vega, it is undisputed that Vega did not advise Tekoh of his Miranda rights before questioning him or taking his statement.

Tekoh was arrested and charged in California state court, but a jury returned a verdict of not guilty. Following the acquittal on the criminal charge, Tekoh sued Vega, alleging that Vega violated Tekoh’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by taking his statement without first advising him of his Miranda rights.

Justice Samuel Alito issued his ruling, a count of 6-3, deciding that using such statements outside of Miranda rights is not a violation of a defendant’s rights and does not give them the right to sue the court for such use. 

Miranda prescribed a specific and protective set of warnings to ensure that criminally accused suspects were made aware of the Fifth Amendment’s decree that no person “shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”  

Miranda is also one of the court’s most culturally famous decisions. Americans know Miranda. More accurately: Americans know their Miranda warnings. Even if they cannot recite the lyrics to the national anthem or the Pledge of Allegiance, they likely can recite Miranda’s warnings: 

  • You have the right to remain silent;
  • Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law;
  • You have the right to a lawyer;
  • If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you.

Generally, if the police obtain a suspect’s statement violating Miranda, the government cannot use that statement against the defendant in court. 

But can the defendant later sue the police for violating the defendant’s constitutional rights? 

The Supreme Court now says, No. 

Keep reading