Brooklyn prosecutors are examining 50 homicide convictions involving a retired police detective who may have intimidated suspects into confessing to crimes they never committed – with words he chose.

Louis Scarcella was a celebrated member of the Brooklyn North Homicide squad through the crack-cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s, when he gained a reputation for his unusual ability to draw out confessions. He investigated about 175 murders alone and helped with almost 200 more, but questions have been raised on whether Scarcella coerced, or even entirely fabricated, the admissions of guilt. 

The inquiries began after David Ranta was released from prison earlier this year. Ranta, once a drug addict and petty criminal, spent nearly 23 years in prison for the 1990 murder of a Brooklyn rabbi, despite no physical evidence linking him to the crime other than a confession statement he maintains he didn’t write. The investigating detective was Louis Scarcella. 

Upon reviewing the cases Scarcella was involved in throughout his 29-year career with the NYPD, The New York Times discovered some alarming coincidences among the confessions. In at least five, the suspects begin their statement with the phrases “You got it right” or “I was there.” Ranta’s statement, which he has always denied delivering, begins, “I was there.” 

Scarcella relied on a drug addicted prostitute to act as a witness in at least six different, unconnected murder trials. Teresa Gomez has since died, but lawyers said she was “Louie’s go-to witness,” despite major credibility issues.

Read More

A judge responded to an assault victim by demanding sex in exchange for ‘legal favors.’ She filed a complaint, and he sent cops to plant meth in her car.

June 11, 2013  | With a plot out of a Hollywood movie or a gripping Lifetime TV show, a mesmerizing drama of sex, power, frame-ups, planted drugs, and lies unfolded in real life in Georgia when two Murray County sheriff’s deputies recently pleaded guilty in federal court for their part in a scheme to send an innocent woman to prison. Now both deputies await sentencing on charges of obstruction of justice and perjury stemming from an FBI civil rights investigation into the odd goings-on Down South.
Read More

From the video description:

This is a film of my encounter with the Middletown CT Police Department on June 5th, 2013. In the 10 minutes before this video begins, I was filming police entering and exiting the MPD building, then filming their rear parking lot. All filming was done from on the public sidewalk, and I did not enter the building or the parking lot.This video begins as I was walking back to the front of the building. As I was passing the side entrance, officer Peck exited the building so I started filming him.

Officer Peck illegally detained me without Reasonable Articulable Suspicion that I had committed or would commit a crime, as required by the Constitution (See: Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)). Officer Peck then lied to me and told me that filming the police department building and parking lot was a crime.

Eventually the officers gave up on detaining me since I was doing nothing wrong. Immediately after this film ended, my brother happened to ride up on his bike, and I started talking to him, telling him what had just happened. After I left, the MPD retaliated against my brother for associating with me, and wrote him a $90 citation for riding his bike on the sidewalk.

The officers that were involved in this illegal detention are:
Officer Peck, Badge #7099
Officer Schreiner, Badge #8666
Officer Maturo, Refused to provide Badge #

I do not know what officers detained my brother as I was not present for that encounter.

To complain about these officers’ violation of 4th Amendment rights, please contact the Middletown Police Department:

(860) 638-4000

For more information on why this detention was illegal and a violation of my 4th Amendment rights,see:

For more information on this, see the case Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). SCOTUS held that police need Reasonable, Articulable Suspicion that a person is committing , has committed, or is about to commit a crime in order to have the legal authority to detain that person.

Simply stating that they look “suspicious” doesn’t fit that narrow guideline.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v_Ohio

NY Woman Arrested for Photographing Cop Cars

A New York woman who wandered into an unfenced parking lot behind her local town hall was arrested after photographing police cars Wednesday.

Melanie Swisher was charged with obstructing governmental administration, trespassing and disorderly conduct after she was accused of entering “private property.”

But the area is far from private considering it was part of a government building. And the only thing indicating it was a restricted area was a “do not enter, police only” sign informing people that they are not allowed to park their cars in the lot.

Essentially a traffic sign.

http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2013/06/06/new-york-woman-arrested-after-photographing-police-cars/

REFUSING TO IDENTIFY YOURSELF ***BEFORE*** BEING CHARGED WITH A CRIME DOES NOT CONSTITUTE “OBSTRUCTION”, AS IDENTIFYING YOURSELF IS A VOLUNTARY ACTION.

CAN YOU SAY: CART BEFORE THE HORSE???

back to top