Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » 'Cops admit to planting MJ on 92 old woman they shot in drug raid

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: 'Cops admit to planting MJ on 92 old woman they shot in drug raid
trade04
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for trade04     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Associated Press | April 30, 2007
Harry R. Weber

ATLANTA — Two police officers pleaded guilty Thursday to manslaughter in the shooting death of a 92-year-old woman during a botched drug raid last fall. A third officer still faces charges.

Officer J.R. Smith told a state judge Thursday that he regretted what had happened.

"I'm sorry," the 35-year-old said, his voice barely audible. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter, violation of oath, criminal solicitation, making false statements and perjury, which was based on claims in a warrant.

Former Officer Gregg Junnier, 40, who retired from the Atlanta police in January, pleaded guilty to manslaughter, violation of oath, criminal solicitation and making false statements. Both men are expected to face more than 10 years in prison.

In a hearing later in federal court, both pleaded guilty to a single charge of conspiracy to violate a person's civil rights, resulting in death. Their state and federal sentences would run concurrently.

The charges followed a Nov. 21 "no-knock" drug raid on the home of Kathryn Johnston, 92. An informant had described buying drugs from a dealer there, police said. When the officers burst in without warning, Johnston fired at them, and they fired back, killing her.

Fulton County prosecutor Peter Johnson said that the officers involved in Johnston's death fired 39 shots, striking her five or six times, including a fatal blow to the chest.

He said Johnston fired only once through her door and didn't hit any of the officers. That means the officers who were wounded likely were hit by their own colleagues, he said.

Junnier and Smith, who is on administrative leave, had been charged in an indictment unsealed earlier Thursday with felony murder, violation of oath by a public officer, criminal solicitation, burglary, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and making false statements.

The third officer, Arthur Tesler, also on administrative leave, was charged with violation of oath by a public officer, making false statements and false imprisonment under color of legal process. His attorney, William McKenney, said Tesler expects to go to trial.

Tesler, 40, is "very relieved" not to face murder charges, McKenney said, "but we're concerned about the three charges."

Both men could have faced up to life in prison had they been convicted of murder. Instead, Junnier will face 10 years and one month and Smith 12 years and seven months. No sentencing date was immediately set, and the sentences are contingent on the men cooperating with the government.

The deadly drug raid had been set up after narcotics officers said an informant had claimed there was cocaine in the home.

When the plainclothes officers burst in without notice, police said, Johnston fired at them, and they fired back.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Yonette Sam-Buchanan said Thursday that although the officers found no drugs in Johnston's home, Smith planted three bags of marijuana in the home as part of a cover story.

The case raised serious questions about no-knock warrants and whether the officers followed proper procedures.

Atlanta Police Chief Richard Pennington asked the FBI to lead a multi-agency probe. He also announced policy changes to require the department to drug-test its nearly 1,800 officers and require top supervisors to sign off on narcotics operations and no-knock warrants.

To get the warrant, officers told a magistrate judge that an undercover informant had told them Johnston's home had surveillance cameras monitored carefully by a drug dealer named Sam.

After the shooting, a man claiming to be the informant told a television station that he had never purchased drugs there, leading Pennington to admit he was uncertain whether the suspected drug dealer actually existed.

The Rev. Markel Hutchins, a civil rights activist who serves as a spokesman for Johnston's family, said the family was satisfied with Thursday's developments.

"They have never sought vengeance. They have only sought justice," he said.

Hutchins said the family is considering civil action against the police department.

"I think what happened today makes it very clear that Ms. Johnston was violated, that her civil rights were violated," he said.

Associated Press writer Jason Bronis in Atlanta contributed to this report.

_______________________________


un****ingbelievable

Posts: 3086 | From: miami | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This happens over and over. Usually, the cops get away with it.

In this case, they willingly broke into a home they had inadequate reason (read that absolutely no reason and they knew that) to suspect was a "drug source" and murdered a citizen who, knowing there was no reason for police to invade, was exercising her Constitutional rights by protecting her home and life from unreasonable search and seisure.

Had these cops not been found to have added the crime of planting false evidence to cover up their murder, I have little doubt they would have gotten off with maybe a soon to be forgotten reprimand at most.

But these cops got away with it. They "copped out" to a lesser charge than the premeditated murder they committed.

Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This whole thing is terrible just goes to show you what abuse of power can do.
Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If it were an isolated case, then the apologist for the cops (not just in this particular case) might be offering a reasonale argument, but the fact is, that falsifying reasons to use force on people and falsifying evidence to justify it are daily events that almost all cops know of and keep secret thought their "code of silence crap", whether or not they participate in the actual offenses. Their loyalty is to the fraternity not to the law or the people.

The claim that testing and hiring procedures and requirements to have "criminal justice" schooling removes or lessens the the concern of having "bad cops" is BS. Just as prison is a fast paced school for a drug offender to lesarn to be a hardened criminal, criminal justice classes are a study in how to violate the rights of the people. (For anyone that has spent a lifetime in the academic world, having to accept the degraded junk that calls itself "criminal justice" along side of chemistry and history and economics is an insult to the profession and should be to the public.)

Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ruthie
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for ruthie     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have to admit, this is a troubling story. I sure hope ALL the truth comes out and justice is truly done...
Posts: 741 | From: North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"I sure hope ALL the truth comes out and justice is truly done"

Why do you question that it hasn't? Aren't still insisting that the cops are white hatted innocent princes and what cops refer to as "civilians" are wrong because a cop "said" so.

That ain't the way it is supposed to work. He is supposed to "prove" it first, beyond a reasonable doubt" or assume the "civilian" in question is innocent and treat him so. Of course, you and I both know he opperates with the converse assumption.

Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share