NYPD committed Crimes in my Case and how many other cases?


http://nypdnewcommission.blogspot.com/2017/04/ray-kelly-charles-campisi-bratton.html
They love using Ron Kuby's letter to pretend I was not coerced and the NYPD did not commit a pile up of crimes.
The Detectives in my case Det Vergona and Det Andy Dwyer, their partners, and supervisors and facebook friends NYPD PO Eugene Schatz aka Gene Schatz and Det Tommy Moran were party to the fact Verogna was lying in his DD5s and was going to verbally violently threaten me over the phone because the cowardly criminal detectives and supervisors did not have it in them to commit the crimes they committed and face me but they did use Ron Kuby's letter to pretend they dd not commit crimes and Internal Affairs has protected them along w/ top brass all party to retaliation.

I had respected the NYPD until NYPD PO Gene Schatz and his facebook friends Detective Andrew Dwyer and Det John Vergona, with their partners, and supervisors DI Ed Winski, Lt Angelo Burgos and Sgt Chen did a bait and switch downgrading their crimes and Delita HOOKS crimes to no crimes. Google Dr Fagelman assault and see Delita HOOKS in action but she wasn't done breaking laws and the NYPD detectives and supervisors joined in and did Dr Andrew Fagelman quite a favor since he did not fire his violent, manipulative attack receptionist and when a private investigator asked Dr Fagelman did you talk to the NYPD he said "no comment" aka he would implicate himself in the crimes of arranging for Delita HOOKS to walk in and commit a crime filing a false cross complaint and Dr Fagelman was party to even more crimes the face Det John VERGONA was going to violently threaten me over the phone with false arrest on a Saturday 4pm only for the utmost retaliation and even fabrication of crimes which Eric Garner outlines in his own case 4 years ago....
These corrupt evil people would teach be about the real NYPD and how they break laws, do fixing and favors and all these years Internal Affairs protected these crimes along with Corp Counsel Zachary Carter lied in my case and his predecessor before him.

Friday, July 3, 2015

Case Law When Illegal Arrests can be challenged in court?

(And thanks to Jose LaSalle for the following: )

Case Law:
1. “An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

2. “Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self-defense.’ (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S. E. 2d 100).

3. “One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S. E. 910).

4. “These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” (Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beavers v. State, 4 Tex. App. 175; Skidmore v. State 43 Tex. 93, 903. Horizontal Divider 12).

Note 2:
…Police Officers can only ask for your identification when an investigation is under way, and you are a part of it. Therefore, when they hinder you, they are saying that you are under investigation. Their car lights and sirens are to only go on if there is an investigation. Therefore, when they hinder you, they are saying that you are under investigation. Their car lights and sirens are to only go on if there is an investigation. Therefore they must identify to you the investigation, and your part in it.

UNLAWFUL DETAINMENT, ARREST & SEARCH:

1. Owen v. Independence, 100 S.C.T. 1398, 445 US 622
“Officers of the court have no immunity when violating a Constitutional right. From liability. For they are deemed to know the law.”

2. Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla 32, 227 F. 417
‘The courts are not bound by an officers interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act.’

No comments:

Post a Comment