Tuesday, February 18, 2014

ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE

QUESTION: In the State of California; all relevant evidence for court trials must be submitted and considered. So why do other police departments extensively utilize surveillance footage to solve crimes; while the Sunnyvale Police Department repeatedly refuses to do so? 

GO TO: Mercury News editorial: Security cameras can help San Jose police @ http://www.mercurynews.com/editorials/ci_25134564?source=rss

"If you're on a neighborhood e-mail list in any Silicon Valley community, you've probably seen one of these videos: a clear shot of a recognizable person walking from a car to a porch and stealing a package, probably just after a delivery truck dropped it off. All courtesy of a home security camera. We were reminded of those real-life crime snippets when San Jose Councilman Sam Liccardo made a pitch to the City Council rules committee a few weeks ago to help police connect with homeowners who'd like to help catch a criminal with their home security cameras..."


1) OFFICERS SMITH AND OCHOA > Smith and Ochoa refused to gather surveillance footage from the Oasis Nightclub back in April of 2012. > GO TO: https://lreblogger.blogspot.com/2019/11/posdps-officers-smith-and-ochoa-illegal.html + http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013_06_01_archive.html

2) JOHN'S NEIGHBOR JANE / CASE #13-3093 > For instance; John's neighbor Jane had her home burglarized. Jane was hesitant to call the police, but John insisted that she do so. Jane then called the Sunnyvale police on Johns' cell phone and they quickly responded. 

To make a long story short; one of the officers came to Johns' house to discuss what had happened to Jane, asking about any surveillance footage that may be available from the incident so they could "place the criminals at the scene of the crime". GO TO: http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/06/incident-on-15-june-2013-ev13-166-206_17.html

3) INCIDENT ON 15 JUNE 2013 / EV13-166-206 > John called the Sunnyvale police and they responded promptly. John then gave the Officers a piece of paper with the photo seen here; which they took with them in order to find the suspects in question. (although they did not give John an event number for this particular incident; causing John to call the next morning and retrieve an event number from a desk officer...a desk Officer who was a bit surprised that John did not receive an event number for the incident. (The event number of this particular incident is: EV13-166-206). Note: One of the responding officers did not want to take surveillance evidence that John offered to them; and one of these Officers is the exact same Officer who helped Johns' neighbor Jane by getting surveillance evidence from John!?! > GO TO: http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/09/witness-intimidation-andor-dissuading.html + http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/08/photo-placing-jake-paolinetti-and.html + http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/09/witness-intimidation-andor-dissuading.html

QUESTIONS: 1) Why did officers Smith and Ochoa fail to gather surveillance footage showing the attack on John that night at the Oasis Nightclub and/or why did Smith and Ochoa discriminate against John by telling John that he would be trespassing if John returned to the club (!?!) when John had recently/allegedly been attacked by karaoke host Doug!?! > 2) Why did Officers Holt and Mathers do the EXACT same thing regarding the event that occurred on 15 JUNE 2013 by failing to gather surveillance footage?!? (see below) > GO TO: http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/05/johns-neighbor-jane.html > Can anyone say "reverse racial discrimination" and/or "ignoring exculpatory evidence" and/or "dereliction of duty" and/or "fucking idiotic cops"? I didn't think so.

 SEE: ALL RELEVANT EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE IN THE COURT OF LAW @ http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=evid&group=00001-01000&file=350-356 > 352. The court in its discretion may exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will (a) necessitate undue consumption of time or (b) create substantial danger of undue prejudice(!?!), of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury. (NOTE: ignoring exculpatory evidence = misleading the jury and/or undue prejudice)...

 SEE ALSO: OFFICERS SMITH AND OCHOA @
https://lreblogger.blogspot.com/2019/11/posdps-officers-smith-and-ochoa-illegal.html

Note: Since writing this Sunnyvale DPS Officer Gibo came walking through the neighborhood one night looking for surveillance footage; and yet another Sunnyvale DPS detective followed up on Officer Gibo many weeks later...Gibo apparently never retrieved the surveillance video footage I left outside; causing me to delete the footage for other footage of a white male on a bike with and American flag who was repeatedly kicking my green garbage can over in the weeks before Sunnyvale DPS took action about both the safety cone and the placement of the green garbage can with 19 MPH painted on the side for traffic calming purposes – all done with permission attained long ago from the Cities of Sunnyvale and Santa Clara...And before all of this the SCPD asked me for surveillance footage in yet another incident as well...Showing a clear pattern and practice of both good and bad police behavior; in that Gibo actually was doing what Ochoa and Smith etc should have done long ago – yet did not seem to finish the task as the female DPS detective suggested...While SCPD Officers were doing their jobs like they should have as the female DPS detective was...
                                         

















at




















1 comment: