Law enforcement should be held to a higher standard, and this kind of violation of trust and abuse of power deserves far more than just the punishment for a DUI. The DUI punishment should be stacked on top of whatever she can be charged with for this act itself: false arrest, filing false reports, falsifying evidence, etc. And there should be no allowance for serving those sentences concurrently.
Unless you can prove in a court of law that another cop was told by another court not to dump booze in another victim’s car, then arrest them for it, then there is no way we can expect her to have known this was wrong! (Qualified Immunity)
Cops don’t have to know the laws they’re paid to enforce. (Heien v. North Carolina)
Cops have no legal duty to protect you (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, Castle Rock v. Gonzales)
That’s not what qualified immunity means, FYI. Qualified immunity protects state actors (i.e. police) from being sued for actions performed during the execution of their duties. The state and/or department takes up financial responsibilities. It does not shield them from criminal prosecution.
The cops certainly really, really wish it did. And if they had their preference, they’d have you believe it did, too. But it doesn’t.
On paper, the police are not above the law in regards to criminal prosecution. Unfortunately in practice generally they are. As we’ve seen many times.
Double the sentence she tried to frame him for in addition to the max for any and all other crimes she may have committed, and knowingly arresting someone based on false evidence needs to be charged federally as kidnapping because that’s what it is.
Straight up psychotic. She should get exactly whatever the max sentencing is that he would have gotten.
More than that.
Law enforcement should be held to a higher standard, and this kind of violation of trust and abuse of power deserves far more than just the punishment for a DUI. The DUI punishment should be stacked on top of whatever she can be charged with for this act itself: false arrest, filing false reports, falsifying evidence, etc. And there should be no allowance for serving those sentences concurrently.
But it probably won’t happen.
Knowingly arresting someone based on false evidence should be charged federally as kidnapping.
Unless you can prove in a court of law that another cop was told by another court not to dump booze in another victim’s car, then arrest them for it, then there is no way we can expect her to have known this was wrong! (Qualified Immunity)
Cops don’t have to know the laws they’re paid to enforce. (Heien v. North Carolina)
Cops have no legal duty to protect you (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, Castle Rock v. Gonzales)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
That’s not what qualified immunity means, FYI. Qualified immunity protects state actors (i.e. police) from being sued for actions performed during the execution of their duties. The state and/or department takes up financial responsibilities. It does not shield them from criminal prosecution.
The cops certainly really, really wish it did. And if they had their preference, they’d have you believe it did, too. But it doesn’t.
On paper, the police are not above the law in regards to criminal prosecution. Unfortunately in practice generally they are. As we’ve seen many times.
Oh it absolutely won’t. You have to have a reasonable expectation.
Double the sentence she tried to frame him for in addition to the max for any and all other crimes she may have committed, and knowingly arresting someone based on false evidence needs to be charged federally as kidnapping because that’s what it is.