Should law enforcement officers be held accountable for fabricating evidence in order to falsely incriminate citizens of crimes?
Is there any set of circumstances which would justify a law enforcement officer the right to edit and falsify evidence in order to incriminate citizens of crimes?
If you answered yes to the first question and no to the second questions then I would like for you to contact California Attorney General Kamala Harris and request that she hold Palo Alto Police Chief Dennis Burns and his subordinate officers accountable for violating California Penal Code 141 (b).
AG Kamala Harris & SAAG Gerald Engler:
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11100 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004:
phone: (415) 703-5500 or (415) 703-1361 email: firstname.lastname@example.org
If the government, the justice system, can edit and falsify evidence; edit and falsify audio/video recordings in order to wrongfully incriminate citizens of crimes and get away with it WITHOUT BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE then we are not free and the Constitution is dead.
As an incentive to look into my allegation on your own time and outside of your jurisdiction for the purpose of upholding the integrity of the justice system as a whole I am providing a $1,000.00 incentive to the first person who can refute my allegation.
The FIRST law enforcement person who is a current sworn officer of the law of any state; or a former or current police chief; or a former or current state or federal prosecutor; or a former or current judge who can prove that Palo Alto Police Chief Dennis Burns and his subordinate officers DID NOT violate California Penal Code 141 (b) shall receive $1,000.00.
I am putting forth this proposition due to the most egregious nature of the offenses committed by the Palo Alto Police and significant entities within the justice system covering it up. I am not only trying to obtain credible support for my allegations, but I am also trying to find out if there is any person in the entire justice system who has the integrity and conviction to place the Constitution and the Rule of Law, and Truth, and Justice and Accountability above personal gain. There are thousands of law enforcement professionals who are considered pillars of society espousing the former traits, yet so far not one who has been informed of the crimes of the Palo Alto Police is willing to hold a fellow law enforcement officer accountable for violating numerous laws eviscerating the very freedoms for which our Nation stands for. Not one is even willing to speak up and simply make a statement to the proper investigative agencies to hold his/her fellow law enforcement officer accountable.
The thousand dollars is simply an incentive for participates to utilize a little of their own time in looking at the evidence of my case. Hopefully if anyone who looks at the evidence and concludes that Chief Dennis Burns and his subordinate officers have violated California Penal Code 141(b) they will have the courage and the integrity to provide California State Attorney General Kamala Harris with his/her conclusions.
There are numerous other violations that could be addressed, however that would be too time consuming for the matter at hand. A plethora of evidence regarding the other violations is provided to corroborate the destruction of evidence violation and to aid participants’ investigation of the evidence. See http://chiefburns.weebly.com/index.html
Back Ground and History:
On March 15, 2008 three Palo Alto, California Police Officers: Manuel Temores; April Wagner; and Kelly Burger made contact with Joseph (Tony) Ciampi. There is much dispute as to the actual happenings during that contact which resulted in two of the officers discharging their taser guns and Ciampi being arrested for felony resisting arrest. See EXHIBIT 1L
Four audio/video recordings captured the incident and the two taser guns’ memory devices documented the electrical discharge.
Ciampi has alleged that all four audio/video recordings have been edited, altered and falsified, corroborated by forensic analysis, including that of the Santa Clara County Crime Lab which verified that 4 seconds of video footage is missing from Temores’ taser video. See EXHIBIT 8
Ciampi also alleges that the taser guns’ memory devices, Data Ports, have been tampered with and that falsified taser gun activation reports were provided to the Santa Clara County District Attorney and the U.S. Federal Court in San Jose. See EXHBIT 6
(Taser guns fire two taser probes per firing.)
The officers involved as well as Police Chief Dennis Burns have gone on record stating that only one taser gun, (Officer Burger’s), fired two taser probes and that Officer Temores dropped his taser cartridge on the ground to which it broke.
Department policy requires that all evidence is to be secured into property, however Chief Buns and his subordinate officers did not secure Temores’ taser cartridge into property and actually have admitted to destroying it. Furthermore, photographs were taken of virtually every inch of the crime scene including broken sun-glasses; a bicycle helmet; Burger’s taser probes and taser cartridge yet not one photograph was taken of Ofc. Temores’ broken taser cartridge. In fact, photographs were taken of Ofc. Temoers’ taser gun which had been reloaded with a new taser cartridge yet the officers did not take a photograph of Temores’ used/broken/destroyed taser cartridge.
The officers involved have gone on record stating that Ofc. Temores did not fire taser probes from his taser gun, however, Ofc. Burger is heard on his own MAV recording confirming with the medics at the scene of the incident minutes after the altercation occurred stating that two taser guns fired a total of 4 taser probes, 2 probes from each taser gun.
HERE IS THE ALLEGATION:
Chief Burns and his subordinate officers removed evidence from the crime scene taking photographs of that crime scene without the evidence, that evidence being Temores’ broken taser cartridge, in order to conceal that Temores actually fired taser probes from his taser gun. (The police had to remove this evidence because the second taser gun firing is missing from the videos and the only logical reason why the second taser gun firing is missing is because it has been edited out of the videos).
In essence, the PAPD falsified and fabricated the crime scene by removing Temores’ taser cartridge, (probes, wires, AFIDS), and then photographed the crimes scene without temores’ taser cartridge, (probes, wires, AFIDS), with the intent to produce the fabricated crime scene as genuine or true to the District Attorney and the courts when in fact it was not genuine or true and used that falsified crimes scene with the intent to incriminate Ciampi of a crime which is a violation of California Penal Code 141b. Destroying Temores’ taser probes and cartridge violated the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause under Brady v. Maryland, California Gov. Code 34090.5. and Calif. Penal Code 1054.1.
In order to receive the $1,000.00 a participant in this inquiry must prove that Palo Alto Police Chief Dennis Burns is not aware that his subordinate officers destroyed Officer Manual Temores’ taser probes, taser wires, taser cartridge and AFIDS. Additionally, said particpant must prove that Chief Burns’ subordinate officers accurately documented the crimes scene with their photographs and other measures. Furthermore, said participant must prove that Chief Burns’ subordinate officers documented and secured Temores’ taser cartridge, taser probes, taser wires and AFIDS into evidence/property pursuant to California Penal Code 1054.1, the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause under Brady v. Maryland and California Gov. Code 34090.5.
Proving that Police Chief Dennis Burns did not violate CA P.C. 141b is not enough. You must prove that Chief Burns and that every one of his subordinate officers did not violate CA P.C. 141b in regards to Officer Temores’ Taser probes; wires; cartridge; and AFIDS.
If not actually directing his subordinate officers to destroy the evidence, Chief Burns has condoned and endorsed the destruction of evidence implicating him through California’s conspiracy law, Penal Code 182 and or aiding and abetting P.C. 32.
To submit your findings go to the bottom of this page and enter your findings in the Reply area.
This REWARD shall end on October 31 2012. All submissions for the REWARD must be received by 11:59 pm Pacific Standard Time October 31, 2012.
The reward shall go to only the first participant who meets the eligibility requirements listed above and who successfully proves that the culpable Palo Alto Police Officers did not violate CA P.C. 141(b).
Jim Kouri,, vice president of the National Assn. of Chiefs of Police, has assembled a group of traits that define psychopathic personalities — like serial killers — and has discovered that these trait also apply to many of today’s politicians.
“While many political leaders will deny the assessment regarding their similarities with serial killers and other career criminals, it is part of a psychopathic profile that may be used in assessing the behaviors of many officials and lawmakers at all levels of government.” http://www.viewzone.com/politicians.html
What makes a law enforcer less susceptible to the human failings then the law maker?
My hope is that many law enforcement personnel will look at the evidence objectively and request that Attorney General Kamala Harris hold corrupt cops accountable for to allow them to violate the law unchecked erodes the freedoms which they have sworn to protect and defend.