Friday, April 22, 2016
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
Coming clean on 'dirty DUIs' in Contra Costa County
A whistle-blower tells how a private detective arranged for men to be arrested for drunk driving at the behest of their ex-wives and their lawyers — and that entrapment using decoys was only one of many alleged misdeeds.
October 16, 2011|By Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times
Reporting from Martinez, Calif. — David Dutcher met Sharon on Match.com in late 2008, a few months after separating from his wife. "We had a lot in common," he recalled. Sharon loved four-wheel-drive trucks and sports.
They met for coffee, then dinner. Sharon was tall, slender, blond and beautiful. She moaned that she had not had sex in a long time. She told him he had large, strong hands and wondered if that portended other things. She described his kisses as "yummy."
"It felt a lot like Christmas," said Dutcher, 49, a tall, burly engineer with wavy red hair.
On their second date, Sharon suggested they join one of her friends "who was partying because she had closed a real estate deal," Dutcher said. They drove to an Italian restaurant in a suburb near San Francisco. Sharon's friend, "Tash," was a loud and raucous brunet who was pounding down shots.
The women fiddled with Dutcher's tie and massaged his neck and shoulders. The brunet unbuttoned her blouse to reveal generous cleavage. "I am way over my head with these girls," he remembered thinking. "I hadn't been out dating in a while."
Sharon had trouble finishing her tequila shots and asked Dutcher to help, he said. When the women went to the bathroom, two men at the other end of the bar peppered Dutcher with questions.
"Are you a celebrity?" they wanted to know.
The women suggested going to a house with a hot tub that Tash was housesitting, Dutcher said. He followed them in his truck. Within a few minutes, a flashing red light appeared in his rearview mirror. The officer said he had been swerving.
Three months later, Dutcher's wife filed a motion in their divorce case, telling the court that her soon-to-be former husband had been arrested on suspicion of drunk driving and that she feared for their children's safety. The judge ordered that Dutcher's visits be supervised.
Then, earlier this year, Dutcher received a letter from Contra Costa County Senior Deputy Dist. Atty. Harold W. Jewett. It contained a transcript of a police interview with Christopher Butler, a private detective and the subject of a state and federal criminal investigation.
"I hope in some small way this information will help you recoup both rights and dignities lost in one of the most deplorable legal practices I have ever heard of," Jewett wrote.
Dutcher had been duped.
The women who'd ogled him worked for Butler's detective agency. Sharon, who told Dutcher she was a divorcee employed by an investment firm, actually was a former Las Vegas showgirl.
A man who once worked for Butler had blown the whistle. He told authorities Butler arranged for men to be arrested for drunk driving at the behest of their ex-wives and their divorce lawyers — and that entrapment was only one of many alleged misdeeds.
Butler, 49, a former police officer, was arrested in February. In addition to setting up at least five DUIs, he sold drugs for law enforcement officers and helped them open and operate a brothel, collecting and delivering the profits, according to prosecutors and a statement Butler gave them after his arrest.
In the March 15 statement obtained by The Times, Butler said his accomplices reasoned that they could shield their illegal businesses because any complaints would be investigated by a state-run narcotics task force, which one of the officers headed.
The alleged crimes implicated three different law enforcement agencies — the San Ramon and Danville police departments and the narcotics task force — and took place in Contra Costa County, a collection of mostly middle-class communities that stretch from the East Bay shoreline opposite San Francisco to upscale suburbs inland.
Jewett called the scandal a "sordid drama" that overwhelmed the resources of the county and raised potential conflicts for police departments being asked to investigate their own.
In May, the FBI took over the probe, interviewing Dutcher and other ex-husbands arrested on suspicion of drunk driving. A federal grand jury indicted Butler and two of the officers in August and September. The charges included drug dealing, running a prostitution business and illegal possession of a weapon.
More indictments are expected. A third officer, implicated by Butler in the DUIs, faces state charges of accepting bribes to make arrests.
Stunned prosecutors combed through pending criminal cases and eventually dismissed charges in at least 20 DUI and vice crimes, tainted by the involvement of the accused officers. Two of them had once worked with Butler on the police force of the East Bay city of Antioch.
Butler also apparently hoodwinked reporters. His agency received national attention for employing gumshoe "housewives" who juggled soccer games with undercover spying. People magazine and Dr. Phil did stories. An East Bay magazine reporter who went on a ride-along with Butler later discovered that everything he had witnessed had been staged.
October 16, 2011|By Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times
Reporting from Martinez, Calif. — David Dutcher met Sharon on Match.com in late 2008, a few months after separating from his wife. "We had a lot in common," he recalled. Sharon loved four-wheel-drive trucks and sports.
They met for coffee, then dinner. Sharon was tall, slender, blond and beautiful. She moaned that she had not had sex in a long time. She told him he had large, strong hands and wondered if that portended other things. She described his kisses as "yummy."
"It felt a lot like Christmas," said Dutcher, 49, a tall, burly engineer with wavy red hair.
On their second date, Sharon suggested they join one of her friends "who was partying because she had closed a real estate deal," Dutcher said. They drove to an Italian restaurant in a suburb near San Francisco. Sharon's friend, "Tash," was a loud and raucous brunet who was pounding down shots.
The women fiddled with Dutcher's tie and massaged his neck and shoulders. The brunet unbuttoned her blouse to reveal generous cleavage. "I am way over my head with these girls," he remembered thinking. "I hadn't been out dating in a while."
Sharon had trouble finishing her tequila shots and asked Dutcher to help, he said. When the women went to the bathroom, two men at the other end of the bar peppered Dutcher with questions.
"Are you a celebrity?" they wanted to know.
The women suggested going to a house with a hot tub that Tash was housesitting, Dutcher said. He followed them in his truck. Within a few minutes, a flashing red light appeared in his rearview mirror. The officer said he had been swerving.
Three months later, Dutcher's wife filed a motion in their divorce case, telling the court that her soon-to-be former husband had been arrested on suspicion of drunk driving and that she feared for their children's safety. The judge ordered that Dutcher's visits be supervised.
Then, earlier this year, Dutcher received a letter from Contra Costa County Senior Deputy Dist. Atty. Harold W. Jewett. It contained a transcript of a police interview with Christopher Butler, a private detective and the subject of a state and federal criminal investigation.
"I hope in some small way this information will help you recoup both rights and dignities lost in one of the most deplorable legal practices I have ever heard of," Jewett wrote.
Dutcher had been duped.
The women who'd ogled him worked for Butler's detective agency. Sharon, who told Dutcher she was a divorcee employed by an investment firm, actually was a former Las Vegas showgirl.
A man who once worked for Butler had blown the whistle. He told authorities Butler arranged for men to be arrested for drunk driving at the behest of their ex-wives and their divorce lawyers — and that entrapment was only one of many alleged misdeeds.
Butler, 49, a former police officer, was arrested in February. In addition to setting up at least five DUIs, he sold drugs for law enforcement officers and helped them open and operate a brothel, collecting and delivering the profits, according to prosecutors and a statement Butler gave them after his arrest.
In the March 15 statement obtained by The Times, Butler said his accomplices reasoned that they could shield their illegal businesses because any complaints would be investigated by a state-run narcotics task force, which one of the officers headed.
The alleged crimes implicated three different law enforcement agencies — the San Ramon and Danville police departments and the narcotics task force — and took place in Contra Costa County, a collection of mostly middle-class communities that stretch from the East Bay shoreline opposite San Francisco to upscale suburbs inland.
Jewett called the scandal a "sordid drama" that overwhelmed the resources of the county and raised potential conflicts for police departments being asked to investigate their own.
In May, the FBI took over the probe, interviewing Dutcher and other ex-husbands arrested on suspicion of drunk driving. A federal grand jury indicted Butler and two of the officers in August and September. The charges included drug dealing, running a prostitution business and illegal possession of a weapon.
More indictments are expected. A third officer, implicated by Butler in the DUIs, faces state charges of accepting bribes to make arrests.
Stunned prosecutors combed through pending criminal cases and eventually dismissed charges in at least 20 DUI and vice crimes, tainted by the involvement of the accused officers. Two of them had once worked with Butler on the police force of the East Bay city of Antioch.
Butler also apparently hoodwinked reporters. His agency received national attention for employing gumshoe "housewives" who juggled soccer games with undercover spying. People magazine and Dr. Phil did stories. An East Bay magazine reporter who went on a ride-along with Butler later discovered that everything he had witnessed had been staged.
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Sacramento Police Officer Gets Life In Prison For Raping 75 Year-Old Stroke Victim
Sacramento Police Officer Gets Life In Prison For Raping 75 Year-Old Stroke Victim
Police officers reviewing footage of the incident immediately recognized their colleague, who was then an active officer on the Sacramento police force.
By Reuters | November 27, 2015
Officer Gary Dale Baker is taken into custody in Sacramento Superior Court after being convicted of raping a 72 year old woman who was paralyzed by a stroke.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – A former Sacramento police officer convicted of raping a 75-year-old stroke victim in her senior living apartment has been sentenced to life in prison, court records show.
Prosecutors said Gary Dale Baker, 52, entered the woman’s apartment at least three times from 2010 to 2012, raping her twice as she suffered from a stroke-related inability to speak.
He was convicted in July of nine charges relating to the case, including rape, forcible oral copulation, sexual battery and burglary. On Tuesday, Baker was sentenced to 62 years to life, meaning that he will spend the rest of his life behind bars, a spokeswoman for Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert said.
The woman, now 77, was recovering from a stroke in a senior living complex in South Sacramento when the attacks began, prosecutors said.
She struggled to communicate to her family what had happened, and initially, even though DNA evidence confirmed the rape, investigators were not able to link it to any known suspects, prosecutors said.
But in late 2012, after Baker attempted a third assault, a Sacramento police detective suggested that the woman’s family install a motion-activated camera.
When Baker came back again, police officers reviewing the footage immediately recognized him. Baker, who was then an active officer on the Sacramento police force, was arrested and fired from the department.
“You tarnished the badge for police officers everywhere,” Sacramento Superior Court Judge Ernest Sawtelle said as he sentenced Baker, the Sacramento Bee newspaper reported on Wednesday. “For your crimes, you will be sentenced to life in prison.”
Sawtelle called Baker’s crimes “unspeakable,” the newspaper said.
Sacramento County jail records show that Baker remained in custody on Wednesday, with no listed release date. A request by his attorneys for a new trial was denied on Tuesday, records show.
Saturday, January 9, 2016
'Making a Murderer': 10 Questions We Still Have
The 10-part Netflix series Making a Murderer is the latest entry in America's newfound obsession with serialized true crime storytelling, coming on the heels of the hugely popular podcast Serial and HBO's The Jinx. In each case the show ends but the story continues – and questions persist.
Filmed over a decade, the docu-series follows the strange case of Steven Avery, a Wisconsin man exonerated after spending 18 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit, only to be arrested and ultimately convicted of a murder for which he also maintains his innocence.
There are, of course, some major questions that people have been asking since the show first started streaming in mid-December: Why did it take so long to find the RAV4 key and the bullet? Why was anyone from Manitowoc law enforcement even allowed on the site that late in the investigation? Here are some other questions we have – some smaller, some bigger, all perplexing (spoilers galore).
1. Who the hell is the international recording artist who was released from the jury?
Richard Mahler, listed in the documentary as an "international recording artist," is actually just a local dude with a local band, according to TMZ. Mahler's outfit, the Rick Raybine Band, played the National Anthem at a NASCAR event once; as for how he got the label, Mahler told the site that a reporter described him that way once and it just stuck. Mahler was ultimately dismissed from the jury for a family emergency after he sat in deliberations for four hours.
Richard Mahler, listed in the documentary as an "international recording artist," is actually just a local dude with a local band, according to TMZ. Mahler's outfit, the Rick Raybine Band, played the National Anthem at a NASCAR event once; as for how he got the label, Mahler told the site that a reporter described him that way once and it just stuck. Mahler was ultimately dismissed from the jury for a family emergency after he sat in deliberations for four hours.
2. What went on with the jury deliberations?
The much more interesting part about Mahler is his new allegation that two fellow jurors were related to officials in Manitowoc County, where Avery was initially wrongfully convicted. Once the trial was over, Mahler discovered, "[one juror] was the father of a Manitowoc County Sheriff's deputy," and that "another juror, his wife works for the Manitowoc County Clerk's Office," according to an interview he gave to People.
The much more interesting part about Mahler is his new allegation that two fellow jurors were related to officials in Manitowoc County, where Avery was initially wrongfully convicted. Once the trial was over, Mahler discovered, "[one juror] was the father of a Manitowoc County Sheriff's deputy," and that "another juror, his wife works for the Manitowoc County Clerk's Office," according to an interview he gave to People.
Maybe that's what defense attorney Jerry Buting was getting at in the final episode, when he made a comment about unanswered questions that he had about jury deliberations. After all, according to Mahler, the original count was that only three jurors were convinced Avery was guilty. In an interview with the Today show, filmmakers Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos said a juror contacted them after the series aired and claimed his or her decision to vote guilty was made under duress. "The person lived in the county, feared for their safety, and also said, 'If they could frame Steven Avery, they could do it to me,'" Ricciardi said in a follow up interview with Time.
3. Why did the defense team for Brendan Dassey seek to further the State's case?
Len Kachinsky – the original defense attorney for Avery's nephew, Brendan Dassey – is arguably the most inscrutable element of Making a Murderer. His initial comments to the press that implied Dassey's guilt (and by extension, Avery's) were so unprofessional that, when later questioned about them on the stand at a hearing, Kachinsky purports to have forgotten he said what he said.
Len Kachinsky – the original defense attorney for Avery's nephew, Brendan Dassey – is arguably the most inscrutable element of Making a Murderer. His initial comments to the press that implied Dassey's guilt (and by extension, Avery's) were so unprofessional that, when later questioned about them on the stand at a hearing, Kachinsky purports to have forgotten he said what he said.
In one disturbing scene, the lawyer's investigator, Michael O'Kelly, appears to coerce Dassey into massaging his statement so that it aligns perfectly with what the prosecution needs. And in an email between O'Kelly and Kachinsky – remember, both technically working for Dassey – the former all but admits he's helping for the opposition. "I am not concerned with finding evidence to placing Brendan inside the crime scene, as Brendan will be State's primary witness," O'Kelly writes. "This will only serve to bolster the prosecution."
Dassey's post-conviction lawyer, Robert Dvorak, presses O'Kelley on this unbelievable admission. "So your goal is not only to get Brendan [Dassey] to confess, but also to help the State in its prosecution. Correct?" Dvorak asks.
"That's correct," O'Kelly replies.
Kachinsky isn't there for the meeting between O'Kelly and Dassey, nor is he there the following day when two officers interrogate his client in an attempt to replicate what O'Kelly extracted. As the film notes, this level of cooperation between a defense attorney and prosecutors is unheard of. And to take it one step further, it appears to go beyond bad representation and raises questions of backdoor collusion or a quid pro quo. What possible motive do Kachinsky and O'Kelly have to affirmatively advance the prosecution's case? We don't know, but even really bad lawyering (which Kachinsky has copped to) doesn't usually translate to sleeping with the enemy.
4. Is there any innocent explanation for the pinprick hole in the vial that held Avery's blood?
No, really: Is there any convincing, non-nefarious explanation for why a box of evidence was opened, a blood vial apparently punctured with a syringe, and then the box taped back up? Is there any scenario in which that's standard operating procedure for re-examining evidence? Even if you think it's far-fetched that one or two cops would plant blood in the RAV 4, what other account is there that makes any sense?
No, really: Is there any convincing, non-nefarious explanation for why a box of evidence was opened, a blood vial apparently punctured with a syringe, and then the box taped back up? Is there any scenario in which that's standard operating procedure for re-examining evidence? Even if you think it's far-fetched that one or two cops would plant blood in the RAV 4, what other account is there that makes any sense?
5. Has testing for EDTA advanced?
Initially it looked like the blood vial is going to be a huge win for the defense. An FBI expert determined, however, that three swabs he ran in his lab didn't contain the chemical EDTA, an additive that would have been in the blood vial — but not in blood itself — that came from a living body. That finding ended up being a major blow.
Initially it looked like the blood vial is going to be a huge win for the defense. An FBI expert determined, however, that three swabs he ran in his lab didn't contain the chemical EDTA, an additive that would have been in the blood vial — but not in blood itself — that came from a living body. That finding ended up being a major blow.
In the final episode, all of Avery's former defense attorneys sit together discussing how their ex-client could get a new trial. Jerry Buting floats one idea that, as another attorney notes, bears a striking parallel to Avery's first case. "If we could do a test today that was scientifically acceptable and valid, that actually proved there was EDTA in those blood stains, that would be newly discovered evidence," Buting said. If that kind of test is possible, and shows what Buting hopes, it would be the second time new technology exonerated Avery of a crime he didn't commit.
6. Is it common for defendants to be barred from arguing that someone else did it?
When we learn in the film that Avery's team won't be able to advance alternate theories to who killed Halbach, we were stunned. What was going on there?
When we learn in the film that Avery's team won't be able to advance alternate theories to who killed Halbach, we were stunned. What was going on there?
The short answer is that Wisconsin has a third-party liability law that prevents a defendant from pointing the finger at somebody else without giving the court 30 days notice prior to trial, and having good reason to believe the third party had "motive, opportunity, and a direct connection to the crime." Avery's defense team wasn't allowed to suggest anyone else could have been the culprit, which he later appealed. It's not entirely clear how often defendants in other states are prohibited from advancing alternate theories for whodunit, but in this case it seems to have had a detrimental effect on Avery's ability to defend himself.
7. What's the story behind the deleted voicemails?
Halbach's ex-boyfriend Ryan Hillegas testified on the stand that he was able to guest Teresa's username and password and listen to several voicemail messages left on her phone. Avery's defense lawyers argue that since the mailbox was full, and then some messages were deleted after her death, that someone knows more than they're letting on.
Halbach's ex-boyfriend Ryan Hillegas testified on the stand that he was able to guest Teresa's username and password and listen to several voicemail messages left on her phone. Avery's defense lawyers argue that since the mailbox was full, and then some messages were deleted after her death, that someone knows more than they're letting on.
When defense attorney Jerry Buting attempts to pursue this line of inquiry, though, the judge stops him on ground it will violate the third-party liability prohibition. If the State argued that Avery had already destroyed the phone, why didn't the police follow up on any and all people who might have had a motive to delete Halbach's voicemails?
8. Why was Halbach's pelvic bone discovered in the quarry?
At trial, defense attorney Dean Strang cross-examined forensic anthropologist Dr Leslie Eisenberg about whether Halbach's remains had been moved or not. Dr Eisenberg testified that she believed the primary burn site was the burn pit 20 feet from Avery's bedroom, but acknowledges remains were found in a separate barrel, as well as a quarry that's far away from the other two sites.
At trial, defense attorney Dean Strang cross-examined forensic anthropologist Dr Leslie Eisenberg about whether Halbach's remains had been moved or not. Dr Eisenberg testified that she believed the primary burn site was the burn pit 20 feet from Avery's bedroom, but acknowledges remains were found in a separate barrel, as well as a quarry that's far away from the other two sites.
The State argued that the burn pit was the primary burn location, while the defense argued it could have been elsewhere – implying, possibly, the quarry. If the State's theory is correct, what accounts for Halbach's pelvic bone being discovered in the quarry?
9. What's going on when Sgt Andrew Colborn called in the read the license plate for Halbach's RAV 4?
In Episode Five, defense attorney Dean Strang asks Sgt Colborn about a phone call he made to his dispatcher prior the discovery of Halbach's vehicle on Avery's property. In the recording of the call, Colborn asks dispatch to run a license plate number, and gets a hit for Teresa Halbach, who at that point was listed as a missing person. Colborn then immediately says "Ninety-Nine Toyota?"
In Episode Five, defense attorney Dean Strang asks Sgt Colborn about a phone call he made to his dispatcher prior the discovery of Halbach's vehicle on Avery's property. In the recording of the call, Colborn asks dispatch to run a license plate number, and gets a hit for Teresa Halbach, who at that point was listed as a missing person. Colborn then immediately says "Ninety-Nine Toyota?"
To Strang – and likely to many viewers – it sounds like Colborn is looking at the very SUV that wouldn't be discovered for another two days. "I shouldn't have been and I was not looking at the license plate," Colborn responded on the stand.
Maybe. But what was he looking at?
10. Who killed Teresa Halbach?
This remains the most important unanswered question in the case. Redditors have been floating alternate theories about who killed Halbach since the show premiered in late December. Since Avery himself wasn't able to pursue this question at trial, and the filmmakers have said it wasn't their job to investigate the case independently, we're left with little more than speculation. If it was Avery, then it seems clear it didn't go down the way Dassey described it. Could Avery have sterilized two crime scenes to eliminate virtually all traces of Halbach's presence? It seems unlikely.
This remains the most important unanswered question in the case. Redditors have been floating alternate theories about who killed Halbach since the show premiered in late December. Since Avery himself wasn't able to pursue this question at trial, and the filmmakers have said it wasn't their job to investigate the case independently, we're left with little more than speculation. If it was Avery, then it seems clear it didn't go down the way Dassey described it. Could Avery have sterilized two crime scenes to eliminate virtually all traces of Halbach's presence? It seems unlikely.
Ultimately, the responsibility for answering this question shouldn't be that of Internet detectives. And although disgraced prosecutor Ken Kratz is waging his own media blitz to assure the public justice was done, that seems to be a lonely battle at this point.
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/news/making-a-murderer-10-questions-we-still-have-20160107#ixzz3wmMNjyKL
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
Tuesday, August 25, 2015
Cannibal Cop Gets Only 8 Years In Prison For Eating A Victim
Detlef Guenzel, a German former police officer, strangled and chopped Wojciech Stempniewicz while listening to pop music. This horror that lasted four hours was taped and later edited into 50 minute video. Guenzel is sentenced to eight years and six months in prison because he was found “guilty of murder and disturbing the peace of the dead”.
The usual maximum sentence for murder in Germany is 15 years, and that is exactly how much Stempniewicz’s family requested for this horrifying act. The punishment was reduced because prosecutors said that Stempniewicz wanted to die. The German officer and the Polish-born Stempniewicz met over a website for cannibal fetishists. They kept in contact via email, text messages and telephone before they arranged the date.
Stempniewicz was picked up by Gunzel at the Dresden’s main railway station, from where they drove to the Gunzel’s house. This place was actually a bed and breakfast which Gunzel ran with his male partner. The video, that wasn’t released to the media, shows that victim was taken to the basement of the house, where he was strangled with a rope and later sliced in the small pieces. Also, the 50 minute video footage shows Gunzel in his underwear, chopping the naked body that hangs on a hook, while pop music plays.
After that, the former German officer buried the pieces of the body in the garden of the house, but officers said that the victim’s penis was never found.
READ MORE
Elburn cop charged in sexual assault of girl over 10-year period
After 23 years as an Elburn police officer, David Wright told a judge he has no money to hire an attorney, and expressed concern for his family's financial well-being after his arrest last week on charges he sexually assaulted a female relative over the last decade.
"We're living check to check," 53-year-old Wright told Kane County Judge Clint Hull while requesting a public defender during a Wednesday hearing.
Wright faces a total of 21 counts of predatory criminal sexual assault and sexual assault of a family member. Prosecutors allege Wright repeatedly assaulted the female for 10 years, beginning in 2005 when she was younger than 13. He remains held on $500,000 bail and is on administrative leave from the police department, authorities previously said, pending the outcome of the case.
Should Wright post $50,000 bond to be released, he is prohibited from any contact with his immediate family and must surrender any firearms or ammunition, according to court records.
READ MORE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)