24 Feb 2014

Charges Dropped Against New Jersey Man After Dashcam Shows Cops Lying

Big Brother, Police 76 Comments

I encourage you to watch this whole thing. Near the end they explain that the police’s own Internal Affairs investigation had concluded the cops did nothing wrong. Thank goodness the second dash cam video came to light. (Also note that the police didn’t originally turn this over. I don’t understand exactly what changed, but prosecutors are saying they didn’t have this video originally.)

76 Responses to “Charges Dropped Against New Jersey Man After Dashcam Shows Cops Lying”

  1. Major_Freedom says:

    Thank goodness we have an undersupplying monopoly of protection against such egregious behavior by the police.

    Keeps the citizenry on their toes…

  2. Dan says:

    I really don’t understand how people can try to ruin an innocent man’s life and throw him in a rape cage for five years like this. I mean, as they are arresting him, for no reason, they’re trying to set him up by yelling “stop grabbing my gun!” Nothing but a bunch of gang banging thugs. I wonder how many innocent people are rotting in prison because of these scumbags.

    • Cosmo Kramer says:

      God bless video cameras.

    • Ken B says:

      The yelling part is the most interesting to me. We don’t see the action from the camera in that cop’s car, but we might HEAR it. This is clearly something that has been passed around as a good trick to use, washroom banter in the station house, folk wisdom on beating the dash cams.

      • Ken B says:

        The corollary is woth spelling out. If a tape shows a cop saying “Stop reaching for my gun” or “stop resisting’ or “stop trying to disable me with your teeth”, he’s faking for witnesses or recording equipment

        • Tel says:

          And should rightly face either perjury or perverting the course of justice right there (or whatever the Americans call those things, undoubtedly different to what everyone else calls it).

      • Gamble says:

        “Stop trying to take my gun.”

        Seems like the cops had planned on murdering him.

        Good thing the victim was so cool and calm, he was a few seconds away from eating guberment lead…

  3. Andrew' says:

    No see, the cops are afraid for their lives…which is why they have to escalate violence.

  4. Andrew' says:

    “Stop going for my gun” is a new one. That is to cover the cop when he shoots him.

    Who doesn’t know about this systemic problem yet? It is obviously systemic and not just bad cops because they have a uniform, pardon the pun, M.O.

    • Andrew' says:

      Serious question: is there a recent convert here who can explain if and why people aren’t aware of the problem?

      • Cosmo Kramer says:

        Noone questions the status quo. Thus, it takes a bit of mental wrestling once confronted with the idea.

        Logical arguments are what swayed me, so I say keep it up.

    • Dan says:

      They sound like a bunch of rapists “Stop resisting!”

      • Matt M (Dude Where's My Freedom) says:

        They may be bullies but they aren’t stupid. They know full well that someone “resisting arrest” means they can pretty much do whatever they want and get away with it.

      • Andrew' says:

        That’s so they can later claim a resisting arrest charge, probably as an optional leverage during questioning, plea-bargaining, sentencing, etc.

        Of course, if someone really were resisting you would not be wasting energy yelling “stop resisting.”

        Thus, I wonder who still doesn’t understand what is going on and how we could effectively explain it to them.

        • Dan says:

          Yeah I know why they do it. Unfortunately, there are people out there that defend cops no matter how heinous their crimes. I’m not really sure what can be done to get people like that to see the light.

    • Gamble says:

      Oops, I posted above before I read your comment.

      Sure does seem like these cops had premeditated murder on their minds. I wonder if victims girlfriend was attractive? Wonder why these guys had planned a murder?

      Victim is lucky to be alive…

  5. skylien says:

    I am just happy that a Fed chairman who is only slightly more powerful is by definition completely immune to any temptation of abusing his postion… So no cameras (=audits etc) needed there….

    • skylien says:

      Oh, just after they chased out the old president they also replaced the governor of the Ukraine Central Bank… Can’t see why that is necessary if that is a completely apolitical position…


      Well, I guess this because the Ukraine isn’t exceptional…

  6. Eduardo Bellani says:

    I’m sure none of this would have happened if the cops in question were Canadian or Swiss.

    • Ken B says:

      Or private contractors. Because only cops are ever corrupt.

      • Andrew' says:

        I think you are wrong, but it’s worth a try.

      • Ben B says:

        Speaking of incentives; may there not exist different incentive structures regarding corruption between private contractors and government contractors? I mean, one of them is backed by a monopoly on legal force, right?

      • Matt M (Dude Where's My Freedom) says:

        Privately contracted security providers would not be immune to prosecution and/or civil liability for any crimes they commit while on duty.

        You were saying something about incentives earlier?

      • Richie says:

        Or private contractors. Because only cops are ever corrupt.

        Produce a quote from any person that advocates private security where he or she says private contractors would not be corrupt. Or is this just one of many strawmen?

        • Major_Freedom says:

          There could not be an argument for the state and against private law without straw men. Or undercutting one’s own argument by saying something to the effect of “people are irrational and are prone to making irrational judgments.”

          Like I said in another thread…

          People are has so we need a government made up of people are bad so we need a government made up of people are bad…

          • Major_Freedom says:

            Bah, auto correct…

            • Gamble says:

              Corporations control the government so we need more government to regulate the corporations control the government so we need more government to regulate the corporations control the government

        • andrew' says:

          Just yesterday I was hassled by private security contractor!

          Oh wait. That’s ridiculous.

          They have different incentives. Give them the same perverse incentives and who signs the paycheck may not matter much.

          • Gamble says:

            I think liability and profit motive are the missing ingredients. Not to mention choice and competition.

            • Bob Roddis says:

              Liability, profit motive, choice and competition are the self evident attributes of the relationships we propose (liberty) as opposed to the self evident attributes of relationships based upon violence and threats of violence (government).

            • Major_Freedom says:

              Not to unintentional Marxists. To these people, the profit motive is inherently evil, and can be tolerated only in M&Ms and microwave production.

              As such, they unintentially want a monopoly in…profit seeking, when it comes to final arbitration and security, so as to…maximize the incentive of raising prices and profits, and lowering of quality over time.

              It’s all very logical and based on sound ecoshmonics.

          • Bob Roddis says:

            “Progressives” and the other schools of statists simply cannot tolerate average people having the final say over their own decisions without the forced input of the anointed ones, aka the statists. This explains Keynesianism, Global Warming, forcing the Christian baker to bake a cake for the gay wedding, gun control, government schools, the drug war……..

      • Eduardo Bellani says:

        I think I found one point of misunderstanding that, if elucidated, can help us communicate better.

        You saw that video and thought ‘Corrupt cops’. I saw that same video and I thought ‘Cops’. That difference flows from our different interpretation of the purpose of the police institution, and the state in general. You think its purpose is to protect and serve the population, I think it is to extract as much value as possible from the people withing its sphere of influence with the minimum of costs to the ruling class.

        • Major_Freedom says:


          The purpose of government cops, economically speaking, is not to protect us. They are here to enforce wealth transfer to, and keep the population from abanding, the state.

          Ken B doesn’t want to accept the fact that “non-corrupt cops” just means they haven’t yet had to actually lay the hammer down against civil disobedience. Like a Mafia Don “button man” not yet having any experience in bashing down a shopkeeper’s door because those shopkeepers have been intimidated into paying “protection money” to the Don. These are the “non-corrupt” button men. They may even save the occasional cat from the tree, or protect the occasional shopkeeper from hoodlums. But don’t you dare refuse the Don’s “offer”! Then he’ll show you just how important it is to have protection.

          Apparently this is the best the human race car ever do. Ken B has unlocked the secret of protection that humans trillions of years into the future will not be able to better. He’s reached the singularity. Praise the unitary digit!

          • Major_Freedom says:

            Seriously Android? Race car?

      • Major_Freedom says:

        The main technicality related argument in favor of absences of coercive monopolies of “protection” is not that people who are hired for such a service will never be corrupt, but rather that it will make it so much more difficult for them to be be corrupt.

        I am not guaranteeing a fully peaceful world if I could be free to hire my own protection and opt out of your preferred protector, the lying, innocent people imprisoning, torturing, and murdering, mommy and daddy government.

        Really, because I am such an understanding guy, I would evdn welcome you to continue hiring such people. All I ask is that you cease insisting that I give my money to the same people as you.

        The world is not going to fall apart Ken B, as much as you believe in the myth that social coordination and peace requires a violent centralized authority. It doesn’t work well for insurance or potato production, and it certainly doesn’t work well for protection, perhaps the most important service of them all.

        The same arguments that expose the reasomong flaqs behind communist economies apply no less to communist protection in particular.

    • Tel says:

      The Australian cops are definitely better than the US cops.

  7. Ken B says:

    Criminal charges are nice, but he should sue the city. A crippling judgment will do more to motivate the council.

    • Matt M (Dude Where's My Freedom) says:

      Why’s that? The individual police involved won’t have to pay. The chief of police and other top cops won’t have to pay. The mayor and councilors won’t have to pay (personally).

      It’ll just be slightly less money in the city budget, and nobody will care.

      • Ken B says:

        Incentives, they never work. That’s your argument.

        • Matt M (Dude Where's My Freedom) says:

          No, I’m saying that this isn’t actually an incentive at all. If somebody could be held personally responsible in a lawsuit, that would be an incentive, but government agents are always immune to such things.

          Suing the city is only an incentive if you really believe the mayor, councilors, etc. genuinely care about the city losing money in its budget. I’m not so certain that’s the case. Especially from something like this, where they can throw their hands in the air and say “It wasn’t our fault! This was just some random policeman doing his job poorly!”

          The public won’t hold this against against the city politicians in any meaningful way.

        • Ben B says:

          I think he is saying that there are no incentives here; and not that incentives never work.

          • Andrew' says:

            Yes, one should ask how we got here in the first place.

            The cops are exquisitely incentivized to cover their asses, thus all the hollering about someone going for their gun while not getting shot followed by excuses about being afraid for their safety while instigating tussles.

            So, while it is systemic, I’m not sure who to go after.

            • Andrew' says:

              The first thing you need to worry about is the incentive to not get caught. So, make sure not to sue the people in charge of IA or dash cams.

            • Bob Murphy says:

              Andrew’ and Ken B., I zapped the last two comments from you two. Incentives matter, blah blah blah.

              • Andrew' says:

                No problem, Bob.

                When there is a bully, sometimes the authority structure can’t stick up for the person defending themselves because they can’t be seen to condone what casual observers might consider extreme reactions.

        • Major_Freedom says:

          What incentives again Ken B? You mean the powerful incentives to increase quality and lower costs in a monopoly?

          Did economic science go bye bye again today? Sounds like a rough life having to juggle all those inconsistencies…

        • Tel says:

          Incentives, they never work. That’s your argument.

          Other People’s Money =/= Incentive

          • Cody S says:


            Ken, please explain how a guy abused by the police suing the city (effectively suing the taxpayers of the city) is an incentive to the police.

            As far as I can see, you are just making the police into the arbitrators of the city tax rate. If they think rates should go up, they can just pistol whip some lawyers.

            An incentive would be judgments against cops coming out of their pensions then wages, and then the city police budget for body armor, ammunition, and firearms.

            That is an incentive.

            • Major_Freedom says:

              Ah but Cody, then you’ll hear or read one of the many variations of “We are the government.”

              So those victims of the police are really doing it to themselves.

    • Major_Freedom says:

      You mean he should seek the binding opinion of the policeman’s boss’ other employee?

      Yes Ken B, tell us more about how to avoid moral hazard and conflicts of interest, especially with our lives.

      Cherry picked examples of successful litigations against cops in 3,2,1…

  8. Gamble says:

    Adrenaline is a deadly drug when mixed with a badge.

    • Andrew' says:

      I wonder how many of these guys played high school football.

      • Major_Freedom says:

        And how many of them had repeated concussions.

        • Gamble says:

          Football takes courage even if for all the wrong reasons.

          Being a cop bully with vest, taser, club, gun and the advantage of numbers requires no courage. So I doubt any of these repressed power wads ever played football or any sport for that matter.

          • Major_Freedom says:

            Maybe they were the ones who got cut from the team.

            And abused by their parents…

          • andrew' says:

            Football takes adrenaline, aggression, thrill-seeking, order following, switching off empathy, size, and yes, repeated sub clinical concussion.

            • Ken B says:

              After Canada won both gold medals in curling, which is very popular in Canada, a friend denied curling was a sport. I asked why. His answer was, you can’t get injured in curling!

              • skylien says:

                If he is Canadian, what does he think about shooting as a sport?

                Yes of course you can basically shoot yourself theoretically in the foot, but you can also throw a curling stone on someones foot theoreticall…

                I cant even say what I would prefer if I’d have to chose..

              • skylien says:


              • Ken B says:

                He is Canadian, but as I point out, from Windsor, a suburb of Detroit.

              • skylien says:


                BTW: I enjoyed your ice hockey teams much more too at Olympia who also won both gold medals.

  9. skylien says:

    How about this alleged abuse of power that was only seen as conspiracy theory by mental retards so far?


    • Gamble says:

      Sky really disgusting but nothing new, to me.

      That just built 95M dollar real life city block created by Feds will be used to make YouTube vids and other propaganda. People will think they are watching normal people, rather than agents.

      The leviathan has got to go.

      Everybody should follow Skylien link. Nasty stuff.
      Wait here it is again.

      • Andrew' says:

        No, see, Cass Sunstein knows EXACTLY where to draw the line on government infiltrating and spying on citizens, so that the Federal grunts on the ground won’t push a toe past the line he imagines in his brain as the only appropriate line of government concern.

        To question him is nothing but paranoia.

        Bottom line: if you have concerns over the government going on fishing expeditions and discrediting citizens, YOU are the paranoid one.

        Kind of like you are resisting arrest if you head butt a cop’s fist.

        • Andrew' says:

          By the way, when is the last time a (false) conspiracy theory caused a problem in this country?

          With that said, how does one look at the world today and decide “what we really need is a Department of Undermining Trust”?

          What a bunch of JV jackasses we got stuck with for leaders!

          • Gamble says:

            Hi Andrew,

            If you follow the link and read the information, you will learn that this is more than fishing and spying and past conspiracy.

            This is digital MK Ultra and it is really happening.

            • Andrew' says:

              I gotcha. My point is that Cass Sunstein his ilk don’t understand how true conspiracies are separated from untrue conspiracies in a world where the government is actually running conspiracies and lying about them.

              Or he does and he’s just evil.

              The Cass Sunstein will reply “but we are only doing this for good!” except that while numerous nefarious applications (such as industrial espionage) have been divulged, not a single legitimate use has been verified.

  10. Andrew' says:

    Nevermind the part where the cops started out by receiving taxpayer money. So, the incentives that caused them to do this are de facto and the incentives involved with a subsequent lawsuit assuming the average individual could win are speculative.

    • Andrew' says:

      State acts with impunity.

      Therefore victim of state impunity should punish state to impose restriction on impunity.

      It’s a little tenuous, to say the least.

      • Andrew' says:

        Also keep in mind that, what do you think, 9 out of 10 or so of these victims don’t get vindicated and thus would have no possibility of winning a lawsuit and in fact would be hit with stronger charges of resisting arrest by resisting the subsequent legal system?

        Cops also hate you recording their actions with cell cams and they control the dash cams to some extent.

        I originally thought they parked their cars all cattywhompus at traffic stops for safety and a quick pullout, but now I wonder if it is to angle the dash cam away from their “citizen contact.”

Leave a Reply