We often discuss the transformative role of video technology on the prosecution of police abuse, particularly the ubiquitous presence of cellphones with video capability. However, this is not a one way street. The technology also clears some officers rather than implicates them in crimes. One such case is the controversy at a traffic stop in New Jersey after Hyacinth Peccoo, 50, of Irvington, accused Officer Daniel Caffrey of yelling and pulling a gun on her. A dash cam video not only showed that Caffrey not only did not do so but actually appeared to cut her a break on a violation.
Peccoo was pulled over for failure to stop at a stop sign. She later filed a complaint against Caffrey and said that he yelled at her, pulled his gun, and pointed it at her. She supplied a written statement and gave an account to an investigator. The investigator, Detective Lt. Michael Fairweather, however, already knew about the dashcam videotape when he interviewed Peccoo, making it something of a set up. After the interview, Fairweather told Peccoo about the videotape. He said that not only what she had just told him was a lie but that Caffrey could be heard giving Peccoo a break by not issuing her an $85 ticket for failure to stop at a stop sign as it carries two points. Rather gave her a $26 ticket for failure to change her address on her license.
She is now charged with making a false report to law enforcement authorities, a disorderly persons offense. The written complain is enough for such a charge, though the oral interview can also be part of the charged conduct even though it appears to be a set up. I would be more troubled by the interview if she had not already filed the complaint and the interview was the sole basis for the violation.
What do you think?
Source: NJ
Throw the book at her. Malicious intent. She has succumbed to the evil incentives provided by the media. Isn’t this basic economics? Incentives matter. The media is showing that if you are a proper victim, you can get a free ride and be a star. Her culture is probably a terrible city culture. She had a great opportunity to but a notch on the ‘good’ side of her perception of police, but I can only assume the ‘bad’ side has been so attuned to that even his good deed had to be ‘remedied’. Instead of retelling the story of how the nice cop used common sense to reduce her violation (like a real Citizen On Patrol), and perhaps make inroads between the two communities (even one brick is a start), she threw the proverbial bomb.
F*ck her. People like her need to be made examples of. Once again, we also find that cameras will save your ass. We should all start ‘carrying’, in the sense that our cameras are shooting, and our guns are holstered.
“I think that she should be severely punished as a deterrent to future morons who want to file false charges.
It is bad enough that we DO have some bad or rogue cops, but this tendency to want to try to harm, destroy, ruin ALL cops by filing false reports only makes it easier for the truly bad cops to skate.”
WELL SAID! HEAR HEAR! (thumping table like a goofy lordship)
Wait, the law has a responsibility to actively prevent a suspect from lying? Where does the constitution say anything remotely close to that? It says they cannot trick them into committing an illegal act, but knowing the facts and asking them what happened is hardly tricking them.
Black female melt down is understandable. Whoopi Goldberg has a “slave” melt down with ABC, the View. But ABC producer is a black woman. Black on black violence?
I think that she should be severely punished as a deterrent to future morons who want to file false charges.
It is bad enough that we DO have some bad or rogue cops, but this tendency to want to try to harm, destroy, ruin ALL cops by filing false reports only makes it easier for the truly bad cops to skate.
Does no one remember the fairy tales of our youth. The Boy Who Cried Wolf. Keep making false reports and when the real big bad wolf is here, no one is going to believe you or help you.
Thank goodness for the video cams which have lately been proving more cops innocent than not and for the cams that have shown the real bad apples. I want reality…..not fairy tales.
An earlier commenter nailed it. You’re “set up” hand wringing is your criminal defense lawyer showing. Hopefully you are able to clear your attorney addled head and see that.
The detective would be considered incompetent had he not questioned this cretin and allowed her to underscore her fraud. Turley foolishly questions whether this is a “setup”. Its a valid tactic in ferreting out truth. Grow up and join the real world prof.
No rights as this was not a custodial interrogation. She was free to leave at any time.
I think Dashcam is a blessing for both parties. This woman perhaps was unaware of it and thought of complaining about the officer.
Turley’s question regarding the issue of a set up is a residual problem all lawyers have. They can argue black to be white and white to be black without even thinking. It is nothing more than a natural lawyer response and can’t be helped. This can be seen threaded all the way through the justice system and into almost every politician. It comes with the territory.
Regarding this whale of a complaint, this is nothing new. Those that have been the recipients of the harsh arm of the justice system spend a lot of time and give a lot of thought as to how to game the system. When I taught middle school in the ‘inner city’, some of the kids routinely set up teachers for sexual harassment, racial discrimination, and other complaints whereby the mother and a lawyer could easily exact $5,000 from the school district. It is cheaper and easier all around to fork over $5,000 than to defend in court, the newspapers, etc.
This clown probably did this without even thinking.
The camera is proving itself to sort out a lot of stuff in our system. Cops will be better behaved and these opportunists will get a vacation in the slammer where they belong. Now she will truly have weapons brandished in her face and be yelled at, along with a whole host of other perhaps new experiences. Bon Voyage.
“Considering that he had read the statement and seen the tape, shouldn’t she have been read her rights before the interview?”
No, she wasn’t being arrested, so no need to read her rights. I don’t understand Professor Turleys stance on this. The police detective had knowledge of the video, of coarse he did, that’s his job. But it’s not up to the police detective to walk her through the halls of truth.
Your calling it a set-up, all because the detective had knowledge of the actual facts via video, is total crap.
What difference would it make if the detective had knowledge of the video or not? . . . NONE.
The responsibility is on her, she lied, she wrote the statement, made the false accusations and finally signed it and you call it a set up! Ridiculous! How about demanding responsibility for your own acts! Jeez
This is a good example of the unfortunate phenomenon where people acting responsibly seems to be an incentive for others to act irresponsibly. Knowing that the current trend is to sanction police brutality, some will irresponsibly take advantage. International relations have the same, but far more serious problem. If responsible nations allow reckless bullies to get away with heinous war crimes, the reckless bullies are incentivised to commit more heinous war crimes.
Fat people got no reason to live.
They got little bitty eyes and little bitty feet.
Little bitty voices going peep, peep, peep.
Don’t want no fat people. Don’t want no fat people.
Don’t want no faaaat people round here!
— take on the song called Short People by Randy Newman
Justthetruth-Your biggest crime is that you are just smart enough (barely) to remember to breathe, but not dumb enough to play in traffic on I-95 during rush hour.
Her biggest crime was making a cop look good.
I think the prosecutor has a civic duty to examine any cases she has filed in the past or testified in and have the various lawyers in those cases alerted.
Was she looking for a big payout or some publicity. What a fool.
Thank goodness for the tape. We almost had another good conscientious cop lose a career and his family dumped into the turbulence which would ensue.
Considering that he had read the statement and seen the tape, shouldn’t she have been read her rights before the interview?
I have no problem at all with the entire proceeding. Two separate crimes. One traffic violation and apparently a false address on top of excessive speeding. Second crime related to the false charges. The investigator followed procedure asking for her statement and allowing chances for retraction. All of it …both incidents on tape and the doer got caught this time on a felony charge. If you can’t stand the time don’t do the crime all though this one smacked of criminal stupidity. Kinda like voting for a Democrat or a Republican and wondering why your medical insurance costs went up.