A RECENT CASE STUDY OF THE CHAMPAIGN POLICE
(Author's note: Before reading this true account of a recent incident with Champaign police officers, the reader should know that within days after becoming aware of the victim's complaint about this incident, the command staff of the CPD were diligent and forthright in addressing the victim's concerns. According to the victim, "Champaign Deputy Police Chief Troy Daniels called me and apologized profusely and promised me it would never happen again, and they [the police] have taken precautions so it will not happen again," the victim said.
Also, in order to protect the victim from any possible police retaliation on the part of offended rogue officers because the victim has gone public with this story; the location of the victim's address and the identity of the victim have been concealed. Every other detail is true.)
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
4th Amendment of the United States Constitution
CHAMPAIGN- A few weeks ago, on a late December night, at approximately 2:00 a.m. in the morning, a resident of north Champaign was driving home after running some late-night errands. Few cars were out, and the resident of Champaign was eager to get home and get some rest before returning to work at 6:00 a.m.
While he was about to turn onto his street, the 40ish year-old home-owner suddenly noticed a Champaign police squad car driving around his car from behind in the other lane on a four-lane thorough-fare near Parkland College.
As the squad car moved up ahead of his vehicle, the driver grew concerned as he watched the police car slow down, in what seemed like a reaction to his car.
Despite the unnerving sight, the driver still made his right turn onto his street, and drove home where the mortgage is paid under his name for the last seven years. As the home-owner parked in front of his house, (in a car registered under his correct name and current address), he was relieved to notice no squad cars had followed him to his home. The home-owner is an African-American male, so any paranoia about police following his vehicle was erased from his mind.
He exited his vehicle, went inside his house where he lives with his three daughters, and took an early-morn shower, and retired to his bed for a short rest.
At about 2:30 a.m., one of his daughters awoke the home-owner, to say the motion light outside the home had been activated.
The home-owner assured his daughter that it was probably just a animal of some kind that had caused the light to go on, and she should return to sleep.
He tried to go back to sleep himself, when suddenly, there was a loud, violent banging on his front door. The home-owner shot up out of bed and said, "What the f--k?!" while rolling his bedroom window shade up to see what was making all that noise. Looking out his window, he was greeted by the sight of a uniformed Champaign Police officer shining a flash light into his window. He rushed to his front door imagining an emergency of some kind for there to be officers banging on his front door so urgently.
The home-owner opened his door partially, leaving the chain lock in position. He could see two other uniformed Champaign police officers with flash lights. Champaign Police Officer McCallister asked if the home-owner is the owner of the vehicle parked outside the house. When the home-owner affirmed that he was indeed the owner of the vehicle, Officer McCallister informed the resident there exists a warrant for his arrest and asked if they, the police, could come inside his home to talk to him about it.
The resident said he would oblige; but first he wanted to put clothes on before they came in. The resident quickly got into some pants and then returned to the door to let officers inside the building. As he opened the door, Officer McCallister (who had been on patrol for the Champaign Police Department for all of four months), without a word, used his left foot to block open the door as it swung open, and immediately stepped forward into the threshold of the door. The gesture startled the home-owner at first, but he still allowed officers entry into the house without protest.
Officers asked if the resident would turn on the lights in the room so officers could see better. The resident did not, and noticed all three officers carefully looking around the house, (though without attempting to actually commence a search through the house). The resident was politely told that there existed a warrant for him on a criminal charge of "larceny", with a bond of over $10,000, and this warrant was issued out of Iroquois County. Officer McCallister asked the home-owner if he had ever been in Iroquois County. When the home-owner said he had not, McCallister asked again if the home-owner was sure he had not been in Iroquois County recently.
The home-owner explained that he has been under police scrutiny before, often confused with a person with his exact name who seems to break the law repeatedly; though the middle initials are different, the weights of the two men are different by thirty pounds, and of course, the social security numbers are different. Officer McCallister paid no heed, and instead, asked to see if the home-owner had any tattoos on his chest. McCallister approached the shirtless home-owner closely, pointing his flash light onto the home-owner's chest and checked his tattoo.
A little frustrated at the officer's insistence, the home-owner asked to see the warrant. He is told that the warrant is currently in a squad car. The home-owner is also told there exists a photograph, matching his likeness on the warrant for arrest. Again, the home-owner re-requests he be allowed to see both the warrant and the photograph. Officers refuse.
The home-owner then calls the Champaign Police Department and asks to talk to the supervisor in charge. Champaign Police Sargeant Olsen speaks to the home-owner and after hearing the home-owner's complaint, advises him to just cooperate with officers for now. After the phone call, the home-owner provides the officers in his home both his social security number and place of employment.
Officer McCallister then calls METCAD dispatch and asks for METCAD to check if the home-owner's social security number matches the social security number on the warrant.
Officer McCallister then walks over to one of the other officers who had accompanied him, (both had said nothing up to this point), and asked his fellow employee, "Don't you think he matches the photograph on the warrant?" The other officer replies, "Uh, yes, it's possible that could be him." METCAD dispatch then reports to McCallister that the social security number given by McCallister does not match the one on the warrant. Officer McCallister then attempts to apologize for the confusion, and all three officers leave the home.
While disturbed by what happened, the home-owner remembers officers remained courteous throughout the interaction.
The next day, the home-owner went to the Champaign Police Department headquarters to file a complaint. Champaign Police Sargeant Rey listened to the complaint and showed the warrant and the photograph to the home-owner. The warrant clearly lists a different address, a different social security number, and a different weight. Most disturbing of all, is the photograph of the wanted person. The face of the wanted man has a decorative goatee that spirals to a point off the man's chin. His head sports a closely cropped haircut. The home-owner is bald and has no facial hair. The two men's facial features are completely different. There is little chance the photograph on the warrant could be mistaken for the home-owner's likeness. The home-owner filed a formal complaint and left the station.
Within days after visiting the police station, Champaign Deputy Police Chief Troy Daniels telephones the home-owner to apologize for the officers' behavior. Daniels explains that Officer McCallister is new to the force, and assures the home-owner that the warrant from Iroquois County will carry a notice for all other officers to see that the home-owner is not the same person sought on the warrant.
The home-owner accepts Deputy Chief Daniels' apology and tells Daniels he is unsure what his course of action will be regarding his complaint against the officers. Daniels told the home-owner he understands the home-owner's frustration.
A week after the phone call with Deputy Chief Daniels, the home-owner has a knock on his door at about 9:00 p.m. at night. When he opens the door it is another uniformed Champaign Police Officer, one Officer Miller. Officer Miller asked if the home-owner is the owner of the vehicle parked in front of the home. When the home-owner again confirms he is the owner of the vehicle, Officer Miller explains he is there because the home-owner's vehicle's left side wheels are parked on the edge of the front lawn, a Champaign city ordinance violation.
Suspicious of the officer's motives (normally, a parking violation ticket is placed under the wind shield wiper); the home-owner asked Officer Miller if the officer is really there to see if the owner of the vehicle is the same person sought in the Iroquois County warrant. Officer Miller became defensive, and threatened to write the parking ticket right away. Officer Miller went back into his squad car, and apparently began writing something. The home-owner again calls the Champaign Police Station and in response; the Supervisor on duty, Sargeant Rey, drives to the home-owner's house. Upon arrival, Sargeant Rey consults with Officer Miller. After the meeting, Sargeant Rey assures the home-owner that no parking ticket will be issued and he is very sorry that the Iroquois County warrant may have again caused the home-owner problems.
In the ensuing week, Champaign Police Public Relations officer, Rene Dunn, repeatedly telephoned the home-owner to say the police department is very apologetic for the identity confusion; and assures the home-owner, again, that police will not be confronting the home-owner about the warrant. She asked the homeowner to understand that there are over 120 police officers on the force and miscommunication can easily happen. Dunn repeatedly tells the home-owner she understands why the home-owner would be complaining about the police action.
As of this writing, officials with the Champaign Police Department have not made a disciplinary ruling regarding this recent incident.
- 1428 reads
The word "douchebags" comes
The word "douchebags" comes to mind. He's lucky that Finney wasn't there or he might be dead.
Well, the warrant side of the
Well, the warrant side of the story seems pretty straight forward. Officers will frequently arrest wanted subjects without a paper warrant in hand, let alone a photograph, so long as the information matches. Addresses, weights and hairstyles can change. Different middle initial and SSN should have been the end of the story.
.....Inow the parking problem? I'm not sure anyone would be able to defend that one.
If My Taxes Are Installing Computers in Squad Cars...
And cops are telling some poor guy they wake up at 2am they have a picture of him to go with a warrant that they told him they SUPPOSEDLY have to go with that picture, then they have no damn excuse for not having a picture in the squad car that should be good enough to be able to tell them whether or not they have the right person. Or someone can run down to the station and get a copy, if they are so low tech they can't send a pic to a squad car. Come on, this is ridiculous. What it sounds like is what my mom called LYING.
And if they have such "facts" as someone's SSN and they don't match, tattoos and they don't match, regardless of whether they have a picture or not, then there's is no excuse in the world big enough to cover up this blatant abuse of authority. None at all.
"Gee, we're sorry, that just didn't turn out quite right."
Once again, the law enforcement abuse involved is far worse than whatever law enforcement action seems to have been mistakenly needed or called for.
It is a culture of impunity that we're dealing with when it comes to the Champaign Police Department. It's a gang that's used to getting away with stuff that ordinary citizens would never think to pull and doing it just because it's easy and they can get away with it. It's about imposing power and seems to bear little if any relationship to their or the public's safety. The law is their toy and the citizens are their playthings.
"Oops, the Constitution, your kid, whatever, didn't mean to break it. No big deal. Just move along, there's nothing to see here."
None of what happened to our fellow citizen is defensible. CPD owes him a public apology, as well as a promise it won't happen again and a commitment that those involved will be advised that further incidents of this nature will be dealt with harshly. And I expect Mayor Schweighart to make sure this gets follwoed up on, because CPD hasn't shown much evidence of being able to keep its house in order. What's the real truth. Were they training the new guy to DO this sort of thing or NOT do this sort of thing? Based on what we KNOW, that's very much an open question.
The most reprehensible part of the whole affair is that an African-American is once again the victim. Big deal that CPD is "accredited." Their slogan seems to be "CPD - Keeping racism alive for 150 years."
If you really think that...
"Their slogan seems to be "CPD - Keeping racism alive for 150 years.""
If you really think that, why do you still live here? Honestly? It's not like you're forced to stay in this town.
Is it, in fact, the case that you know it's not really that bad here, and just like bitching?
"Is it, in fact, the case
"Is it, in fact, the case that you know it's not really that bad here, and just like bitching?"
Perhaps s/he believes that the environment is not given, but rather that it can be changed by the will of the people.
I am going to be honest.
I am going to be honest. Local Yocal and I usually don't see eye to eye on much of anything, I but I need to give him/her a compliment on a job well done. The article was well written. Facts seemed to have been presented pretty much straight forward. There was no obivous angle to the story, just reporting what supposedly happened. I wish some (like BD for example!!!) who post here would use this as an example to follow. The IMC voice is usually so outlandish, that I immediately dismiss what is said. This, clearly, was an example of just the opposite.
Local Yocal - kudos!!!
To Anonymous 12:18 a.m.
Just a few points of clarification: Police claimed to have the warrant and photograph in the squad car at the time the home-owner asked to see the warrant. The warrant had the social security number listed on the warrant. Police had ample time to determine the social security number and middle initial of owner of the vehicle whose license plate was checked (why?) and would have known there was no match to the warrant from Iroquois County BEFORE they pounded on his door at 2:30 a.m.
In Defense of Mr. Dolinar
To Annonymous 3:24 p.m.
While I thank you for your compliments I guess, I myself don't have a problem with Brian Dolinar's reporting. Dolinar covers very emotionally charged topics, i.e. the killing of a 15 year old, for example, and does so from a blantantly activist point of view. His educational background is that of a historian, and he does not hide his opinions about the subjects he writes about. While his bias is clear, so also is his research into facts, his efforts to find the real information. This he does for no pay. While some find a detectable bias to be unworthy of the name journalism, at least Dolinar is upfront about his; while The News-Gazette and WDWS try to hide their bias- which is detectable anyway, in the name of objective journalism. In fact, every reporter in their selection of topic, the sources they seek, their questions they ask, their arrangement of information, and their emphasis of points made- reveals a bias of some kind. I don't know how any article or story can be done "objectively" since it's being created by humans. I have been consistently mystified why Dolinar's work generates the hostility it has.
As a reminder to all, if you think you have a story, an article, an editorial you think needs expression; this venue is available to you as much as me or Mr. Dolinar.
Identified?
Since facial and head hair can be changed on a minutes notice, it's not considered a primary factor in identification, but rather secondary.
Identification cards commonly carry fake SS #'s, so that defense, too, is weak.
My drivers license is approximatly 40 lbs. off, and many others are commonly off, too, so that's strike three of three.
You really provided no information in this story convincing me - or any other thinking person - that the police were negligent in potentially identifying a person who otherwise resembled the wanted person. I feel bad for the home owner, but if I were the wanted man I'd pose as an innocent homeowner who was just trying to get some sleep. Oh, you mean......
Passion for Abuse of Authority vs Passion for Civil Rights
I wish that our police would have the same passion for respecting the average citizen's civil rights as they do for abusing their authority. If they did, they would have cleared up the misunderstanding that occured that early morning and allowed an innocent man to get his sleep.
Surely there was nothing that required such immediate action that couldn't have been settled in some different form, such as alerting the officer whose neighborhood whose beat this was to follow-up later. Somehow, driving-while-black is the functional equivalent to CPD of throwing blood in the water around sharks.
To Annonymous 10:20 a.m.
What remains inexusable in this case is:
1) The random check of a license plate with the only reason seeming to be the driver was black.
2) Police knew the address, middle initial and the social security number of the owner of the vehicle were different than that of the person wanted on the warrant before they approached the home at 2:30 a.m.
3) Police refused to show the homeowner the warrant even though they claimed they had a copy of the warrant in the squad car.
To call this good police work because fugitives of warrants may hide their facial hair is the stuff of paranoid cop showdom. Fugitives don't own vehicles in their own name with their correct home address. This case represents aggressive police tactics you simply don't see being employed against whites in this town.
My tires are on my lawn?
Who cares, get the fuck off my property PIG
Post new comment