Alfonzo Dennard Trial

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

It was a 17 second video and the author of the story made it sound like the video was inconclusive as to what happened and as to whether or not the police officer identified himself.

I would think that you would be able to tell whether Dennard and the officer were looking at each other face-to-face, as the officer described it, or not.

If they were not face-to-face, then that's a discrepancy in the story and right there you have reasonable doubt, IMO.

The article said that "from the galley" it wan't clear if the jurors were convinced, but it sounds like the writer didn't actually see the video close-up himself, he rather gauged their reactions.

 

[DaBruinz]

I would think that you would be able to tell whether Dennard and the officer were looking at each other face-to-face, as the officer described it, or not.

From a Cell phone video. At night on a street that we don't know what the lighting was like. From an unknown distance. There is no link to the actual footage, so we don't actually know. Nor did the author who wrote about the video state that actual voices could be heard on the video.

If they were not face-to-face, then that's a discrepancy in the story and right there you have reasonable doubt, IMO.

The article said that "from the galley" it wan't clear if the jurors were convinced, but it sounds like the writer didn't actually see the video close-up himself, he rather gauged their reactions.

With a name like Lindsay, you can't be sure if it was a he or a she. And, if you are in the gallery, you should be able to see the video. But you are correct, the writer was gauging the reactions of the jury.

 

[jbb9s]

That's not how plea bargains work. People take plea bargains not because they're guilty, but because, even if you're 100% positive that you're innocent, anything can happen when you go to trial. In large part because the 'jury of your peers' is typically way, way too stupid/biased to understand the concepts of 'presumption of innocence' and 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

No matter how sure you are of your innocence, plea bargains are simply the better option if you're pleading down from a felony to a misdemeanor. The fact that Dennard didn't already resolve this whole situation by taking one means that either a) he's an idiot, or b) the prosecution didn't offer him one, which would pretty much have to be because they want to make an example out of him just because he punched an off-duty cop (if it was an off-duty construction worker, of course, they wouldn't give a ****).

That said, I agree that plea bargains suck on principle. It's basically extortion, but the Supreme Court unfortunately (and definitively) ruled otherwise, I believe in the '70s. As a result, you can now see way more arrests for petty BS, since cops aren't so worried about clogging up the court system with essentially meaningless cases when the majority plea bargain anyway.

The Netherlands do not utilize plea bargains, and also control Aruba, which is the site of the Holloway *unsolved* murder. They couldn't get turn one guy against the other two, and so all three walked. No plea bargain = less convictions. So three guilty guys keep their mouths shut and the prosecutor has no leverage.

 

[supafly]

The Netherlands do not utilize plea bargains, and also control Aruba, which is the site of the Holloway *unsolved* murder. They couldn't get turn one guy against the other two, and so all three walked. No plea bargain = less convictions. So three guilty guys keep their mouths shut and the prosecutor has no leverage.

There are many examples of issues being better or worse in other countries from everything from gun control to welfare and healthcare. In many instances the stats show that other countries may tend to do things better, but then again we have to take all of the variables into account when trying to compare them to US policies, so it's hard to really know if areas like the Netherlands have a better read on how it should be or not.

One thing I'd personally love to see changed here in the states is how they handle our country's drug abuse problem, especially since it is now the main source of clogging up the courts and leading to more arrests, deaths, etc.

Here in the US our adversarial system has advantages and disadvantages, just like everything else. I am not entirely familiar with the practices of the Netherlands and their court systems, but I think that we pretty much have to try and work with what we're "stuck" with on many of these issues, because that's the way that it is in this country.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Netherlands do not utilize plea bargains, and also control Aruba, which is the site of the Holloway *unsolved* murder. They couldn't get turn one guy against the other two, and so all three walked. No plea bargain = less convictions. So three guilty guys keep their mouths shut and the prosecutor has no leverage.

Plea bargains work for both sides, and they work in favor of the defendant far more often than they work in favor of the prosecution. The problem comes in when a DA/ADA abuses his/her position and overfiles charges in order to put someone in a very uneven position, in an effort to strongarm them into a plea.

 

[eom]

A few things.
1) The league can't suspend Dennard for actions that occurred prior to him entering their employ.
2) There is no way the Cop knew who Dennard would be playing for.
3) No way the cop could know what Dennard's salary would be.
4) Everyone's pain tolerance is different. For instance, I tore my ACL in half and the pain was an 11 or 12 on a scale of 10.. So much so that when it happened I actually passed out for 3-4 seconds..

didn't that raiders dude get suspended for shizzle he did in college?

 

[stealthdog]

didn't that raiders dude get suspended for shizzle he did in college?

The NCAA suspended Pryor for the 1st 5 games in the 2011 season. He decided to skip the year and enter the supplemental draft instead. The NFL just carried the 5 game suspension from the NCAA to the NFL. If they didn't, that would have set a precedent of a loophole that others could just ignore NCAA suspensions by going straight to the NFL.

The Pryor and Dennard situations are apples and oranges.

 

[eom]

The NCAA suspended Pryor for the 1st 5 games in the 2011 season. He decided to skip the year and enter the supplemental draft instead. The NFL just carried the 5 game suspension from the NCAA to the NFL. If they didn't, that would have set a precedent of a loophole that others could just ignore NCAA suspensions by going straight to the NFL.

The Pryor and Dennard situations are apples and oranges.

so, the nfl did suspend him for stuff that happened prior to his nfl career, is what you're saying?

 

[supafly]

so, the nfl did suspend him for stuff that happened prior to his nfl career, is what you're saying?

Yes, you're right. They did suspend Pryor but it was only due to the fact that he was already suspended in college for 5 games, where obviously Dennard was not. Dennard's situation fell within a grey area where he wasn't a student in the NCAA's or a player in the NFL, so Goodell would really be stretching his power of authority for sure.

If they hadn't suspended Pryor then anyone could have just left school and jumped to the NFL to avoid having to serve their suspensions they occurred in the NCAA's, which certainly would happen at some point probably sooner rather than later.

I agree with you that it's something to keep in mind, but I also think that the circumstances are entirely different. I don't think there have been any other instances to try and go on pertaining to this issue. If they try and suspend Dennard then it will certainly be a controversial ruling that will be fought by the NFLPA. Who knows what Goodell will try to do though? He's practically a madman.

 

[Get it shawtaay]

Can anyone clue me in on how Dennard's statement that he only pushed the cop affects the likelihood that he gets in real legal trouble?

 

[PATS68]

Clearly you missed the whole part where the arresting officer has refused to allow the 3rd Degree Felony Charge to be pleaded down to a misdemeanor. Clearly that doesn't make Dennard an idiot.

Hell, for all we know, the cop set Dennard up by having this Ben Samani go across the street, wait for Dennard to cross and plow into Dennard in such a way to make it look like Dennard started something so that Kopsa could arrest the "big time football player".

I have been a cop for 10 years and 4 years in the military and this post is beyond stupid.

1st off the County Attorney or DA chooses what charges to go forward with not the cop. Never has been that way and it will never be that way. In fact any felony charges first has to have a probable cause hearing where a judge says yes there is PC or no there is no PC. Judge found PC in this case. Second you then go before a grand jury and they say yes or no, but you knew that right.

The cop set up Dennard? The cop could of and should have arrested Dennard at the bar where he 1) assaulted someone and 2) committed the crime of disorderly conduct. To further on that point he told Dennard to go home twice and that sounds like a, "Set up" job to you! That's sounds like someone cutting someone a serious break to me!

You make no sense with your theory. So the officer passed on arresting Dennard with a bar full of witnesses to only set him up where there were very few witnesses? If it is me, I am taking him at the bar and handing out about 50 statement forms.

I have been to plenty of bar fights and when you do what the officers did here you watch where the people involved go so they don't start up again. I had the same thing happen to me and told a guy to beat-it and he went about 70 feet up the sidewalk and kicked in a store window. I had to run the 70 feet up the sidewalk and put his on his ass and arrest him.

What is being over looked here is that 2 officers saw Dennard punch someone 70 feet away, because the other officer tackled Dennard to the ground after he had assaulted the 1st officer.

 

[supafly]

I have been a cop for 10 years and 4 years in the military and this post is beyond stupid.

1st off the County Attorney or DA chooses what charges to go forward with not the cop. Never has been that way and it will never be that way. In fact any felony charges first has to have a probable cause hearing where a judge says yes there is PC or no there is no PC. Judge found PC in this case. Second you then go before a grand jury and they say yes or no, but you knew that right.

This has been my main point also, that the ADA would never pass off his own responsibility of making this judgment for a potential plea deal on whether or not the officer "wanted" Dennard to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and have no plea bargain offered. I've yet to see ANY kind of plea bargains refuse to be offered, and that includes rape, kidnapping, and even murder. In 9/10 times, the prosecution offers some type of lesser charge in exchange for a guaranteed guilty plea.

It's the DA/ADA's job to make that determination, and while true that they will always likely take into acct the officer's feelings, I'm not necessarily buying the rumor that's been reported that "they refuse to offer him a plea deal" based on the nature and seriousness of the charge itself.

I can believe that their plea offer included some small amount of jail time, and that Dennard and his reps turned it down due to that reason, OR Dennard and his reps decided to take it to trial themselves (questionably stupid in my opinion) because they thought they had a decent chance at proving their case and getting him off scot free.

The rumor supposedly is that the prosecution refuses to offer any type of plea bargain, and a very reputable poster even claimed that was being reported in the media. While anything can be true in these cases to a certain degree, I am very surprised at this news.

 

[Deus Irae]

I have been a cop for 10 years and 4 years in the military and this post is beyond stupid.

1st off the County Attorney or DA chooses what charges to go forward with not the cop. Never has been that way and it will never be that way. In fact any felony charges first has to have a probable cause hearing where a judge says yes there is PC or no there is no PC. Judge found PC in this case. Second you then go before a grand jury and they say yes or no, but you knew that right...

1.) Not all states have indicting grand juries

2.) Many states with indicting grand juries do not require them in all cases, and the prosecuting attorneys can charge via an information, instead

3.) As an attorney, and one who's worked in state attorney's offices, I can say without question that the wishes of the victim play a part in a lot of charges, and the wishes of a police officer victim are taken very seriously. So, in a case where the police officer was adamant about charges being kept, or kept at a felony level instead of misdemeanor level, the ADA will often defer to the officer's wishes.

4.) It's very easy to get grand juries to indict

 

[supafly]

It was a 17 second video and the author of the story made it sound like the video was inconclusive as to what happened and as to whether or not the police officer identified himself.

It also should be noted that the arresting officer was indeed in uniform, which many here (including myself) have not been aware of. Some here have claimed that he was a bouncer who was off-duty at the time. That certainly does not seem to be the case from these accounts:

"At the time, Kopsa was a uniformed member of a four-officer bicycle team that helped patrol the 2 a.m. bar closing scene, when hundreds of mostly college-age people swarm out of at least a dozen bars within a two-block area of downtown Lincoln. It’s an often unruly scene, he said."



"When an officer tells you to put your hands behind your back, what do you do? You put your hands behind your back,” he told Dennard. “You see I’m wearing a uniform, I’ve got the badge. You know I’m not going to hurt you. We’ve got to get things sorted out.”

 

[PATS68]

1.) Not all states have indicting grand juries

2.) Many states with indicting grand juries do not require them in all cases, and the prosecuting attorneys can charge via an information, instead

3.) As an attorney, and one who's worked in state attorney's offices, I can say without question that the wishes of the victim play a part in a lot of charges, and the wishes of a police officer victim are taken very seriously. So, in a case where the police officer was adamant about charges being kept, or kept at a felony level instead of misdemeanor level, the ADA will often defer to the officer's wishes.

4.) It's very easy to get grand juries to indict

Where I would have to disagree with you is the strength or weakness of the case. I have sat down with many of DA's and we talked about strengths and weaknesses of the case. So my feelings take a backseat to the strengths of the case and the best chance at a conviction.

You should know being an attorney that your reputation is on the line in that court room with the judge. You file charges on feeling then your rep. would be shot in the court room and you give yourself a up hill challenge on your next case.

Even if the state does not have GJ they have a PC hearing so there was PC for the arrest.

I am an officer who is very active when it comes to the pleas and the prosecutors know that I want in on that meeting.

 

[supafly]

3.) As an attorney, and one who's worked in state attorney's offices, I can say without question that the wishes of the victim play a part in a lot of charges, and the wishes of a police officer victim are taken very seriously. So, in a case where the police officer was adamant about charges being kept, or kept at a felony level instead of misdemeanor level, the ADA will often defer to the officer's wishes.

And I think that's probably the answer, even as surprising as it may be to me personally, the fact that the charge was a 3rd degree felony and there wasn't really any room to move with that specific charge (which is also obviously the main and most important charge) is likely why the officer's wishes have been given so much importance.


So in some possibility, what is being reported in the media about not wanting the felony pushed down to a misdemeanor is true, but there could still have been the possibility that they did also offer something of a compromise for the lesser charges and the overall punishment.

 

[PATS68]

It also should be noted that the arresting officer was indeed in uniform, which many here (including myself) have not been aware of. Some here have claimed that he was a bouncer who was off-duty at the time. That certainly does not seem to be the case from these accounts:

"At the time, Kopsa was a uniformed member of a four-officer bicycle team that helped patrol the 2 a.m. bar closing scene, when hundreds of mostly college-age people swarm out of at least a dozen bars within a two-block area of downtown Lincoln. It’s an often unruly scene, he said."



"When an officer tells you to put your hands behind your back, what do you do? You put your hands behind your back,” he told Dennard. “You see I’m wearing a uniform, I’ve got the badge. You know I’m not going to hurt you. We’ve got to get things sorted out.”

This seems more like the case to me, because the second officer was right there to tackle Dennard to the ground. Also he had handcuffs with him and most likely had his radio to call for back-up.

Man as a guy who works the streets you really have to think twice before you go hands on with a guy like Dennard. He is 200+ pounds of solid muscle and power and you would have your hands full. So I do not see this officer trying to be a hero, but he must have witnessed something that made him commit.

Rule of thumb is when you decide to go hands on with someone you have entered one gun into that fight and you as the police officer have brought that gun.

 

[DaBruinz]

I have been a cop for 10 years and 4 years in the military and this post is beyond stupid.

1st off the County Attorney or DA chooses what charges to go forward with not the cop. Never has been that way and it will never be that way. In fact any felony charges first has to have a probable cause hearing where a judge says yes there is PC or no there is no PC. Judge found PC in this case. Second you then go before a grand jury and they say yes or no, but you knew that right.

Do yourself a favor and don't comment unless you know the story. Clearly you don't in this case. The ADA has been on record in the papers saying that they went to trial because the Cop refused to allow the felony to be pled down. Since the cop was off-duty, he is considered the victim. Not to mention that, as Deus pointed out, the ADAs tend to support what the officers want for the reason that they have to work with them on a regular basis.

Next, your experience doesn't mean anything because how each state prosecutes things is different.

The cop set up Dennard? The cop could of and should have arrested Dennard at the bar where he 1) assaulted someone and 2) committed the crime of disorderly conduct. To further on that point he told Dennard to go home twice and that sounds like a, "Set up" job to you! That's sounds like someone cutting someone a serious break to me!

Clearly you missed the part about the cop being OFF-DUTY. Second, getting into an argument is not disorderly conduct. If you arrested people for that, then you should be fired for wasting the taxpayer's money. Third, Kopsa's testimony mentioned nothing about Dennard assaulting someone prior to being told to leave.

Again, we only have the COP's word that he told Dennard to go home twice. As for what it sounds like to you, that and $5 will get you a Starbucks coffee. You'll have to forgive me but 99% of the time Cops stick up for other cops regardless of reality.

You make no sense with your theory. So the officer passed on arresting Dennard with a bar full of witnesses to only set him up where there were very few witnesses? If it is me, I am taking him at the bar and handing out about 50 statement forms.

Or the cop who was not on duty but acting as a bouncer didn't really have a case to arrest Dennard in a bar full of witnesses to begin with and decided to make an example of Dennard by setting him up.

It makes no difference what you would do. You weren't the off-duty cop.

I have been to plenty of bar fights and when you do what the officers did here you watch where the people involved go so they don't start up again. I had the same thing happen to me and told a guy to beat-it and he went about 70 feet up the sidewalk and kicked in a store window. I had to run the 70 feet up the sidewalk and put his on his ass and arrest him.

What is being over looked here is that 2 officers saw Dennard punch someone 70 feet away, because the other officer tackled Dennard to the ground after he had assaulted the 1st officer.

This is false. Only Kopsa claimed to have seen Dennard drop his shoulder into Samani (not punch per your statement). All McBride saw was Kopsa wave to him for help with Dennard and then Dennard punch Kopsa. McBride didn't see the events leading up to that.

Also, you have no idea what the lighting was like so you have no idea what Kopsa saw. In fact, considering that the person who Dennard supposedly assaulted can't definitively ID Dennard when he was standing right next to him, how could Kopsa, from 70 ft away, definitively say what happened?

What is clear is that your bias for your brothers in blue is showing through.

 

[chicowalker]

..."When an officer tells you to put your hands behind your back, what do you do? You put your hands behind your back,” he told Dennard. “You see I’m wearing a uniform, I’ve got the badge. You know I’m not going to hurt you. We’ve got to get things sorted out.”

bolded part is amusing...

 

[Deus Irae]

And I think that's probably the answer, even as surprising as it may be to me personally, the fact that the charge was a 3rd degree felony and there wasn't really any room to move with that specific charge (which is also obviously the main and most important charge) is likely why the officer's wishes have been given so much importance.


So in some possibility, what is being reported in the media about not wanting the felony pushed down to a misdemeanor is true, but there could still have been the possibility that they did also offer something of a compromise for the lesser charges and the overall punishment.

You can't really compromise between felony and misdemeanor, and the key here is the felony. Dennard's attorney is already conceding on resisting arrest.