Pride, Arrogance and Ad Lib Testimony are a Peace Officer’s Achilles’ Heel
Today I began a DMV hearing regarding a DUI case. I previously appeared at an evidentiary suppression hearing in the same case. Two officers arrested my client for DUI. The officer who testified at the DMV hearing today miraculously had a better memory of what occurred although he opted not to testify and deferred to his partner previously due to what I was told was a lack of personal knowledge. This officer who testified today added facts that were never previously reported, including my client was trying to flag the officers over for assistance despite contradictory testimony by the partner officer that the sole basis for the stop was his license plate was allegedly obscured.
This case is still pending but I will likely take it to trial. It is sad testimony when officers risk so much to justify their conduct or ends justifies the means. I can almost predict a favorable outcome for my client as I have been down this road before in other cases, the last in Federal court. An officer’s election to come up with new and extraordinary facts two years after the incident backfired and caused sufficient liability.
Juries can accept innocent mistakes and memory affected by time, but they don’t usually buy into facts that don’t make sense. Although the officers arrogance and unwillingness to back down from unimpeachable facts helps my client, I am so offended at what some officers are willing to do.
